FORUMS: list search recent posts

So long, and thanks for all the fish

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>

Steve Connor
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 2:57:24 pm

Edius doesn't get mentioned very much around here, I'd be interested to hear more about it

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Alan Lacey
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 4:23:55 pm

Download the demo and try it Steve. It may not be quite as feature rich as FCP7 (I'll stay out of the FCPX debate) but it's fast and I mean fast, and rock solid stable on the PC. By the way did I say it was fast?

There's no Edius Forum on the cow but a really excellent one supported and inhabited by GV staff as well as really helpful members at http://forum.grassvalley.com/forum/

If I've got time to invest then I'll play with FCP, PremCS5.5 and will even try FCPX eventually, but for a job to be done quickly & well Edius is now my first choice.

I was a committed Liquid Silver user until Avid pulled the plug and have never supported Avid

Cheers Alan

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


Return to posts index


Jason Jenkins
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 4:56:14 pm

[Alan Lacey] "There's no Edius Forum on the cow"

Maybe that's why it doesn't get much traffic... http://forums.creativecow.net/edius

Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production... with style!

Check out my Mormon.org profile.


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 5:05:58 pm

Actually not quite true, there is an Edius forum here on the cow
http://forums.creativecow.net/edius
However, it's not the most frequented forum around here. The forum at Grass Valley itself is very informative.

About Edius itself, I had the chance of playing around with it at a friends who swears by it and I was extremely impressed. I love the UI and the concept. Coming from FCP, I felt instantly 100 per cent at home and I mean no issues at all.
It is indeed freakin' fast, extremely stable and its realtime capabilities are brutal. I did some PIP tests with AVCHD to test something that taxes the machine and I stopped at 10 streams, no dropped frames, and it doesn't even use CUDA.
It brings its own intermediate codec, Canopus HQX. It uses the avi wrapper, not Quicktime based, redering into it is the fastest codec I have seen anywhere. It smokes DnxHD, Prores and Cineform in terms of performance bigtime. I can't remember how fast it was but it was about 3-4x times faster than exporting to a DnxHD QT.
I might do some speed comparisons and RT tests with some of the big NLEs when I have the time one day. I wouldn't be surprised if Edius beats them all to be honest.


Return to posts index

Alan Lacey
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 6:51:07 pm

Wow, I've never seen that! Thanks

Alan

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


Return to posts index


David Roth Weiss
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 6:20:29 pm

I love where you wrote: "Personally, I tried FCPX, as I’ve tried lots of other systems. Walter Murch said, I think, something along the lines of “Apple are looking further into the future than me”. Apple are looking at a future that doesn’t include lots of professionals, probably not Walter Murch, maybe not the BBC, and certainly not me."

I guess even the best in the world just aren't advanced enough to appreciate X. At least we're in good company Bernie.

David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.com
http://www.ProMax.com

David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Michael Sanders
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 7:12:44 pm

This guy is an Ex BBC staffer as I understand it.

It may interest him - and you to know - that someone (according to some blog post I read) high up in BBC Studios and Post P is heavily involved with helping improve Apple FCP X, they are really excited by it. I have no proof of this other than what I read somewhere.. I'll try and remember where.

I do know BBC scotland are playing with it.

Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor


Return to posts index

James Mortner
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 8:29:57 pm

[Michael Sanders] "It may interest him - and you to know - that someone (according to some blog post I read) high up in BBC Studios and Post P is heavily involved with helping improve Apple FCP X, they are really excited by it. I have no proof of this other than what I read somewhere.. I'll try and remember where.

I do know BBC scotland are playing with it."


BBC is a massive company, Im sure somebody somewhere is involved with Apple !


Return to posts index


David Roth Weiss
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 9:23:24 pm

[Michael Sanders] "Someone (according to some blog post I read) high up in BBC Studios and Post P is heavily involved with helping improve Apple FCP X, they are really excited by it."

Michael,

The fact that some unnamed blog mentions some unnamed person high up in the BBC who is reportedly excited by FCPX and is involved in helping to improve it is not exactly newsworthy, nor will it impress any "real" editors among us. When the BBC goes on the record that they are adopting FCPX maybe we'll want to listen.

The fact that FCPX needs so much improvement in order for most editors to even consider using it is perhaps the more important message.

[Michael Sanders] "This guy is an Ex BBC staffer as I understand it."

