FORUMS: list search recent posts

walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Aindreas Gallagher
walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 12:51:48 am

i made one of an endless series of arsey points about editing there a while back, and I ended up blabbing:

"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?"

I am truly, courtesy of apple, confused on this point. We are extrapolated, as software based editing practitioners, from the physical processes, and the practitioners, that beget us. On a personal level, I am disturbed, I think, by the radicalism of Apple's new editing vernacular. I am not speaking to the relational databases, the metadata, or the tagging.

Rather, I am disturbed by the incredibly forceful, and reductive, vernacular and methodology Apple have chosen to impose on the basic editing processes themselves. Vernacular which they intend to gain wide, overwhelming audience.

Ultimately: Is a forensically absolute, intellectually disinterested timeline, shorn of pre-baked methodology, an anachronism?


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


Return to posts index

John Pale
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 3:24:40 am

Can you just go back to ranting like a lunatic?

I need a thesaurus, a dictionary, and Google on 3 tabs in my browser to get through this and I still don't know what you are talking about.

My head hurts.


Cheers.


Return to posts index

Sohrab Sandhu
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 5:10:52 am

[John Pale] "I need a thesaurus, a dictionary, and Google on 3 tabs in my browser to get through this and I still don't know what you are talking about."

Just like FCP X, there is no way in or out of Aindreas's world full of FCP X rants. You need to buy a 3rd party plug-in which will then translate his post back in to english language. Then you can successfully import the post in your brain. ;-)


Sohrab

2.66 GHz 8-core, ATI Radeon HD 4870,
FCS 3, AJA Kona Lhi



"The creative person wants to be a know-it-all. He wants to know about all kinds of things: ancient history, nineteenth-century mathematics, current manufacturing techniques, flower arranging, and hog futures. Because he never knows when these ideas might come together to form a new idea. It may happen six minutes later or six months, or six years down the road. But he has faith that it will happen." -- Carl Ally


Return to posts index


David Lawrence
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 4:17:54 am

@Aindreas - you sir, are a poet. :)

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Ultimately: Is a forensically absolute, intellectually disinterested timeline, shorn of pre-baked methodology, an anachronism?"

I certainly hope not!

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Alan Lacey
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 10:32:14 am

You keep them coming Aindreas. A lot of us aren't as articulate as you but feel your continued pain.

Alan

FlashXDR,XDcamHD,XDcamEX,D9 etc
FCS,AE,Combustion,LiquidSilver,Vegas,Edius,
G5,MBP,Vista64,XP


Return to posts index

David Cherniack
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 12:25:25 pm

An Irish poet...they seem to grow with the moss there. I met my first at the Winter games in Grenoble in '68. He had been sent by Guinness as a goodwill ambassador to the local pubs. Now that was corporate benevolence at its finest.

@Aindreas - please continue to delight and entertain.

David
AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 12:44:47 pm

ah cheers lads - like I say, I figure I had to lay off the ranting as the conversation was generally getting more coherent..


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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 7:22:56 pm

I just listened to the podcast interview. great stuff. "this is too important to what I do, we need to get this fixed."

Amen to that.


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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking PLUS schema, rails, and the space-time continuum
on Jul 22, 2011 at 12:36:27 pm

Great post, Aindreas!


[Aindreas Gallagher] "Ultimately: Is a forensically absolute, intellectually disinterested timeline, shorn of pre-baked methodology, an anachronism?"

I'll try to expand on this point a little bit and connect it back to David Lawrence's earlier post. I will need way more words than Aindreas did.

FCP's timeline was totally open and didn't have an opinion on how editing was to be done -- "forensically absolute, intellectually disinterested." You simply placed time-based media at specific points in absolute time, with immense (and occasionally dangerous) freedom over their arrangement and re-arrangement.

FCPX is a far more specialized tool. Craig Seeman has made the good point a few times that Apple has likely studied how people used editorial UIs for FCPX -- I think we're taking that idea a step further here. Apple has studied how people edit, and then incorporated the most common methodology directly into FCPX's design. It's even there in the language: primary storyline, secondary storyline, clip connections.

It seems the vast majority of all our work follows the same schema: edited A-roll to advance the story with edited B-roll to fill in either conceptual or technical gaps. This was possible in FCP, because the timeline itself imposed no specific order on the editor; it's practically mandated in FCPX with the primary storyline anchoring the timeline, instead of linear time. This is FCPX's "pre-baked methodology."

I generally try to avoid car analogies -- car analogies always fail -- but please indulge a superficial comparison.

