Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[Charlie Austin] “No multiple takes with him. 1 or 2, then move on.”
Boy, and he sure got pissed if you asked for one that he didn’t think was needed.
-
[John Davidson] “Remember when our biggest gripes were ‘no broadcast monitor support?’ Life could be worse :).”
No, hey–I agree. I’m still here and the water is definitely getting warmer. I ain’t there yet, but I’m definitely convinced that there is a time I could be. It’s just been a better bet for me to re-up Avid and learn Premiere in the short term. I’d be happy to have a good working excuse to learn X.
-
[John Davidson] “One time I asked Don to read so gritty he would ‘make babies cry’. It came out awesome.
“The guy who could really do that was Chuck Riley. I worked with him a bunch, too. Of the main VOG’s he had by far the deepest voice. Very nice guy.
-
[John Davidson] “Here’s a funny little thing. We totally don’t care about roles anymore since X2Pro pretty much automates everything for us. I suppose if we really cared and had a huge edit we would feel more motivated to work with roles. Then again, even a sizzle that we worked on for 2 months and delivered last week – never touched a role in it.”
I just want to be able to see where things are. I like to be able to navigate quickly by using the timeline as a map, so color-coding roles would give that to me.
-
[Charlie Austin] “Very true but… (in my best Don LaFontaine voice…) “
I worked with Don a little, but my “In a World…” guy was Percy Rodriguez. I worked A LOT with him. I actually did an “In a World…” trailer with Percy to Carmina Burana back in the early ’90s when such things were still fresh. Yes… In a time where Carmina Burana was still fresh. I’ve never figured out why Don was recognized as THE VOG. I know he had a press agent, which helped. Percy was great, though, and I quite liked working with him.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I can keep so much information and choices stored and out of the way in X right in the timeline. It is an aspect of the X timeline that I like a lot.
“I could certainly get to like that, too.
-
[Charlie Austin] “(not fixed tracks though!)”
I don’t think X should have tracks, either. It is a big part of what it is, and I do like that there is something quite different out there. I’m more than willing to not have tracks as long as there is an adequate mapping system to replace it. Color-coded roles could be the answer. All I really want is to be able to look and see exactly where everything is without having to click things on and off. I can adjust to the vertical instability if there are strong, tangible indicators that allow for instant assessment. Purple dialog, green SFX, red MU, and blue VO would probably go a long way to making this happen. Maybe add to that a quick view where you could get a navigable snapshot of the different audio roles laid out in parallel horizontal lines (same types of audio could overlap on the same line; a blob of green just means there are sfx, and clicking on it takes me to that part of the actual timeline, not a specific sfx) and I think you would probably mollify my objections to tracklessness.
-
[Chris Kenny] “The driving analogy doesn’t map.”
Sure it does. Good play on words, though.
-
[Chris Kenny] “The objective fact is that all of these apps have different feature sets. FCP X has features not found in other NLEs, and other NLEs have features not found in FCP X. Had you been using FCP X for years, and designing workflows around that, you’d be looking at other apps and saying they had workflow weaknesses because they required external transcoding, or they didn’t have metadata support as good as FCP X’s, or you couldn’t create bundles of output settings and generate multiple deliverables with a couple of clicks, or you couldn’t add roles to specific timeline items and output each set of items to a separate file, or whatever — all of these are features that could become critical to workflows one might construct around FCP X.”
This is an absurd argument. You are treating these NLEs as if they existed in a parallel Universes, and that has no bearing to reality. In my country, everybody drives on the right side of the road. That’s our workflow. It’s been that way for nearly a century. All the lines and turn lanes are painted to facilitate that. All of the drivers muscle memory is all about driving on the right. All of the steering wheels and control panels are designed for driving on the right. Driving on the left presents an equally valid workflow. If we’d been driving on the left for nearly a century, our workflows would be constructed around that. But, so what?! Fortunately for X, it isn’t THAT different. But that is the argument you are making.
[Chris Kenny] “But since you’re going in the other direction, and dealing with workflows that were constructed around other apps, it’s FCP X that gets identified as having workflow weaknesses.
“Quite definitely.
[Chris Kenny] “So, even at the high end, a given project could, for all you can say in the abstract, end up finding (for instance) FCP X’s metadata features absolutely critical, and finding that its lack of EDL exporting isn’t a problem at all. “
It’s not Oliver who is speaking in abstractions. He’s speaking in practical terms. You are the one postulating a different reality to make everyday problems go away.
[Chris Kenny] “FCP X’s workflow features have reached the point where one can’t say it’s worse with respect to workflow in the general case. One can merely point to specific workflows where it’s worse.”
Sorry. “In the general case,” you CAN say which is worse, and taking the overwhelming numbers of real world examples and dismissing them as mere specific workflows is beyond cheeky.
-
[John Davidson] “They should have used FCPX :).
“Perhaps they were. 😉