It would seem this statement is designed to imply that Bernard's point of view, which clearly differs from your own, is rendered invalid, simply because he's no longer an active employee with the BBC.

Personally, I would suggest to you that Bernard is in fact "a graduate" of the BBC, with years of service, experience, and expertise that go well beyond most of the active employees currently on staff there. In fact, this makes Bernard's POV far more valuable in my estimation than your very excited mystery BBC staffer, especially since my own experience and that of the vast majority of respected editors I know agree with him, not with you or your mystery BBC staff member.

Does this make sense?

David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.com
http://www.ProMax.com

David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 11:34:33 pm

I saw the promotions recently and had a look at the software features online. I searched for a reference to using external cards like Kona for broadcast accurate monitoring and saw nothing so lost interest in Edius. Also I need a tool that can import formats like XML and AAF plus round tripping to a grading program (da Vinci is now taking over from Color for me).

Does anyone know if it supports export and import of any standards and if it has proper output via a Kona?


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 12:10:07 am

[Michael Gissing] "I saw the promotions recently and had a look at the software features online. I searched for a reference to using external cards like Kona for broadcast accurate monitoring and saw nothing so lost interest in Edius. Also I need a tool that can import formats like XML and AAF plus round tripping to a grading program (da Vinci is now taking over from Color for me).

Does anyone know if it supports export and import of any standards and if it has proper output via a Kona?
"


Edius outputs AAF and edl, also reads FCP XML V.5 (haven't tried that but read it does). As far as hardware support, the situation is a bit like Avid MC pre 6, ie. Grass Valley have their own IO hardware to go with Edius (Storm 3G would be the Kona equivalent, It was in the machine I tired. Output is super smooth as we are used to via FCP.). However, there is one BM card that works with Edius at the moment and rumors have it they might open up more in the future. Current V.6 is more than a year old so there will be a big release this year (the 3D capable version of Edius is in beta and that Beta will expire around NAB so...). Not sure though, GV is a hardware company mainly so they want to move their own IO boards. It's certainly an app to look at very closely. Again, I was very impressed with the UI and the speed. It's pretty much like FCP on PC, just much faster and native.


Return to posts index


Michael Gissing
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 12:26:39 am

Thanks Frank. I am trying to capitalise on overpriced hardware already purchased. Edius might be worth a trial but I have to have proper monitoring and output to HDCam & digi beta.


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 12:41:30 am

[Michael Gissing] " I am trying to capitalise on overpriced hardware already purchased. Edius might be worth a trial but I have to have proper monitoring and output to HDCam & digi beta."

Same for me, totally agree with you. If there was full-on 3rd party io support plus if they made their own codec cross platform it would be extremely interesting. It's still a 32bit only app so it will also be interesting to see if the next rev will move it to 64bit. I am keeping an eye on that one, NAB could bring some interesting new alternatives. Nevertheless, if you have a windows installation I'd recommend to check out the trial and just play around with it - it was just plain, pure fun for me regarding speed and responsiveness.


Return to posts index

Gary Bettan
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 28, 2012 at 5:38:40 am

New Features in EDIUS Version 6.5 Strengthen Grass Valley's "Edit Anything" Reputation

San Francisco, Calif. February 24, 2012 — Due to its advanced codec, multiformat file support and unparalleled speed, the Grass Valley™ EDIUS® high-definition (HD), nonlinear video editing software is quickly becoming one of the dominant solutions among editors working in the digital news and professional video production industries. At NAB 2012 Grass Valley will demonstrate the latest version (EDIUS v.6.5), with a comprehensive 3D editing workflow and native support for raw footage captured with digital cinematography cameras from RED Digital.

"The Grass Valley EDIUS system continues to increase market share, due to its growing reputation as a fast, reliable, 'edit anything' editing solution," said Charlie Dunn, Executive Vice President of Products for Grass Valley. "As the market has demanded new features to accommodate new file-based formats and even 3D production, we have kept pace and want to ensure our users that we are committed to the platform and will continue to add new improvements and the most critical features as they become available."

Grass Valley is also making its renowned intermediate codec technology freely available to other applications. As well as the PC-based HQ/HQX codecs, a QuickTime version of Grass Valley's HQ and 10-bit HQX codec (for Windows and Mac platforms), will be available for free download.

read the full press release here

Gary

COW members get 5% OFF with Coupon COW5OFF

http://www.videoguys.com 800 323-2325 | We are the video editing and production experts!