FCP was like a car. It's pretty fast, and you can take it nearly anywhere you want to go. FCPX is like a mag-lev train. It's inconceivably fast, but the route is fixed. The train needs its rails for speed, and gives up open flexibility to get it.

So Aindreas asks this -- do all the places we need to go have train stations?

Most of them do, but I can immediately think of one that doesn't: multicam. I think Aindreas's point about building an editing methodology into the software, taken with David Lawrence's points about time on the storyline, is the root of the conceptual problem for multicam in FCPX.

In a single-cam edit, there is no common time linking the A-roll and the B-roll. They both get separated from their own real times, chopped into pieces, laid onto the timeline, and related to each other. Clip connections make sense, because there's nothing else tying them together.

In a multi-cam edit, you are not chopping the media's real time into pieces. There is a common, continuous real time that connects all the media. B-roll happens in the same real time that A-roll happens in. In FCPX's language, it's all primary storyline, whether the shot is conceptually A-roll or B-roll. FCPX may not be built for unedited time.

Are there other scenarios, or is nearly all editorial built on the same methodology that's built into FCPX?

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


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking PLUS schema, rails, and the space-time continuum
on Jul 22, 2011 at 12:42:37 pm

that's what I meant to say.

Everyone else started making intelligent points, so I thought I'd crack out the big words dictionary for Andy - but walter has it there: is pre-determined methodology - (even one that covers many use cases) burned right into the timeline itself, an issue for the art and craft of editing?


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


Return to posts index

Carsten Orlt
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking PLUS schema, rails, and the space-time continuum
on Jul 22, 2011 at 1:11:17 pm

You guys are all crazy :-)

There is absolutely nothing you can do in the FCP7 timeline that you can't do in X. Not always the same way but that is pretty obvious, isn't it.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking PLUS schema, rails, and the space-time continuum
on Jul 22, 2011 at 1:51:51 pm

[Carsten Orlt] "You guys are all crazy :-)"

That may be!

But FCPX is undeniably a huge foundational change. Don't let the superficial similarities of the FCP and FCPX timelines mask what a big change FCPX brings in the way we work.

FCPX has challenged our assumptions about what an NLE is and what an NLE does. It's uprooted decades of thought on the editorial process, and invited us to re-examine things we took for granted before.

This is not the sort of reading you usually see on a web forum, but I think conversations about the design principles behind the tools or the philosophy of the craft itself is just as valid as the conversations we're used to about technique.


[Carsten Orlt] "There is absolutely nothing you can do in the FCP7 timeline that you can't do in X. Not always the same way but that is pretty obvious, isn't it."

FCP was a general-purpose tool for arranging audio and visual media in time and within the constraints of video playback devices. We all used it for editorial, and nearly all of us used it in a very specific editorial model.

FCPX is built with a specific editorial model in mind.

The tools may accomplish the same tasks, but the distinction is real -- and I for one think that Aindreas is wise to ask if it will have unintended consequences on how we think about editing.

I'll bust out the Marshall McLuhan quote again: "We become what we behold. We shape our tools, then our tools shape us." Now that we've reshaped our tools, Aindreas is asking what will happen as our tools shape us.

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


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking PLUS schema, rails, and the space-time continuum
on Jul 22, 2011 at 1:56:06 pm

what he said.


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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking PLUS schema, rails, and the space-time continuum
on Jul 22, 2011 at 3:55:27 pm

[Walter Soyka] "FCP's timeline was totally open and didn't have an opinion on how editing was to be done -- "forensically absolute, intellectually disinterested." You simply placed time-based media at specific points in absolute time, with immense (and occasionally dangerous) freedom over their arrangement and re-arrangement.

FCPX is a far more specialized tool. Craig Seeman has made the good point a few times that Apple has likely studied how people used editorial UIs for FCPX -- I think we're taking that idea a step further here. Apple has studied how people edit, and then incorporated the most common methodology directly into FCPX's design. It's even there in the language: primary storyline, secondary storyline, clip connections."


That, right there, is the history of computing. In ye olden days, the process of using a computer was the process of programming a computer... and programming meant telling the machine precisely which hardware-implemented instructions to execute. As time passed, more abstraction was added. Higher-level programming languages were created, in which you no longer directly interacted with the hardware. Operating system vendors began to create extensive libraries of code with nice APIs, providing developers access to lots of pre-packaged functionality that didn't require them to write their own code. Standard software was distributed, which performed simple tasks without requiring the user to write software at all. These tools could be used together to perform fairly complex operations. Later, 'application software' was invented -- large software packages that provided all-in-one solutions for specific tasks.

