FORUMS: list search recent posts

Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bill Davis
Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 12, 2016 at 6:34:32 pm

It's on Vimeo and not passworded, so obviously for public consumption...

FWIW.

; )

https://vimeo.com/161710321

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 12, 2016 at 6:45:20 pm

Some interesting stuff but mostly a stand up sales pitch.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 12, 2016 at 7:29:35 pm

[Steve Connor] "but mostly a stand up sales pitch."

Agreed. But, if you strip out the hyperbole, there are some nice points described. However, as someone who's done a lot with native media in all sorts of LEs and NLEs, I have to take exception with the "never before possible" claims. That's actually more attributable to the fact that they shot with Alexa and used native ProRes media. "Never before accepted in Hollywood" would be a little more accurate. Nevertheless it's still a solid workflow story and cudos to all involved.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 12, 2016 at 7:39:12 pm

For more detail and less sales pitch, here's a more involved discussion with the directors and editors.



- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Gregor Queck
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 12, 2016 at 10:07:54 pm

Great discussion.

Highlight: 27:48 - 29:06:
' It’s shocking how slow it is to work in that timeline (Avid)…….
….Avid could do this and Avid can do that. It isn’t until you get back in the program. Oh wait: It can’t. '


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 12, 2016 at 7:28:26 pm

Did they color correct Michael's on-camera interview in FCPX?

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los Angeles


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: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 12:58:27 am

I must say I am most stunned that a feature with a reasonable budget would not shoot raw. Especially with 1000 VFX shots.

I also love the shot of the editing assistant with editor and a notebook is what they are looking at. Despite the awesome database, a good old piece of paper and a pen can triumph.

I also don't understand the assertion that X is a database with an NLE and AVID is an NLE with a database. All edit systems are databases with a UI to perform editing. Surely they all are database first, NLE UI second. How can they be otherwise?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 1:04:38 am

[Michael Gissing] "Especially with 1000 VFX shots"

Many of these shots are production fixes. Wire removal, boom removal, etc. So those 1,000 VFX shots are certainly different than the ones in "Deadpool" for example. But ProRes4444XQ from an Alexa are pretty amazing and I doubt raw would buy you anything.

[Michael Gissing] "I also don't understand the assertion that X is a database with an NLE and AVID is an NLE with a database"

FCPX hyperbole. However, the integration of external data is very slick inside FCPX, especially data from script and audio.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 1:13:34 am

[Oliver Peters] "But ProRes4444XQ from an Alexa are pretty amazing and I doubt raw would buy you anything."

Providing you don't want access to ISO, Color temp, image sharpening, exposure and highlight recovery etc in the grade, then log ProRes is fine. At least it is 12 bit.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 1:19:15 am

[Michael Gissing] "Providing you don't want access to ISO, Color temp, image sharpening, exposure and highlight recovery etc"

Sure, but that would be true of any non-raw film. There are quite a lot of films these days that forego shooting raw because it isn't worth the effort. Most films that are shot raw don't deliver raw files to the color correction stage. All of Fincher's RED films, for example. If you were shooting with film negative, effectively you'd have the exact same limitations. Same was true when Viper or F900 cameras were the digital cinema camera of the day.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 1:30:13 am

If they don't use the raw to grade then sure, it's a waste of space to shoot it, especially with controlled lighting.

Personally I am looking forward to my new camera (Ursa Mini 4.6) which can shoot UHD at 4:1 cDNG raw. The data rate is on par with ProRes4444HQ so why shoot non raw?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 1:32:00 am

[Michael Gissing] "so why shoot non raw?"

Better workflow.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


David Cherniack
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 1:38:48 pm

Michael, you might check the discussions on the BM Cinematography forum. There's lots of questions being raised, with technical analysis, on the sensor and an uneven magenta cast by those who've taken delivery.

First time here in a while. Nothing much changed. Triumphalism and fetishism seem just as widely prevalent with a few adult voices in the mix that make for enlightening reading and at the same time demonstrate a patience and tolerance that might qualify for sainthood. Bravo and thanks.

David
http://AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 11:16:55 pm

[David Cherniak]"Michael, you might check the discussions on the BM Cinematography forum. There's lots of questions being raised, with technical analysis, on the sensor and an uneven magenta cast by those who've taken delivery."