Return to posts index


Michael Sanders
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 25, 2012 at 11:58:47 pm

The post, nor the information contained within it, was designed to impress - just a response to the point made in Bernard's post that FCP X may not be right of the BBC - it seems there are others (currently working within the BBC) who might disagree.

From his own post Bernard makes it know he retired/went freelance in 2001 - I don't know what he's up to now nor seek to belittle him or his views. I do know that in the intervening 11 years the tools for television production, the stories people tell and how they tell them have changed and have changed dramatically. In some ways for the best, in someways.. well that's another day's post :-)

But that's by the by. In response to the rest of your post:

No real (read professional) editor should ever go just on what someone else says, no one should be impressed with what someone else is using. I'm not impressed by what tools my decorator uses, but the fact he can paint my house well as well as he does impress's me.

I would always listen to other people's suggestions, but trust yourself, trust your abilities and screw everyone else. Even working on the same kind of programme we all work in different ways - and the beauty (or not depending on your point of view) with FCP X is that we now have a different way of working - not three edit systems fundamentally the same,

I still regularly meet editors who happily pronounce FCP X as "the most utter piece of crap ever" - despite never having used it, or in most cases actually played with it.

I really can't believe that almost a year later we're still having this basic argument.

One editor I know won't touch FCP X because well, in his words "Walter Murch said its not up to par so that's good enough for me". Well far be it for me to disagree with one of the worlds top editors, but so far FCP X works for me on the stories I need to tell. Another editor admitted he was never going to try FCP X because it looks too much like iMovie and he hates iMovie.

For about 70% of the time I'm a DOP, imagine the response if I said I hate the ugly design of RED so I'm not going to use it! I'm not a huge fan of the RED one for many other reasons, but I've come to that conclusion from working with it. Lets be hones,t just because RED isn't as easy to use as an Alexa doesn't make the RED less of a professional camera.

There are some excellent editors doing great things with FCP X, who have bothered to play around and looked at what it has to offer. It is never going to win over every editor in the world, just in the same way FCP 7 never did. For me - I get it. I get the metadata driven workflow, trackless doesn't bother me - in fact it works for me. I'm not totally won over by the event/project layout - but then on the current project I'm editing its a massive bonus.

What I really hate is the inference from a lot of people that because I use FCP X I can't be a "professional" editor. I work to the highest standards I can, both technically and artistically. Be it shooting or editing I use the tools I have to the max and often go beyond what the clients ask because it will be better.

My clients (some of whom I've worked with over 13 years since I went freelance) value my editing skills for my ability to tell a story. They trusted my abilities when I worked front panel on BVW75's, then again on Sony 910's and again on FCP 7. As long as I deliver the goods to the standards my clients have come to expect - I suspect they don't give a rats arse what I edit on. That's how I define a professional editor.

Actually thinking about it the fact that I bothered to investigate FCP X so deeply I think is testament to my professionalism - what would it say about me if I said to my clients, "Oh, people told me FCP X is crap so I haven't bothered"

One last thing, just don't tell my clients I'm doing it faster on FCP X - or they will expect lower bills!

Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor


Return to posts index

Ken Zukin
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 2:24:41 am

[Michael Sanders] "What I really hate is the inference from a lot of people that because I use FCP X I can't be a "professional" editor. I work to the highest standards I can, both technically and artistically. Be it shooting or editing I use the tools I have to the max and often go beyond what the clients ask because it will be better.
"


Totally agree with this -- FCP X isn't a good fit for me now, and may never be. But like a crap guitar in the hands of a journeyman guitarist -- some sweet notes are going to be created no matter what.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 7:02:15 pm

First Michael, let me just say, not to put you down BTW, but you're a bit late to the party here, everything you're saying has already been discussed, argued, debated, and reiterated hundreds of times on this forum.

[Michael Sanders] "I still regularly meet editors who happily pronounce FCP X as "the most utter piece of crap ever" - despite never having used it, or in most cases actually played with it."

There you go, that's an argument that's been bandied about here forever. To which I've responded over and over by asking, "do you actually have to jump off a bridge to know the fall is not going to be good for your well-being?"

More to the point however, there are many who may not have tried it and many who may have only used it sparingly, but there are also many admirers of X here who have dug quite deeply into the app since day one, but who have just recently expressed their frustration with some of the most basic tenets of the new paradigm. So, please, don't use that tired generalization here try to support your side of the argument, it's been tried over and over again here and it really infuriates a lot of people now.

