Franz Bieberkopf
Forum Replies Created
-
Forum name-change: The Neverending Thread?
-
[Walter Soyka] “The more you jog or shuttle through media, and the more often you switch back and forth among sources for non-realtime assessment, the more benefit the skimmer offers.”
Walter,
I think this corroborates one of the distinctions I was trying to make. Sequence based editing (where all or most of your work is done in one sequence at a time) is quite different from clip based editing (which might not be a good name for it).
[Walter Soyka] “you are probably already wasting a lot of time rewatching footage and trimming, evaluating, and retrimming edits.”
Well, there’ll always be people who think I’m wasting time editing … but the word that gets said to my face is “fast”.
Franz.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] ” If it breaks my creativity, it’s slower, even if it’s technically moving faster.”
That’s the end of the thread, don’t you think?
Franz.
-
[Walter Soyka] “Do you disagree with the logic (perhaps I’ve left something out) or the assumptions (perhaps you think the skimmer is overrated)?”
Walter,
I haven’t used the skimmer, so I can’t rate it. I’m very sceptical of grandiose claims though. In the short forays into PPro that I’ve done, I don’t use hover scrub and don’t really anticipate using it (though I understand it is more limited than skimming in ways you’ve outlined).
[Walter Soyka] “… reviewing footage in isolation, making new edits, reviewing footage in the context of an edit or series of edits, and modifying existing edits.”
I’d say the first step is more “evaluating” where you say “reviewing”. I don’t really look at things “in isolation” – they’re always in context. But I think that’s the crux – there are very different approaches to making that evaluation or selection process. If you’re going through 10hrs of footage in 3hrs, that’s entirely different from 3 months of assembling 100 hours of footage. It’s a difference of approach, not just quantity.
I also make a distinction between “reviewing” (by which I mean screening, picture and sound, in real time) and maybe “searching” which is maybe where skimming comes in handy. It’s an important distinction to me when it comes to this statement:
[Walter Soyka] “… the skimmer offers improvements over other tools for review.”
I suppose part of the issue is how easy it is to easily maintain uniform “realtime” playback while skimming.
Franz.
-
Steve,
“The skimmer is simply the fastest way to view and evaluate (etc.) lots of footage on any NLE that exists today”
So that’s your claim? You can view and evaluate footage faster.
I’m with Herb. Colour me sceptical.
Franz.
-
[Steve Connor] “… get through…”
… meaning?
Franz.
-
[Bill Davis] ”
Essentially, if you’re trying to decide how good competing brands of cars are – don’t you give slightly more weight to the opinions of those who have driven BOTH?”Bill,
Do you know of good comparisons between X, PPro, and Avid?
Did you do your comparison before deciding?
Franz.
-
[Walter Soyka] “Search … Evaluate … Reduce … Cut.”
Walter,
I think part of the issue is that the process is quite varied. What you’ve described strikes me more as “clip-based” approach. I wouldn’t describe my process that way. Something like “Screen & Select, Assemble, Structure” might be closer but I’d have to give it more thought.
[Walter Soyka] “How can we legitimately talk about speed?”
… echoes by Herb and myself below. Speed means many things in terms of NLE.
Franz.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “… I make bins of selects. Then, I usually make a sequence for each bin and string out all of those clips for that bin. I then copy and paste from the selects sequences to the main “edit” sequence which will eventually become the finished sequence. Depending on the project, this means I can have a lot of sequences open at any given time.”
Jeremy,
I’m going to add to my already tenuous categories, and call this “hybrid”.
[Jeremy Garchow] “FCPX does this for me with much less clicking, with greater speed, and I don’t have to constantly switch back and forth between sequences. … To me, it is the best of both worlds. It allows for accurate searching, and it also allows for visual footage discovery without the database feel.”
I find these kinds of posts much more interesting and constructive than claims of “fastest NLE”.
First, because I’m interested to know how other people work.
Second, because I’m not sure when “fast” became the primary criterion for NLEs. Generally when software is described as fast, people are referring to a specific task, or a specific process which is taxing on the hardware. “Fast” can mean responsive (in terms of UI), efficient in terms of processing (or rendering), conducive to organization etc. When you get to the more workflow or process based assessments however, you’re into pretty specific (and often divergent and subjective) needs depending on the kinds of production and editing involved.
“Flexible” is another way of assessing NLEs.
Meeting the needs of a specific workflow is another.
Subjective appeal is another.
Steve Connor may have more charts for those (though he does seem restricted to FCP7 and FCPX).
I’m trying to imagine a conversation between an editor and a filmmaker where the editor boasts of his or her “faster” NLE; I can’t imagine doing this myself.
Franz.
-
Daniel,
Thanks. Hardware? External video?
Franz.