FORUMS: list search recent posts

What does FCPX teach new editors?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Walter Soyka
What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 3:02:50 pm

We become what we behold. We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.”
- Marshall McLuhan


I was in college studying broadcast communications during the linear/non-linear transition, and I learned to edit nearly simultaneously in a tape-to-tape bay and an Avid suite. I think this has shaped my early approach to editorial: some problems are easier to solve linearly (radio edit, then visuals), and some problems are easier to solve non-linearly (assembly followed by re-arranging to shape the story).

I started learning FCP with version 1, and I started using it seriously with version 3. From FCP's immense flexibility, I added what I'd consider a clay-sculpting approach to my mental toolbox. I could throw things on the timeline, use multiple layers as a scratch pad, and manipulate clips and edits directly on the timeline with the mouse.

All of these approaches have strengths and weaknesses, and experience is necessary for knowing which of the approaches I've learned works best for a specific problem.

My questions for the forum are these: how will a new editor, just starting on FCPX, learn the craft of editing? What problems will they be "good" at solving and what problems will they be "bad" at solving, due to the design perspective of their tools? What good habits will they pick up? What bad habits? What old editorial problems does FCPX fix? What new editorial problems does it introduce?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 3:35:10 pm

They will learn good project organization habits.

Keyword and Smart Collections teach good organizing given it's advantage over simply dumping all the clips into a bin or two. I suspect some people starting on FCPX will find other NLEs deficient in that respect. That a single clip can exist in multiple collections is hard (but not impossible) to replicate in other NLEs. That a single clip can exist under multiple collections can encourage a "non linear" way of organizing.

FCPX handles clips as relationships to each other rather than relationships locked in time. It's not a good or bad value judgement but it's very different than other NLEs. In some respects it's like nodal compositing vs track based compositing.



Return to posts index

Noah Kadner
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 3:59:53 pm

Yeah it does let you focus more on the creative aspects and enforces organization from the moment you ingest footage. It's kinda like having an assistant working alongside you. Of course you might find this unexpected if you're used to working in a less 'active' NLE, well which is pretty much any other NLE. But if you get used to it you can get projects from ingest to completion a lot faster with much less boring busy work.

Noah

Unlock the secrets of 24p, HD and Final Cut Studio with Call Box Training. Featuring the Panasonic GH2 and GoPro HD Hero.


Return to posts index


Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 4:04:40 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Keyword and Smart Collections teach good organizing given it's advantage over simply dumping all the clips into a bin or two."

Great point. I've seen people make the argument that FCPX will separate them from their footage, but I agree with you on this.

If you'll pardon the overgeneralization, I've found that editors with linear experience are a lot more willing to spend more time upfront with the footage -- possibly because constantly scanning through it all randomly on a linear system was out of the question. I've found that editors who started on non-linear systems were less afraid to jump right in without spending all that upfront time with the footage.

Abraham Lincoln famously said, "Give me six hours to chop down a tree, and I'll spend the first four sharpening my axe." Perhaps pervasive metadata will make logging (tree pun welcomed but not intended) attractive enough again that new editors will spend more time with the footage before beginning the edit?


[Craig Seeman] "FCPX handles clips as relationships to each other rather than relationships locked in time. It's not a good or bad value judgement but it's very different than other NLEs."

Agreed here, too -- but what do you think this means in editorial? Will this change the way editors assemble their cuts? The way they adjust them? The way they perceive the timeline? Will an editor who learns on FCPX be less inclined to view these relationships fluidly because the software is less inclined to treat them that way?


[Craig Seeman] "In some respects it's like nodal compositing vs track based compositing."

I see where you're going here (nodal compositing is about managing relationships), but I wonder if this analogy isn't a bit superficial. I think that FCPX's design philosophy is abstraction, hiding technical detail where possible and moving the editor away from the underlying mechanics of what the computer must do to assemble the edit. Nodal compositing requires the compositor to manually manage the comp in excruciating detail and understand exactly how the renderer works to get the result they're looking for.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Noah Kadner
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 4:07:08 pm

[Walter Soyka] " I think that FCPX's design philosophy is abstraction, hiding technical detail where possible and moving the editor away from the underlying mechanics of what the computer must do to assemble the edit"

Really this is the underlying philosophy of all of Apple's products if you look closely enough.

Noah

Unlock the secrets of 24p, HD and Final Cut Studio with Call Box Training. Featuring the Panasonic GH2 and GoPro HD Hero.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 4:10:58 pm

[Noah Kadner] "Really this [abstraction] is the underlying philosophy of all of Apple's products if you look closely enough."

I think this is true today, Noah, but as I just posted in response to Jean-François, I think that flexibility was the design philosophy of "classic" FCP. This feels like a big change.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index


Noah Kadner
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 4:33:27 pm

Oh totally- there was more flexibility but also a steeper learning curve. Now those of us who knew how to drive FCP 7 well already probably don't care so much about the latter but it's still an important consideration. The genius of great design is striking that perfect balance between power and usability.

Noah

Unlock the secrets of 24p, HD and Final Cut Studio with Call Box Training. Featuring the Panasonic GH2 and GoPro HD Hero.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 4:35:11 pm

[Walter Soyka] "[Craig Seeman] "FCPX handles clips as relationships to each other rather than relationships locked in time. It's not a good or bad value judgement but it's very different than other NLEs."

Agreed here, too -- but what do you think this means in editorial?"


Currently, the most obvious feature of nodal based editing is sync and compositing relationships (cutaways, layered fx, sync to primary storyline clips). It's important to point out that the nodes (connection points) can be moved. They default to the first frame but they can be moved to any frame of any underlying clip (a connected clip and secondary storyline can cross multiple clips in time) in which their existence in time overlap. By itself it has no value until one starts moving the underlying clips.

Therefore, it's biggest impact is in moving around stacks of relationships in time. Movement in time is both horizontal (track) and vertical (stack). This vertical movement doesn't easily exist in other NLEs (short of lassoing or very complex selections). This makes the movement of such stacks much easier. As to whether that's of value, depends on the project. It does facilitate moving sound synced to specific clips, cutaways, composited fx, titles, as a unit though.

In other NLEs one might build the track and then add layers. In FCPX it's possible to build layers, knowing you can comfortably move them if you find the entire stack should happen at a different point in time.

[Walter Soyka] "I see where you're going here (nodal compositing is about managing relationships), but I wonder if this analogy isn't a bit superficial. I think that FCPX's design philosophy is abstraction, hiding technical detail where possible and moving the editor away from the underlying mechanics of what the computer must do to assemble the edit. Nodal compositing requires the compositor to manually manage the comp in excruciating detail and understand exactly how the renderer works to get the result they're looking for."

See above. I don't think it's hiding things in this context. I think it exposes vertical relationships which previously were difficult to manage in other NLEs if you had to move the base of the stack. It allows the computer to do something that wasn't done easily in an NLE previously.

Maybe you're thinking of the "magnetic" timeline and clip collisions. Now the computer moves things out of the way for you . . . although even that doesn't "hide" the problem the editor needs to deal with. In this case it's really changing the sequence of how you handle such problems. Previously you'd have to resolve the collision to rework the move. Now you can make the move first and then decide how you want to handle the media that just became layered.

For those who tend to want to move things first this solves a problem. For those who'd work out the timings first, this wouldn't mean much because they'd not have the collision so this would be a vestigial new feature. It does mean that you have more flexibility because you can still avoid the collision first. It's just not a "block" if you tend to move things first.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:09:33 pm

I know that there's a mix in attitude toward FCPX from the posters here, so I can't thank everyone enough for their thoughts and civility. I'm learning a lot in this conversation, and I hope there is much more to come.

I'm going to continue challenging a few points and asking a few questions here, but I hope it doesn't come across as argumentative. I really respect the diversity of opinion on FCPX will affect the future of editorial, and I'm hoping to understand everyone's perspective a bit more deeply so I can better formulate my own.


[Craig Seeman] "I don't think it's hiding things in this context. I think it exposes vertical relationships which previously were difficult to manage in other NLEs if you had to move the base of the stack. It allows the computer to do something that wasn't done easily in an NLE previously."

I think FCPX hides a lot of the mechanics -- like file management, media types, track layout, even absolute time -- asking the editor instead to focus first on defining the relationships between the clips.

Maybe I got a bit derailed by the comparison to nodal compositing. I think that nodal compositing requires the compositor (the person) to think mechanically like their compositing app to get work done. In this regard, nodal compositing strikes me as much more similar to how FCP worked than how FCPX works.

I think that FCPX has much more defined perspective on how to work than FCP did. Jean-François said that FCPX felt very organic -- but is it still flexible? It seems to me that it pushes the editor towards a very specific way of working. Am I wrong on this? If not, are these changes good things, or are we giving up too much for too little?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index


Gerald Baria
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 2:52:22 am

[Walter Soyka] " I think that FCPX's design philosophy is abstraction, hiding technical detail where possible and moving the editor away from the underlying mechanics of what the computer must do to assemble the edit"

This is EXACTLY is what Steve Jobs philosophy on how he approaches every single Apple product. Ever since the first mac..up to its most recent releases..this is his entire point. Giving the user the power to do what he needs, without having to learn all the complications under the hood.

Heres a great playboy interview of steve j. in 1985 which exemplifies this: http://gizmodo.com/5821429/that-time-in-1987-when-playboy-interviewed-steve...

"That's a simple explanation, and the point is that people really don't need to understand how computers work. Most people have no concept of how an automatic transmission works, yet they know how to drive a car. You don't have to study physics to understand the laws of motion to drive a car. "


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 4:37:17 pm

[Craig Seeman] "They will learn good project organization habits."

Craig,

I think your response seems to imply that all previous NLEs encourage bad organization, and that FCP X changes all that. I know better to think you think that, but the implication is there anyway.