[Michael Sanders] "Actually thinking about it the fact that I bothered to investigate FCP X so deeply I think is testament to my professionalism - what would it say about me if I said to my clients, "Oh, people told me FCP X is crap so I haven't bothered""

No one said you were a bad guy for trying X or even using it. Knock yourself out if it works for you... But, if you can't understand why it doesn't work for others, or even why they just don't like it, then perhaps you don't fully understand collaborative and mission critical workflows, and you might consider reading more posts here, because some pretty smart people have explained their issues with X unemotionally and very precisely.

[Michael Sanders] "One last thing, just don't tell my clients I'm doing it faster on FCP X - or they will expect lower bills!"

You're not the first to say this one either Michael, and frankly I've begun to wonder who's actually saving time with X. Picture cutting may well be faster, and as a cameraman that might explain why X works well for you. However, most non-fiction, unscripted, and reality-based projects are built upon an audio bed or "radio cut" first, and several editors who have thoroughly explored X have expressed a great deal of frustration with the magnetic timeline and it's lack of precision, claiming that instead of saving them time, they've had quite the opposite experience.

Of course, there are also instabilities and other issues to consider as well with what is really just beta software at this point. Not to mention, there's a learning curve that requires users to wrap their heads around a completely new workflow and new ways of just approaching what might otherwise be a simple edit. That can take up a lot of valuable time that some people may not have or may not want to spend until they're completely satisfied that FCPX will be useful in their own editing ecosystem.

David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.com
http://www.ProMax.com

David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Michael Sanders
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 7:25:42 pm

David,

I know its all been said before - I've said it here and other places over and over again. So in that we are in agreement.

As for your comments on editing, cutting etc.

Perhaps I'm being a bit unfair to myself as to be honest I've cut plenty of material over my 23 yrs in the industry (I know that's not a huge amount really). This includes a vast number of hour long doc's, news segments, current affairs programmes, a bit of drama and a lot of corporate talking heads and the odd high end corporate.

So I do understand why people don't like it and I have no problem with them. Its the people who haven't bothered to try it who irk me, I think there's an awful amount of difference between a bridge fall and trying a new piece of software. Which, yes does mean relearning how to do things - but that's not the worst that can happen to a person.

As I've said over and over again, now we have a choice, and if track based editing works better on your programme then great, Avid and PP are there for you. I know people are pissed at Apple for what they've done. I was at first but I know think they are very brave for trying something new and innovative.

And FWIW there are a few project's I've done recently where I sat down afterwards and thought it would be quicker on a track based editor. So I haven't totally drunk the Kool Aid!

Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 27, 2012 at 7:36:40 pm

[Michael Sanders] "I know its all been said before - I've said it here and other places over and over again. "

Repeating ourselves from slightly different directions is what we do all the time, in every aspect of our lives. It's part of the process of deepening roots. No need to point this out as if it was a bad thing.

There's certainly not been a single topic I can think of that's not revisited on a fairly regularly basis (how much should I charge, et al). That's how it happens when two million people visit a forum every month, and especially in this case, when stakes are so high.

More important, there are literally tens of thousands of brand new people finding their way to this forum every month. I predict that the number is going to explode soon...if you know what I mean. :-) To all of these folks, the discussion is brand new, and it's not reasonable to read all of the thousands of posts that go up in this forum every month. In fact, we've gone through phases where posts were going up every few seconds.

So I'm asking now, please, stop stop stop saying "we've talked about this already." This is all brand new to a huge number of people all te time. They're going to be blowing off as much steam as you did. Give 'em room, give 'em help, give 'em hope....

Tim Wilson
Associate Publisher, Editor-in-Chief
Creative COW Magazine



Return to posts index

Dominic Deacon
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 12:15:25 am

Since the FCPX switch I've been using Edius pretty solidly. It has a bunch of great points.

Firstly in terms of real time playback it's the fastest thing out there. Adobe always likes to make that claim for Premiere but in my experience Edius smokes it.

Seondly it accepts the broadest range of formats I've ever seen. I do a lot of short promotional pieces for bars where they give me footage on DVDs and all sorts of exotic formats. Just chuck them all on the same timeline without any transcoding and your good.

The colour correction tools are pretty extensive and excellent. I love being able to throw as many filters as I like on top of my footage and play it back immediately without rendering. The little split screen before and after tool is super handy as well.