Thanks David. I have been following the magenta story. I haven't got my 4.6 yet and hopefully the issue will be sorted before I do.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 1:05:10 pm

[Michael Gissing] "my 4.6 "

I have been shooting with that camera myself Michael and some of it's missing features make it a challenge to shoot with (at least for me). It's a good price point for the image you can get out of it, but I'd like a few more basic features.


Return to posts index


Michael Gissing
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 11:11:31 pm

[Tony West] "I have been shooting with that camera myself Michael and some of it's missing features make it a challenge to shoot with (at least for me). It's a good price point for the image you can get out of it, but I'd like a few more basic features."

Curious what features you are missing Tony. At the moment I am dealing with the BM4k brick which is impossible to hand hold. I am using the Ursa viewfinder with it so that is a vast improvement. I have ordered the Ursa Mini with the shoulder plate & Vlock battery adaptor so apart from the better sensor I am getting a whole lot of improvements including compressed raw.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 11:38:24 pm

[Michael Gissing] " what features you are missing Tony."

I would like built in ND filters. I can use a matte box but I'm use to just rolling the ND when I go from bright sunlight on the field to maybe someone in the tunnel or dugout. I just want to control light faster.

I like having A and B WB on the side of the camera. I want the option to cheat the color temperature
and click back and forth to the producer. A B A B A B

There's no WB on the camera. You just dial it in (5600k) I don't really want to do that. Sometimes there are multiple sources of light coming in and I want to see what the camera thinks that looks like on a WB

I like the option to dial but I also want the WB.

You also have to go into the menu to dial up a WB and you lose the picture in the flip out while the menu is up. I want to see the color temp as I change it.

You also can't step through thumbnails of your clips. You can't just delete one clip to make room on the card or playback a certain clip.

I'm sure some one will correct me if they have a different experience with the camera.

No HDMI out.

I get it, they want to make it affordable, but dang. It's like it's a sensor in a shoebox.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 11:51:24 pm

I get the ND and the WB for your needs. With the sort of shooting I am doing that isn't a problem. If I shoot raw I can change temp and iso later so I have some post control over those lacking features. I have a matte box and lots of ND with IR filtering. It is certainly a production camera compared to a run & gun but for me it has enough doco features and the things it has compared to the 4k brick are a big improvement.

HDMI out doesn't worry me. I live in an SDI world and even external monitors I have are SDI. I don't need external recorders so it is just monitoring and SDI is fine for me.

I guess the big thing is the camera is for my projects. I am not a cinematographer for hire.


Return to posts index


Tony West
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 15, 2016 at 12:21:43 am

I guess I'm old school. I want my shots as close to pro in the filed as I can get them. I'm looking to just tweak in post, but different strokes.

The matte box just gets in my way as I'm changing primes. It just slows things down.


[Michael Gissing] "I live in an SDI world and even external monitors I have are SDI. "

Me too mostly, but I have the Paralinx system that's HDMI so when I want to fly this thing I can't give the client a monitor. I'm sure I could find a convertor but wouldn't need to if they put it on the camera.

I'm sure you are going to get some really good stuff out of this camera. I was happy with the footage. I didn't see any noise in the blacks that I heard folks talking about. It was very clean.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 1:41:56 am

[Michael Gissing] "I also don't understand the assertion that X is a database with an NLE and AVID is an NLE with a database. All edit systems are databases with a UI to perform editing. Surely they all are database first, NLE UI second. How can they be otherwise?
"


If form actually follows function, the FORM of the programs matters.

X installed ACCESS to the database directly into the interface. It created easy to operate tools like the entire keyword HUD, magnetism, and clip containers that default to audio AND video in a single representation - precisely because that works best in the range based tagging system that is the heart of X.

Traditional NLEs pretty clearly put the editorial heart of the system exclusively in the timeline.
Basically, Randy and the team took the database out of the shadows. And brought it's controls directly into the program's dashboard.

Not understanding why elevating the database over the timeline is a REAL difference is fine. But an increasing number of people (most recently Mr. Cioni andthe WTF post team) have been telling you that the way X uniquely approaches editing DOES matter to them.

It may NEVER matter to a particular editor. Preference is preference, after all. But for some of us, it matters a whole lot.

