Forum Replies Created

Page 2 of 3
  • Ty Vann

    January 18, 2014 at 11:20 pm in reply to: To Editors thinking of switching to FCPX 10.1

    I am still waiting for you to save me and give me a clue what NLE I should use instead of FCPX? Keep in mind I have used most of them. I have FCPX, FCP7, Lightworks, and Premiere Pro 6 installed. And I’m not in Lalaland, Gotham, or Foggy London. I need real facts, not just your facts.

  • Ty Vann

    January 18, 2014 at 2:08 am in reply to: To Editors thinking of switching to FCPX 10.1

    No capitalization? 🙂

  • Ty Vann

    January 17, 2014 at 3:33 pm in reply to: To Editors thinking of switching to FCPX 10.1

    guess you have never heard of how resolve or pro tools for finishing and you’d use them with FCPX?

  • Ty Vann

    January 17, 2014 at 3:07 pm in reply to: To Editors thinking of switching to FCPX 10.1

    LA certainly is a great barometer of the rest of the world.

  • Ty Vann

    January 17, 2014 at 3:05 pm in reply to: To Editors thinking of switching to FCPX 10.1

    This OP is so funny. He actually believes that by airing his own failings with FCPX, he is doing everyone a favor. Thanks, but no thanks. FCPX does EVERYTHING I need in a modern EDL, and I make good money with it.

  • Ty Vann

    December 21, 2013 at 12:00 am in reply to: A step backwards

    I signed up for Obamacare and saved a couple of hundred a year. That’s money earned, which I will put toward a shiny new Apple Tube :). But that’s beside the point.

    The point is the new Library may be subjective, but I’m loving it subjectively. It’s exactly what I have been waiting for. I can sort of see where Apple is going with this as a foundation to build on, and I’m liking it a lot. Also the other little improvements to increase speed and stability I highly welcome.

  • Ty Vann

    October 19, 2013 at 7:28 pm in reply to: FCPX is Ready for prime time

    [Chris Harlan] “Exactly how is it misinformed? I don’t see it.

    And biased? Its an opinion piece. Its supposed to be biased; that’s what opinions are.”

    Some opinions are more informed then others, therefore less biased (i.e., more fair, if you want a definition).

    How is it misinformed…? See Mr Austin’s post above or the posts at fcp.co. Overall the article is a reactionary piece, more appropriate for 2011 than 2013. Do professional editors care about FCPX? Apparently Mr McAulife’s type of professionals don’t care. And anyone else who cares about FCPX, the thousands of editors out there using FCPX to make a living, don’t count.

  • Ty Vann

    October 19, 2013 at 4:10 pm in reply to: FCPX is Ready for prime time

    [Oliver Peters] “I think this article is apropos about now 😉

    https://provideocoalition.com/kmcauliffe/story/do-the-professionals-care-abo...”

    The guy who wrote that obviously doesn’t like and use FCPX, but it’s no excuse for such a misinformed and biased piece.

  • Ty Vann

    September 16, 2013 at 10:39 pm in reply to: Interesting presentation….

    [Aindreas Gallagher] “[Dan Stewart] “a 2perf 35mm that sounds like a lawnmower but reams the Alexa in every available port.”

    so that’s a great sentence.”

    great for S&M postproduction. No pain no gain?

  • Ty Vann

    September 16, 2013 at 3:37 pm in reply to: Interesting presentation….

    Nothing he’s saying is new. But he’s on point (which he makes with the ballsy certainty of a salesman) about the state of acquisition and post, and those who can’t keep pace with the change.

Page 2 of 3

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy