Michael Sanders
Forum Replies Created
-
I agree with Bill.
I did a project similar to this at the start of the year. 3 people, 20 odd questions each.
I went through person a and selected the clip for Q1, key worded that “Q1”, etc etc.
Then went through person two, and three using the same keywords. I had 20 plus bins (or buckets as my client called them) of all the answers for each question. Really did work like a dream.
Ahem oh yes – we had timecoded transcriptions as well which helped 🙂
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
In the Kona set up utility app, have you definitely got analogue audio selected as the input?
Its under audio setup I think – I don’t have the utility on the computer I’m doesn’t have it installed so this is from memory.
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
[Tom Wolsky] “You have to select the secondary storyline by clicking on the shelf.
Tom, what do you mean by the shelf?
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
A static talking head..
It wasn’t the shots – its the fact I didn’t even notice that got me..
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
10.0.3 does go along way to solving the reconnect media issues with alias files to the point you could import your rushes into one folder and import them into the project but not copy to the folder. That way you can archive the rushes before you start – or not (in the case of XDcam, import the files into a folder using XDcam transfer and then have to recopy the files again.
You could then import other files (graphics, stills, audio etc) into the event folder and use that for archiving.
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
At the moment if you want to use XDcam EX or HD material in either FCP X or 7 you have to use Sony’s XDcam browser or XDcam Transfer s/w to copy the files from the media (disc or card) to a hard drive.
Whilst it is copying the material it also re-wraps the files into Quicktime. It’s pretty fast but since I have’t worked with Avid or Premier much I have no idea if this process adds much time to the process of copying cards or discs (Avid or Premier I believe both work with the native MXF files).
I say at the moment because there was an announcement somewhere that Sony are going to be demoing a new way of working with XDcam material and FCP X (maybe 7 who knows) at this years NAB – which is only a month away.
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
David,
I know its all been said before – I’ve said it here and other places over and over again. So in that we are in agreement.
As for your comments on editing, cutting etc.
Perhaps I’m being a bit unfair to myself as to be honest I’ve cut plenty of material over my 23 yrs in the industry (I know that’s not a huge amount really). This includes a vast number of hour long doc’s, news segments, current affairs programmes, a bit of drama and a lot of corporate talking heads and the odd high end corporate.
So I do understand why people don’t like it and I have no problem with them. Its the people who haven’t bothered to try it who irk me, I think there’s an awful amount of difference between a bridge fall and trying a new piece of software. Which, yes does mean relearning how to do things – but that’s not the worst that can happen to a person.
As I’ve said over and over again, now we have a choice, and if track based editing works better on your programme then great, Avid and PP are there for you. I know people are pissed at Apple for what they’ve done. I was at first but I know think they are very brave for trying something new and innovative.
And FWIW there are a few project’s I’ve done recently where I sat down afterwards and thought it would be quicker on a track based editor. So I haven’t totally drunk the Kool Aid!
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
[Bernard Newnham] “And Mr Sanders says –
“I really can’t believe that almost a year later we’re still having this basic argument.”
It’s because people still can’t believe they’ve been so betrayed by a company they relied on, even believed in, in some cases. Simple as that.”
Bernard,
Sorry but you are selectively quoting – or maybe I didn’t make myself clear. My point was I can’t believe that after almost a year since FCP X was released we are still seeing people slam it without having used it. It’s not like you even now have to pay for it to play with it!
[Bernard Newnham] “And that’s the thing about NLEs – after a time of trying out various ways of doing things, everyone settled down to a common way of working. Not much is different between one screen and another. A bit like cars with the accelerator pedal on the right – it works so don’t screw around with it. Anyone, even Apple, change things at their peril. Ir’s an amazingly arrogant thing to do.”
Or you could say: “Congratulations, Good on them” Thank heavens for the people who set out to try out something new, who want to innovate and see what they can come up with. Thank you to the people who say: “Well how could we do this differently with the tools (hardware, OS, software) we’ve got now”. TV’s all file based, everything is in clips – how can we make sorting and finding stuff easier. Because that’s half the battle sometime.