Been saying that for about 5 years now.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 11:50:36 pm

[Michael Gissing] "I agree that X's access to database functions are probably better than other NLEs but it doesn't alter the fact that all (I nearly typed ALL) NLEs are databases with editing UI. Not understanding that is fine."

I think there is a difference, even though my initial flip response was that it was all hyperbole. If you think of NLEs like Media Composer, Premiere Pro or FCP7, the media is organized in the browser as a sort of spreadsheet structure. Each media clip has a set of metadata that can be accessed in the bowser. Each media clip is connected to an actual asset. In addition, there are search, sort and filter functions that work in tandem with this spreadsheet design.

In FCPX at the basic level, you have that, too. That's when you bring a file into an Event. However, in addition to the standard spreadsheet-style display of metadata, you also have two levels of organization on top of that - Collections and Smart Collections. Think of this as a relational database view of the information. Unlike a traditional NLE, multiple clips can simultaneously appear in different Collections or Smart Collections, based on the keywords you've assigned or the sorting criteria you've established. This isn't possible in a regular NLE, unless you create a sub clip for each alternate location.

That difference between the spreadsheet and relational model is the key difference - in how the editor interacts with info in the browser - between FCPX and all other NLEs. It's why FCPX gets characterized as a database that lives on top of an NLE.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 12:04:39 am

[Oliver Peters]"This isn't possible in a regular NLE, unless you create a sub clip for each alternate location."

Resolve has smart bins that also group clips that live in different folders(bins) by metadata tags. X isn't exclusive. Sure it is a nice thing and I am starting to use it to manage versions of graphics & credit rolls in finishing so I get that editors like this feature.

I think allowing this sort of display and control access to the database is good and both X and Resolve are potentially better by having that feature for certain types of production, more notably docos than features.

Again, under the hood they all are databases first. The UI simply gives the editor the degree of access but I am criticizing the sales pitch that somehow structurally X is different to Avid.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 12:08:26 am

[Michael Gissing] "Resolve has smart bins that also group clips that live in different folders(bins) by metadata tags. X isn't exclusive. "

When FCPX introduced this, no one else had this function. BMD has copied FCPX as far as they can (possibly legally) in the updates to Resolve, but this came a few years after FCPX launched. That's still only one of the two options. They don't have an equivalent to Collections.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 12:05:15 am

[Oliver Peters] "Collections and Smart Collections. Think of this as a relational database view of the information. Unlike a traditional NLE, multiple clips can simultaneously appear in different Collections or Smart Collections, based on the keywords you've assigned or the sorting criteria you've established. This isn't possible in a regular NLE, unless you create a sub clip for each alternate location."

How is this similar/dissimilar from Adobe's Search Bin? If I make a Search Bin in PPro media, sequences, etc., will appear in both their original location plus in the Search Bins, and the Search Bins will auto-populate as new media/sequences are created that meet the search requirements.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 12:18:39 am

[Andrew Kimery] "How is this similar/dissimilar from Adobe's Search Bin?"

It's similar to Smart Collections, but there is no direct equivalent to Collections. A good example is in this blog post of mine from 4 years ago:

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2012/06/17/into-the-fire-with-fcp-x/

By setting up keywords for location, job type, etc. I could easily organize my clips for each group. So when the client asked for a clip of a female manager shot on day 1 in location B, I could pull up all of the options in the appropriate Collection. That's because I had assigned these Keywords accordingly when the media was ingested. By doing that the media has been auto-sorted into a variety of appropriate Collections.

Another example would be a feature film shoot. In Media Composer, I would have a bin for each day of dailies and then I would sub clip each of these clips and place the subclips into separate bins according to scene. In FCPX I would have an Event for each day of dailies and then use keywords to automatically assign clips according to scenes. This latter function would be done automatically by the software, other than my creating the initial keyword.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 12:38:43 am

[Oliver Peters] "By setting up keywords for location, job type, etc. I could easily organize my clips for each group. So when the client asked for a clip of a female manager shot on day 1 in location B, I could pull up all of the options in the appropriate Collection. That's because I had assigned these Keywords accordingly when the media was ingested. By doing that the media has been auto-sorted into a variety of appropriate Collections."