And Application software itself has continued to evolve to provide more support for the way people use it. Consider iTunes vs. the previous approach of managing your music collection in the file manager, and using three different apps for playback, ripping, and burning. Consider the sharing features iPhoto has -- they don't do anything you couldn't do yourself by exporting images and uploading them somewhere, but they save a bunch of steps. Consider the layout of the OS X file system, which is structured in a much more standardized way than the classic Mac OS file system.

Complaints about the introduction of higher-level tools, on the part of people conformable with lower-level approaches, have followed nearly every one of these historical developments, and the rhetoric is always remarkably similar -- "I have less control", "Things are too easy now and amateurs are going to show up and ruin everything", "My skills are being devalued", etc.

Yet despite these objections, the trend toward higher-level tools in computing has been relentless for, literally, five or six decades at this point. It's not going to stop. At any rate, not until computers function at the same level of abstraction as human brains, and software natively understands mental concepts.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking PLUS schema, rails, and the space-time continuum
on Jul 22, 2011 at 5:22:53 pm

I agree that continued abstraction has been seen throughout the history of computing -- but I'd point out that it's somewhat unique to computing, and doesn't exist in all areas where people craft things with tools. Many other tools have remained strictly functional.

People still build houses with hammers, but building materials and techniques have changed a lot over the past few hundred years.

FCPX "burns in" our current editorial model to the application. Aindreas asks us to consider the consequences. Maybe we had the best model, so there's no harm in accepting the abstraction. Maybe we didn't, and the assumptions built into our tools will limit how we think going forward.


[Chris Kenny] "Complaints about the introduction of higher-level tools, on the part of people conformable with lower-level approaches, have followed nearly every one of these historical developments, and the rhetoric is always remarkably similar -- "I have less control", "Things are too easy now and amateurs are going to show up and ruin everything", "My skills are being devalued", etc."

No one is saying that in this thread. There are plenty of other threads where you can go to argue these reactions.

This thread is, ironically, a higher level, abstract discussion about how the new tools could affect editorial. It's also a place to alternately compliment Aindreas on his brilliant writing or to good-naturedly ridicule him for being totally inscrutable, if you're so inclined.

Do you think that the model built into FCPX encompasses all editorial? I'm not sure yet. I've been thinking about editorial in essentially the same way that FCPX has since I learned the craft. I'm having a hard time thinking outside of it so far-- is that because that schema is the essence of editorial, or because that's all we've come up with so far?

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


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking PLUS schema, rails, and the space-time continuum
on Jul 22, 2011 at 5:28:44 pm

[Walter Soyka] " ridicule him for being totally inscrutable, if you're so inclined."

Hey - hey now.

Inscrutable is the new black you know.


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


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking PLUS schema, rails, and the space-time continuum
on Jul 22, 2011 at 7:23:20 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Maybe we had the best model, so there's no harm in accepting the abstraction. Maybe we didn't, and the assumptions built into our tools will limit how we think going forward."

No matter how many times it's said, it will never sink in...

Aindreas might provoke that argument as the extreme in his blistering rants, but in all honesty, that's so far off base, what he is saying is a fundamental truth, not extreme in its core...which is why his voice here represents to me a wider range of thought

But the other coin here, who I'm really getting tired of reading, takes it into the gutter *projecting* his own interpretation of the argument...

While this thread, by its outset transcended that, he has to drag it right back down into the stench of what makes this so divisive and manifest some imaginary monkey protesting by throwing wrenches in the machine...


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking PLUS schema, rails, and the space-time continuum
on Jul 22, 2011 at 9:29:03 pm

[Walter Soyka] "
In a single-cam edit, there is no common time linking the A-roll and the B-roll. They both get separated from their own real times, chopped into pieces, laid onto the timeline, and related to each other. Clip connections make sense, because there's nothing else tying them together.

In a multi-cam edit, you are not chopping the media's real time into pieces. There is a common, continuous real time that connects all the media. B-roll happens in the same real time that A-roll happens in. In FCPX's language, it's all primary storyline, whether the shot is conceptually A-roll or B-roll. FCPX may not be built for unedited time.
"


I'd also like to add; that is kind of a - head nodding a few times re-reading the passage - brilliant point.

Apple may have cut beyond the fat, through the bone and into the marrow of time based editing with what they've done to absolute time.
I wonder a little if Lawrence's post on time, as perceived by FCPX, might not be met by horrified glances between the software engineers at apple.
That it could quite simply be a serious intellectual error on their part.


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


Return to posts index

Andrew Richards
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 2:48:37 pm

Aindreas, after that post you should change your COW avatar to this:



:-)

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 4:03:00 pm

Andy, you are so, so mean.