The fact is, good organizational skills are learned skills, and anyone lazy enough to get around good organization or who doesn't know enough to appreciate good organization, will always find a way to edit without organization, no matter what app they're using. FCP X is no exception to this rule, and it could easily be argued that it actually encourages bad habits by automating parts of the process.

[Craig Seeman] "That a single clip can exist under multiple collections can encourage a "non linear" way of organizing."

Or, it could just as easily encourage a "non linear" way of disorganizing. There are many very highly organized editors who would suggest that a single entry filed in a single location is better organized and gives them a much greater sense of confidence.

There's no right or wrong, just what works for some does not work for all. And, lazy work habits won't go away just because Apple built in a better system for handling retrieving clips with metadata.


David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 4:50:53 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "
The fact is, good organizational skills are learned skills, and anyone lazy enough to get around good organization or who doesn't know enough to appreciate good organization, will always find a way to edit without organization, no matter what app they're using. FCP X is no exception to this rule, and it could easily be argued that it actually encourages bad habits by automating parts of the process."


Good point David. While i do think FCPX has tried to make it harder for editors to be unorganized, you are correct, people will find ways of being disorganized.

I fully agree that taking the organization of footage etc etc out of the equation for you is encouraging laziness. I hate when clients (or bosses) want me to capture a whole tape, B/c it's lazy and dissoranized (in most cases). It's a cheap easy way out of having to log your footage, which is how you learn your footage if you did not shoot it.


-mattyc


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 5:05:59 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "I think your response seems to imply that all previous NLEs encourage bad organization,"

FCPX adds a key way to organize more easily. One clip can now exist in multiple collections (bins). That's the way my brain thinks and I've always felt previous NLE's bin methodology obstructed that. Of course one could apply keywords, notes, markers so that a clip can be tagged multiple ways in previous NLEs. I think FCPX makes that easier though.

I also find keywording ranges a major improvement. Sure you could have ranged markers and subclips in previous NLEs but now the clip can bee seen in the various collections and even if one looks at everything unsorted (the master dump bin?) you can see the single clip with its multiple ranges of keywords by looking at the color coded bars on top.

The act of keywording itself is amazingly easy. It can be as detailed as selecting range after range in a clip and typing in a keyword ... or as easy as dragging the same clip to multiple collections so it takes on the keyword of each for the entire clip.

Sure one can do the same organizing in past NLEs but making it easier means one is more inclined to do it IMHO.

I've been using NLEs before Avid existed and I can honestly say I've never encountered an NLE that easier and more flexible at organizing clips.

BTW I'm excluding the "Event" methodology here which I do think has some problems that need to be "explored."

[David Roth Weiss] "Or, it could just as easily encourage a "non linear" way of disorganizing. There are many very highly organized editors who would suggest that a single entry filed in a single location is better organized and gives them a much greater sense of confidence. "

But I wouldn't want to be limited to that way of organizing. Of course others would. I like that FCPX allows me to organize the way I want to. I could not do that easily in other NLEs.

A single clip can be interviews, two shots, daytime, exterior, Chicago, summer, and a selection of bites from the interviews. Depending on what I'm doing in the project I can find what I need in context. Smart Collections afford me certain combinations of the above. The entire clip allows me to look at multiple range selections when I need to see it that way too.



Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 6:52:14 pm

It's not hard (or uncommon) to have a single clip in multiple bins in Avid. Do it all the time.

Chris


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:07:39 pm

[Craig Seeman] "That a single clip can exist in multiple collections is hard (but not impossible) to replicate in other NLEs."

That's surely not true, is it? There is nothing easier in FCP7 than copying a clip to new bin and it's probably faster to do. Is that really any different? (In Media Composer too it's a doddle to have copies of the same clip in different bins - something that happens all the time with feature film edit organization.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:16:08 pm

In FCPX I don't have to copy/duplicate the clip. I place the clip in each Collection. They then are keyword searchable. In other NLEs the bin doesn't "tag" anything to the clip. I've used both Avid (first 12 years) and FCP (last 10 years) and neither are as easy or as flexible as FCPX doing this. Even searching a clip that meets the criteria (has been placed in) multiple Collections is easy. If I need to find Interviews, Chicago, exterior it takes me seconds because the clips are tagged with those keywords rather than just sitting in those bins.



Return to posts index

Jean-François Robichaud
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 3:59:37 pm

Every editor's got his own way of doing things. A flexible enough tool allows one to develop his own approach, using it in a way that it wasn't necessarily designed for, but fits the editor's mindset.

I also started out with linear editing, but moved on to NLE with Premiere, then Final Cut Pro (around V4). For most projects, I start with a cerebral, analytic approach to editing: I spend I lot of time browsing my clips, organizing them, picturing the edit in my head, before I even start putting anything together in the timeline. This might be a leftover from my linear beginnings (or it could be constructive procrastination), but it works for me. However, once I start assembling in the timeline, the process becomes more impulsive (in a good way).

I've been playing around with FCP X since its release. I haven't yet edited a full project in it, but I've run many tests and used it to synchronize audio to interviews. It's obvious that the media management features are very well suited to my style (keywords collections and all). It will be interesting to see how beginners will use these features to organize media. They might learn to spend more time thinking about the edit before putting anything in the timeline.

Beyond the obvious lack of interaction with an editing ecosystem, I've met my share of quirks, bugs and other strange behaviours in the timeline (all reported to Apple). Yet it don't feel FCP X forces me to work in one specific way. There are still many ways to construct an edit using the primary/secondary storylines, connected clips, compound clips, etc. Some operations are very efficient, others require too many steps to accomplish. Once again, how will a newcomer adopt it, since they have no preconception of how a timeline should behave?

It's too early to tell if I will be editing any faster in FCP X than FCP 7, but overall, I find its approach more attractive, despite its quirks. Sure, part of it is the novelty aspect, but there is something substantially smart about it. Once the interface has matured (2012? 2013?), it should be quite an efficient tool.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 4:08:56 pm

Nice post, Jean-François. One question for you:

[Jean-François Robichaud] "Every editor's got his own way of doing things. A flexible enough tool allows one to develop his own approach, using it in a way that it wasn't necessarily designed for, but fits the editor's mindset."

I think that flexibility was the design philosophy in FCP -- there were always multiple ways of doing the same thing.

Do you find that FCPX allows this same flexibility, or is there one easy path with FCPX, and others that are possible but much more difficult?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jean-François Robichaud
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 4:37:15 pm

[Walter Soyka] "
I think that flexibility was the design philosophy in FCP -- there were always multiple ways of doing the same thing.


Agreed. In fact, I'd say it's the design philosophy of all successful NLEs.


[Walter Soyka] "
Do you find that FCPX allows this same flexibility, or is there one easy path with FCPX, and others that are possible but much more difficult?"


The first thing one notices when using FCP X is how it breaks with the traditional multi-track timeline shared by most NLEs. One tends to think: it forces me to work in a specific, "alien" way, rather than what I'm used to. But that's just the first impression. Differences in the timeline are mechanical; they don't force you to change the way you construct a narrative, but you do need to adapt to the new tools and features. After a few weeks, I do get the feeling it's very flexible (organic might be the word), certainly less rigid. Some timeline operations still lack precision.

I don't see a problem with the base architecture, but with some of the secondary design decisions: the unified viewer is very well implemented when working on a laptop, but for one who has the screen real estate, can I get a separate viewer please? Some things shouldn't have been hidden from view: it should be more timecode-friendly, etc. Hide some things by default, sure, but just let me turn it back on if I want to see it.


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 4:44:31 pm

Walter, This is a great topic.

I think editors who learn on FCPX may lack a very important skill in editing: Problem solving.

Let's face it. FCP 7 had a lot of problems and you'd often run into those problems. Any Editor who uses FCP day in and day out has had to become a very good troubleshooter.

Moreover I feel like most of the people who started editing in linear environments are much more versatile editors. They can come up with a thousand different ways to accomplish the same thing and figure out how to do that thing ( a lot of times) faster than someone who didn't learn editing in a linear environment. It took way more planning to do edit's in linear form and that's why people who came from that Background are often much more oganized editors than those who started on NLE's.

It's like learning to drive a stick shift. If you learn to drive on the crappiest car in the world you can pretty much drive any stick shift car. But if you learn to drive a stick shift in a brand new corvette, when someone has you drive their 85 honda civic, you're gonna have some problems.

FCPX is sort of the same if you learn to edit on it, you pretty much only know how to edit on it. If someone puts you in front of an avid, you have no idea what's going on.

While I feel like the new way of FCPX's editing is incredibly fast, I feel like it may be at the cost of certain flexibilities.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 5:53:49 pm

"I think editors who learn on FCPX may lack a very important skill in editing: Problem solving.
Let's face it. FCP 7 had a lot of problems and you'd often run into those problems. Any Editor who uses FCP day in and day out has had to become a very good troubleshooter."


Matt -

I'm sorry but this is a pretty flawed argument. Extending your thesis everyone should use the worst possible iteration of everything to increase their problem solving abilities - word processor, spreadsheet, food blender, hand drill, surgical tool.

Problem solving skills are developed by solving the core problems - how to tell a story with this limited material, how to work with even the best NLE in the world, because even the best has problems and needs workarounds; not by extolling the virtues of incompetence. Lets elect the worst government so that we can learn the value of civic action ... oh wait, we've already done that.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 6:30:00 pm

I think Matt's point was that serious contraints teach discipline -- and with it, valuable skills or a valuable perspective that might be unattainable or unfathomable without those constraints.

[Herb Sevush] "Extending your thesis everyone should use the worst possible iteration of everything to increase their problem solving abilities - word processor, spreadsheet, food blender, hand drill, surgical tool."

Looking at Matt's argument through the lens of discipline and understanding fundamentals (or problem-solving in a specific domain rather than generalized problem-solving), I do actually think that professionals should begin their education as close to the basis of their domain as possible.

Writers should use pen and paper before word processors. Accountants should use their minds and ledgers before calculators and spreadsheets. Cooks and chefs should use knives and hand tools before food processors and blenders. Carpenters should use hand tools before power tools. Surgeons should use scalpels before DaVincis.

In all cases, this separates the why from the how -- the purpose of the tool from its mechanical use. It teaches more about the process as a whole, develops discipline, and builds appreciation and understanding. It allows the practitioner to understand the strengths and weaknesses of the tool separately from the process. I think all of these are good things and important to professional development.

Moving back to my original questions: whether FCPX gets us closer to the basis of editing, or further away -- I think that's still an open question, and that's part of what I'm hoping to explore in this thread.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 6:37:54 pm

"Writers should use pen and paper before word processors. Accountants should use their minds and ledgers before calculators and spreadsheets. Cooks and chefs should use knives and hand tools before food processors and blenders. Carpenters should use hand tools before power tools. Surgeons should use scalpels before DaVincis."

As someone who started in film and who believes that anyone seriously interested in the visual art of storytelling needs to start with the films of DW Griffith, Buster Keaton, Charlie Chaplin, and Sergei Eisenstein - I couldn't agree with you more. I didn't get that from Matt's posting, and for that I apologize.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 6:43:16 pm

[Herb Sevush] " I didn't get that from Matt's posting, and for that I apologize."

Thanks walter, Most likely my fault, Sometimes I focus too much on certain specifics rather than focusing on the root of what I'm getting at.

While you do come up with really good stuff Fiddling around with the edit. Which FCPX is great for. Planning and conceptualizing is a really big part of the process, that I'd imagine someone learning to edit on X would skip.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:21:54 pm

[Matt Callac] "While you do come up with really good stuff Fiddling around with the edit. Which FCPX is great for. Planning and conceptualizing is a really big part of the process, that I'd imagine someone learning to edit on X would skip."

As I mentioned earlier, laziness is a possibility with any NLE app... The bigger question confronting us with FCP X is whether anyone just learning to make videos and using X as their primary NLE app will be in any way prepared to work in the industry, or more importantly whether the general perception will be that they are unprepared.


David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:32:34 pm

[David Roth Weiss] " The bigger question confronting us with FCP X is whether anyone just learning to make videos and using X as their primary NLE app will be in any way prepared to work in the industry"

It depends on where the industry goes with FCPX.
Working on Avid Media Composer did not prepare me well for my brief attempt to learn Quantel Harry.
Someone working on FCPX may have some time adjusting to Avid or Premiere. On the other hand in FCPX gains significant market share it might be a valuable skill.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:35:34 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "The bigger question confronting us with FCP X is whether anyone just learning to make videos and using X as their primary NLE app will be in any way prepared to work in the industry, or more importantly whether the general perception will be that they are unprepared."

This is infinitely more down-to-earth than any of the other questions I was raising, but it's certainly where they were all going.

Without making a judgment on how FCPX will do in the market, is the editorial mindset learned on FCPX alone transferrable? Does learning on FCPX alone encourage significant gaps in understanding?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:43:45 pm

[Walter Soyka] "
Without making a judgment on how FCPX will do in the market, is the editorial mindset learned on FCPX alone transferrable? Does learning on FCPX alone encourage significant gaps in understanding?"


Really depends on the what criteria we choose to evaluate most heavily.

What's more important...file formats, workflow's etc, or the ability to craft a story. An FCPX only editor would be at the disadvantage on the formats/workflows side of things. Both are important, but i guess the question is, are both totally necessary.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Andree Franks
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 6:56:36 pm

Let's face it. FCP 7 had a lot of problems and you'd often run into those problems. Any Editor who uses FCP day in and day out has had to become a very good troubleshooter.

and this is the Problem I find with all applications, I don't want to solve or troubleshoot I want to create content.
But again that what Computers are there for right? Fixing them!



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:25:02 pm

[Andree Franks] "and this is the Problem I find with all applications, I don't want to solve or troubleshoot I want to create content. But again that what Computers are there for right? Fixing them!"

There are two kinds of problem solving we're talking about so far: technical problem solving (like converting H.264 clips to ProRes for use in FCP7) and creative problem solving (like identifying and fixing a bad cut). Sometimes technical and creative problems overlap (like fixing a bad shot that's the only right shot for the cut). In any case, problems are inevitable in the process.

I think Matt's point raises these questions:

First, if the only application you've ever used takes care of most (but not all) of the technical problems for you, are you at a disadvantage for solving the harder problems it can't solve automatically? In other words, is a deep technical understanding still relevant, and does FCPX help or hinder its development?

Second, does removing contraints (like those that were in linear editorial) while an editor is learning the craft encourage or discourage creative problem solving? Do hard constraints paradoxically encourage more flexible problem solving, or will someone who developed without contraints think more freely?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Andree Franks
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:40:58 pm

[Walter Soyka] "There are two kinds of problem solving we're talking about so far: technical problem solving (like converting H.264 clips to ProRes for use in FCP7) and creative problem solving (like identifying and fixing a bad cut). Sometimes technical and creative problems overlap (like fixing a bad shot that's the only right shot for the cut). In any case, problems are inevitable in the process.
"


In my world those are no problems I call them creative challenges and would not consider them a technical problem, issues or even challenge.
Like drawing on stone wall with pencil it can be done depends on the artist.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 8:04:16 pm

[Andree Franks] "Like drawing on stone wall with pencil it can be done depends on the artist."

I think all art has technical and creative elements, and that these are separate dimensions -- they're both deeply involved in the art, but it's not an either-or proposition.

My larger point -- the McLuhan quote -- is that an artist's toolset affects the artist's thinking. Drawing on a stone wall with a pencil introduces different biases than painting oils on a canvas with a brush. Do you disagree?

Taken a step further, the language we learn in affects how and what we learn, and influences how we think, because different languages have difference degrees of nuance around different concepts. This is the heart of my question about how FCPX will shape new editors' approaches to editorial.

I can reflect on my own experiences to see some of the biases I learned in linear editorial, some of the biases I learned in Avid non-linear editorial, and some of the biases I learned in FCP non-linear editorial. FCPX is so strikingly different than non-linear editors which came before it that I'm curious what biases it will introduce to the next generation of editors who grow up using it as their primary NLE.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:44:48 pm

Does anyone using an NLE know how to solve color framing or system timing issues? What about problems around cutting on a different field from edit to edit?

It depends on what happens with certain problems as technology progresses. Some problems are no longer common. If one NLE solves a problem that others don't is it important to solve the problem or is it important to use the NLE that solves the problem for you.

Yet knowing how to solve problems, to troubleshoot, is important. I see many newbies who seem to have no troubleshooting skills regardless of gear they used.

My ability to align heads on a Quad machine helped me years later when I had to do something sorta similar on a D2 machine.

Knowing that one doesn't rip the tape out of a cassette informed me that I shouldn't rip apart the BPAV folder on XDCAM EX file . . . yet I see newbies doing that all the time and then crying for help when the files don't import into their NLE. Some NLEs can handle the XDCAM EX .mp4 directly but what about the metadata tossed away?

Troubleshooting is an important skill that some newer folks don't seem to be learning. The question is, as technology progresses does the specific "trouble" go away to the point were that specific problem is no longer encountered? Is it encountered because some thing that are on the market haven't yet found a "built in" way to handle it?



Return to posts index

Andree Franks
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:49:40 pm

hihihi true true technology will always bring issues... tell me about newbies hihihi but again I am hear to help with the troubleshoot I know off thanks to experience!

Thank god I know ho two fix a car since I drive it everyday... only newbies will bing it to a shop. ;)



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:56:36 pm

[Walter Soyka] "There are two kinds of problem solving we're talking about so far: technical problem solving (like converting H.264 clips to ProRes for use in FCP7) and creative problem solving (like identifying and fixing a bad cut). Sometimes technical and creative problems overlap (like fixing a bad shot that's the only right shot for the cut). In any case, problems are inevitable in the process."

Isn't one of the great pleasures of editing - whether it's a good thing or a bad thing is another matter - precisely the interplay between the technical and the creative, using both sides of your brain at the same time or at least in parallel? At its most satifying one side is always distracting you from the problems you are having with the others - at its most frustrating neither side is working out!

I'm not sure where this leaves FCPX but there will always be mechanical limitations no matter how easy the editing UI and this for me has to be a good thing. I think the general point that constraints are beneficial for creativity will always hold good.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:14:58 pm

[Jean-François Robichaud] "This might be a leftover from my linear beginnings (or it could be constructive procrastination), but it works for me. However, once I start assembling in the timeline, the process becomes more impulsive (in a good way)."

I think a lot of editors use the organization process as a "displacement activity" which puts off the dread of actually having to be creative - it's a whole lot easier to spend time naming things and making them tidy rather than getting down to the nitty-gritty of editing.

Just enough organization is the right amount - any more and you're wasting time. But I guess finding the right balance is the key ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 7:55:14 pm

VERY interesting discussion. (Thanks everyone for keeping the signal to noise ratio high in this.)

My contribution is to suggest a brief exercise of looking at learning FCP-X through the lens of modern education.

There's a school of thought that the best path is to focus on the basics. Drill in reading, writing and math fundamentals. Require ever more standardized tests. Students (or programs!) that don't meet the basic criteria FAIL.

But I happen to have a kid with a learning disability. He's a very smart kid, but has a brain that struggles mightly with written expression. He's an auditory learner. When I was reading him Harry Potter Book FOUR, he was correcting my recollections of Book ONE that I'd read to him 3 years previously.

Standardized tests have always been a NIGHTMARE for him - because he learns differently than the norm. A lesson plan, a test, or a piece of software - that relies on big manuals, 19th century processes, and a "do it THIS way or you're not doing it correctly" foundation will FAIL him at every turn.

With FCP-X - we're ALL being asked to alter our comfortable mode of past learning. The program designers and writers essentially have said - the industry has done this task in a particular fashion that's appealed to a group of people who edit a particular way for a long time. But we think we see a better way to approach the problems we see in the future of computer based editing. We think that we can leverage the increasing capabilities of the hardware and software tools at our disposal to incorporate new ways of approaching the problem that we think will be both relevant and superior tools that will best fit the FUTURE needs of media creation.

You can easily argue that if you take my son's reading story above literally, that the FCP-X team has designed for a small - special needs subset of the overall class of editors. And if you're correct about that, the software will fail.

Apple, is betting, however that there's a larger shift possible. That re-thinking the classroom model to provide a DIFFERENT kind of flexibility - moving away from the standardized tests and creating a world where tasks aren't so shoe-horned into a traditional mindset has real value in moving the whole notion of visual content creation and manipulation into a world of more modern tools and thinking. (Kinda like how the excelling schools now ADAPT to various learning styles, rather than MAKING kids learn exclusively by a worksheet model that works for many, but utterly fails for a significant percentage as well.

It is a truth that the US system of education is in a bit of a crisis. Little innovation and LOTS of inertia, hidebound thinking and a massive desire to simply tinker around the edges rather than looking for a foundationally better way. Apple clearly believes that the software industry has gotten pretty similar. Massive entrenched approaches that produce incremental improvements at best.

Apple has the money, power and guts to take a shot at re-inventing the game.

Time will tell if it works - but at LEAST they aren't simply accepting that the current way MUST be the right way and must be preserved at all cost.

Good for them, in my view.

Bring on the core engine database changes. Bring on some new thinking. MAKE ME UNCOMFORTABLE. Please. Because looking back, I can see with the wisdom of age that I've always learned by baby steps when I'm happy - but I stretch mightily when I'm confronted by something truly challenging (and possibly very uncomfortable!)

I suspect that for anyone embarking on FCP-X exploration - as many here are - will become MUCH better editors in the long run. Simply because they allowed themselves to be pulled and tugged into new ways of thinking. (Just like my wife and I did when helping my son navigate an educations system that was NOT working for him.)

Grow or perish.

As it's always been.

For what it's worth.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Conner


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 8:03:48 pm

[Bill Davis] "I suspect that for anyone embarking on FCP-X exploration - as many here are - will become MUCH better editors in the long run. Simply because they allowed themselves to be pulled and tugged into new ways of thinking."

I agree with this, and it's one of the reasons I'm trying to learn it. But the question is will starting on FCPX make someone a better editor.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 8:20:51 pm

[Matt Callac] "I agree with this, and it's one of the reasons I'm trying to learn it. But the question is will starting on FCPX make someone a better editor."

I totally agree that learning any new editing paradigm will expand your horizons as an editor and not just technically but creatively as well.

Every time you learn a new way of doing stuff you get better and more imaginative - and that's regardless of whether the new way is better or worse than your old way. In all probability you are creating whole new neurological circuits each time you do this kind of thing and creating new avenues of possibility.

It's limiting yourself to one little world of editing that limits what you can achieve - this will be as true of those who only ever learn FCPX as it is of those who never wanted to get beyond Media Composer.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Andree Franks
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 8:21:35 pm

[Matt Callac] "I agree with this, and it's one of the reasons I'm trying to learn it. But the question is will starting on FCPX make someone a better editor."

No the same as with Avid, Premiere, media100 or Final Cut Pro 7 but the tools can help them out and save time. Isn't that reason for all this great stuff? Save time and money? ;)



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 8:37:58 pm

Well,

Saving time and money are excellent goals if your entire approach to creating content is business-oriented. But that's just ONE way to view business. You can simply build a slightly better pizza stand and compete on that basis - or you can invent a new food and create a new category. Apple, Google, et al didn't get to the top of the pyramid by simply making incremental changes - they re-structured the fundamental nature of their industries.

The most valuable and lasting art is often that which pushes so many boundries upon release that it's reviled in it's own time - but comes to be seen later as groundbreaking and signals a new way of thinking about the form.

I'm NOT saying FCP-X is "art." just that it's a pretty radical re-thinking of what editing software should be. And that's pretty cool on it's face.

Whether it becomes any kind of "standard" is a function of much more than it's underlying quality OR utility.

Imagine the Venn diagrams for "pop music" and "great music" - just don't expect too much overlap.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Conner


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 9:13:24 pm

Forgive me waxing philosophic for a moment but I don't think any particular way of editing will
make anyone a better editor. Understand I am not defending FCP X here, but it is a poor carpenter
who blames his tools. From my perspective editing is 90% organization and 10% inspiration (if you
are lucky enough to get one of those rare jobs where they allow inspiration - forget about them recognizing it; that rarely happens.) And that 10% comes from a knowledge of the language of film (gained mostly from watching films) and an appreciation and understanding of the art of storytelling (which comes from reading, going to the theater, watching the street performer in the park, appreciating how a good joke is crafted, and a million other ways.

bigpine


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 9:28:46 pm

[TImothy Auld] " Forgive me waxing philosophic for a moment but I don't think any particular way of editing will
make anyone a better editor."


I totally disagree with that statment. Simon said it very well:

[Simon Ubsdell] "Every time you learn a new way of doing stuff you get better and more imaginative - and that's regardless of whether the new way is better or worse than your old way. In all probability you are creating whole new neurological circuits each time you do this kind of thing and creating new avenues of possibility.

It's limiting yourself to one little world of editing that limits what you can achieve - this will be as true of those who only ever learn FCPX as it is of those who never wanted to get beyond Media Composer."



-mattyc


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 9:49:58 pm

Jeez, Matt - where in that post did I even remotely imply that learning new things was bad?
Learning new things is good. Being forced to look at things differently is good. Organization
is good. An appreciation for storytelling and how it is achieved in different media is good.

Just what exactly is it that you are in such disagreement with me about?

bigpine


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 10:05:32 pm

I must have narrowly interpreted this statement.

[TImothy Auld] "I don't think any particular way of editing will
make anyone a better editor."


Misread your meaning.

Your meaning was that no tool can make you better at your craft. I misunderstood your meaning as learning a new tool won't make anyone better at a craft. My mistake.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 10:38:43 pm

No problem Matt. Sometimes I get so involved in my head that I say (or write) things that
piss people off that I am oblivious to. Thanks for letting me know that this was one of those
rare occasions where this was not the case.

bigpine


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 10:08:46 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Forgive me waxing philosophic for a moment but I don't think any particular way of editing will make anyone a better editor... it is a poor carpenter who blames his tools."

I'm arguing that editorial can't really be taught apart from its tools and materials, just as carpentry can't be taught without taking a saw to wood. I (along with Matt) wasn't asking if FCPX makes someone a better editor -- I was was asking how learning to edit with FCPX will color a new editor's approach to editorial.

FCPX asks us to think about our work differently than previuos NLEs, and those NLEs asked us to think differently than linear bays, and linear bays asked us to think differently than physical film editorial.

An editor coming up on FCPX may have a totally different mental model for media and editorial than someone like me, who came up with a mixed linear and first-generation non-linear education. That's the new take on FCPX that I'm trying to explore here.

Do you disagree with that premise? If so, can we discuss that a bit? Could you elaborate on why you think the tools we learn with don't impact how we think about the work?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 10:53:02 pm

Hoo, boy Walter. You ask the $64,000 question and then some. I guess I'll start with how I approach editing. I'm looking to serve the story. I know that sounds a little bit pompous but I feel it is as valid in a web video about putting a slipcover on a chair as it is in a feature. I look at all editing systems from the
standpoint of how I can make them do what I need them to do. FCP X seems to be designed with many
powerful features (which may or may not be developed in the future) but also with an eye toward serving people who are not remotely interested in accessing those powerful features. If in the future I am forced
to work on FCP X (and I may well be) my focus will be on how I can get it to do what I need it to do and not
on how it wants me to work. I could be wrong (no, really - it has happened ) but I'm guessing that is how it will play out for most editors.

bigpine


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 11:18:46 pm

Hoo, boy Walter. You ask the $64,000 question and then some. I guess I'll start with how I approach editing. I'm looking to serve the story. I know that sounds a little bit pompous but I feel it is as valid in a web video about putting a slipcover on a chair as it is in a feature. I look at all editing systems from the
standpoint of how I can make them do what I need them to do. FCP X seems to be designed with many
powerful features (which may or may not be developed in the future) but also with an eye toward serving people who are not remotely interested in accessing those powerful features. If in the future I am forced
to work on FCP X (and I may well be) my focus will be on how I can get it to do what I need it to do and not
on how it wants me to work. I could be wrong (no, really - it has happened ) but I'm guessing that is how it will play out for most editors.

Also, I can't tell you how many times I've had people with no editorial experience whatever look at a scene and tell me what they thought was wrong and they were exactly right. In my view it's not about the hammer, it's about the house.

bigpine


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 12:42:14 am

Timothy, please indulge me if I over-stretch the carpentry metaphor.


[TImothy Auld] "I'm looking to serve the story... If in the future I am forced to work on FCP X (and I may well be) my focus will be on how I can get it to do what I need it to do"

This is the approach of an accomplished craftsman, not a novice. Consider the law of the instrument: when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

I'm not talking about FCPX will affect anyone already posting in this thread. We've all already learned editorial to varying degrees. We all have hammers, but we've also got screwdrivers and wrenches and vices. We know how to handle nails, but we also know how to handle screws and bolts and glue. We also all recognize that we need to continue learning as the craft itself evolves.

But what about new editors -- people just starting in editorial for the first time today -- whose only experience with editorial is going to be with FCPX? How will they learn differently than we have? How will they think and solve problems differently than we do?


[TImothy Auld] "Also, I can't tell you how many times I've had people with no editorial experience whatever look at a scene and tell me what they thought was wrong and they were exactly right. In my view it's not about the hammer, it's about the house."

I think there's a colossal difference between being able to point out what's wrong and being able to make it right. After all, you don't need to be a good filmmaker to be a good film critic.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Gerald Baria
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 3:22:09 am

"But what about new editors -- people just starting in editorial for the first time today -- whose only experience with editorial is going to be with FCPX? How will they learn differently than we have? How will they think and solve problems differently than we do?"

Those new to serious editing who will exclusively learn and live with FCPX will be better off in the long ruyn because this product is made for the FUTURE, and in the future traditional NLE systems will disappear.

FCPX is all about digital "maximization' in both metadata organization, li instantaneous effect previews without rendering, clip connections,manetic timelines, and "visual" data manipulation. As the world moves forward, and REDs makes 8k easy, HDSLRs makes 2k to 3k cheap (megapixel wars on video capture ), mobile processors enables hdslr RAW video capture, televisions will have to be broadcasted not only on cable, or antennas but also on the web, no more bandwith bottlenecks so interlaced will not be required anymore, HD will be cheap and is the standard, 3k the premium, 3D TVs will be cheaper and people will want them (some maybe), tapes and all of its incarnations will disappear.

And we'll be left with an all digital capture and workflow. That is the inevitable future - ALL WILL BE DIGITAL. And thats where FCPX is strong. And as the world moves by it will get even stronger, because the foundations that are in place are already awesome.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 8:14:11 am

Is it at all instructive that prior to the advent of word processing, humans were able to easily write novels with grace, eloquence and a clearly unfolding plot?

Word processing certainly changed how writers approach the mechanics of writing - since there's no longer the same penalty for exploration and re-arangement as there was before you could cut and paste text as easily - but the essence of what makes a story sing didn't actually change all that much from the typing to the word processing era.

Perhaps we'll see the same with editors who use this new tool.

Perhaps the human taste for storytelling fits within a more narrow set of parameters than we might think? And in the end, we'll just use the new tools to create the same types of finished products?

The advent of power tools didn't actually change the nature of what a house is all that much. Wood, concrete, glass, metal studs - the materials, techniques and embedded systems may change, but the vast, vast majority of homes are still merely a basic arrangement of rooms - because that form satisfies our needs really well.

Just thinking here.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Conner


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 3:39:57 pm

Although having more power and flexibility can improve the "story."
If writers gained the ability to explore by cut and paste with word processing, might it have helped improve their writing by being able to venture down a path they might not have otherwise?

The reader doesn't see the improvement because they don't know how the story would have been otherwise but the improvement (or change at least) is there.



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:45:14 am

[Walter Soyka] "But what about new editors -- people just starting in editorial for the first time today -- whose only experience with editorial is going to be with FCPX? How will they learn differently than we have? How will they think and solve problems differently than we do?"

I think - to descend for a moment from the lofty realms of philosophy to a more practical level - one of the key things that is different with FCPX is that it encourages you to edit on the timeline, in other words to throw stuff down quickly and start thinking about the actual editing once you've got it there.

In the old days, and especially for editors who came from a film and/or tape background, making an edit (inserting material into your story) was always a very considered act. You selected very carefully, you refined your selection, you thought about what you were doing and the consequences of it before you "made the edit". On tape for example, the magic button was the preview button - you made sure you were going to get the result you wanted before you committed to it. The consequences of "getting it wrong" could be seriously painful - in different ways on film and tape, but no less so in either case.

The development of NLE's and their attendant working practices did not eradicate this element of preparatory thought and caution in making the edit - and one of the key tools for evaluation was the source/record window model. In Media Composer, while you had great tools to fine tune your edit once you'd made it, they weren't the fastest and you would still save time by getting it right first rather than by "being sloppy" and fixing it later. FCP in my view somewhat loosened this constraint as it was definitely easier and more intuitive to fix stuff on the timeline - but I don't think a lot of editors necessarily changed their method because of that. All in all, the hesitancy about making edits never really went away for a lot of people.

Conversely, FCPX emphatically takes the anxiety out of this part of the process and indeed out of editing as a whole. It's not to say that you can't do it the old way and carefully think through every edit, but you will clearly save time if you just dive in a throw stuff on the timeline with a view to crafting it there. I think then to answer a least one aspect of Walter's complex question, this is one of the areas where you will see a marked divide between old and new schools.

Personally, I don't think this is a bad thing - having observed many editors at work down the years, I always felt that "performance anxiety" at every level was a debilitating factor, and a large part of this was down to worrying about how much extra work would be involved in making the wrong edit decision and having to fix it. Oddly, the ability to keep multiple versions and Undo at will never seemed to be enough to conquer this anxiety. But maybe finally FCPX will do that.

My view is that it is frequently better to dive in and make lots of edit decisions, even "wrong ones" (if there are even such a thing as "wrong ones"), rather than endlessly agonize about making the right ones. Editing for me is about reviewing as many options as you can and seeing what comes out (often serendipitously quite amazing), rather than prejudging that a certain set of edits is not worth the trouble of trying.

So I hope and expect that FCPX will shape a new generation of editors who are fundamentally "braver" than their predecessors ...

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 11:50:12 am

As an editor who is still not used to not hitting the preview button I have to agree with what
you are saying here. A big part of working with NLE's (and getting used to working with NLE's)
was the fact that you could just try something for the hell of it, and then just try something else.
Now that I have gotten used to that way of working and thinking I can't imagine going back. If
new NLE's encourage that way of working even more I believe that will be - generally - a good
thing. That said I still think preparation and organization and the heart of post production.

The one thing that does make me long for the past is when I get 30 or 40 minutes of footage with
a useable minute and a half. That makes me wish for the days when they couldn't possibly shoot
more that 11 minutes without changing magazines.

bigpine


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 3:46:11 pm

Along the same lines, the Connected Clips and Connected Storylines make it much easier to move things together as vertical chunks along with the more traditional horizontal chunks. This mean you can cut a whole section with b-roll, titles, video and audio synced fx . . . and move the whole chunk someplace if needed. Building a story vertically is no longer something one is reluctant to do until the late stages since the whole vertical set of layers is connected to the "master" clip.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 4:22:32 pm

"This mean you can cut a whole section with b-roll, titles, video and audio synced fx . . . and move the whole chunk someplace if needed. Building a story vertically is no longer something one is reluctant to do until the late stages since the whole vertical set of layers is connected to the "master" clip."

Talking about setting up a straw man - when was this ever hard?

I do this all the time without hesitation in FCP7 and improving it never made the top 100 of my yearly "wish list." I bet if we did a search on the FCP forum it never made it to anybodies wish list becasue it was NEVER A PROBLEM.

What could be easier?? It's called cut and paste - select the section your working on, shift-X, go to the place your going to put it, shift-V, done. Yes, you do have to put a moment's thought into things like dissolves that are on the border of the selection, but come on -- there were dozens of things that I really wanted upgrades to in FCP7, basic things like being able to mute the top video track without losing all your renders. The idea that this is somehow a major innovation makes me laugh.

The magnetic timeline - perfect for fixing things that was never a problem in the first place. Like "clip collisions" -- oohhhh now there's a scary term. But what is it really. Why would I EVER want to slide a clip into the same location as another clip without either rippling it or overwriting it? Is there some reason to want to hear 2 different audio clips play at the same time? What's the point? I honestly don't get it. But it sure produced a lot of oohhh's and aahhh's at the NAB sneak when he showed it on the screen. How about showing the source timecode of the clips on the storyline instead - or is that too pedestrian an idea?

New slogan - "Final Cut Pro X - it solves problems you never knew you had."

End of rant.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:25:15 pm

[Herb Sevush] "
The magnetic timeline - perfect for fixing things that was never a problem in the first place. Like "clip collisions" -- oohhhh now there's a scary term. But what is it really. Why would I EVER want to slide a clip into the same location as another clip without either rippling it or overwriting it?"


I don't necessarily disagree with you about this, but maybe the reason we'd never want to do this type of operation is because it wasn't possible before.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:37:14 pm

And while previously you HAD to ripple or overwrite you now have the ADDITIONAL option to move first, play down the section and decide wither to ripple or transition. It would seem FCPX provides you with more choices, not less.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:02:11 pm

"It would seem FCPX provides you with more choices, not less."

No, it just allows you to change the time when you make the choice. In FCP7 you have to think, then act. IN FCPX you have the option to Act, then think, then act. Wow, a major improvement.

A new slogan - "FCPX - you don't have to think first anymore."

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:16:12 pm

[Herb Sevush] "A new slogan - "FCPX - you don't have to think first anymore.""

Great proof that FCPX is more flexible. Think in the order you like, not dictated by the NLE.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:16:56 pm

"Think in the order you like, not dictated by the NLE."

Or not at all.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:25:38 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Or not at all."

Not possible with editing or driving a car. Most people don't care how one got there but that the results are good. Thinking is unavoidable for the talented.



Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:32:16 pm

[Craig Seeman] "
Great proof that FCPX is more flexible. Think in the order you like, not dictated by the NLE."


I think Herb's point is that the program encourages you not to think, and thinking is an integral part of the process of editing. Especially before you start an edit.


-mattyc


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:36:02 pm

[Matt Callac] "I think Herb's point is that the program encourages you not to think, and thinking is an integral part of the process of editing. Especially before you start an edit."

But I don't see how it encourages you not to think. It just changes the sequence in which one thinks.

For example, even without clip collision you are still confronted with an overlap that you have to deal with. It's just that you get to move into that position and deal with it rather than having to take that into account before moving the clips. For some, being able to see the result helps one deal with the results more creatively.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:49:52 pm

What's most hilarious about this exchange is that the "magnetic timeline" is one of the features Apple is touting as a major break-through. It was featured at the NAB sneak, it's in all their marketing brochures, and the best thing that Craig can come up with is that it allows you to think later.