Maybe there is a nuance that I'm missing because I don't use X, but I'm doing something similar on a current project in PPro. I have Search Bins based on things like person, location, and type of footage (broll, interview, etc.,) and after I apply my keywords the media shows up in all the appropriate Search Bins. Adding Keywords can be faster in X than PPro but the end results seem very similar to me (media with the same keywords are automatically grouped together in a bin/folder and can live in multiple bins/folders at the same time).

Applying keywords to a range, as opposed to an entire clip, still seems unique to X and might be something that is inherently unique to X, but so far I really haven't seen anything to go against Michael's stated feeling about NLEs and databases.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 12:42:18 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Maybe there is a nuance that I'm missing because I don't use X, but I'm doing something similar on a current project in PPro."

I would agree with that. Some of it just gets down to nitpicking. However, just like with Resolve, FCPX had this before Premiere added theirs.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 1:26:55 am

[Oliver Peters] "However, just like with Resolve, FCPX had this before Premiere added theirs."

But both Resolve and PPro are capable of doing it, which goes back to Michael's point of questioning the 'inherently better' database in one NLE vs another. It's not that other NLEs are incapable* of Keyword/Smart Collections-type functionality, it's just that they hadn't implemented that feature until recently. Maybe it just wasn't the best example to try to illustrate the differences?

*Avid might be incapable of it because of how bins in Avid function differently than bins/folders in other NLEs.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 2:05:44 am

When FCPX can create a story and write narration it'll do something worth my time to learn it, until then I still maintain it's a solution looking for a problem, and it's not a problem I have.

On the other hand, Resolve solves many problems for me, and though it's perhaps not the perfect editing app for all things, it's becoming my goto solution for many things.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los Angeles


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


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 7:00:24 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "*Avid might be incapable of it because of how bins in Avid function differently than bins/folders in other NLEs."

There are now searchable bins in Avid, as well as the timeline and project window.

If you amend your clips with a keyword at the end - it functions similiar to FCPX in that it will filter out unwanted media.

Def not the same or as elegant as FCPX but doable and a workable solution.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 7:38:30 pm

[Neil Goodman] "There are now searchable bins in Avid, as well as the timeline and project window.

If you amend your clips with a keyword at the end - it functions similiar to FCPX in that it will filter out unwanted media.

Def not the same or as elegant as FCPX but doable and a workable solution."


Wasn't it in 7 or 8 that Avid really started beefing up the search tool? I was working on a doc a year or so back in 8 and by the end I spent more time in the search tool than in my bins. Do you know, can you save the search results to a bin? Being able to search globally in Markers was very helpful at the time and I wish PPro had similar functionality.

What I don't think Avid can do is have bins auto-update with media the way X or PPro can have folders auto-update with media because of how bins in Avid behave.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 10:00:09 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "How is this similar/dissimilar from Adobe's Search Bin?"

Search Bins are OK, but are limited, and sometimes return unexpected results. I have my X libraries set up to automatically sort all my different versions of each spot. Snapshots, WIPS, Versions submitted to client, finished versions etc all get auto-sorted to proper collections. I basically never have to manually move anything. It's really cool. Tried to match it in Pr Projects and bits and pieces worked, but not nearly the same. Still need to hit the browser a lot. Also there's no such thing as a snapshot, and no way to duplicate a sequence while in the timeline.

Also this...



-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 10:14:30 pm

[Charlie Austin] "I have my X libraries set up to automatically sort all my different versions of each spot. Snapshots, WIPS, Versions submitted to client, finished versions etc all get auto-sorted to proper collections. I basically never have to manually move anything. It's really cool."

Metadata driving workflow is so smart. This is stuff that humans should never have to manage manually.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 14, 2016 at 10:33:56 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Metadata driving workflow is so smart. This is stuff that humans should never have to manage manually."

Agreed, and in X, I hardly ever have to do the stuff manually. Maybe add a note to a submitted version or something, but it the app pretty much does it all for me.

Other thing about X is that I can concentrate on the edit, no tabbing through windows, moving to other apps to do VFX etc etc. Set up X the right way, and bolt on the additions you require, and you can pretty much just do everything from the timeline. You can of course do many things in other NLE timelines too, but it's not the same at all.

-------------------------------------------------------------

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 15, 2016 at 2:12:35 am

Adobe is still being skimpy on the search parameters which is unfortunate (and is a feature request I have put in). PPro supports a lot of different types of metadata and it would be much more useful if the search feature wasn't so constrained.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 13, 2016 at 4:18:03 am
Last Edited By David Roth Weiss on Apr 13, 2016 at 4:27:19 am

[Jeff Markgraf] "Wow. Sick burn there, David. Great contribution, really on point."

There's an old rule that applies to that video Jeff, i.e. anything you publish for public dissemination should be properly error-checked before publishing, because it reflects on you, your company, and your message.

That rule is not one that anyone in our business should ignore, and that makes my point valuable to all here on the Cow who wish to communicate effectively and have a long and lasting career. Or would you argue otherwise?

By not taking just a few minutes to crush the blacks or to simply drop a freaking LUT on Michael's on-camera portion of his company's PR piece, would you argue that they strengthened his message?

Face it dude, it's sloppy craftsmanship, and the guy who posted it for Light Iron and Panavision should get reprimanded, because it's going to be on the Internet in perpetuity, and forever is a long, long time.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los Angeles


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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 15, 2016 at 9:49:06 am

[Jeff Markgraf] "Great contribution, really on point."

"In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people, by posting inflammatory,[1] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[2] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion,[3] often for their own amusement."

Yup.


Return to posts index

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 16, 2016 at 8:16:01 am

[Robin S. Kurz] "In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet... "

Oh yes, I know. But truly successful trolling should be virtually transparent, or invisible, at first glance. So I would suggest DRW's harrumphing isn't really good trolling at all. Just garden-variety hissing and spitting at something he doesn't understand and doesn't to understand.

Ultimately, tiresome and of little value. Not to mention condescending.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 16, 2016 at 10:37:27 am

Nailed it.


Return to posts index


Dom Silverio
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 15, 2016 at 9:35:30 pm

Mr Cioni overstates a lot of things in there. Original with non baked LUTs? Background transcode? Advance searches? Not "very very unique".

Even an old Meridien Avid, make a custom column (aka metadata) and write any word (tag) if you like.

Working with high-res media (be it camera original or some sort of transcode) is nothing new. Often its not a question can the NLE handle it, but do we have the money (storage, powerful CPUs, infrastructure) to utilize it.

And that workflow still involves the same amount of equipment and staffing. And editors for major feature rarely have to deal with the tedious tasks of transcode, VFX pull, etc. Those are the job of the AEs. So those are not really taking any "creative time." Does not matter if it took 15 secs in FCPX or 5 min in x NLE. All AE time.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 15, 2016 at 10:39:56 pm

[Dom Silverio] "And that workflow still involves the same amount of equipment and staffing. And editors for major feature rarely have to deal with the tedious tasks of transcode, VFX pull, etc. Those are the job of the AEs. So those are not really taking any "creative time." Does not matter if it took 15 secs in FCPX or 5 min in x NLE. All AE time.
"


Except that it doesn't. This is your view from the outside. The directors have argued forcefully just the opposite in recent weeks. Their opinion seems to be that the X workflow they have adopted is saving them SIGNIFICANT time and money on set and in post. And a even a BUNCH of hours of AE vs Editor time just doesn't drive the kind of efficiency they are speaking of. Which means you are missing a lot of the story.

In the AFI videos, both the directors, Mr Kovac the editor, the first AE AND the assistant editor ALL spoke of VERY significant increased efficiency - and the furthest above the line Producer on stage was equally clear that the new workflow was a large element in their coming in "well under budget." I've spoken directly with the Editor, Jan Kovac, and I can assure you that he sees X and the new workflow as a significant improvement over how the editorial team used to operate. So sorry, but I think it's fair to assign more weight to the opinions of people who actually have experience with how a system really works, over the opinions of those who don't.

Not a slam at all, just a analysis of the facts.

I get that you and a lot of others can't see how X can be more efficient - and therefore an easier and perhaps more satisfying way to work for many editors, but that's exactly how a lot of us see it. Guys like me in corporate - and men and women editing lots of big dollar projects like the films we're discussing here.

The "but it can't ' do..." straw men are largely ashes now. What's left is each editors decision of whether to give it another look, or feel that even tho it's capable, fast and almost rediculously inexpensive it OWN - it's not worth studying. That's fine. Not everyone will enjoy it.

