FORUMS: list search recent posts

2013 an exciting new year

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
craig slattery
2013 an exciting new year
on Dec 31, 2012 at 10:51:34 am

Tonight on BBC One, my very last edit for 2012. Two VTs during the NYE fireworks display live from London on the Thames at 11:40pm. Estimated audience 14million, significant as it will be my last in FCP7. In 2013 its FCPX only. We start The Culture Show, for BBC Two 7th of January and our editors are all on notice to get up to speed on FCPX. The series Producer and I have made a final decision that our program will transition from FCP7 to FCPX by the end of February. We start the season with two, hr long specials. One on the guys from South Park and their new theatre production 'The Book of Mormon' and a film history of 'Danny Boyle'.
All in all, it promises to be an exciting year. Happy New Year to all the Creative Cows


Return to posts index

Trevor Asquerthian
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Dec 31, 2012 at 12:22:53 pm

Good luck!

Remember that you can always spot the pioneers - they are the ones with arrows in their backs...

I hope you, and the other editors involved, are able to let us know how it is going as you grapple with inevitable issues. It's the kind of discourse that informs the debate and the development.



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Dec 31, 2012 at 12:34:48 pm

Happy New Year to you Craig and good luck with the new series, I look forward to watching the two specials

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Dec 31, 2012 at 1:16:59 pm

Congrats! Please keep us posted on your transition. Happy New Year! And remember, the drinking starts AFTER the edit ;-)

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Craig RussillRoy
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Dec 31, 2012 at 1:42:30 pm

Yep we are moving to fcpx and a smoke ... Fcp7 is a good tool but with events manager and the 3 TB raids works for us interested to see nab this year

10.7
FCP 7.0.2
FCPX 1.0..4
3 x 4TB Thunderbolt R4
VC100
3 x ioXT
MicroHub
Ultrascope
SmartView


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Dec 31, 2012 at 5:55:09 pm

I'm planning on moving our two person in-house production to FCP X starting January. I haven't spent a lot of time with it yet. But my feeling from the time I have spent with it is that it will make a substantial difference in how fast and efficiently I can work. To me that makes it faults (there still are some) acceptable.



Return to posts index


Michael Sanders
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 1:30:11 pm

Craig - which VT's? I only watched the Olympics one as on the whole I find the Beebs NYE coverage cringeful. Although Gabby did a decent job. The Olympics one was very good thought!

As a matter of interest why did you use 7 and not X for this?

Michael.

Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 6:25:43 pm

[Michael Sanders] "Craig - which VT's?"

Michael, both the Jubilee VT and The Olympic VT. I cut them in FCP 7 because it was a last minute job over at television centre just before christmas. They weren't set up for FCPX and it was a new client. I should have been more assertive and pushed for FCPX because in my opinion it eats this type of edit up. 2013 I wont be so demure, FCPX should be an option on every job,and frankly Im sick of having to explain why I want to use it.


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 6:28:09 pm

[craig slattery] "frankly Im sick of having to explain why I want to use it."

Michael, I mean sick of explaining my reasons to post houses not to you guys on the cow.


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 7:07:28 pm

[craig slattery] "frankly Im sick of having to explain why I want to use it."

Sad irony as it seems so many people have grown fond of saying thing like, "you don't ask a carpenter what hammer they use." If you, the editor have the hardware to run the software of your choice and the ability to interface with whatever you need then why need there be an explanation. If there's trust and believe in your skills that should include trust in your choice of tools.

Otherwise the contrary may be true in that people are still looking for "Avid editors" or "Final Cut (not X) editors" and not simply "talented, skilled editors." It is sad if this is still the case and it may be.



Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 8:11:01 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Otherwise the contrary may be true in that people are still looking for "Avid editors" or "Final Cut (not X) editors" and not simply "talented, skilled editors." It is sad if this is still the case and it may be.
"


Craig, Im talking about other editors and post houses. The producers I work with are happy to use what ever I choose.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 8:49:31 pm

[craig slattery] "Im talking about other editors and post houses"

It shouldn't happen anywhere. As long as the editor is fully aware of the project workflow and deliverables, one should trust their choice of tools.



Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 11:03:04 pm

[Craig Seeman] "It shouldn't happen anywhere. As long as the editor is fully aware of the project workflow and deliverables, one should trust their choice of tools."

I don't think it's that cut-and-dried. Post houses want to be able to have someone step in and pick up where the editor left off if need be. Using software that enjoys broad editor support is a big concern for post house managers. Project compatibility is a lot more than moving a decision list across via a translated XML. That's generally inadequate, since speed ramps and plug-ins almost always cause problems. I freelance at different places, but I am only hired if I can run THEIR system. That means FCP 7, X, PPro or Media Composer, depending on the shop. In addition, it also means getting up to speed very quickly on their internal workflows throughout the facility. Ultimately it gets down to who is calling the shots.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Michael Sanders
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 11:14:43 pm

On the other hand post houses can be massive stick in the muds.

One London post house was vetoing the use of c300's and Alexas on shoots because their media management system couldn't handle 1080 25p!

Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 11:24:50 pm

[Michael Sanders] "On the other hand post houses can be massive stick in the muds"

Yes, I can definitely agree there. On the plus side, I get extra work adding LUTs to Alexa files and generating offline-edit-ready media, because some post house are too lazy to do it themselves. Works for me! ;-)

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 2, 2013 at 12:17:39 am

[Michael Sanders] "One London post house was vetoing the use of c300's and Alexas on shoots because their media management system couldn't handle 1080 25p!"

Interesting that you brought that up.
It's why, maybe in a different context, I think of hiring an editor much like hiring a director or maybe a DP and their choice of camera. Sometimes the camera preference comes with the talent . . . and sometimes that's a big fight as well.



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 11:54:14 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I don't think it's that cut-and-dried. Post houses want to be able to have someone step in and pick up where the editor left off if need be."

Ironically that reminds me of why I stopped freelancing like that. Too many jobs, for me, started with either cleaning up a mess or trying to figure out somebody else's method of organizing or workflow. For me, that was through the early '00s and all my freelance work was Avid. FCP was too immature at that point.

Personally I wouldn't want jobs to be handled like that. I no more want to switch directors mid project than I'd want to switch editors. Back in my facility days, the clients were more often that not livid if they had to switch editors. Granted things happen.

[Oliver Peters] "Post houses want to be able to have someone step in and pick up where the editor left off if need be. Using software that enjoys broad editor support is a big concern for post house managers. Project compatibility is a lot more than moving a decision list across via a translated XML."

But then you'd be looking at editors you like and trust with the tools you already have. You wouldn't be asking what they edit on if you're familiar with their work.

If you're hiring an editor because you like their work and they have a tool of choice, there's a reasonable chance that editor can bring in those who can handle the workflow.

Maybe a better way of putting it is that the editor would brought on as part of a team who have the skill set to handle the project end to end.



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 2, 2013 at 12:23:42 am

[Craig Seeman] "But then you'd be looking at editors you like and trust with the tools you already have. You wouldn't be asking what they edit on if you're familiar with their work. If you're hiring an editor because you like their work and they have a tool of choice, there's a reasonable chance that editor can bring in those who can handle the workflow."

That's not really a given. Or maybe I'm not following the logic.

Look at this hypothetical. A shop is completely FCP/Quicktime-based and I'm hired and allowed to bring in my own system running Media Composer. I post the whole project with all media converted to DNxHD. At the end I deliver masters as converted QTs. So all is good, right? No, because six months later they want to dive back into the project, but don't have the budget to hire me again. Since I cut on MC, all of the project info (beyond just sequences) is useless to them as is the DNxHD media. Therefore, they have to start from scratch.

OTOH, if I cut on their FCP system - or bring in my own FCP system - all is compatible with their later need to handle revisions.

Let's look at this scenario a bit differently. We started with the context of FCP X and we are all looking to be favorable to X. But given the same scenario, what if the editor is cutting on EDIUS, Vegas, Avid DS, Mistika, Lightworks, etc.? How does the facility manager justify that and make it work?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 2, 2013 at 1:46:41 am

[Oliver Peters] "A shop is completely FCP/Quicktime-based and I'm hired and allowed to bring in my own system running Media Composer."

The question is why are they hiring you?
If it's because they know your work and your familiar with their NLE and workflow of choice, you'd be using their equipment.
If it's because there's a specific job that calls for your creative and technical skills, then they have a meeting with you to discuss the workflow. If your axe of choice is Media Composer you work out the details of the workflow.

[Oliver Peters] "No, because six months later they want to dive back into the project, but don't have the budget to hire me again."

They hire another Media Composer editor. I don't think there's a shortage of very good Media Composer skilled freelancers.

[Oliver Peters] "Let's look at this scenario a bit differently. We started with the context of FCP X and we are all looking to be favorable to X. But given the same scenario, what if the editor is cutting on EDIUS, Vegas, Avid DS, Mistika, Lightworks, etc.? How does the facility manager justify that and make it work?"

So you mean what if the editor has an NLE choice with a small freelance pool... at least of the talent caliber they're looking for?
Again the question is why are they hiring the given editor?
If you like an editor's work and they're brilliant with Vegas, they might even know Media Composer a little but you may not get the performance or speed on Media Composer or FCP with this particular editor. Then you may need to consider whether you have other Vegas editors you can call on in a pinch. Of course if our Vegas editor under consideration has a list of happy clients and showed you their demo, one has to consider that it must be working out for the others hiring that person.



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 2, 2013 at 2:03:13 am

[Craig Seeman] "The question is why are they hiring you?
If it's because they know your work and your familiar with their NLE and workflow of choice, you'd be using their equipment."


I am a "hired gun". Mainly for creative reasons, but almost always on their gear. Some of these shops have less experienced staff editors that do the nuts and bolts work. In other situations, I'm hired to handle overflow. Creative editing skills are assumed to be a given, but equally important is the ability to sit in the chair and work with their gear. Note, too, that they would not pay extra if I were allowed to bring my own gear. So I get paid the same whether it's just me or me+gear.

[Craig Seeman] "They hire another Media Composer editor."

Remember I said they had no budget to hire me. This also means they have no budget to hire a different editor. The revisions/versions would be handled by the junior staffer. Also remember in the hypothetical scenario, I was the one supplying MC and the system. They wouldn't have that available to work on without a rental.

[Craig Seeman] "Again the question is why are they hiring the given editor?"

That's the wrong question. The right question "who is doing the hiring?". If the producer or a production company is hiring the editor and that deal includes the editor's kit, then it doesn't matter and your scenario is accurate. I work that way, too, on occasion. If it's a post house doing the hiring, the editor often has to work with the gear provided to them. This is a similar situation for DPs. Many DPs can dictate the camera to be used for the production, but in some cases they lose and have to use the camera picked by the producer. It's simply the way the world works. Sometimes the reasons are completely valid and sometimes they are silly.

In the context of Craig's original post, it's really more about setting up the pipeline for a show. That's a very critical scenario. You'll also notice that he said the producers have put the other editors on notice that the show would be cut in X in 2013. So, Craig gets the edit system he wants, but the other editors may or may not ;-)

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 2, 2013 at 12:27:01 am

[Craig Seeman] "Maybe a better way of putting it is that the editor would brought on as part of a team who have the skill set to handle the project end to end."

Here's another example. Walter Murch has been cutting on FCP "legacy" since "Cold Mountain". That's still his preferred NLE. Yet on "Wolfman" he had to cut on Media Composer, because everything was already in place at the time he was brought on board.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 2, 2013 at 2:03:46 am

[Oliver Peters] "Here's another example. Walter Murch has been cutting on FCP "legacy" since "Cold Mountain". That's still his preferred NLE. Yet on "Wolfman" he had to cut on Media Composer, because everything was already in place at the time he was brought on board."

I understand that Murch was the "replacement" editor in that film. That's a bit different than being hired at the start of a project and Murch not editing on his NLE of choice. I doubt they would have hired him if they and he didn't feel comfortable with his skills on Media Composer.



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 2, 2013 at 2:06:20 am

[Craig Seeman] "I understand that Murch was the "replacement" editor in that film. That's a bit different than being hired at the start of a project and Murch not editing on his NLE of choice. I doubt they would have hired him if they and he didn't feel comfortable with his skills on Media Composer."

Correct and agreed. A good argument though for knowing multiple systems, though ;-)

I do know some talented prime time TV editors who lost good gigs because they mainly knew Avid and the show was using FCP (legacy).

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Michael Sanders
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 1, 2013 at 11:11:27 pm

Well a fine VT it was! Excellent work.

Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor


Return to posts index

Michael Sanders
Re: 2013 an exciting new year
on Jan 3, 2013 at 10:50:44 pm

Oh one last thing Craig - if ever you get asked to cut another Olympics vt, can I suggest "you gotta the love" by flo and the machine!

Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor


Return to posts index

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