First of all, for audio it's totally useless because you can't hear anything but cacophony.

For video it's sometimes handy to have 2 choices stacked on top of each other to play around with - oh, let's see, hold down the option key, drag to an unused upper track (you remember what those are don't you Craig) and then either drag where you want or cut and paste. Yes, it's nice that you can do this in one keystroke instead of two, but really is this the best you've got for all we lost? If not, then why is Apple pushing it so hard? Ask any 100 editors whether this is worth losing the source viewer over, or the lack of source timecode in the timeline, and let's bet on how many say yes.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:13:41 pm

[Herb Sevush] "For video it's sometimes handy to have 2 choices stacked on top of each other to play around with - oh, let's see, hold down the option key, drag to an unused upper track"

Oh you mean Auditions and you can have a whole bunch of them to try and you don't need any tracks for them at all.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:18:37 pm

"Oh you mean Auditions and you can have a whole bunch of them to try and you don't need any tracks for them at all."

That's right Craig. Auditions, which sound like an IMPROVEMENT over the messy way of stacking up multiple clips in FCP.

See, I don't have a problem with noticing an actual improvement, as opposed to the marketing BS of magnetic timelines.

You should try it sometime, actually seeing what's out there and responding with your mind as opposed to your ego. But, wait, that's not the FCPX way, that way you would actually have to think BEFORE you spoke.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:26:38 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Oh you mean Auditions and you can have a whole bunch of them to try and you don't need any tracks for them at all."

Is there a very obvious visible marker in your timeline when you use auditions so you know how many you have loaded and where they are? I honestly don't know. I've read that compound clips are hard to recognize.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:56:32 pm

[Craig Seeman] "But I don't see how it encourages you not to think. It just changes the sequence in which one thinks.

For example, even without clip collision you are still confronted with an overlap that you have to deal with. It's just that you get to move into that position and deal with it rather than having to take that into account before moving the clips. For some, being able to see the result helps one deal with the results more creatively."


Lets go back to the stick shift example example for driving a car. In an automatic you don't have to think about shifting gears. The car handles that for you. For a lot of people that's fine. For me it's a problem. Not having think about shifting makes me not really have to think about driving. So when I drive an automatic, I tend to sort of miss stop signs, or accidentally go faster than I have intended. I only drive stick shifts because it makes me more aware of what I'm doing. It's sort of the same for editing. Having things automate, means I don't have to think about them, which means I might end up with a tendency to miss certain things because I'm no longer use to having to pay attention to certain aspects of an edit.


-mattyc


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:17:13 pm

[Matt Callac] "Not having think about shifting makes me not really have to think about driving. So when I drive an automatic, I tend to sort of miss stop signs, or accidentally go faster than I have intended."

So you require a stick shift otherwise you are not an alert driver. I do hope that's not the norm for those driving automatic shift. I expect not otherwise we'd see lots of news about this.



Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:21:32 pm

[Craig Seeman] "So you require a stick shift otherwise you are not an alert driver."

Exactly. Point being: Less thinking does not always mean better result for the task at hand.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:56:44 pm

Nor would you want to force all drivers to use a stick shift though. In fact most cars are automatic and some very smart and very safe drivers use them.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:03:44 pm

But we are all amateur drivers here.

To keep the analogy going the question isn't what do "most" drivers do, but rather what do most "pro" drivers do, and even here we want to talk about race car drivers and long distance truckers, not taxi drivers.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:11:38 pm

[Herb Sevush] "
To keep the analogy going the question isn't what do "most" drivers do, but rather what do most "pro" drivers do, and even here we want to talk about race car drivers and long distance truckers, not taxi drivers"


So in this stretch of the analogy I guess we're deeming Taxi drivers as Non-Professional Drivers? You're gonna piss off a lot of taxi drivers that see themselves as professional drivers.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:18:26 pm

"So in this stretch of the analogy I guess we're deeming Taxi drivers as Non-Professional Drivers?"

No, I specifically included them in the set of "pro" drivers, but not in the set of "higher end, technically demanding pro drivers."

Or, to reverse our analogy, as one-man-shop video pros who don't have to deal with broadcast or films. In other words, the FCPX target audience. We can now call it taXiPro, this way they can keep the X, and get the i they've always wanted.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 11:17:08 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Or, to reverse our analogy, as one-man-shop video pros who don't have to deal with broadcast or films."

So if one is a small shop that does local cable spots and digital signage and some of those things might be used in theater based advertising? So I guess I acknowledge I'm an FCPX target taxi driver and my clients might even want to work in 4K given theater is amongst the media buy (and I do the media buys too sometimes as a small ad agency).

So if you mean episodic TV and feature films only you're talking about a very small market. In fact there are many large facilities that may focus on corporate video as their main source of revenue.

So if FCPX hits that vast "middle" (these people are decidedly not "prosumer" in the derogatory use of the term) then it really would be a great and widely used professional NLE. And if the third party support flocks to it for that reason it might creep up the food chain . . . as FCP legacy did.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 11:23:32 pm

FCP7 worked well for both of us, FCPX only works well for you. Which is why this whole transformation leaves you smiling and me scowling. So tell me again about the greater flexibility of the relational database model.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Paul Dickin
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 20, 2011 at 8:01:24 am

[Herb Sevush] "So tell me again about the greater flexibility of the relational database model...."
Hi
Sure ;-)
This, O my Best Beloved, is a story--a new and a wonderful story--a story quite different from the other stories--a story about.....
...XML project management. Not just about FCP1-7 and the hundreds of COW media mangler threads...
Quote:
After you import your media, go grab some coffee or do some jumping jacks or something else interesting, and let the process finish. Now, if Premiere Pro continues to generate files, there is something wonky with the media database, and it usually means purging the PEK/CFA/etc. files and then cleaning the media cache database. Premiere Pro will have to regenerate the files (yeah, again), but this time, they'll usually stick. I think it can be a little touchy if you continue to try to work during this process, and Premiere Pro can lose track of those files. That's why most of us have griped again and again for this process to change or go away forever and ever.
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/871659
30th June 2011.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 20, 2011 at 1:37:14 pm

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about, referring to or trying to say.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:15:30 pm

[Herb Sevush] "To keep the analogy going the question isn't what do "most" drivers do, but rather what do most "pro" drivers do, and even here we want to talk about race car drivers and long distance truckers, not taxi drivers."

And why not taxi drivers? They are professional. They have a different objective and course than a race car driver. They are professional. They get paid. Certainly the cab companies are businesses and they can be very profitable. Maybe the wrong assumption is that all professional car drivers are race car drivers. Even the UPS and FedEx driver is professional as is the bus driver. They may even need to pass special tests. Maybe the goal is to get the package and the passenger delivered on time for those drivers. Maybe overall cab, bus, package delivery services are a much bigger business than race car drivers. They are certainly professional.



Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:27:43 pm

[Craig Seeman] "And why not taxi drivers? They are professional. They have a different objective and course than a race car driver. They are professional. They get paid. Certainly the cab companies are businesses and they can be very profitable. Maybe the wrong assumption is that all professional car drivers are race car drivers. Even the UPS and FedEx driver is professional as is the bus driver. They may even need to pass special tests. Maybe the goal is to get the package and the passenger delivered on time for those drivers. Maybe overall cab, bus, package delivery services are a much bigger business than race car drivers. They are certainly professional."

Now we're getting way off track... BUT.

I don't think Taxi drivers should be included in any analogy whatsover. All other drivers make their money by maximizing some sort of efficiency. Racecar driver, by winning races. Truck driver by delivering stuff in a timely manner. Etc. Taxi can maximize their profitability being inefficient from a driving standpoint. The money they make is based on the cab fair, so they can make more money by taking you a round about way to get somewhere. (not saying all of them do).

But the main thing about the driving analogy is that each form of PRO driver has a different set of priorities, much like each form of Pro editors.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 11:22:53 pm

[Matt Callac] "Taxi can maximize their profitability being inefficient from a driving standpoint."

I can certainly tell you've never lived in NYC!
They are capable of handling a maze of paths, crazy obstacles, with the goal to make the fastest trips so they can make the most money.

[Matt Callac] " so they can make more money by taking you a round about way to get somewhere"

Not true at all given the initial drop on the meter and the meter's slow progress when "standing." They make more money on more fast trips. BTW this is certainly on topic of "what is a pro" because of the assumptions that "one man bands" aren't doing broadcast work. Many do local cable spots. And while not "one man bands" I know of a few reality shows that were so low budget they were happening out of somebody's basement.



Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 20, 2011 at 2:40:00 am

[Craig Seeman] "I can certainly tell you've never lived in NYC!"

actually I did. But I rarely rode in cabs, too cheap for that. Subway's and buses.

[Craig Seeman] "Not true at all given the initial drop on the meter and the meter's slow progress when "standing." They make more money on more fast trips. BTW this is certainly on topic of "what is a pro" because of the assumptions that "one man bands" aren't doing broadcast work. Many do local cable spots. And while not "one man bands" I know of a few reality shows that were so low budget they were happening out of somebody's basement."

BTW I said CAN, not do. Implying the possibility, not saying that they absolutely DO.

Also I'm not on the certain types of people aren't pro editors wagon. I know plenty of guys that are one man bands, that like you said, do tons of local cable spots.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:28:36 pm

"And why not taxi drivers? They are professional."

Actually read my post Craig and you'll see I specifically kept Taxi Drivers in the "set" of professional drivers.

I've never said that the FCPX target audience wasn't "professional," but rather they were not broadcast, film or technically demanding professionals. And if you see yourself as a taxi driver sort of editor then an automatic shift will suit you fine. But if your trying to pull a 16 wheeler across country, then I want to be driving a stick.

