Jeff Markgraf
Forum Replies Created
-
[David Roth Weiss] “finding knowlegable Premiere editors is much, much easier here than finding knowledgable FCPX editors”
No official polling results here, either, but I find the opposite: finding knowledgeable FCPX clients/facilities is much harder than finding Premiere clients/facilities.
I see lots of people who run facilities, or network operations, who made the leap to Premiere based mostly on FUD. And those of us who work for and with these folks now have to live with the consequences.Unlike many of those who post here on the COW, those of us who work in LA usually don’t get a say in the matter. If you do promo work for NBC, you use Avid, because NBC on-air promo uses Avid. And they do the finishing. ABC dropped FCP7 for Premiere. So if your’e a vendor for ABC promo, you better get used to Premiere. And so on.
I read, wistfully, of those on this board who are hired to produce, edit and deliver projects, without being told what platform to edit on. Every client I’ve worked with who sees me working with FCPX has expressed shock and delight at how quickly and smoothly the work gets done. But since just about everyone in Hollywood is an expert in everything, it often comes down to some know-nothing manager dictating the platform. “We need an Avid editor…we need a Premiere editor…we need an After Effects editor (what the hell is an AE editor, anyway? who edits in AE?)…”
PS – I just don’t get the “Premiere is the FCP8 we really wanted” trope. I don’t find Premiere to be anything like FCP Legacy. Other than having tracks. 😉
-
Very glad to see this. Although, I must confess I was really hoping for an X to Avid utility, in the style of the old fcp7 to Avid app from automatic duck 10 years ago.
Still, a big jump forward for X.
-
Oliver-
I think, ironically, that many (may be even most) of the Windows based Avid systems came about because of Apple.
Remember the situation years ago when Apple was being destroyed by Scully and Amelio? I remember a lot of people here in Hollywood predicting the imminent demise of Apple. Then Avid seemed to shift focus to the Windows-based version, leaving the Mac version seriously behind in the upgrade and new features cycle. I seem to recall Avid vigorously denying any intent to do so, but the fact was that Mac-based Avids fell behind for several years. So a lot of previously diehard Mac facilities made the switch to PCs at the next upgrade point.
Frankly, there was at least a ten-year period in which PC Avids out-rendered and out-featured their Mac cousins.
So now there are lots facilities with a major investment in PC hardware and avid and interplay, etc. and Avid made some good deals on those HP systems. Sure, the graphics department stuck with Apple, but editorial wasn’t about to ditch their still expensive stuff for new Macs and new software.
And given all the hoopla over FCPX’s less than stellar introduction, it was easy to justify not even giving it a look by pointing at their entrenched investment in PC systems. At the same time, it was a no-brainer to give cross-platform Adobe a shot.
I think many if these people never really trusted Apple after their near death experience. Even the second coming of Jobs wasn’t enough to counter their fear of being left hanging.
-
“PPRO CC on Interplay.”
Link? More info?
-
[Robin S. Kurz] “[Herb Sevush] “if you pissed everybody off”
Everybody? 😀 Hardly.”
Somehow I missed the pissed off stage and just got on with learning a new NLE. But I do sometimes enjoy seeing the tantrums…if only to point and laugh.
-
Going for three days. Would love to meet and greet fellow COWS.
-
[Shane Ross] “And that’s a thorn in Avid’s side, for sure…”
For sure. One wonders what might have been if Avid had had the “testicular fortitude” to drop a badly aging, nearly 20-year-old platform and reinvent their NLE – kinda like Apple did, but without the arrogant and bungled introduction.
I find it frustrating that most of Avid’s new features, especially when it comes to modern frame sizes and tapeless workflow, feel bolted on, rather than integrated and well implemented. (Will AMA ever be anything more than a kludge?)
Yes, I know the ISIS (and Unity before it) shared workflow is great. But, honestly, there are so many things about the actual editing process in Avid that feel SO cumbersome after all these years. And even more so the basic media and file management stuff. I always feel this strong sense of “back in my day, we walked 5 miles to school in the rain, and we liked it!” oozing from the keyboard.