I just read it in my head with his voice. It works.. horribly well.


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


Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 5:25:49 pm

For sure, the absolute BEST thing that has come from this whole FCX release is the emergence of Andreas as a "poet for the people". Much needed insanity in these days or utter irrationality.

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

Rafael Amador
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 22, 2011 at 6:07:53 pm

[Walter Soyka] "FCPX is built with a specific editorial model in mind.

The tools may accomplish the same tasks, but the distinction is real -- and I for one think that Aindreas is wise to ask if it will have unintended consequences on how we think about editing.

I'll bust out the Marshall McLuhan quote again: "We become what we behold. We shape our tools, then our tools shape us." Now that we've reshaped our tools, Aindreas is asking what will happen as our tools shape us."

Walter,
Is not about tools, but about concepts.
Mr Jobs decided long ago to change the concept of the "Personal Computer", now they have decided to change the concept of video editing.
Tapes are disappearing and most of us are shooting file-based formats, but the concepts of movie, reel and sequence won't change.

[Walter Soyka] "FCPX is a far more specialized tool. Craig Seeman has made the good point a few times that Apple has likely studied how people used editorial UIs for FCPX -- I think we're taking that idea a step further here. Apple has studied how people edit, and then incorporated the most common methodology directly into FCPX's design. It's even there in the language: primary storyline, secondary storyline, clip connections."
I doubt very much Apple has studied the way people edit.
All that of "primary storyline, secondary storyline, clip connections.." sounds to schools papers and manuals.

[Carsten Orlt] "There is absolutely nothing you can do in the FCP7 timeline that you can't do in X. Not always the same way but that is pretty obvious, isn't it."
My editing starts when I go to shoot. back home, I preview, select and edit all at once. Many times I even write the text on subtitles while I edit.
FCP gives me all the freedom I need to work the way I like.
FCPX doesn't gives me that freedom at all and force me to a senseless process.
[Chris Kenny] "Complaints about the introduction of higher-level tools, on the part of people conformable with lower-level approaches, have followed nearly every one of these historical developments, and the rhetoric is always remarkably similar -- "I have less control", "Things are too easy now and amateurs are going to show up and ruin everything", "My skills are being devalued", etc"
With those better tools most people end up working with presets.
The trend are tools for people which doesn't understand (and doesn't care) about the underlaying technology. You won't get what the tools have to offer if you don't know what's going on inside the machine.
My "value" is not on my 8 years editing with FC, but in my 25 years editing with everything. No fear for cheap good tools for everybody.
rafael

http://www.nagavideo.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 25, 2011 at 3:14:26 pm

Hi Rafael -- glad to have you in on this conversation!


[Rafael Amador] "Is not about tools, but about concepts... Tapes are disappearing and most of us are shooting file-based formats, but the concepts of movie, reel and sequence won't change."

[Rafael Amador] "I doubt very much Apple has studied the way people edit. All that of "primary storyline, secondary storyline, clip connections.." sounds to schools papers and manuals."


My point here is that FCPX (the tool) has a very specific concept built into it about how editorial is supposed to be done. The most common approach to editorial -- A-roll driving the story and B-roll filling in conceptual or technical gaps -- has been hard-wired into FCPX.

You have your primary storyline (A-roll). Everything else (secondary storylines, B-roll) is placed and linked relative to the primary storyline in FCPX, instead of placed in absolute time as it was in FCP. It seems to me that FCPX is built to rough out a primary storyline, connect clips to it, and then re-shuffle the primary storyline and keep everything in sync.

It's almost as if Microsoft Word forced outline mode on all writers, and added automatic unresolved antecedent replacement. You build the outline, you write to the outline, then you separate yourself from the actual flow of the words and simply re-arrange and edit the outline to craft your piece.

I call out the McLuhan quote because I think that Apple has built FCPX to make the general editorial case simpler -- but now with that done, FCPX will affect the way its users think about editorial problems.

I have been fascinated by Herb Sevush's comment that the first thing he does in an edit is rip sync apart. This style of thinking runs so contrary to the FCPX philosophy that an editor raised on FCPX might never realize its possibility, let alone its power.

I'd love to hear a bit more on how you work with FCP and how it doesn't translate to FCPX, because I'm still trying to understand all the ramifications of changing the way the user intreprets and interacts with the timeline.

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

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: walter murch, bee dancing, and blinking
on Jul 25, 2011 at 7:46:13 pm

[Walter Soyka] "FCPX will affect the way its users think about editorial problems. "

yep yep yep. they may be right in their use case assumptions, but its still worth thinking about this.


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


Return to posts index

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