[Gerald Baria]

Ok, when I first started getting interested in video, guess what my first investment was..no not a camera but a powerful computer.:D I know that a finished video is only as good as its editing. 😉 But before I bought one I researched hard on what software to use since this will determine the specs of the computer Id be buying. I decided to go with Premiere because firstly, the individuals which I looked up to being the multiawarded groups for several years now in WEVA, Jason Magbanua and Mayad, all use Premiere Pro. I searched why, as the only editing platform I am aware of at that time was final cut..I saw it at” the making” of some movie somewhere. Then I discovered the answer…its the “no need to transcode” feature. A feature so important especially when your doing same day edits which time is of the essence. Instead of waiting for gigabytes of files to be transcoded to prores, you could be editing in premiere already. And this reason alone justifies the use of Premiere Pro in the wedding videographers businesses here in our country. The other more probable reason is its cheaper than all other NLEs.

So the I downloaded a copy of the trial and watched hours upon hours of youtube tutorials to familiarize myself of how things worked..then I started to learn editing. As much as I loved it, there were some things that I wish were there that could have made my editing faster, like when I decided to insert some clip in the middle of the timeline, I wouldnt have to select all theclips in front of it then move it, and mind all the clips that might hit each other than gets trimmed without me knowing. I would have loved it if I decided to move a video file, all thespund I placed below it wiuld just follow it around…an important feature cause on sdes your usually editing to the music. I would have loved to just changed clips quickly just to try how each one will look without having to drag and readjust everything. I would have loved to just see and pic all the section of my clips that I could use faster than playing them one by one.

And then Final Cut Pro X was demoed and my jaw dropped. It does exactly all of the things I wanted to have happend and did it well. Now in less than an hour I can skim thru hundreds of clips, pick the ones I can use. Clip a music to a slug. Drop all the usable clips I want, further trim them down to the music. Overlay slo mo clips over voiced ones, add color corrections, effects, titles without rendering. Clips move around whenever I decide to insert one in the middle of them. My sounds,vlices, music stay with the videos that theyre supposed to be with..and I can group them all togetther while i add or move around others. I can try several clips thru audition until im satisfied without ever minding the rest of the timeline. And I can export all of thsoe at almost the same length as my video output.

FCPX seems to just help you with all of the redundant stuff..so you can focus more on creating your vision, your story. It just takes care of all the clutter for you. And is insanely fast! That I think are the main advantages.

Quobetah
New=Better

[Gerald Baria]

There are some editing jobs where its speed is just beyond valuable..one of those is this SDE thing for wedding videographers. Imagine doing an entire cinematic edit in less than an hour after you gathered all the shots you’ve just filmed several hours before. And everyone in the reception’s audience is waiting for it as the event’s climax. So its a great thing that such a program exists for us.

Quobetah
New=Better

[Gerald Baria]

Yesss..and very expensive. I use to just read and dream about it and I just creamed when I saw one in person attached to my boss’s Leica M9.:D Thankfully she had an m-mount adaptor for Nex. Such a great camera.

Quobetah
New=Better

[Gerald Baria]

“You can make today’s processor smaller tomorrow, or you can keep it the same size and make it faster.”

Or…you can make it BOTH smaller and more powerful. So then you’d require less energy to do the same processing cycles..less energy consumption is more or a need now than an option so that’s the best way to go. And fortunantely it is the direction of the 3 leading processor corporations..smaller and smaller transistors that consume lesser and lesser power for the same processing cycles.

Quobetah
New=Better

[Gerald Baria]

Excatly Mr. olof! Thatis excatly what is happening that most are having a hard time grasping. That technology is is continously evolving and currently taking on forms that doesnt look as huge and “serious or pro” as the ones we had before but has actually more power and caabilities in it.

The whole point of a pro’s requirement for a workstation is POWER! To be able to run efficiently the ever bloating pro softwares and do them faster and more efficient than they ever could before. As long a new systems can provide you that power REGARDLESS if they are the size of a hockey puck, it should not matter as long as you can do your job in it.

And fortunately Apple has been leading that evolution. They have always been the first to offer new ways to give you power in a whole new form for greater flexibility. Remember firewire? And thats what they are doing now with thunderbolt. And everyone else follows them afterwards. We already reached a point where consumer processors can already match / surpass professional grade processors, and power and cooling requirements are decreasing as well, so of course you should expect apple tonput them in a smaller prettier case…but make no mistake that they will be more powerful than the tower ever been.

Quobetah
New=Better

[Gerald Baria]

So what are you saying, that “experienced” editors ate shpposed to NOT learn anything new anymore cause the’re…uhmmm…experienced already.

The exact point of simplofication is take outall the redundant stuff and just make the primary purpose REALLY,REALLY good. Complocated software does not make it more pro, its just a testament to its lazy, unimaginative developer.

That’s what makes Apple differrent, they take the extra mile to break the rules..mix power and simplicity.

Quobetah
New=Better

[Gerald Baria]

The one related most to FCPX would be the second key: Simplicity

“Simplicity

The second key to Apple’s success is the process of making a complex thing simple, Joswiak noted. According to him, the company’s products begin simple, become increasingly simple as they are built, and then are brought back to simplicity.

“A lot of people think it means take something simple and leave it at its core essence. But it isn’t that. When you start to build something, it quickly becomes really complex. But that is when a lot of people stop. If you really know your product and the problems, then you can take something that is complex and then make it simple.”
”

Especially those words in bold. They know all the stuff that made editing with FCP7 a pain, so they removed all of them and replaced it with lots of new advanced solutions.

Everyone pretty much agrees with FCPXs superior, organization tools, rough cut speed and fresh interface. Its the new and improved timeline that’s getting most worked up. But like everything else thats new, you just got to learn it. Its very powerful once you get to know it.

Quobetah
New=Better

[Gerald Baria]

Yet they made Final Cut Pro X, spent a decade writing code from scratch and planning and executing pro-level functionality (4k editing,advanced organization,64bit etc). Why would they go to all that trouble if they intend to drop it later anyways?

Steve Jobs is an artist first, a CEO second. He made products that he wanted to use…not because it will make money. Its one of his last words on his autobigraphy, that the main motivation for making products should be to make great products, not great profit. Profit is important, yes, but it should not be the motivation. Cause if its profit that’s the focus when you start up a product, it would be poop for sure.

He made sure the executives he placed at the top understood that and hoped they continue it. Businesses are now using more and more of their products cause their products are great.

And I think same can be applied to FCPX. He hated it when people called the iPad a “consumption dvice” and exibits no regrad for creation. That’s why he spent the next year making sure the iPad 2 would be powerful enough and launch with tablet versions of iMovie and Garageband (also in the book). He always prided himself of having his products be used for creativity and was really passionate about it. That’s why all this talk about him not caring anymore about the pro market is all bullshit to me. As an artist, that’s the last thing he would ever think of doing. he never cared much about money..all he wanted was to make great products.

Quobetah
New=Better

[Gerald Baria]

[Walter Soyka] “talent (innate ability) is neither necessary nor sufficient for success, and talent doesn’t matter nearly as much to success as hard work does.”

See this is my problem, and the one I’m disagreeing on..especially those words in bold. Not suffiecient for sucess, yes..but “not nescessary” now that is just appaling. Does that mean that any regular joe, who has money and time, can just buy some first rate gear, go into film school, and after he comes out of it he’s another Spielberg? Anyone?! As is any “regular guy”..can make works of art such as the “Schindler’s list” after going thru some film school and practice?

Really.

Then why am I seeing a lot of crappy work both in television and in movies then? Why am I not seeing the same depth, interpretation, artistry, pace, story telling emotionally moving movie every single time…?! I assume the people who made them have been working really really hard top be able to have worked for some of the richest studios in hollywood? Why is there still so much crap?

I get it. Im young. Im poor. The work I have done so far sucks balls. but that’s because my abilities havent caught up to my “taste” yet. I know whats good..i wanna make them..but currently i am not capable yet, majority of the reason is i am not financially capable of buying all the shit I need, and learning all the knowledge that I need to know….or so I assume. Now when it comes to,”learning enriches talent”, I will agree on you on that. But you had to have talent in the first place.

A tree wont grow without a seed.

Quobetah
New=Better

[Gerald Baria]

[Walter Soyka] “So you think creativity cannot be learned? Again, I must disagree. Creativity is a process which can be studied; it’s an activity which can be practiced; it’s a skill which can be improved. “

Wow, really?! Talent, as in pure bread, just born with it crazy good the first time, tyoe of talent is completely ridiculous to you? And the only way to really make great work, is to study 10 years in films school, work under some 60 year old pro for another 10 years, and start from the bottoom and move slowly up..only then could you be given the credit to be “capable” of doing something great?! I cannot believe I am seeing this staement from a Cow writer. Have you people really have lost all respect for ART, just to protect your slowly disappearing turf?!

Here’s the hard facts.

Many people can get the best equipment, best crew, best grading tools, huge budgets..but if the director has NO TALENT, his movie will be CRAP. That is proven several times every single year from all the crap that comes out of Hollywood. CRAP..as in that ridicolously bad Mobius movie by Laforet for the C300 demo. Technically well made YES, but overall value is poop nonetheless. And a lot of times…low budget, meager equipped indie dudes really make something great.

You can argue all you want that only 4 decades of hard work and experience is the ONLY way to do great stuff but the proof is in the pudding. I see american TV everyday, I see hollywood movies every week. And those are old well equipped, hard working “pros” but 98% of the things I see is still CRAP. Because talent, can and will never be learned. When you have it..you just have it. If you dont, no amount of money or training can cover it for you.

Quobetah
New=Better