I also really like the interface. FCPX people may like the magnetic timeline but to my way of thinking it doesn't have too many advantages over using Edius in Ripple and Tracks Locked mode. All the footage dances around as you edit in much the same way. Of course with Edius you can turn that off.

The big problem for me is project bloat. I'm working on a feature with it right now and starting to wish I'd gone with AVID. The project file- which is admittedly very large- now takes five minutes to open and it's slowing down a touch as I go. Still way faster than FCP7 ever was but I've gotten used to everything being instant.


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 1:07:35 am

[Dominic Deacon] "The big problem for me is project bloat. I'm working on a feature with it right now and starting to wish I'd gone with AVID. The project file- which is admittedly very large- now takes five minutes to open and it's slowing down a touch as I go. Still way faster than FCP7 ever was but I've gotten used to everything being instant."

This is something I don't think non-Avid people realize: in Avid, every single bin is a separate file, wrapped in a folder which IS the project file. Simply stated, it takes very little time to open a project, because you're just pointing to a folder. Each bin opens quickly as well, as it's only a subset of the entire project. It's also this architecture which allows Avid's extensive project sharing capabilities.

Every editor can have read/write access to the master project (ie, the folder), but only the first editor who opens a bin has read/write access to that bin -- everybody else simply has read access. Actually kind of amazing that Avid had this thought out 20 years ago and it has proven so robust that I can still open AVBV projects from the early nineties on a current generation Avid.

I'm consistently frustrated on other NLEs when I have to wait more than a minute to open even the most complex projects.

Chris


Return to posts index

Geoff Addis
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 8:49:54 am

I've been a long time user of Edius, also Premiere CS5, FCP7 and FCP X since its launch. In the pre FCP X days, when I commented how slow and render intensive FCP7 was I was looked upon as I if didn't know what I was talking about, how could anything be better than FCP? FCP X has changed things and now I hear from these same people how much the old FCP needed to improve and how terrible FCP X is! My experience with X gives me hope, in many ways it is far more efficent than FCP 7, but it still has a long way to go to catch up Edius's real time performance and stability. Colour correction is a breeze and I would suggest that for anyone interested, it is worth down loading a 30 day trial also looking at these tutorials and GV announcement:

http://www.grassvalley.com/news/pres...ing-reputation
http://www.onscreentraining.com/
https://grassvalley.csod.com/selfreg/register.aspx?c=gvedius6
http://www.misterfrag.com/EdiusWBCC.wmv

Note:

GV is to make their codec cross platform and that they provide input/output hardware that is suitable for brodcast monitoring.

The software does not utilise either GV or other graphics cards for accelerating their own FX.

If you have a Black Magic Intensity Pro card, that may be used for ingest although it does not (at yet?) provide an output.

+True, Edius may not be suitable for everyone, but for many it could be the answer.


Return to posts index

Bernard Newnham
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 2:23:32 pm

Of course, I couldn't resist coming back for one last time to see what people said. I would have left it longer, but Cow has a rather average board system in which any given subject disappears very quickly. Perhaps time for a new paradigm in bulletin board technology, or perhaps be like all the others.....which brings me neatly to -

First, thanks for the Edius links. It's interesting to see so much praise in this particular forum. I've been playing some more with it, and though I can't seem to place a wipe transition at the moment, I expect I'll manage it soon. I'm sure that back a long time ago Edius was pretty basic, and that has really changed - the more one looks the more there is to see. A serious system.

Now to Mr Sanders, who says -

"From his own post Bernard makes it know he retired/went freelance in 2001 - I don't know what he's up to now nor seek to belittle him or his views. I do know that in the intervening 11 years the tools for television production, the stories people tell and how they tell them have changed and have changed dramatically."

Well, I think I noticed that life moves on. TV isn't black and white any more, and last time I was at Television Centre I couldn't find a 2" machine anywhere. But actually an awful lots stays the same. I'm always slightly amazed at the size of studio cameras. I stopped being a studio cameraman in 1977. The cameras were heavy and moved around on Vinten peds with steering rings. The viewfinders were about 7" and the length of the camera was around 3 feet. They had panning handles, focus knobs and a place to put your shot cards. If one looks now, they are pretty much the same only lighter, and they've been mostly the same since tv started. The design parameters long ago settled down to what worked.

