Tony West
Forum Replies Created
-
I just feel much like politics, things are being discussed on here in too general of terms.
There are all types of editing environments. Some people are in a news stations, some in their office or home or remote trucks or in the filed or wherever.
Feature film, sports, local news national news, you name it. To think that any one technique is going to work all the time across all these different situations is unrealistic, and anyone that’s been working in this field for decades should already know that.
It also gets back to what I was talking about before. Having a conversation with people who are doing the same type of work as you vs. trying to generalize about all kinds of jobs and all kinds of situations across the industry.
-
[Steve Connor] “Because as someone who DOES work directly from the browser most of the time in FCPX I take great offence at this.”
Don’t worry Steve, most of the greatest films in history were not cut with pancakes, so you will be in good company inside
the “rubbish” box ; ) -
This looks like they are wanting to have someone come in and train the staff on X. They may not want to say they are switching to publicly.
A “guru” is a teacher.
-
[Oliver Peters] “Simply questioning the premise that roles and keywords are a deciding factor.”
It’s odd. You posted that “FCPX in Europe” thread in which all he was doing was showing people using these tools in X. You called his presentation “excellent”.
He made the same points that many of us have been making for years, and got no push back. That thread got 0 replies. Speed speed speed. He kept saying that over and over. Replies to this day ZERO.
Just kind of funny : )
-
[Andrew Kimery] “how is Resolve not the #1 free thing on his list? ;)”
He said “easiest to use” iMovie is “easier” to use than Resolve ; )
-
[Walter Soyka] “We get down to time and motion studies here, counting keystrokes and clicking stopwatches and arguing about whether it takes longer to lasso multi-select or drag-and-lag. It’s easy to forget that the computers are the machines, not us. How we feel about the tools is a real factor in the choices we make.”
I imagine for many they are the same thing. I don’t like the program because of the color of the layout or the name or something trivial like that. I like it because it speeds up the “non-creative” parts of editing so I can spend more time on the creative, fun parts editing.
At least, that’s why I like it.
-
[Oliver Peters] “[Tony West] “The cut and paste method you mentioned seems to defeat the purpose of the connected clips. You would have to lasso all the elements to do that instead of just dragging the primary clip.”
Yes. So?”
So, your way is less efficient than how I wold do it.
First, if you are going to use that method you have to make sure that you lasso all of the elements that you want to past. If you don’t, whatever you miss won’t be there when you paste. I’m only worried about the primary clip or clips.
[Oliver Peters] ” When I move a piece, it’s usually a segment, so in FCPX that would be several primary clips and their associated connected clips,”
If I’m moving a segment I still only lasso the primary clips (which is less lassoing than your example.)
If you have over 10 elements connected to a primary like Carter, it’s a lot more work trying to reach vertically down to lasso all of those clips. (That’s why I imagine you don’t see him doing it that way often)
Your way is 1. Lasso more (than I would) 2. Cut 3. move the playhead down the timeline to where you want it to be. 4. select that spot 5. Paste
My way is 1. Lasso less 2. drag everything to the spot.
There are often multiple ways of doing the same thing. I often see people doing things in X that I would never do. If you are working like that I can see why you don’t feel it’s any more efficient. I wouldn’t either if I did it that way.
Also, the point isn’t can you move chunks in X more efficiently than me (doesn’t look like you can) but rather can you move the same chunks in a track-base time as efficiently. You would have to make your own version of the carter video to prove it.
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “[Oliver Peters] “I would argue that to do the equivalent function in a track-based NLE takes more keystrokes, but isn’t inherently slower.”
It always surprises me to hear people make such a big deal out of this.
Did they really have so much difficulty doing this in other NLEs? How did they ever get anything done?”
You are actually calling Oliver out in this statement as not knowing what he is doing in tracks (since you use “his” statement ). I don’t think you meant to do that.
-
[Oliver Peters] “I’ve spoken with Thomas. He works on short form with low-res media using fast, local SSD media drives. That’s when FCPX excels.”
Well you might have to use low-res media also like him if your system is not handling the material.
I don’t have any lag when swapping shots with 4k material in an 60 min timeline (without low-res mat) at all. People who are interested can just test it with their own system and material to see how it works for them. It’s pretty easy to test that.
The cut and paste method you mentioned seems to defeat the purpose of the connected clips. You would have to lasso all the elements to do that instead of just dragging the primary clip.
-
[Oliver Peters] ” with a large timeline is a real performance drag.”
Hum. I never see that drag when I watch folks on these demo videos. If you get a chance to interview Thomas Carter, maybe ask him why his performance is zippy and yours is not. Ask what he’s doing differently than you.