And finally, if you know how to drive a stick, you will understand how to get the most out of an automatic if your stuck with it. If you never learned to drive a stick and someone throws you into a big truck, well, be prepared for a bumpy ride.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:30:42 pm

[Herb Sevush] "
Actually read my post Craig and you'll see I specifically kept Taxi Drivers in the "set" of professional drivers."


Yeah, I was just making a joke, Sorry for the confusion.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:34:26 pm

Matt -

Nothing to apologize for, the confusion wasn't yours.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:41:42 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Nothing to apologize for, the confusion wasn't yours."

but reading my joke after your post, easily could have helped him make the assumption he did.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:58:09 pm

I look at it as less of an option and more of a mandate.

bigpine


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:40:30 pm

[Herb Sevush] "I do this all the time without hesitation in FCP7 and improving it never made the top 100 of my yearly "wish list." I bet if we did a search on the FCP forum it never made it to anybodies wish list becasue it was NEVER A PROBLEM."

And now it's easier since you don't need to select anything. It follows the clip it's connected to. And you can even change the connection points to other underlying clips. This allows for very complex vertical stack movements.

Every single thing that makes editing faster or adds another option to handle something is a step forward for a faster edit.

I mean why would I ever use an automatic shift in a car when the stick shift works just fine? After all I know how to switch gears.



Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:57:54 pm

[Craig Seeman] "I mean why would I ever use an automatic shift in a car when the stick shift works just fine? After all I know how to switch gears."

Having said that, there are lots of reasons, including the fact that you simply WANT to, that one might still purchase a car with a manual stick. I might be wrong, but don't think you can purchase a high performance Ferrari with an automatic transmission.

Chris


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:05:01 pm

[Chris Conlee] "Having said that, there are lots of reasons, including the fact that you simply WANT to, that one might still purchase a car with a manual stick. I might be wrong, but don't think you can purchase a high performance Ferrari with an automatic transmission. "

Admittedly maybe FCPX is not that Ferrari. Maybe Apple wants to be Toyota.

The question many of us have is whether Apple will give us access to what's under the hood. One example is how closed FCPX is yet how it seems there are elements that would point to it being a good server seat NLE. The challenge is whether the pointing ever leads to a road traveled.



Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 8:03:42 pm

If you had enough cash to throw at them I bet they'd make you one.

bigpine


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 6:58:26 pm

"I mean why would I ever use an automatic shift in a car when the stick shift works just fine? After all I know how to switch gears."

Craig, your talking to a person who always buys a manual. the automatic shift is a perfect analogy for FCPX, it costs more to buy, more to fix, gives you less performance, but makes it easier for novice drivers.

"Every single thing that makes editing faster or adds another option to handle something is a step forward for a faster edit."

This is a TRIVIAL improvement, the cost of which are significant losses, like a source viewer and fixed audio tracks. A tiny step forward against some huge steps backward.

"And now it's easier since you don't need to select anything."


You mean you didn't have to select anything when you created the compound clip in the first place, it just read your mind?

"This allows for very complex vertical stack movements."


Describe one I can't do easily in FCP7.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 7:13:40 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Craig, your talking to a person who always buys a manual. the automatic shift is a perfect analogy for FCPX, it costs more to buy, more to fix, gives you less performance, but makes it easier for novice drivers."

That's probably true. I think Apple wants to start from that point. I'm not sure that's where it'll end up. I do think there objective is that they will open up the power at some point but, as alluded to in another post, they are starting with a Toyota, not a Ferrari . . . or as I mentioned in another post, they have a great engine with a go-cart chassis. I don't think they're going to let that engine go to waste based on their past history.

[Herb Sevush] "This is a TRIVIAL improvement, the cost of which are significant losses, like a source viewer and fixed audio tracks. A tiny step forward against some huge steps backward."

Audio wil be through metadata for export. They've already stated that. I'm not finding the loss of a dedicated viewer much of a loss but they need to improve the two-up so it's available for all the times in vs out comparisons are needed.

[Herb Sevush] "Describe one I can't do easily in FCP7."

In nearly every case it's easier in FCPX so I don't have to worry about the selection at all. If a clip overlaps two clips below it I can connect it to either and the entire stack above it can follow. It all depends on how much you pile on vertically but no there's no reason to feel a complex stack will get unwieldy.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:07:32 pm

I have tried very hard to resist using the automatic/manual shift metaphor, because I believe I'm on the record somewhere claiming that car analogies always fail.

That said, I think this time it's really apt and I'm glad you brought it up!

An automatic transmission abstracts the mechanics of the car from the driver -- it hides the relationship between the engine, the gearing, and the car's movement. It makes the car easier to drive on a basic level, but harder to drive for performance.

A manual transmission exposes the mechanics to the driver -- it gives the driver direct control over the relationships between the engine, the gearing, and the car's movement. It makes the car harder to drive on a basic level, but easier to drive for performance.

There are many non-driving reasons why professional racecar drivers use manual transmissions, but this degree of control and understanding may well be among them.

Does this also apply to the professional editor?

I learned to drive on an automatic, but now I drive a standard. Re-learning to drive with a standard changed driving for me -- it added an extra dimension of precise control over the car and totally changed my perception of engine output and motion. I am now able to think more like the way my car actually drives, instead of asking both car and driver to buy into a simplified model that only superficially relates to how the car works.

Is that progress or regression?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:19:47 pm

[Walter Soyka] "A manual transmission exposes the mechanics to the driver -- it gives the driver direct control over the relationships between the engine, the gearing, and the car's movement. It makes the car harder to drive on a basic level, but easier to drive for performance."

Yes, that's what I always thought - until I recently directed some commercials for a Japanese car manufacturer and was told by the client that the automatic version of their top performance car was appreciably faster than the manual even when driven by top professional drivers. Technology has moved ahead of us on this one, apparently.

I'm not sure what the moral is - except you're probably right that the car analogy isn't as helpful as it might be ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:23:52 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "
I'm not sure what the moral is - except you're probably right that the car analogy isn't as helpful as it might be ;-)"


Moral is, Simon is a jerk-face for ruining Walter's great manual shift analogy.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:31:26 pm

It wasn't really my analogy -- remember, I said that car analogies always fail!

But I picked it up and ran with it, so I've done my best to try to save it...

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Matt Callac
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:40:30 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I said that car analogies always fail!"

or maybe analogies always fail.

-mattyc


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:29:24 pm

Awesome. Been a while, like oh, 35 years, since I've heard the 'jerk face' slam. ;-)

Chris


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:25:05 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Yes, that's what I always thought - until I recently directed some commercials for a Japanese car manufacturer and was told by the client that the automatic version of their top performance car was appreciably faster than the manual even when driven by top professional drivers. Technology has moved ahead of us on this one, apparently. "

The Nissan GT-R Simon?


David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 9:30:13 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Yes, that's what I always thought - until I recently directed some commercials for a Japanese car manufacturer and was told by the client that the automatic version of their top performance car was appreciably faster than the manual even when driven by top professional drivers. Technology has moved ahead of us on this one, apparently."

I knew this would happen...

Continuously variable transmissions can be set to optimize for fuel efficiency or for power. When optimized for power, they cannot be beaten by any geared transmission with stepped variability -- it's simple physics. I don't believe there are currently any CVTs that can handle the extreme amounts of torque generated by big performance engines, though.

Then there are dual-clutch transmissions, which do not require the driver to manually clutch and can be self-shifting or driver-controlled. They can shift gears in less than a tenth of a second.

Maybe these details really mess up the analogy, but both CVTs and DCTs share a critical feature with traditional manual transmissions that traditional automatic transmissions do not have -- direct drive. They all directly link the engine's output to the wheels, whereas a traditional "slushbox" automatic transmission is indirect. I think that this, moreso than gear selection, is the critical component of relating the work the engine does to the actual movement of the car.

Did I save it?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 10:31:27 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Did I save it?"

Not sure, but it's sure as hell a valiant effort.

Chris


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 11:38:47 am

No problem I'm always happy to stretch a metaphor until it snaps.

The thing is, I really wish I had a good answer to your very good question. My guess is that
is X ever evolves into an application suitable for broadcast and features it will hardly be recognizable
next to its present form. If on the other it remains pretty much the way it is then I think the lazy
editors will come to depend on some of the more automatic features and will produce mediocre
content, while those who are driven by producing the best possible content will find ways to get
X to do what they need it to do. Not a very exciting answer, I know - but right now that's all I got.

And your film critic analogy could not be more correct.

bigpine


Return to posts index

Christopher Gildenstern
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 8:27:26 pm

"My questions for the forum are these: how will a new editor, just starting on FCPX, learn the craft of editing? What problems will they be "good" at solving and what problems will they be "bad" at solving, due to the design perspective of their tools?"

Admittedly, I haven't played with FCP X for more than an hour or two (so, at this rate, the "alpha test" has only run me $150/hour...yeesh), but I have sort of a followup question regarding the direction Apple's taken (and it doesn't even involve OMFs or EDLs). Apologies if this has been posted. It seems I've been failing miserably in my forum lurking duties of late.

Even assuming Apple makes some much-needed updates to X, but the industry backlash against FCP X's particular style of editing continues long-term, are young editors who grow up in FCP X going to find themselves overly constrained to that particular system?

As an example, my editing history goes something like this: Starting in '95, I cut Media 100. Then moved to Velocity. Then moved to Avid MC. Then moved to Premiere Pro. Then moved to FCP. Now transitioning more of my work back to Premiere Pro. Every single one of those moves was an absolute piece of cake. Why? Because they're all essentially the same software, behaving in essentially the same way.

FCP X, for all its good and bad points, is really nothing like any of those systems. If I have need of another body and get a hell of a demo reel from a kid who's cutting MC, I'm confident he can transition to FCP or PP Pro pretty darn quickly.