And that's the thing about NLEs - after a time of trying out various ways of doing things, everyone settled down to a common way of working. Not much is different between one screen and another. A bit like cars with the accelerator pedal on the right - it works so don't screw around with it. Anyone, even Apple, change things at their peril. Ir's an amazingly arrogant thing to do.

And Mr Sanders says -

"I really can't believe that almost a year later we're still having this basic argument."

It's because people still can't believe they've been so betrayed by a company they relied on, even believed in, in some cases. Simple as that.

Back at the BBC, I don't know much about what they're up to. A current member of staff told me about the Salford editing problem. I imagine whoever decided to equip the place with FCP is feeling as betrayed as everyone else. I can't imagine the arrogant people at Apple are going to listen to the BBC.

Just for fun, something else that didn't work -
http://tech-ops.co.uk/next/2010/09/the-vinten-peregrine-stories-6/
and something that much much later did -
http://www.tech-ops.co.uk/page164.html

Ta Ta

B


Return to posts index

Michael Sanders
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 3:17:20 pm

[Bernard Newnham] "And Mr Sanders says -

"I really can't believe that almost a year later we're still having this basic argument."

It's because people still can't believe they've been so betrayed by a company they relied on, even believed in, in some cases. Simple as that."


Bernard,

Sorry but you are selectively quoting - or maybe I didn't make myself clear. My point was I can't believe that after almost a year since FCP X was released we are still seeing people slam it without having used it. It's not like you even now have to pay for it to play with it!

[Bernard Newnham] "And that's the thing about NLEs - after a time of trying out various ways of doing things, everyone settled down to a common way of working. Not much is different between one screen and another. A bit like cars with the accelerator pedal on the right - it works so don't screw around with it. Anyone, even Apple, change things at their peril. Ir's an amazingly arrogant thing to do."

Or you could say: "Congratulations, Good on them" Thank heavens for the people who set out to try out something new, who want to innovate and see what they can come up with. Thank you to the people who say: "Well how could we do this differently with the tools (hardware, OS, software) we've got now". TV's all file based, everything is in clips - how can we make sorting and finding stuff easier. Because that's half the battle sometime.

And so what if they fail, we in TV (especially in reference to the BBC) spend so much of our time saying there's no room to failure, everything must be tested and focus grouped so everything defaults to a formula and there's no innovation. I don't want to live in that world. I want people to try and find new ways of working and doing better.

Not everyone thinks that the old track based way of work was the best way and at least now we have an alternative.

Personally, I say kudos to Apple and Randy for giving it a go.

Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor


Return to posts index

Daniel Frome
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 2:38:40 pm

I'll just add my own personal story that Edius is indeed a monster. It rips through anything, faster than any other NLE.

I'm not a 'freelancer' in the sense that I use my home equipment very much, and therefore I've been happy to edit on FCP or Avid, which ever the television show has already set up.

However, I once edited a short piece on Edius and I can say with certainty: This was on a Core 2 Quad (non hyperthreading) with 8GB RAM ... no matter how many FX and filters you throw at it, Edius screams. Even today, people say "oh you need a 12 core bla bla bla" -- well I feel like I had already won that war with my home-made quad core system and Edius.

It's hard to explain to someone who's never seen/used it. Just about any NLE has a dedicated, expected render time, maybe even a bit of a delay when you're scrubbing around the timeline, general slowness here or there. Edius, on the other hand, hardly ever does this. It seems that no matter effect, filter, or complex edit, you feel like the effect was already rendered to tape and you're just shuttling back the playback to watch it. I actually like to refer to it more as if you're a DJ with analog records... it feels very analog in a good way, in the sense that there's no 'computation time.' Hope that makes sense.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 2:44:08 pm

[Daniel Frome] "I'll just add my own personal story that Edius is indeed a monster. It rips through anything, faster than any other NLE. "

From the reports I've read it seems like a great NLE, why hasn't it achieved broader acceptance in the industry?

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 2:56:02 pm

[Steve Connor] "From the reports I've read it seems like a great NLE, why hasn't it achieved broader acceptance in the industry?"

Well, I'll pick my own nose here: because for years and years I didn't really look beyond FCP and the Mac; happily repeating the mantra of crash prone Windows, Blu-screen of death etc. etc. Until I had to use Windows for jobs I couldn't do on a Mac, and then X came along. It just seriously changed my outlook and gave way to a ton of possibilities.
I just take this as an opportunity to really evaluate things left right and forth. Some more, also for paid work, some just for fun. Most of the stuff is available as a trial so there is no reason to play around with it. And when there is a liking and I feel it suits my workflow in better ways than other apps I explore it deeper.
Next week or so I want to install Edius on one of my production machines and give is a thorough try because it's seems pretty perfect for some of the things I have to do on a daily basis.