But you've got to marvel (just a little) that these teams have successfully (even happily!) have cut multiple major motion pictures now on the same hardware and $399 App Store software that anyone can buy. And they did it with little to no "special handholding" from Apple - no special software builds nor teams of engineers hovering around them. Just buy the gear, install the same siftware as everybody gets - and make a movie that's in the local multiplex in the same timeframe as everyone else's film. Seems pretty cool to me.

YMMV.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 16, 2016 at 1:04:38 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Apr 16, 2016 at 1:06:20 pm

[Bill Davis] "This is your view from the outside. […] …it's fair to assign more weight to the opinions of people who actually have experience with how a system really works, over the opinions of those who don't. "

Bingo. Can't wait for the day when the usual suspects actually start making comparisons and judge things that they are factually even in the position to objectively do.


[Bill Davis] "and $399 App Store software"

Actually... either $299 or $397 ;-D [scnr]
(assuming you're referring to just the Apple suite of apps)

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

Dom Silverio
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 17, 2016 at 1:27:48 pm

[Bill Davis] "I get that you and a lot of others can't see how X..."

Not sure why you are bundling me with the "usual suspects" since I don't really engage in the whole FCPX viability debate here or any where else. I was specifically addressing Mr Cioni's general sales pitch.

While I don't doubt that Tango staff had an incredible workflow that benefited them, his over the top statements ("very unique") is a little hard to swallow, at the very least very disingenuous especially coming from a man very well versed in the technical things of our industry.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 17, 2016 at 2:49:40 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Apr 18, 2016 at 1:01:02 am

[Dom Silverio] "his over the top statements ("very unique") is a little hard to swallow"

Which is imho an ironic statement, seeing that that exact fact, the fact that FCP X follows a very (i.e. too) "unique" paradigm that so many are unwilling to adapt to, apparently makes FCP X as a whole "too hard to swallow". So how can his overall claims be so for out? (feel free to be specific) I for one completely agree. They used various tools that are 100% UNIQUE to FCP X or rather only have any real use in the context of X. E.g. Lumberjack et al for example. And I'd love to see how you do even half the stuff he describes they did in terms of metadata and organization (e.g. with audio) with any other NLE. So again, unique, and very much so, yes.

And I'd have to question if you yourself have even ever used FCP X for any extended period of time, let alone in actual production? Because if not, then how exactly do you figure you can even be the judge of whether what he is saying is so totally over the top or "disingenuous" or not? There's no way you could, since 80% of what he describes couldn't possibly have made much sense to you. That would be like me judging someone's surgical techniques, without ever having studied even one semester of medicine.

It's like Michael says himself: "You have to understand the context of how to USE the tool, in order to open up doors that you've never had access before." And that BECAUSE he is in fact "very well versed in the technical things of our industry", yes.

But then I don't even get how his video could be misconstrued as a "sales pitch" seeing that he doesn't sell FCP X. And the Light Iron hard and software is completely NLE independent. So that strikes me as a rather odd (and typical) strawman.

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 17, 2016 at 3:36:03 pm

We need a sticky at the top of this forum page saying "If you haven't used FCPX then your opinion isn't valid"

On an unrelated note





Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 1:18:16 am
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Apr 27, 2016 at 1:45:37 am

Sure thing.

(content deleted)
(I rethought my post. Far be it for me to criticize the work of others. I didn't much like the attached work, but i IS original work and as such, deserves respect. I got pissy because its all too easy to just criticize others with a boilerplate term like Fanboy, and the answer is not to criticize THAT, it's to articulate the reasons for disagreement. So, sorry. original language retracted..
The rest stands.)

Yep, I did become a Beatles FANBOY at 14. I also became a Springsteen FANBOY at 18 or so. I was also big on a whole random group of artists over the years including the Turtles, Simon and Garfunkel, Dave Brubeck, Emmylou Harris, Gene Kelly, Annie Lennox, Eric Satie, Rodrigo y Gabriella (particularly Gabriella's astonishing right hand!, Richard Blanco, and a hundred other people and things I'm too tired to type out.

Becoming a fan ROCKS.

It's discovering something that makes you happier than the other stuff your comparing it to.