And so what if they fail, we in TV (especially in reference to the BBC) spend so much of our time saying there’s no room to failure, everything must be tested and focus grouped so everything defaults to a formula and there’s no innovation. I don’t want to live in that world. I want people to try and find new ways of working and doing better.
Not everyone thinks that the old track based way of work was the best way and at least now we have an alternative.
Personally, I say kudos to Apple and Randy for giving it a go.
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
The post, nor the information contained within it, was designed to impress – just a response to the point made in Bernard’s post that FCP X may not be right of the BBC – it seems there are others (currently working within the BBC) who might disagree.
From his own post Bernard makes it know he retired/went freelance in 2001 – I don’t know what he’s up to now nor seek to belittle him or his views. I do know that in the intervening 11 years the tools for television production, the stories people tell and how they tell them have changed and have changed dramatically. In some ways for the best, in someways.. well that’s another day’s post 🙂
But that’s by the by. In response to the rest of your post:
No real (read professional) editor should ever go just on what someone else says, no one should be impressed with what someone else is using. I’m not impressed by what tools my decorator uses, but the fact he can paint my house well as well as he does impress’s me.
I would always listen to other people’s suggestions, but trust yourself, trust your abilities and screw everyone else. Even working on the same kind of programme we all work in different ways – and the beauty (or not depending on your point of view) with FCP X is that we now have a different way of working – not three edit systems fundamentally the same,
I still regularly meet editors who happily pronounce FCP X as “the most utter piece of crap ever” – despite never having used it, or in most cases actually played with it.
I really can’t believe that almost a year later we’re still having this basic argument.
One editor I know won’t touch FCP X because well, in his words “Walter Murch said its not up to par so that’s good enough for me”. Well far be it for me to disagree with one of the worlds top editors, but so far FCP X works for me on the stories I need to tell. Another editor admitted he was never going to try FCP X because it looks too much like iMovie and he hates iMovie.
For about 70% of the time I’m a DOP, imagine the response if I said I hate the ugly design of RED so I’m not going to use it! I’m not a huge fan of the RED one for many other reasons, but I’ve come to that conclusion from working with it. Lets be hones,t just because RED isn’t as easy to use as an Alexa doesn’t make the RED less of a professional camera.
There are some excellent editors doing great things with FCP X, who have bothered to play around and looked at what it has to offer. It is never going to win over every editor in the world, just in the same way FCP 7 never did. For me – I get it. I get the metadata driven workflow, trackless doesn’t bother me – in fact it works for me. I’m not totally won over by the event/project layout – but then on the current project I’m editing its a massive bonus.
What I really hate is the inference from a lot of people that because I use FCP X I can’t be a “professional” editor. I work to the highest standards I can, both technically and artistically. Be it shooting or editing I use the tools I have to the max and often go beyond what the clients ask because it will be better.
My clients (some of whom I’ve worked with over 13 years since I went freelance) value my editing skills for my ability to tell a story. They trusted my abilities when I worked front panel on BVW75’s, then again on Sony 910’s and again on FCP 7. As long as I deliver the goods to the standards my clients have come to expect – I suspect they don’t give a rats arse what I edit on. That’s how I define a professional editor.
Actually thinking about it the fact that I bothered to investigate FCP X so deeply I think is testament to my professionalism – what would it say about me if I said to my clients, “Oh, people told me FCP X is crap so I haven’t bothered”
One last thing, just don’t tell my clients I’m doing it faster on FCP X – or they will expect lower bills!
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor -
This guy is an Ex BBC staffer as I understand it.
It may interest him – and you to know – that someone (according to some blog post I read) high up in BBC Studios and Post P is heavily involved with helping improve Apple FCP X, they are really excited by it. I have no proof of this other than what I read somewhere.. I’ll try and remember where.
I do know BBC scotland are playing with it.
Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor