FORUMS: list search recent posts

What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Mathieu Ghekiere
What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 30, 2016 at 12:47:30 pm
Last Edited By Mathieu Ghekiere on Oct 30, 2016 at 12:58:35 pm

Well the title pretty much says it all. With the new Roles features, being able to focus on certain stuff, etc...
In my opinion with this release I don't understand how one could still defend tracks.
The new lanes, combination with the magnetic timeline, the timeline index etc seems to combine the best of tracks with the best of the trackless FCPX.

I would be very curious to hear what Walter Murch' opinion is on it because he always seems like a very well-spoken and interesting guy to listen to. Someone who has access to him?
A chance that Apple approached him?

I can imagine that it could be something that he himself would be very curious to try.

EDIT: you could open up the question even more for discussion and say: are Tracks (as we know them in other NLE's) finally really obsolete now?
I have difficulty imagining advantages for them compared to the FCPX system of lanes and how it works with a timeline index, where it CAN be re-arranged automatically without effort of the user during editing (except assigning roles first) and based on content (music, dialogue, etc.) instead of a 'track 1-4, track 5-8' system, but as always I am curious to see discussion about it.

https://mathieughekiere.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 30, 2016 at 3:31:28 pm

[Mathieu Ghekiere] "are Tracks (as we know them in other NLE's) finally really obsolete now?"

No. I don't think it's a question of advantages or disadvantages. Simply a matter of the preferred style of working.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mike Warmels
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 30, 2016 at 6:55:30 pm

Well, Walter Murch said an editing system was, to him, basically three things:

1. A video graphics programme
2. A clock
3. A database

I think he was kinda lost on the database element of FCPX. At the time. It's gotten a lot better, gotten more like the 'traditional' NLE's. To me, I still think it could be better. A lot of the structuring is more cosmetic than actual folders. I don't know how it is on FCP 10.3, but I would like to be able to import into Folders in one go. Not into the Event first and then move the Keyword Collections (which you have to create first) into the folder. It's a double action, that I find rather bothersome.


Return to posts index


Lance Bachelder
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 30, 2016 at 7:50:51 pm

I would think he would "get it" - being as much a sound designer as an Editor, I've never been happier with a timeline as I am with this new version. Hopefully he'll take another look, though the only way to fully "get" FCPX is to start and finish a real gig with it - fiddling around is useless.

It was at a Vegas premiere that I resolved to become an avid FCPX user.

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 30, 2016 at 10:46:31 pm

OK, this Walter Murch thing always fascinates me.

I guess my first thought is "who cares?". I mean really . He is a talented guy and probably very nice and interesting to talk to, but he has almost zero relevance to what I (and probably most other editors) do, day-in and day-out. And I would think Mr. Murch would probably say to most of us "why do you care what I think? Find out for yourself.".

If Walter like Premiere or Avid, more power to him. But his choices should not dictate mine or anyone else's.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 30, 2016 at 11:04:30 pm

The reason the question comes up is because this community - the FCP users - probably feel spurned that he moved on. I don't see Avid editors asking what Walter Murch feels about the latest version of Media Composer. This is probably the most recent, which is about a year old.



- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


David Lawrence
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 31, 2016 at 7:20:06 am

[Oliver Peters] " I don't think it's a question of advantages or disadvantages. Simply a matter of the preferred style of working."

I agree with Oliver.

As much as I like the new lanes organization features (and believe me, I think they're great!) the Magnetic Timeline v2 still doesn't help with the kind of spatial workflows we discussed five years ago:

https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/16979

Right now I'm working on a five-channel video installation. It would be a major PITA to build it in FCPX. I'd be fighting the magnetic timeline with every edit.

Different tools for different jobs. Tracks still have their place in many workflows.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research

linkedIn: http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
vimeo: vimeo.com/album/2271696
web: propaganda.com
facebook: /dlawrence
twitter: @dhl


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 31, 2016 at 6:48:04 pm

[Oliver Peters] "The reason the question comes up is because this community - the FCP users - probably feel spurned that he moved on."

This.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 31, 2016 at 10:40:46 pm

I've not had a single discussion about Mr. Murch in the thousands of email exchanges about X I've had in the past 3 years.

Walter is an amazing man and editor and I feel very proud to have briefly met him twice and more than that - I hugely admire his patience and amazing desire to take time with and engage with EVERY single editor in line to meet him at the SuperMeets I was involved with. Great guy, Period.

But he's not really a part of the X community discussion and absolutely NOBODY I know feels at all "spurned" about that.

We have plenty to think of that's far more relevant to what we're doing.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Nov 1, 2016 at 7:01:52 am

[Bill Davis] "But he's not really a part of the X community discussion "

Yet whenever Murch mentions X it ends up getting talked about on FCP.co, this forum, X Facebook groups, the X users I follow on Twitter, etc.,. By virtue of his accomplishments and career choices I think Murch's views on NLEs (and editing in general) will always end up being part of the discussion in editing communities.


Speaking of FCP.co, this old post sounds a little salty. ?

"Come on Walter, you were meant to be one of the pioneers of doing things differently, trying new stuff out, being the first and getting a big splash on the Apple website for your reward.
.
.
.
We expected more, maybe Walter might look again at FCPX after the proposed update in the new year."

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/624-walter-murch-qthis-may-have-been-t...


Oh, and here's a less salty post from FCP.co after Murch says nicer things about X.

"It is great to hear Walter being more upbeat about FCPX in this interview and he makes some pretty good points in this nineteen minute discussion dedicated to our new NLE on the block."

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/639-walter-murch-apple-with-fcpx-has-t...


Speaking in generalities, people like their personal choices to be externally validated (especially if their personal choice is validated by a successful person that is in a position to pick 'the best' regardless of cost). If these shoes are good enough for Michael Jordan, if Wheaties is good enough for Michael Phelps, if Gatorade is good enough for NFL players... If Murch said tomorrow that X was the best NLE he's ever used I think there would be a lot more flag waving than poo-pooing from the X community. And, 'coincidentally' there would probably a lot of downplaying from many users of other NLEs. Somewhat recently I remember Murch said nice things and PPro and some people on an Avid FB group started slamming Murch. I think the were still putout about that whole Cold Mountain thing. ;)


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Nov 1, 2016 at 3:21:47 pm

I think it's an interesting question, not so much because I'm looking for his approval (I made my mind up years ago)
while he is a great editor, there are people on this forum who have way more expertise with the program than him.

One of the main reason he didn't like X was because he likes to organize his audio in tracks.

At this point the way X handles organization of audio is pretty impressive and very organized.
They really kind of took the best of both worlds.

As far as feature films go, I think that was more about people saying "I told you so" because many people (myself included) knew that it could be used on one if somebody really wanted to.

He still may not want to use it because he has spent years developing a skill set that he uses with certain programs.
As good as he is, he would be starting from square one with this program and that doesn't appeal to many people.

That's something that's always going to be a challenge for X, no matter how cool they make it.

I think years ago people may have asked about him using it before they started using it.
Like, "will you use it, maybe I will then also" I think now it's more like "have you come over to my side yet?"


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Nov 1, 2016 at 5:21:04 pm

[Tony West] "He still may not want to use it because he has spent years developing a skill set that he uses with certain programs.
As good as he is, he would be starting from square one with this program and that doesn't appeal to many people. "


There's also a variable that affects Murch, more so than other editors. On many films he's the editor, but also the re-recording mixer and/or sound designer. To my knowledge, he sticks with ProTools on the audio front. Since he's often involved on both the video and audio side, he has a greater ability to prep final (or close to final) elements during the edit, rather than just temp sound. As such, I would presume, working in similar layouts (tracks) might make for a better direct translation in how you approach and view your timeline.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Mike Warmels
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 31, 2016 at 9:57:12 am

Well, this a guy who's been in the business for a long time. He was also the guy who brought FCP into main stream movie editing, mind you. He was big in making FCP a serious NLE contender. Because he saw (at the time of FCP 3, mind you!!) the potential.

But honestly, for movie editing, I am not so sure FCPX is that great. I know it's being used for it, but the amount of audio sources you'd need to access and synch on a real movie is quite a bit of work. You need overview (Murch showed it once, what he had to deal with on average) and FCPX always looks like a jumble of audio sources, where you had rather limited control in creating some kind of visual overview without putting everything into groups or compound (which you then needed to access separately of you wanted to change anything).

I read that little booklet of the editors doing FOCUS. But man, I got tired from just reading that. You sure need a lot of assistant editors to keep track of the workflows going back and forth, through XML's, X2Pro relinking and what have ya.

And his choices don't dictate anything, he's just an experienced editor who does know what he's talking about. If you disagree fine. If you prefer to edit in Movie Maker or iMovie, just do it. But I still care about the opinion of other editors. Also of avid FCPX editors, because the knowledge base is great.

No NLE is perfect... but in my experience of three years on FCPX, I think the problems... no, I should say, the PITFALLS of working with FCPX are so numerous, that even though it's basic method of the magnetic timeline has benefits, it's the infrastructure and the exchange with others (like finalising in a different editing suite, audio mixing, exports for broadcast, creating AAF's) that still makes it rather clumsy in many respects.

But... here's hoping FCPX 10.3 takes a lot of the clumsiness away. Again: very happy with the audio lanes!


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 31, 2016 at 7:17:42 pm

FCX is released.

TV/FILM EDITORS: Man...what happened? This application isn't usable by us at all!

FCX Fans: Well, this isn't really designed for you. You are 2% of the video market, and FCX is designed for the other 98%'s wants and needs. For us, it's PERFECT!

TV/FILM EDITORS: OK...looks like we'll go back to Avid, and also look at Premiere Pro.

FCX Fans: HEY!! Look! FCX was used to cut two feature films! Wow...the prestige it now has! TAKE THAT AVID!! See, it CAN be used to cut features...

TV/FILM EDITORS: ....

Not trying to be TOO snarky here, but this is how it feels. We TV/Film people complain that this doesn't do most of the things we want done, FCX fans go "it isn't designed to...it's designed for our needs." But then the FCX fans are all very ecstatic to point out that "IT WAS USED ON FOCUS! IT WAS USED ON WHISKEY TANGO FOXTROT! IT'S A PRO EDITOR FOR FILM PEOPLE!" And now you are seeking the advice of Walter Murch on this app...why? First you don't care, then you do. First it doesn't matter, then it does. "We don't need Hollywood's blessing for this.... but really, it would be cool to have their blessing on this."

Some people keep looking at what Hollywood uses as their go-to reasoning for getting an editing app. When we all know that what Hollywood uses isn't always best for what your needs are. When I didn't do Hollywood stuff, when I did corporate video, I looked at Avid like, "ewwww," and looked at Media 100 like "Yesssssss!" And then at FCP Legacy like "Even more yessss!" But then I liked it so much, and it solved a very specific need I needed for editing a TV show, that I used it.

Don't seek validation for the app from Hollywood...you don't need it. That's the point I'm trying to make. Albiet in a snarky manner, I'll admit. :)

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Mathieu Ghekiere
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 31, 2016 at 7:31:08 pm

Well, you are being snarky indeed ?

For one, I never said Walter Murch's opinion isn't important or that the opinion of people in the business didn't matter. Although I know you probably weren't talking about me specifically (although I started the thread).
Because I think someone with Murch's credentials, and an influencial book, and his changing to FCP when he was one of the first to do it on a big scale, makes me interested in his opinion.

He also had very specific reasons for not wanting to work with FCPX.
I'm wondering how someone that has won oscars for his sound editing, would think about a system like those new roles and audio lanes.

And again, I also want to broaden the discussion to why tracks still have relevance. I was 'raised' with tracks too. I really had to get used to the magnetic timeline, and I didn't like it in the beginning either. But now I can't see myself going back to them. And a lot of people, even people who liked the magnetic timeline, said that they missed the visual overview even with Roles, because they were scattered, in audio they were all green, etc. ...
I am interested in hearing people's feedback.

For myself, I have the feeling that the whole idea that it's based on content, and it doesn't get in your way DURING creative editing, while with the new features it still holds a lot of visual overview and even automatic 'track-management' or automatic 'visual-organisation-in-the-timeline' management, I don't see how one could go back to the system where you have to make sure you click the right stuff before you put a new shot in. But again, I very much enjoy the discussion.

https://mathieughekiere.wordpress.com


Return to posts index


Shane Ross
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 31, 2016 at 7:58:47 pm

Nah...not targetted at you. A mere glancing shot. ?

I mean, you do have a legit question..."How does the great audio editor, who liked FCP because of the way it dealt with audio tracks, how does he feel about FCX?" I can underastand that. But I too am like, "who cares?" Does the opinion of a man deeply intrenched in Hollywood matter for an app that isn't aimed at his needs? Why does it matter? Is he cutting stuff like you are cutting?

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Nov 1, 2016 at 6:51:58 pm

[Shane Ross] "Does the opinion of a man deeply intrenched in Hollywood matter for an app that isn't aimed at his needs? Why does it matter? Is he cutting stuff like you are cutting?"

My point exactly. The opinions of a lot of people on this forum are far more valuable to me and my workflow than Mr. Murch's. Not because he is not a nice, talented and creative guy, but it just doesn't compute for me.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: What would Walter Murch think of FCPX 10.3?
on Oct 31, 2016 at 11:05:22 pm

[Shane Ross] "Don't seek validation for the app from Hollywood...you don't need it. That's the point I'm trying to make. Albiet in a snarky manner, I'll admit. :)"

I agree but I'm not sure that's the point, Shane.

I'm not sure it's actually "validation" so much as dealing with the very real issue of players at a particular level appreciating having the safety to go in different directions IF they wish to.

Ficarra and Requa, the co-directors of Focus and WTF as well as Jan Kovac the editor - plus Mike Matzdorff the 1st AE that pioneered the X workflow for features - were all once again on stage at the Summit this weekend.

They were unified in saying that they now PREFER working in X unless something about the project or client requires them to go back and work in something else. They all articulated lots of reasons for why they now have this preference.

John Requa even used the specific term "Insanely Efficient" to describe FCP X during his presentation.
Would it be "insanely efficient" for every editor who uses it? Of course not. And right now - there are obviously many, many more working editors in Hollywood who are WAY more efficient in AVID then they would be in X (or Premiere Pro!) for years, if ever.

But it's still useful to understand that pros who use it in specific high-profile niche workflows (and major hollywood movies are precisely that if nothing else!) have a viable alternative if they WISH to explore that - that has had the same success that other workflows involving other NLEs have had as well.

Seems to me that's worth knowing. That's all.

Back to work now...

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

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