I hope I NEVER stop being a fanboy and I hope I never run out of things to be a fanboy of.

Shoot, even the things I spent some time kinda being ashamed to be a fan of, (The Monkees and Donovan, come to mind) I now look back on and realize that the REASON I'm a fan is not necessarily the quality of the work - but what it meant to me in the context of the times.

If one of the signature qualities of ART is that it changes those that experience it, then the fact I can still hear the 3 simple chords of the Monkees theme song - "Here we come....walking down the street..." and it still makes me smile today - then who am I to reject that small injection of free joy in my life?

Hard enough to find that.

So excuse me if I let my FANBOY flag fly as often as possible.

Not to would kinda mean that I've STOPPED looking for things that excite me and that feel special and that I can maybe grow to love.

And who the f*** wants to live like that?

FWIW.

New signature under construction and coming soon. Please stand by...


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 6:27:29 am

[Bill Davis] "Hard enough to find that.

So excuse me if I let my FANBOY flag fly as often as possible.

Not to would kinda mean that I've STOPPED looking for things that excite me and that feel special and that I can maybe grow to love.

And who the f*** wants to live like that?
"


Good grief, lighten up Bill!


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 7:37:33 am

[Steve Connor] "Good grief, lighten up Bill!"

Sure. Just provide me a reason. They're just words. Nobody gets hurt.

I can just as easily write dull careful paragraphs that don't bother anyone.

Buy why?

Can't we have one little corner on the web where we get to argue with a little passion occasionally?

New signature under construction and coming soon. Please stand by...


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 8:40:58 am

[Bill Davis] "Can't we have one little corner on the web where we get to argue with a little passion occasionally?"

Sure we can, it could be the same place where people are allowed a negative opinion about FCPX, who haven't used it extensively, without being jumped on every time they say something.

and for the record I enjoy using FCPX as much as you do :)


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 5:29:06 pm

[Steve Connor] "and for the record I enjoy using FCPX as much as you do :)"

I know that Steve.

And respect your opinion.

I just want to keep one little part of how I can express my thoughts about X open to not having to ALWAYS weasel everything I say to acknowledge every other approach as equivalent.

I'm not actually trying to confront others who have chosen an alternate path. If they're happy, I'm happy for them. But I'm still going to do my best to articulate what it is about MY choice that makes ME happy.

And I think that's fair.

If people think I'm hyperbolic about stuff, fine. Nobody ever died from watching somebody be else be excited by something.

At least I hope not!

; )

New signature under construction and coming soon. Please stand by...


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 9:49:01 am

You forget, Bill. You can't have an opinion OR ask questions (especially the uncomfortable ones) before running it past Steve! ;) Do it, or feel the righteous wrath!

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 10:37:09 am

[Robin S. Kurz] "You forget, Bill. You can't have an opinion OR ask questions (especially the uncomfortable ones) before running it past Steve! ;) Do it, or feel the righteous wrath!
"


Yep, that's what I meant, you're not missing the point at all.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 11:08:38 am

Oh the irony.

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 1:00:32 pm

[Bill Davis] "Shoot, even the things I spent some time kinda being ashamed to be a fan of, (The Monkees and Donovan"

There is no reason, none, to be ashamed of liking either.

The Monkees, while a corporate construct, recorded very good pop songs using the best producers and session musicians in LA at the time. Michael Nesmith, who wrote Linda Rondstandts first hit "Different Drum, is a talented musician and made some excellent records on his own with the First National Band. The rest of the Monkies were not much and the only great song they recorded is Carol King's "Giant Steps" who's ultimate recording was by Taj Mahal, but "I'm a Believer" holds up very well as mid sixties pop.

As for Donovan, he was a fabulous musician who made some really great records that stand up to this day. He was better served when he added more Jeff Beck and subtracted a little of his airy fairies - but I'd put his music up against pretty much anyone from his time.

See what I did there Bill - I advocated for that which I loved but still managed a little critical evaluation. It's possible to be a fan with being a fanboi. Here, I'll try it again:

I love Springsteen, but he hasn't made a decent record in over 15 years and I'd rather listen to Patti Scialfa's latest records than his.