If you grow up in Apple's new paradigm and then decide you want to cut at a post facility using anything else, something tells me you'd better have a lights out demo for them to be willing to spend the time and effort to get you out of that paradigm.

Christopher Gildenstern
Creative/Production Director
Barnes Chase & Davis, Inc.
Advertising, Marketing, New Media

(This space for rent)


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 9:15:54 pm

Quote:
If you grow up in Apple's new paradigm and then decide you want to cut at a post facility using anything else, something tells me you'd better have a lights out demo for them to be willing to spend the time and effort to get you out of that paradigm.

Christopher Gildenstern
Creative/Production Director
Barnes Chase & Davis, Inc.
Advertising, Marketing, New Medi



Or...

The new "editor" shows up at your facility...
you'll give him the locator/unlock code to the footage storage pool...
he or she jacks in their laptop/pad/whatever editing interface to the pool...
works as long as it takes -
and output you a file with enough meta-data tags describing every editing decision, type adjustment, timing tweek and shift that they just made - so that whoever does the next edit can build on that.

And the editing PROGRAM he or she uses is incidental to the entire process - just as the brush a particular artist uses is incidental to the process of creating a painting?

That ONLY might exist in a world where clips aren't locked to a program - and robust metadata is the CORE of the edit - rather than today's world where a monolithic core program is NECESSARY to the manipulation of the data that it uses.

Today, if you write a document in Word, I can open it in a dozen different word processors because they all understand (more or less) the underlying tags that reside atop the basic ascii code.

Maybe future video editing programs should be MORE like word processors than today's "program locked data in a program locked code base?"

But to get there, we need a MUCH better data handling engine than we've got in the current structure. Perhaps that's one meta-strategy behind the FCP-X re-write? The database is every BIT as important as the video manipulation tags (program features) because in the long run, it's ALL just digital data - and if you can tag it really, really well - than anyone can use those tags in ANY program to access and manipulate it?

Perhaps?

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Conner


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 18, 2011 at 9:25:08 pm

Metadata can be a great thing in the right hands. But like auto-correct on a word processor,
it can get you into deep, deep trouble if you don't know what you're doing.

bigpine


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 12:49:42 am

Walter Soyka : "some problems are easier to solve linearly (radio edit, then visuals), and some problems are easier to solve non-linearly (assembly followed by re-arranging to shape the story)"

and - "From FCP's immense flexibility, I added what I'd consider a clay-sculpting approach to my mental toolbox. I could throw things on the timeline, use multiple layers as a scratch pad, and manipulate clips and edits directly on the timeline with the mouse."

Poking head in late. Super super duper interesting stuff. Deadly thread. I'm honestly personally deeply confused on this point. I was taught radio edit for promos and short form - it's an impeccable approach born from serious prior limitations. But it's still immensely correct now in certain circumstances. Which make this whole thing metaphysically weird - limitations of craft impose discipline which bears real fruit. so what does perceived limitation mean? and given that FCPX has conscious limitations, or rather - shapings - of approach what does it mean this time? There are consciously designed channels of execution in FCPX, mostly regarding an explicit statement of function; that the provision of b-roll is a near absolute eventuality on V2 that deserves explicit terms, linking and methodology, such that it is easily absorbed by an early entrant as it is one of the invariable uses and expressions of the vertical stack, that the vertical stack is, as a verb, effectively "b-roll" second story or what have you...
To define the intelligible purpose of the stack - it's reality in practice - is something which on a certain level I find myself having quiet difficulty disagreeing with.

But I also - looking carefully at my pots of expended bile - do really find myself hovering back to Walters interspersed question - is this degree of conscious pre-shaping, literally provisioning packaged second storyline verbs and nouns of editing usage of the toolset at its most basic level an issue?


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 1:54:58 am

Walter, re: starting at the base of your domain, this has been a proven methodology of teaching since teaching was first taught. What makes us think we have suddenly and magically short-circuited learning? We are still born earlier and less formed than any other species, so that we can learn our environment and its complexities from the ground up.

Many film programs, the smart ones IMHO let students who seem serious about the craft work on Moviolas and handle film. They don't necessarily start there; they are not dogmatic about "walk before you run." But at the appropriate time, once you have been exposed to NLEs in depth, the handling of film can create an epiphany, a realization of the "metaphorical" nature of GUI and digital tools. It can help you separate WHAT you are doing from HOW you do it. It can remind you that the basics of visual communications and psychology come from inborn mechanisms from 'the ancestral environment' -- rather than something "invented" every year by each new software.

There is ALWAYS the danger with any experience that is automatic or does the work for you that, you may never learn how to problem solve in its absence. Is that a defect? Not if you never need to know how something works. Few people understand the basics of electricity and yet survive and prosper in the modern world.

I have watched my son (age 17) learn "organization" via the MacOS and Google. Whereas he mother and father are expert organizers in the hierarchial filing system, folders within folders, he locates everything via Spotlight, Google and other searches. I accused him of not being "organized" but it turns out he maintains a sophisticated relational database in his head of keywords that allow him to use his searches efficiently. Just as my filing and bin systems only work if I know what the names mean, and can visualize in my mind's eye the logical path as I drill down into folder stacks.

So who is more organized? I think we just do it differently.

Doug D


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 2:25:02 am

Great reply, hanging off my blurb and rather meant for the Walter - but just to say - that's a nuanced post - is there an ultimate truth to the practise of editing, ala see the flammable celluloid in your mind - that it is an anchoring truth - or can it all now be be sublimated completely to new ways of thinking ala issues of organization and recall growing out of words and tags etc. I'm regurgitating there but it's all a bit interesting that.

Like - are there valid historical truths to editing; does it have a memory as a craft, or is editing instead a malleable expression of something outside of itself such that the practise of it can be completely reformulated by time and technology?

Walter Murch, blinks, and the bee dance as the man says.


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 2:44:37 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "are there valid historical truths to editing; does it have a memory as a craft, or is editing instead a malleable expression of something outside of itself such that the practise of it can be completely reformulated by time and technology?"

There goes the neighborhood...

Shakespeare has arrived, but he hails not from England.


David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 3:13:59 am

Doug,

I don't disagree with you at all - but - we also have to realize that there will be some functional limits on the relevance of older approaches to modern processes.

Cutting on a Steenbeck may well imposes some important understandings and disciplines on the student.

But few of them will really NEED to know that to function in the modern editing world.

I'm not sure a modern math teacher would be prized if he or she demanded that their students master the slide rule before moving on to the calculator. It's a generation too far for significant relevance.

Reminds me of sharing a cab at NAB one year with some young audio editors. I mentioned that I started out cutting tape on a splicing block and they were FASCINATED. They had never editing in any fashion other than digitally. That happened more than a decade ago.

At some point tools move on. That's just the way it's always been.

FWIW.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Conner


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 1:02:30 pm

For sure, it's not necessary to sit down at a Steenbeck. As I said, it's kind of a grace note, to give you a visceral connection with the "metaphors" still in use. For example, "Hey Teach, why do they call it Final 'CUT' Pro?" "Well you see, they used to actually CUT a piece of film or a piece of tape."

Doug D


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 1:24:09 am

Walter:

Thanks for the great post on your formative workflow influences. I especially liked the clay-sculpting metaphor; this is how I work all the time in documentary -- where you can go in so many directions, and so you need to gets your fingers in there and get the feel of how best to shape YOUR version of the story. Whether FCPX influences us, a new generation or no one, YOUR particular post is both familiar and inspiring.

Doug D


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 2:19:54 pm

I'd encourage everyone interested in this discussion to check out David Roth Weiss's podcast Apple's Final Cut Pro X: One BIG Love/Hate Relationship. He interviews David Lawrence, and they touch on several of the issues we're discussing here.

It's a three-part series:
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/11421
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/11422
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/11423

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 4:43:27 pm

Interesting aspect discussed in those podcast is the fact that those new editors will have to start off learning descriptions of the processes that are COMPLETELY different than current industry standards. It is a very valid point to say that someone with only FCPX experience is going to be confused when they hear the words timeline, project and sequence, as they are used fairly globally now.

Perhaps FCPX is going to be a major contributor to confusion for those reaching out to a broader professional market?

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 4:48:39 pm

[Marvin Holdman] "new editors will have to start off learning descriptions of the processes that are COMPLETELY different than current industry standards."

Is this really as big a problem as people are making out, I wonder? Many different applications use different names for the same thing but it doesn't represent a major obstacle to learning them. Are you really not going to be able to move on from FCPX because you once learned that a sequence was a "project"? I somehow doubt it in most cases.

Not to say that Apple haven't been particularly daft with their new nomenclature!

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 4:58:21 pm

I remember thinking FCP's Viewer/Canvas was strange after 12 years on Avid. It was even more confusing when learning how I had to double click clips in the timeline and see clips with three dots under them in the Viewer to do additional stuff to.



Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: What does FCPX teach new editors?
on Jul 19, 2011 at 11:35:43 pm

Is this really as big a problem as people are making out, I wonder?

Is it prohibitive from learning? No. Will it be discriminatory when that youngster walks into an edit shop for a job and has to be told what a sequence is? Probably.

Much as I cringe when someone comes to me and tells me they "filmed a video" because the results, by and large, are predictable, I fear the same stigma will be there for FCPX. How will that affect a new editor? Someone who might be a bit insecure about their craft? I suspect it will re-enforce their doubt. Remove the confidence to reach out with their craft.

Have anything to do with their ability to edit? Probably not. Integrating into a shared environment? Going to make it a bit tougher.

Frankly, I think this will be divisive software, much as iMovie is in a professional environment. It may be used incidentally, but for any work with depth it is not useful. Because of that, most don't really include their experience with iMovie in their resume. It speaks to naivete.

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]