[Craig Seeman]

I’ve used MacWhisper and now Ulti.Media Transcriber which is based on MacWhisper. It does depend on the “engine” but Transcriber uses the “Large” model and it seems to be real-time or better for me on my Mac Studio M1 Max. It would be slow on an Intel Mac though.

[Craig Seeman]

iZotope doesn’t “officially” support FCP and, years back when I contacted them they blamed this on FCP’s audio handling. RX is up to version 10 now and I don’t think this is or will change.

Other options like Accusounus have come and gone. CrumplePop went from FXFactory distribution to BorisFX and looks like it’s more expensive than it used to be. It’s kind of sad to be boxed into such limited options.

[Craig Seeman]

I was a big Telestream Episode user back in the day. Actually started using it when it was still Compression Master owned by Popwire, which Telestream bought. I used Episode right up to the point Telestream killed it.

Given Episode development stopped many years ago I don’t think anyone has attempted a comparison with the current version of Apple Compressor. Episode certainly had a lot more control and settings. But the demand for MPEG 2 has probably been in decline which means this testing is even less likely.

Sorry, but it would be interesting and maybe just a bit academic if someone tested this.

[Craig Seeman]

Aeroquartet focuses specifically on repairing video files. You can use their Treasured app to confirm the file is repairable. If you’re dealing with professional client work I’d check with them first rather than risk a generic repair utility potentially doing more damage.

https://aeroquartet.com/treasured/index.en.html

aeroquartet.com

Treasured (Aero Quartet)

Treasured Video Repair Service by Aero Quartet

[Craig Seeman]

Kinda sad and worrisome that we can’t even trust Apple’s FCP bug fixes anymore. Are they not even putting in enough resources to do enough testing and QA before releasing?

Meanwhile, Resolve just went through another round of public betas and a full release with new features.

[Craig Seeman]

ulti.media Transcriber is built on MacWhisper. I’ve also used MacWhisper. Transcriber uses the “Large” transcription model from Whisper (MacWhisper Pro) which improves transcription reliability and adds many Caption features. They’ll be adding even more caption features. BTW it’s also Adobe PremierePro compatible so I suspect they feel their offering is even better than Premiere’s built-in equivalent.

[Craig Seeman]

One key feature I’m looking for in Transcription software is the creative editing of the ensuingly generated Titles. I believe most, including Simonsays, come in as Basic Title which has limited animation functions.

Alex from Ulti.Media has said that their Transcriber will support using Titles other than Basic in a future update. I would love for Titles to come in as Custom for example which would allow very flexible animation.

As the professional demands for marketing and advertising on Instagram and TikTok increase, creative title editing will also increase. Consider what CapCut or Instagram’s built-in titling can do now.

BTW I do think the subscription services (Simonsays, Speedscriber, etc.) are going to have to focus on more value-added features as Transcriber and Captionator are based on Whisper so there’s no per word or duration cost (beyond the cost of the module).

[Craig Seeman]

Transcriber released today from Ulti.Media through FXFactory. Based on AIWhisper “Large” module. Standalone but exports directly to FCP as Project in an Event as Titles.

https://ulti.media/transcriber/

[Craig Seeman]

Two obvious questions:
1) Have the client commissioned video productions before, and who was their previous supplier?
(As in why did they not go back to their previous supplier(s)?)
2) If they haven’t commissioned productions, what is guiding them through the process now?
An overeager legal department and/or insecurities?

The client was previously the Executive Producer and featured talent in a reality tv show which never was distributed. Apparently, they also lost all rights to the video shot which was then used elsewhere. I believe there is an overeager legal dept. and insecurities involved.

In addition, they want a non-compete clause that extends two years beyond the end of my work for them even though it wouldn’t be full-time work. While I think an NDA is reasonable, I will not accept being locked out from working for similar clients especially if the type of client (entertainment based) may be a significant source of my income.

Personally, I don’t want to negotiate with someone who comes from a position of non-trust. Contracts must have some level of mutual trust with fair recourse and protections for all parties involved.

As worded there is no information on money offered or the duration of the contract. The client wants me to Produce, Shot and edit. 

[Craig Seeman]

Thanks for your response. Much of it is similar to my thinking and experience (nearly 40 years) wearing hats as a camera operator or, editor, or production company.

As a camera operator, in my experience, some clients want all the footage at the end of the shoot and I include that in the billing. As a production company if they want all the video not used in the final delivery I add that to the bill or include that if it’s clear they’ll want that from the start. And I agree that my method of creation which is part of the project files are my own.

As an editor, they’re responsible for all the source elements and copyright clearance. If there’s stock media involved, I can include timecode or watermarked recommendations from me and they can pay for or pay me to keep searching or, otherwise search on their own and buy.

As a production company, I have to ask them to confirm copyright clearance on anything they provide. I know from experience I’ve been handed sources that were in dispute (e.g. a dance recording where one of the two choreographers did not give permission) or video the client claimed to own but was of them but owned by a news outlet (CNN, AP, even Getty Images in one case). There are also times when clients insist you use a pop tune (“Hey it’s internal marketing only”) or music from a local performer they claim to own. That’s a legal problem waiting to happen. I know what I’ve shot. I know if I hired musicians or graphic artists etc. I know how to find stock video, and audio and make sure it’s cleared for the purpose.

Generally, as a production company, they can use (and own) the final editor in perpetuity for any purpose they see fit. Optionally I can sell them source camera files. Obviously, they can use them elsewhere whereas if I were to control they’d be inclined to come back to me for further editing.

I don’t like work-for-hire agreements when I’m providing all the services. Either I’m responsible for the production or the client is and I’m only the editor.

Even as the editor if I’m using templates or plugins I’ve paid for I can’t hand over those to a client.

They also want a non-compete clause for two years after the end of production. That’s dead immediately. If I shoot car commercials they have no right to block me from shooting car commercials for another brand. There are no circumstances as a camera operator, editor, or production company the client can block me from my next job. This is especially absurd given how even specialize such as shooting food commercials, car commercials, medical training videos, etc.