On the other hand, v8 has some good, long-needed improvements.
On the other other hand (3 hands – yikes!), so many facilities are working on badly outdated versions, because “why fix it if it ain’t broke,” it almost doesn’t matter .
(slinks back to his FCPX system and crosses himself…)
-
[Robin S. Kurz] “In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroÊŠl/, /ˈtrÉ’l/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet… “
Oh yes, I know. But truly successful trolling should be virtually transparent, or invisible, at first glance. So I would suggest DRW’s harrumphing isn’t really good trolling at all. Just garden-variety hissing and spitting at something he doesn’t understand and doesn’t to understand.
Ultimately, tiresome and of little value. Not to mention condescending.
-
[Neil Goodman] ” Interplay and Isis seems to keep it at bay”
That’s certainly the case in Hollywood. And it’s a shame.
My last three projects were on Avid. It was difficult to keep from falling into the “this would be so much easier and efficient on FCP X” mantra. Because Avid was fine…it was, well, Avid.
But, OMG, I could have cut the edit time significantly in FCP. Not because of the logging/metadata tools so frequently fetishized here on the forum. Rather, it was because of the ease of moving clips and groups of clips around. For upfront, sales reels, promos, etc., nothing I have used in 30 years is as fast and easy as X (once you get to know it for a few months). Seriously. Nothing.
Frustratingly, the only thing preventing using FCP X was inertia. It wasn’t a case of we offline, and the network finishes, so we have to use their NLE platform. The company was finishing, so platform didn’t matter. More of a “not invented here” syndrome.
Oh, well. At least I get paid for the unnecessary OT.
By the way, I surely do loves me some Interplay. Best thing Avid ever did.
-
Hi Phil.
Yes, your unhappiness with X is quite apparent. 😉 You aren’t alone. Although, I must say, it has become by far my favorite editing system (right up there with the long ago, late, lamented Immix VideoCube!)
A couple of points, if I may:
[Phil Lowe] ” I was unable to trim the b-side video over the a-side narration.”
The trick here is to expand the AV on the clips and then do a “double roller” trim on the video. Or trim just the outgoing “video” part of the VO and pull the B side picture with audio along. Even though the “DIVA DRIVE” audio clip is audio only it still acts like an A/V clip in the primary. So if you expand both clips, you can edit the “video” part of each clip.
Regarding VO in the primary, or not: I often put it all in the primary to do the basic assembly, then lift elements from the primary to start tweaking. Lifting the clip (option-command-up arrow, I think) leaves a gap clip on the primary with the lifted clip connected to it. Now you can adjust the connected clip to your heart’s content, and just expand or shorten the gaps underneath.
When I first started cutting with X, (promos) I cut with everything as connected clips over one long gap clip. It worked fine. Felt a lot like using Avid or FCP7. But it really didn’t take advantage of the speed X has to offer once you’re in the groove. So I’d really recommend the drop-it-in-the-primary, then lift-clips-out-of-the-primary method as a bridge between the two techniques. Until you’re more comfortable with trimming the expanded audio technique.
[Phil Lowe] “I have always dealt with audio issues immediately after laying down each clip.”
I usually do the audio stuff as I go along. It takes a few keystrokes to accomplish, but it’s nothing compared to how long we had to wait to shuttle and cue tapes to find b-roll or next SOT.
I prefer to listen as I’m editing in mono, since that’s how it will be presented. I find listening to split audio distracting, and harder to get the levels right. That’s why I generally wait until the end to pan the audio. But if you can mono your monitors, then you could just as easily do the audio panning as you go. Different strokes, etc.
In the long run, the station you’re working for really should begin to rethink their approach to cutting and archiving. Using roles properly would allow stories to be output and archived with true audio stems (VO, SOT, nat sound and music and effects all as separate tracks on a multi-track Quicktime (or other) file). Much more flexible in the long run. After all, having only VO as a separate track was always a compromise forced by 2-track tape machines. A more modern approach could really make things go faster and make archiving more useful. IMHO.
Happy to go into more detail here or off board, complete with pictures, if you wish.