Return to posts index

Alan Lacey
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 3:16:46 pm

Fast's original 601 was magnificent from day one but never seemed to be taken seriously. Well not until Avid bought the Liquid line, to kill it, many manifestations later.

Alan

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


Return to posts index

Geoff Addis
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 3:46:45 pm

Just a short follow up to my earlier post.

The demo version of Edius does not come with the additional third party FX that are supplied with the full version. Of these, I find the Mercalli stabilising software the most valuable; it only stabilises the selected part of the clip, is incredibly fast and is one of the best that I have used.

Wipes are found in the SMPTE section of filters.

A software bridge provides access to After Effects Plug-Ins.

I think that the FCP X chroma inlay is perhaps a little easier/better than that of Edius, but that is not to say Edius's is unusable and there is a very good third part plug-in available (can't remember the name, offhand).

Edius's audio capabilities may be limited for some, but you can export XML.

Its multi cam editing is very good.

And finally,

I remember editing video tape with Ferrofluid and a razor blade, so that dates me!!

Geoff


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 9:34:56 pm

[Geoff Addis] "Its multi cam editing is very good."

It's very good if your cutting a simple music piece, or anything where you merely want to be able to change camera angles, but it's totally inefficient if your looking to cut with any degree of complexity. Wish it wasn't so, I would absolutely give it a look if it's multicam were more capable.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Alan Lacey
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 27, 2012 at 9:02:21 am

Herb,can you explain a bit please. I'm not an experienced editor but you imply that multicam can do more than effectively operating as a 'live' switcher to recorded clips. What am I missing here?

Cheers Alan

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 27, 2012 at 1:57:29 pm

[Alan Lacey] "you imply that multicam can do more than effectively operating as a 'live' switcher to recorded clips. What am I missing here?"

A well designed multicam feature should create a "clip" that behaves exactly like any other video clip with the addition of having multiple video angles to go with it's multiple audio channels. Any program that limits you to working on a special timeline, or using markers instead of cut points, or anything else like that, is going to provide much gnashing of teeth.

Let me give you a typical scenario. I work on a 5 camera cooking show. My first assembly will typically be about 75 - 90 minutes long for a show who's content is 23:40. Lets say I have a scene where one of the 2 chefs is talking about the different types of carrots you can buy and their different cooking properties as he starts dicing the carrots.

In my assembly I use the "show mix" for my audio: camera B channel 1 (B1).In my first pass WS on chefs talking (camera B), cut to CU carrots chopping (camera C) - simple use of multicam to switch angles. On my second pass I lose the WS to save time and move the sync under the shot of the carrot chopping. It's now VO and I want to use that Chef's iso mike to minimize the chopping sounds, which I have on channel o2 of camera C (C2) instead of the show mix from B1. The multicam feature had better make this possible or I'm going to be unhappy. Third pass I decide the chopping is going on for a little too long and I want to bring back a CU of the chef talking in the middle of the action, and I'm tight enough on camera D that you don't notice the chef's not really chopping in sync. To do that I have to match the video back to the VO audio but now use a different angle from that audio, which by the way is no longer on the main audio track.

Using shots out of order and out of sync intentionally and then needing to re-establish either audio or video sync, not only from the original angle but from any of the angles in the multiclip is an essential feature for anything beyond basic live switching.

Try this on something like Edius, Vegas or Media 100 and you won't be very happy. Try it on Avid or FCP7 you'll be all smiles. PPro will have you smiling as long as you're using 4 cameras or less. As for FCPX, though I haven't tried it, it seems like an excellent implementation of multicam except for the fact that apparently X itself is limited when it comes to dealing with using audio split out over many cameras, so the limitation comes from the entire program, not the multicam feature.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Alan Lacey
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 27, 2012 at 3:37:03 pm

Many thanks for taking the time to explain this Herb, it's much appreciated. As you may well guess my use of, and knowledge of, multicam in both FCP7 and Edius is limited to just the one pass. To be honest it never occurred to me that multipass was even possible. What a numpty!

Cheers Alan

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


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 27, 2012 at 9:16:16 pm

[Alan Lacey] "Avid bought the Liquid line, to kill it,"

Okay, I tried to not respond to this for a couple of days, but once again, I fail. :-)

I was at Avid when Liquid came in, and became part of its product marketing team. I can assure you most strenuously that it was not bought to be killed. Quite the contrary. Avid Xpress Pro was killed two years BEFORE Liquid...which was only EOL'd as the software-only Media Composer was given free rein.

In fact, right here at Creative COW, you can see a post from our old friend Gary Bettan at Videoguys.com in 2006, promoting an interview I gave in support of the first new version of Liquid under the Avid banner. As I said at the time,

"Gary, you've been talking to me about Liquid for as long as I've known you, and some of the features you've been most excited about - thousands of real-time GPU-accelerated effects, background rendering, instant auto-save updated 30 times a second, 5.1 audio mixing, and DVD authoring directly from the editing timeline - are exactly the same ones that excite us at Avid.

Avid Liquid is unique: video, surround audio, DVD, and effects in one application. Not one application for each of those tasks - one application that does it all. Nobody else can say that."


Videoguy Interview: Tim Wilson of Avid tells all about Avid Liquid 7

There was nothing else like it then, and nothing else like it now.

When Liquid was first featured at NAB, it was featured very prominently indeed as the only product in the company that supported uncompressed video -- back when people thought that that was a good idea. :-)

Avid -- including me personally -- spent considerable time and money building the Liquid dealer channel, including training existing Avid dealers on selling and supporting Liquid. I hosted a very-well attended webinar rolling out Avid Liquid, I traveled from Avid HQ in Massachusetts to Cali to lend my experience in title animation software (from my days at Boris FX) to help develop the next generation of Liquid CG....as well as to try to find ways to incorporate that technology into legacy Avid titling. I also traveled to meet with Liquid customers and user groups, and was only one of a large group of people travelling across this great land to ensure Liquid's growth.

Now, of course Liquid was EOL'd in 2010, but its growth over that 5 year span at Avid is far different than "buying it to kill it," especially when it outlived a much older legacy Avid product that might be considered to operate in the same market space. Xpress lost. Liquid won.

Despite my respect, and, yes, love, for Liquid, I have to agree that Avid renewing its focus on Media Composer was the right thing to do...especially in light of recent events.

All of which is to say that I completely agree with everything you said -- except for the part I completely disagree with! :-)

Whew! I feel much better now.


Return to posts index

Gary Bettan
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 28, 2012 at 5:51:35 am

Tim is 100% correct. I spent may hours with Tim, before after and during the time he was at Avid singing the praises of Liquid. It was WAY ahead of it's time. Avid gave it a great shot, but they never really had their heart in it. When they decided to make Media Composer a stand alone NLE that didn't require any special hardware, it marked the end for Liquid. That said, there is a lot of Liquid technology inside MC now, under the hood.

As for Edius, it also is ahead of it's time. While Avid and Adobe now brag about native format editing, it's been in Edius for years. Even more important, Edius handles formats like AVCHD & DSLR footage much better on a less powerful machine. Edius gets more performance out of your computer.

Videoguys is selling Edius 6 crossgrades for $399.

Grass Valley just announced Edius 6.5 and it will include broad 3rd party hardware and plug-in support.

Gary

COW members get 5% OFF with Coupon COW5OFF

http://www.videoguys.com 800 323-2325 | We are the video editing and production experts!


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 28, 2012 at 9:32:41 am

[Gary Bettan] "Grass Valley just announced Edius 6.5 and it will include broad 3rd party hardware and plug-in support. "

According to some official posts at the GV forums their HQ and HQX codecs will indeed become cross platform, encode/decode on both and it does stereoscopic. That's a big one for me. Very much looking forward to hearing more details about the next version as NAB comes closer.


Return to posts index

Alan Lacey
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 28, 2012 at 5:33:42 pm

Tim, I didn't realize this. I suppose I considered the writing was on the wall for Silver once Fast sold out to Pinnacle. I take back my sentence.

Cheers Alan

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


Return to posts index

Daniel Frome
Re: So long, and thanks for all the fish
on Feb 26, 2012 at 4:41:36 pm

Edius does have a small but stable footprint in the news industry. As for why it didn't grow bigger? I think it does over all have a little less capability then FCP7 or Avid. Back when I used it it will didn't have 10bit support... but that's been solved now. I'm not really sure to be honest.


Return to posts index

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