[Richard Herd]

John, I show my first year students your video on editing because of the editing time lapse. They get the a-ha moment! It’s crazy that some of them like the “link clips to the gap” approach and other like the “build it in the timeline” approach.

Question: How long did it actually take to cut “The Decider” Promo?

Thanks!

[Richard Herd]

Post Redacted.

[Richard Herd]

Compound Clip it. Set the dB of the CC to -12. Hit CMD-8. Choose the compressor and jack the settings sliders to 100% and 100%. Presto. All audio (if it’s captured cleanly) is at -12.

You want, -6, set it to -6 and so on.

Audio compression shouldn’t be that hard. And it isn’t.

It still needs to be recorded clean. <– Can’t overstate that!

[Richard Herd]

[Bill Davis] “If your students are looking to work into filling seats as professional editors where the bulk of what they’ll do is precision timeline editing and full production – focusing on AVID would be smart. “

I know what you mean. But you didn’t say that. First, a student has to get results they intend. Avid is clunky and ridiculous except for those in a niche market that has nothing to do with storytelling abilities. I mean the crappiest movies in Hollywood are cut on Avid. That has nothing to do with the software.

Get the students telling stories ASAP! Then, once they have a bit of a reel and a knack, then they can look at markets and job skills. This is pedagogy, here. X is a deep program.

[Richard Herd]

I’m a teacher.

I taught Premiere Pro for the last 2 years. This year I purchased FCPX and am teaching it. I teach a lesson on dialogue editing. In PP, it took a week. In X, it took 50 minutes. L-cuts, J-cuts, audio mixing. It really sucks because now I have to come up with 4 more days of curriculum. I think we’ll do dubstep remixes of Sinatra tunes.

In my opinion as a teacher and a freelancer (yeah, I’ve made 1,000 effing ads in a dead market, soul-crushing environment, can’t wait to move), X is best. The folks who say X ain’t for film are wrong.

The decision for Avid and PP has nothing to do with actual storytelling, editing for content type stuff. Avid is so clunky as to be embarrassing. PP still has that weird rendering-but-not-rendering in the bottom right but thankfully it integrates nicely with AE. Whew. Otherwise, we’d get it for free and let it sit on our HD for a decade.

(Swore off this damn forum. Hate to be back.) Truth is … no… my experience mandates that your students touch X first. Get the story going. What editing is: it is not the most important part of a move. IT IS THE MOVIE!

Another detail, my first year students shoot on consumer panasonic cameras. My second year students shoot on Canon XA10. Actually, the Canon stinks to get the footage into the system.

You should’ve seen the first year students huddled around the iMac, collaborating, discussing shots and angles, and which one to use. This was day friggin’ one. By my curriculum that’s 10 times more efficient. When they have a question, I show them the next buttons and how deep the program actually is.

Look: If they can tell a story with motion picture and they have the drive for the entrepreneurial hustle, then maybe they can be so lucky as to get a shared corporate IT, low-risk permission, anti-hacker environment gig Avid is so proud of. Me? I installed a SAN and taught them how to make password protected sparse images to protect their work.

Ok. I’m very proud of my students.

Premiere upgrade arrives in 2 weeks.
Avid arrives in August.

They gotta know all three.

[Richard Herd]

Well, the story is everything!

If there’s space in the story, it would be funny to have a cutaway of the fly with a GoPro mounted to its little tiny helmet.

[Richard Herd]

[Walter Soyka] “The best lesson of FCP7: there’s no one perfect NLE.”

Bone to pick here too:
ok if that’s actually true, then you need to stop trying to “fix” what you don’t like about X. Just live with its failings and move on. A final kiss goodnight. X goes that way <– you go that way –>. You don’t have to hate each other or sue for child support. Just break up. Move on. Find a new one. Plenty of fish in the sea. Other cliches to type.
The speculation you posited proved false, ergo PIOPs are impossible because of the code. Well, apple proved you wrong and screwed up my workflow. I use X. You don’t. Easy peesy: move on.

Not trying to be a dick (though my name is Richard) just pointing out the obvious.

[Richard Herd]

[Oliver Peters] “Sometimes complexity and the need to put in effort to LEARN your tools is a good thing. “

oh olly. You can’t even export a file out of X, man. Hard to take your critique seriously. Seriously.
No offense intended. Your ethos is flopping on the deck like Truckee river salmon. Just pointing out the obvious. If you don’t like the software, stop using it. Sheesh.

Like you said “…LEARN your tools…”

–all in good faith and humor, Rich

[Richard Herd]

[Bill Davis] “fixed lots of issues and bugs”

Ok. here it is. PIOPs suck. Folks in this forum (the three blind mice) arguing for PIOPs though they don’t use X are notcool — the extent to which Apple heard their arguments.

Simple easy point: If you ain’t usin’ the software, stop “improving it” from your (malapropisms) point of view of “theory” guised actually as speculation. It was laughable when the three blind mice said piops were impossible because of the codebase and then they b begging blindly for siops. Threeblindmice, if you ain’t usin it. go away.

I.M. feeling better now.
deep breath.
moving on…we need single payer health care.

[Richard Herd]

[Bill Davis] “paid to look farther downstream”

or is it further