Neil Goodman
Forum Replies Created
-
[James Culbertson] “[Daniel Frome] “Well in this case the joke is not that it can’t be real… it’s that it IS real 🙁 Instead of giving editors more ‘creativity’ with the supposed advantages of FCPX, they just expect to consolidate 4 jobs into 1 :/”
To be fair, this consolidation has been going on for a long time, and has nothing to do with FCPX. They could just have easily used Premiere or AVID as the editing base, with the same job requirements.
“That was my point. FCPX or any other NLE on the market – this is the job of 4 or 5 people, and should be paid accordingly.
-
[Scott Witthaus] “[Shane Ross] “SHOW EDITOR with Field story producing experience AND color correction AND audio mixing? Not asking for much are they? Wonder what they pay for this is…AND, I wonder what they mean by “Trial basis.” ”
ah yes, welcome to the new world….
“So reality editor, mixer, colorist and field producer.
that better be a $2000+ a day position trial or no.
-
[Bill Davis] “Glenn Ficarra “I could cut at least twice as fast if not three times as fast on Final Cut Pro X as I could on Avid.””
I hear this quite a bit – its faster, its faster, its faster..
No one ever says specifically what made it faster ?
Was it all the front end prep, was it the the actual timeline? What specifically?
It also makes me wonder because he says he had to do a lot less clicking around but in my experience you do way more mousing and clicking in FCPX than any other NLE.
Not trying to argue, but genuinely curious – whats so much faster?
-
Has anyone seen the movie? Is it good? Is the editing good?
Thats really what it boils down to me.
For me its not wether FCPX can do it or not. Its wether you like the timeline or not. That all it really boils down to for me.
Its also funny that in this thread there are people who continually say there not worried or concerned with FCPX getting certain features because they are “niche” and only usefull in hollywood big budget features now are all excited thats theres press about it doing it now being in that “niche”.
As for those certain that Avid’s market share in this is dwindling – I bring up this post about from the wonderful Marianna over at Avid.
Every winner and nominee in the Best Picture, Film Editing, Sound Editing and Sound Mixing categories at the Academy Awards relied on Avid.
https://www.avid.com/US/press-room/AcademyAwards -
I wondering the same as Andrew – while I have a staff gig, I’m always on the hunt looking for opportunities both Freelance and otherwise.
I’ve seen two posts total about FCP X none of which offered anything close to a livable wage or even close to what the average day player in LA would be making. And that’s just “average day player”. There’s still many here who are making $1500 a day at the top end of the spectrum. That said, i took it upon myself to learn the software to formulate my own opinions and have used it on a few freelance gigs now where the client didnt care what I was cutting on.
As someone who doesn’t solely rely on X, but know’s it well enough to execute and deliver high end work – I reached out to Sam as well. It will be interesting to see what comes back.
-
[Jeff Markgraf] “I would hate to see this particular feature be the deciding factor against X. As always, YMMV, to each his own, post no bills, don’t run with scissors, etc.”
I dont particularly use “dynamic trimming” like those guys tried to demonstrate most of the time either but im sure narrative guys do all day long, – I do however heavily rely on the loop back, dual heads up display and the ability to see the changes to both clips when trimming with the keyboard. I generally dont have “snap” on when i cut so the mouse is clumsy to trim with IMO. Its not just an Avid thing, Premiere has it to now.
Its not a dealbreaker for me in X – Im getting to like it, I just dont prefer it and Ive found while X has lots of strengths and great things going for it, trimming just isnt one of them.
-
[Scott Witthaus] “[Richard Herd] “Regardless of how anyone works, how it be known where to cut if the head and tail are unseeable (Jeremy’s post notwithstanding.) This is especially a problem on a continuity cut between angles of the same action.
”Well, you get it pretty close with your first cut, then tweak later. I am not seeing what you are missing.
“What your missing is that not everyone works like that.
To have to step into the precision editor, then only to take a stab, and “get it pretty close”, then have have to step out, grab the mouse and trim a second time to get it perfect with dual heads up view is crazy to me and so is trying to make one frame adjustments with the mouse when you have snap off. Especially in a situation where i have other people in the room with me.
The whole point of it being “Dynamic” is being able to dial it in while watching the edit!
The dual heads up should stay up if the trim tool is activated so you can make adjustments with the keyboard and you should be able to dial in a pre/post roll so that it loops back. Thats one thing i really hate about X and doesnt make any sense to me.
This video just seems like a couple guys trying really hard to convince themselves that this trim tool is on par with others.
*im not trying to bash fcp-x. Just not buying what this video is selling.
-
[Scott Witthaus] “Interesting. I saw quite the opposite for the way I work. Much like when I switched over to FCP from Avid, and everyone was saying ‘well the trimming is FCP sucks, Avid is the only way…” I soon found out I really missed nothing from Avid and I was faster at FCP. And now after learning more and more about trimming in FCPX I realize that I really don’t miss alot from FCP7 and Avid (which is a moot point as it’s dead in my region) and FCPX is much faster in the way I work. I customized the keyboard and went at it. Not missing much at all in the way I work. Your mileage will certainly vary.”
Cheers mate- glad its working out for you!
-
[Bret Williams] “Yes, but what you’re describing isn’t dynamic trimming. Neither is anything the ripple guys are doing. Let’s forget the many extra steps to get to it, but even the limited nature of what they’re doing is only available on them primary. And I didn’t see a roll edit where both sides are shown nor even the tail or head of the otherside of the single sided edit. All he did was a slightly dyamic extend edit.
“This – i actually thought the video did more to show the shortcomings of Dynamic trimming in FCPX than anything else. Its not all about simply being able to play around an edit point.
-
[Bill Davis] “But Charlie,
They’re so organized looking, and, like, I know what they all MEAN, and they feel so, well, COMFORTING, and you know, HOW CAN I TELL WHAT THE HELL ANYTHING IS WITHOUT TRACKS! – cuz, you know.
They’re TRACKS.
for gods sake.
How can I get stuff done if you take my TRACKS away? ……….. (i’m scared)
(said way too many people over the past 4 years)
“Tracks arent nearly as annoying as this post. SMH