Forum Replies Created

Page 8 of 11
  • James Lackleter

    January 17, 2014 at 11:42 am in reply to: To Editors thinking of switching to FCPX 10.1

    That’s just not true. Not in LA and not in NY, not in London. Some news outlets use it, the reporters can edit because it’s easy to use. Internet yes, Broadcast and film, no.

    And let me just say, I’m sure the program has been used to cut stuff that has appeared on television. But I’m talking about major primetime, studio films, even indie it’s not used. I’m an Indie NY/LA mainly based director, indie film absolutely does not FCPX.

  • James Lackleter

    January 17, 2014 at 11:32 am in reply to: To Editors thinking of switching to FCPX 10.1

    I bought it day one, returned because of no XML, and unsuitability. Watched it develop. I’m always trying to be ahead of the curve, so I thought why not. I can always transfer to Smoke. But I got stuck in it because of the broken and ever-changing XML.

    It’s fine, I have a rather funny workaround for this should anyone want to transfer out to Smoke. You can get the Student version free which I think has virtually everything.

    I just don’t want kids to learn FCPX, Avid, Smoke, Prem. These are what professionals use. Davinci Resolve and Scratch for color.

    The whole apple line is being weeded out and rightly so. Quality and stability trumps all.

  • James Lackleter

    January 17, 2014 at 11:08 am in reply to: To Editors thinking of switching to FCPX 10.1

    Yes, I’m saying editors don’t use FCPX. Not in LA, not in NY. Not for film, not for broadcast. This is a fact.

  • James Lackleter

    January 17, 2014 at 10:56 am in reply to: To Editors thinking of switching to FCPX 10.1

    I will say for the color correction, that editing programs are not made for color correction, so will let it slide on that. Mark give the resolve manual a read and try using it to correct your log footage, you’ll get better results and it’s a quick learn. Not to mention lite is free and supports 4k now.

    As for everything else I said, it’s fact. No rants here. On a more comical note here’s a little video my buddies made that sums it up.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxKYuF9pENQ

    Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!

    This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.

  • James Lackleter

    January 17, 2014 at 8:00 am in reply to: To Editors thinking of switching to FCPX 10.1

    I don’t think FC7 is dead but it will be shortly. And FCPX should fall off the earth. I’m saying avoid FCPX and FC7 in general, but I am gearing this towards younger editors mostly.

    And FCPX can be used for a casual user making one track audio, stereo videos etc, but if anyone thinks this is a good program for editing film and television, they are not an editor. And don’t understand what an editing suite needs to produce the highest quality A/V.

    One more note that’s very important to add, the new compressor is just as useless as Logic. No mention or hints of HEVC, 4k output h.264 blocky and dull. Let’s not forget Quicktime X which essentially color corrects your footage for you. Stopping before this turns into a rant. Really trying to stick to facts but it get’s me pissed.

  • James Lackleter

    January 2, 2014 at 6:14 pm in reply to: Logic Limiter Plug

    What I don’t get is why the output level is not acting as a ceiling when I set it to -4.5. The audio meter is showing over 0db. Thanks for reply

  • James Lackleter

    December 30, 2013 at 3:37 am in reply to: Sound Question

    https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/35455152/third%20act%20sound.wav

    Still needs work, working on the ambience track, just heard a click, but it’s getting there I think. The trans impulse is still a concern of mine

  • James Lackleter

    December 30, 2013 at 3:13 am in reply to: Sound Question

    Do you mean am I hiring a mixer? Probably not as I’ve come pretty far with it and I don’t think there’s much more I can do with it. I’m still working on the mix but I’ll put up the whole scene I a minute if you want to take a listen. For the most part I did not use the lav but I did get some use out of it. When the actor dropped to his knees it’s as you said, caught in his cavity. One sec I’m going to put up the scene.

  • James Lackleter

    December 29, 2013 at 10:40 pm in reply to: Sound Question

    Yes the channel 2 is a lav mic, 1 is the boom, so for the most part I just used the boom mic. They are in a small room so I don’t mind the reverb too much, though I did run a very slight dereverb on the shots where I only used the boom. I don’t know if I mentioned this but the other actor is a grip reading off camera so his voice doesn’t matter. What’s really bothering me is the “huh, huh” line. A very subtle low frequency noise which I think is a low frequency transient impulse causing it. I’ve done some research on it and all I can find is grad papers suggesting algorithms to fix it, but they are way over my head. I’m a director not a sound engineer.

  • James Lackleter

    December 27, 2013 at 11:41 pm in reply to: Sound Question
Page 8 of 11

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy