[Craig Alan]

Not sure about this. For starters a NLE is just one tool of many that is needed for production. Democratizing anything that was previously only in the hands of an elite class is revolutionary. Does democratizing carry with it the negative effect of old standards being compromised? Absolutely.
But it also carries with it far greater choices including truly interesting new expressions.

The elite motion picture industry, as good as their product is, and they do keep pushing the envelope technically, still produces stuff that is often safe, mind-less, and condescending. They also employ a lot of gifted craftsman who are good at their jobs. Spending upwards of a $100,000,000 to produce one unimportant film whose target audience is the popcorn date crowd is obscene. You know why people might turn to Vimeo and the like – a) to see something different that can afford to take chances and b) because if it sucks it doesn’t cost them over $50 a pop (snacks included).

Has the whole production process become dirt-cheap? No it hasn’t. Has it become affordable to anyone who seriously wants to pursue it? Sort of. But if there is no money to be made for the new middle class of production, then it will fall out of fashion and again be left to the elite.

U-tube can take care of the cat videos, the voyeuristic and very short reality clips and goof ball crap. That’s what millions of people are already uploading. You’d think that would drive the networks away from this genre but it hasn’t. The pro versions are soapy manipulated garbage and I hope the mass uploads drives them out of that business.

Let’s look at the reality from the point of view of a middle class filmmaker who wants to shoot a narrative. What do you need? For starters, you need a script. (There was a time when only an elite class could read and write. And computers certainly took away the need to have good handwriting or be able to touch type accurately). Maybe a copy of final draft or any of the free programs on-line. You’ll need a camera. You want it to look pro or “film” like so you need a large sensor camera. At the lowest price point as of the last year, we are looking maybe $6000-$7000 (Black Magic Cinema with as much lens as you can afford). Though most of the serious contenders are still going for Red or Alexa at many times that or maybe the Canon c300 at several times that. You’ll also need a couple of batteries, chargers, a case, a tripod, a dolly, and perhaps a steady cam rig, and/or a jib rig, and/or a track and dolly, and/or a car mount, etc. Anywhere from $2000-$6000 (and up). You need lights and grip equipment – another $10,000 at least. Forget about day light temp HMIs for outdoor shots unless you want to rent. You’ll need audio gear – at least another $5000. You’ll need places to shoot and you’ll need to round up a crew and actors, which the truly ambitious can do but this requires the time to do it. Want to shoot green screen? Where? In your garage studio? Maybe rent a studio for those shots? Are you working at your day job? How’s managing your volunteer crew and cast coming along? And the collective group of these producers might be a threat to the entertainment market share of the elite but how are they making ends meet?

There are guys making 6 figures producing direct to Internet series. Most of them are pros or trained in professional practices and can be in line for pro gigs.

As for post, yes its way cheaper than it was when Avid bays were ½ mil and they still had to send the footage out of house for rendering. But in the last year the only difference is NLE software for $300 instead of $1000. Evolution for sure. Computers are about the same. Yeah they are way more powerful but the codecs demand this. When it dipped from $120,000 to 15,000 to set up a post computer, that was revolutionary. When the Sony vx1000 brought the entry-level camcorder down to $6000 that was revolutionary. But it looked like video and no one thought that film cams would die anytime soon.

What I would like to see is creative people being able to make a good living making artistic works in a variety of styles and genres and not the traditional elitist model where a single movie costs 10s of millions of dollars and the above the line folk are all millionaires.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV30/40, Sony Z7U, VX2000, PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

Understood.

And I do consider the browser in X to be very powerful and a giant step forward.

I do go through my original clips in the browser and add keywords and make some rough cuts.

However I also make changes in the timeline. As the project sequence starts to evolve changes are needed.

Is there a way to save these changes in the browser. I understand this is not the default behavior.

Are the changes made in the browser to a clip non-destructive? Can I always open it in the inspector and return it to its original state?

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV30/40, Sony Z7U, VX2000, PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

I would give disk warrior a try and I would clone the system drive before attempting anything.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV30/40, Sony Z7U, VX2000, PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

Maybe a permissions issue?

https://www.larryjordan.biz/trouble-shooting-your-fcp-system/

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV30/40, Sony Z7U, VX2000, PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

Thank you Jeremy. Of course, “the old tilde control right arrow trick” to paraphrase Maxwell Smart. That was what I was asking for. And even if it does not work that smooth and might get enhanced in the next update, it suggests that Apple was intending to allow these type of edits within compound clips. I mean compound clips are really just a non-destructive way of visually organizing two or more connected clips and/or any group of clips.

One follow up question: If I modify a clip in the timeline (say color correct and crop) where is this stored in the browser? Is the original modified but non-destructively? Do I need to save the changes somehow? Generally I’d like access to both the original and the modified versions whether or not they are still in the timeline.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV30/40, Sony Z7U, VX2000, PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

I know I can do what I want by breaking apart the compound clip. When I open an audition window or open the compound clip in its own project window, since the compound clip appears broken apart, I thought that I could apply edits to it as if it were broken apart. The FCP manual under MANAGE COMPOUND CLIPS seems to say that’s the case.

“The compound clip opens in a new Timeline view, with its contents ready for editing.”

If FCP was fully treating the compound clip as a single merged clip (like for example when you export a merged clip or an entire timeline as a self-contained QT file) then you would not see the clips in their own tracks with the connection points.

However, now that I know it is still treated as a single clip even in these expanded windows, I, as you pointed out, can just work the other way: break the compound apart and audition to my heart’s content. Not a big deal. I am using this particular project to learn the program better and therefore will “waste” time trying to understand how the different operations work rather than just finding the least resistant path that gets the job done.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV30/40, Sony Z7U, VX2000, PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

Well put.

A professional user is someone who makes money using the gear or uses the gear as part of the way they make a living.

A lot of folks fall into these groups who were not in the traditional pool. A pool by the way that has only been around for about 23 years and took over half of that to be the professional tool set. Not much of a tradition among traditions.

The high end is not going away, but putting down any one who uses less expensive/complex installations is completely missing the boat.

My father’s generation used the term “a real pro” as a compliment, meaning the person lived up to a high standard of craft and efficiency. By contrast “a hack” was still a professional but did not live up to this standard. A lot of professional TV productions created by pros using all these high-end tools are hack jobs. The judgment is not necessarily personal. TV and Film production is a huge collaborative effort. A colorist on a movie might well be a real pro and a true artist yet the movie is still a paint-by-the-numbers hack job.

I would guess that there are more people employed using high-end installations of this gear now than ever. But they are no longer the only fish in the pond. Insulting other users because they do not use these high-end installations is a sign of insecurity. And insulting companies that make products for them is self-defeating.

The Internet is fast becoming the real pond in which the vast majority of multimedia produced (using both high and low end gear) will be distributed. And although the production standards are certainly higher on average for productions that use the high-end gear, there will be more and more productions shot and distributed using prosumer level gear that are much more interesting and artistic than what is being distributed now on cable and in theatres.

Because the productions will not cost as much to make, there will be more variety and much greater experimentation. The serious hobbyist not that long ago shot using 16mm film cams and edited literally cutting and taping the film into a sequence. But unlike now, they had no way to distribute their passion and no way to make a living from it.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV30/40, Sony Z7U, VX2000, PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

Thanks so much Todd.

You are not being snobby and if you are it is in a constructive way.

I agree with everything you said. However, video style is still a craft and small crew shooting is becoming a powerful and professional reality.

Why is it that they can’t put a large sensor chip in a “video” form camera and Black Magic proved it could be at a prosumer level price?

I understand why you’d use your zoom lens on your cinema style cam to match shots in a production that was shot primarily with prime lenses.

I will say that on a film shoot the first assistant camera op is often pulling focus.

And it’s almost always a group effort. Lots of hands and lots of eyes.

Video style is still a craft and can still tell stories and the two styles seem to be merging.

I can see technology improving the focusing ability of the cams even on large sensor chip cams with greater control over depth of field.

Canon is adding continuous auto focus and continuous auto iris on their C-100 cam so they seem to be addressing prosumer or at least run and gun style needs. Still wonder why this has to be tied to the center of the image instead of user controlled or at least at the rule of thirds markers.

I do not think that shallow depth is always the best choice.

Deep focus has its place and brings up another aspect of a professional workflow: design your set and light the entire image. Or if not designed at least pay attention to the entire image.

To me a shot that smells of pretense is a dialog shot with back and forth-back and forth rack focus. It reminds me of the quick pans used a few years ago. Now a show like Boston Legal pulled these off beautifully by using the beats of the sound track and emotional flow of the characters and as a humorous take on the power grab, but mostly they are just calling attention to the camera work and it is often distracting.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV30/40, Sony Z7U, VX2000, PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

Todd,
How ergonomic is the c-300 in run and gun shoots? Like you pointed out, the traditional work flow is way different in cinema than video. I see a lot of out of focus shots coming from DSL and large sensor cams when used video style. Does your zoom lens really make it the best of both worlds or does it still require a more disciplined work flow?

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV30/40, Sony Z7U, VX2000, PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.

[Craig Alan]

I was hoping the new mac pro would be modular along these lines. Give each customer what they need and allow them to add on as the need changes. I was also hoping the new OS would be a sequential number and/or date so i knew intuitively which OS came out when and in what order. Mavericks is a ridiculous name for one of the the most recognized brands in history.

But bottom line, I’ll be happy if the new configuration is reasonably priced when all is said and done.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV30/40, Sony Z7U, VX2000, PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.