Give it a try Bill, come to the dark side.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 1:03:56 pm

I realize it's sacrilege to point this out here, but there were a lot more interesting things at NAB than whatever may or may not have happened over at the Renaissance. :)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 5:42:58 pm

But isn't it odd that unlike the past two years, there really hasn't been any big "breakout" announcements like the stuff BlackMagic has done in recent years past.

I don't recall getting a big "top of mind" message take away from Sony, Canon, RED, or any of the other big camera players,

In the NLE space, it seemed REALLY quiet. Resolve got a nice update, but not earth shattering. Apple did what Apple did. JVC and Panasonic had nice line adds, but nothing that seems to be a real game changer. Lytro tried to make a big splash as did Ozo, but the price points are like the old days when good cameras were expected to command at least five figures - and it may be that that ship has sailed. Time will tell.

Lighting and grip was active with large scale LEDs continuing their advances, but again, I didn't see anything truly transformative.

The big VR theme was the only fresh takeaway, but mostly at the will this fly for the masses? level of discussion. Not so much as this is something you've GOT to do right now to remain relevant.

Oliver, what stuck with you? Anything you noticed that you think that you'll look back on NAB 2016 and remember as the year (IDEA X) changed things?

New signature under construction and coming soon. Please stand by...


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 6:03:54 pm

[Bill Davis] "But isn't it odd that unlike the past two years, there really hasn't been any big "breakout" announcements like the stuff BlackMagic has done in recent years past.

I don't recall getting a big "top of mind" message take away from Sony, Canon, RED, or any of the other big camera players, "


fwiw, please note that I've added a new thread on this very topic, and I'd love to see this part of the discussion continued there: NAB 2016: What is standing the test of time? (The 1 Week Edition)

Although far be it from me to suggest that a thread stay on topic. LOL What does that even MEAN anymore? LOL

But I'm feeling lonely and bad about myself over there, and I need you to give me a reason to live. LOL

thx,
tw


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 27, 2016 at 6:06:43 pm

[Bill Davis] "Oliver, what stuck with you? Anything you noticed that you think that you'll look back on NAB 2016 and remember as the year (IDEA X) changed things?"

See my response in Tim's new thread:

https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/88874#88874

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 15, 2016 at 11:21:03 pm

[Dom Silverio] "All AE time."

Depending on the task though AE time can certainly impact editor time. How quickly can dailies be prepped for the editor? How quickly can an AE build a string out for the editor? Find a certain shot? Do some some temp sound design or temp VFX? The longer it takes the AE the longer the editor has to wait. Even for tasks not directly for the editor (such as sending shots to the VFX house) can still impact editor time if the editor has to wait for those tasks to be done before the editor can get help from the AE.


Return to posts index

Tangier Clarke
Re: Michael Cioni on X and modern workflows for NAB 2016
on Apr 26, 2016 at 10:43:27 pm

I went to the Light Iron discussion on the FCP X workflow for the movie "Focus" where Mike Cioni was impressed with FCP X back then. Perhaps when producers and execs realize the shear economic difference of having an FCP X focused workflow, they will more readily jump in. It makes no economic sense not to use FCP X when it comes to the price per frame (as Mike Cioni of Light Iron puts it). There are some scenarios where I still see value in both AVID and Premier Pro/ AE. FCP X isn't perfect, but the updates have been plenty and keep coming. Leveraging Apple Motion with it to create effects, transitions, generators, etc. for FCP X has been a great workflow help as well.. Third party developers (even casual ones) love it because they can make professional plugins for it just using Motion or their own programming skills.

Granted there are some things that are intangible such as muscle memory and familiarity of the NLE being used, but having used AVID, Premier Pro, DaVinci, and FCP X and have yet to use anything that let's me freely work as fast and efficiently while maintaining focus on the story as FCP X. Having it at the center of our workflow has been a boon. It's still an uphill battle for many though because it's so unfamiliar to the old[er] way of doing things in an NLE.

Change is good though. Competition is good. Keeps us on our toes and continuously learning.


This was form last year I believe where some sentiments were echoed:







(12:00-17:50)

Specific points:
(13:35) - sound turnovers
(23:30) - about effects
(33:03) - about time and creativity
(36:55) - quality of software
(37:20) - Warner Bros. reaction to FCP X

Tangier


Return to posts index

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