APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X FCPX Debates FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

Murch and NLEs from IBC

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Oliver Peters
Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 15, 2015 at 5:49:33 pm

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/1734-walter-murch-talks-final-cut-...

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 15, 2015 at 6:35:38 pm

When Murch talks about how responsive Adobe has been to the Coen Brothers and himself in terms of adding new features it reminded me of EMC, the original PC NLE. If someone suggested a feature that was later implemented, that person would get credited in the EMC update documentation - a small thing but recognition is both free and powerful.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 15, 2015 at 10:35:39 pm

you'd be curious at the 7 minute mark - where Murch effectively describes how Premiere Pro is being shaped and altered, on a month to month basis, by front rank directors and editors, right down to the buttons we see.
that's almost crazy. Adobe take it under consideration and he says that, but that's editing software alive like no one has ever seen. Even Murch himself says he's never seen anything like it. Adobe are about gone blood simple after editing.

If anyone thinks Premiere Pro isn't on a massive march they are having a laugh. It's close to a monster.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index


James Ewart
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 10:33:42 am

[Herb Sevush] "ecognition is both free and powerful."

Until people start claiming ownership of those features and sue you.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 15, 2015 at 9:46:21 pm

So, I sincerely wonder, why is it you guys aren't teaming up on Walter Murch to call him a Luddite? After all, he's just repeating many of same things David Lawrence and I spoke of four years ago, immediately after the EOL of 7 and the launch of X.

Take a listen to the 3-parter at the links below to hear what David and I were discussing almost immediately after X was launched... Mr. Murch has had the benefit of four years of watching X development to gain some additional perspective that David Lawrence and I didn't have, but we were certainly saying many of the same things then that Mr. Murch says now.

https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCPX-David-H-Lawrence-inte...

https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCPX-David-H-Lawrence-2/1

https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCPX-David-H-Lawrence-3/1

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

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 12:39:09 am

Considering the number of 'firsts' in Murch's career it's always interesting to get his POV, but a bit to David's point, the basics of what he said were as a few years ago as they are today. I do think it's interesting that seemingly the biggest reason he didn't use PPro on "Tomorrowland" was because he didn't think he could find enough people with both high level movie experience and high level PPro experience to handle what sounded like a very demanding workflow (even by Hollywood standards). He mentioned the Coen's using PPro on "Hail, Caesar!" and you can also add Marvel's new movie "Deadpool" to that list as well. Still solidly an 'Avid world' world though for scripted movies and 'TV' shows. I put TV in quotes because many original shows on Amazon, Netflix and Hulu are also being cut on Avid (call them TV-style shows?).

To flesh out a bit more about his audio comment, it's not just the number (PPro being able to do more than Avid) but also the fact that there are still tracks. Murch spoke at Adobe's booth at IBC and it was semi-live Tweeted and, which his audio background, he pre-mixes a lot in the NLE and having tracks is not just familiar from his NLE experience but also from his DAW experience.

FCP.co's blurb about the interview is more provocative than anything Murch said, but I guess they wanted to do something to drum up more clicks. ;)


Return to posts index


Tim Wilson
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 12:58:53 am

[Andrew Kimery] "FCP.co's blurb about the interview is more provocative than anything Murch said, but I guess they wanted to do something to drum up more clicks. ;)"

Exactly my feeling. Any conversation with Murch is worth reading -- his work with Coppola is some of the best that human eyes have seen -- but...

I'm not surprised to hear that audio is part of why he still relies on tracks. Watch, and LISTEN, again to The Conversation. It's easy to understand why he worked for a year on the audio, why he was nominated for an Oscar for it -- and it's easy for me to believe that he wouldn't have necessarily have saved all that much time with having it digital.

(I've noticed that we never talk about that two of his three Oscars are for SOUND. Or that his only picture Oscar was on The Avid. Not that it matters, but not that it doesn't. Because if it doesn't matter, why are we still talking about it?)

Even his use of FCP was in the service of a workflow that had been around for dogs ages -- not THAT much changed for 100 years, and ZERO changed from his work with Avid.


[Aindreas Gallagher] "Murch effectively describes how Premiere Pro is being shaped and altered, on a month to month basis, by front rank directors and editors, right down to the buttons we see.
that's almost crazy. Adobe take it under consideration and he says that, but that's editing software alive like no one has ever seen. Even Murch himself says he's never seen anything like it."


THAT to me is the takeway. Yes, he gets all the way through the interview without unzipping and urinating on FCPX. LOL This is not news. He doesn't do that kind of thing.

But to Walter, the entirely revolutionary, altogether unprecedented thing is Adobe's responsiveness to the requests of editors.

(As EDITORS. We're talking about what Walt says about EDITING, not financial models.)

Heaven forbid that "Walter is nice to FCPX but says that Adobe is responding to editors to an unprecedented degree" be the heart of the introduction.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 1:45:42 am

[Tim Wilson] "But to Walter, the entirely revolutionary, altogether unprecedented thing is Adobe's responsiveness to the requests of editors.
"


Any guesses on what the Coen Arrow is (or whatever Much called the feature that the Coen's requested)?


[Tim Wilson] "But to Walter, the entirely revolutionary, altogether unprecedented thing is Adobe's responsiveness to the requests of editors. "

Basically with Apple you get what they give and that's been in it's DNA since Day 1 when Jobs and Woz made the Apple I. Jobs basically wanted a sealed box that no one could open and Woz wanted something totally open and available that anyone could modify (at one point I think Woz was actually selling the schematics for the Apple I until someone mentioned that that's not good for business). Obviously that business model has worked out very well for Apple, but it's not always the best experience for users that need specific solutions to specific problems.

As much as has changed with X since it launched in 2011 (both in terms of features as well as real world usage and perception) I'm actually more intrigued by what has changed for PPro. Premiere, in some version, has been around since the early 90's but it's only been in the last 2-3 years that it hasn't been an also-ran in the NLE world. That's a lot of baggage to lose in a very short amount of time. Sure, it took the death of FCP 7 to give PPro an opening but the PPro team has done a great job exploiting that opportunity.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 2:42:41 am

[Tim Wilson] "Heaven forbid that "Walter is nice to FCPX but says that Adobe is responding to editors to an unprecedented degree" be the heart of the introduction."

The biggest issue with FCPX is Apple. Their communication with users - even in private - is never completely open. Many users who love FCPX still don't quite trust Apple. The underlying thought is that FCPX has a 10-year expiration date of which we are half-way through. What next, if anything? Why hitch your horse to that wagon?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 5:25:41 am

[Oliver Peters] "The underlying thought is that FCPX has a 10-year expiration date of which we are half-way through. What next, if anything? Why hitch your horse to that wagon?"

As has been talked about before, any program from any company can disappear w/o notice but there certainly does seem to be more worry about Apple than others (probably because Apple is infamous for yanking products/features off the market). Given how far in advance they announced the EOL of Aperture I wonder if they learned a lesson from the X launch?


-Andrew


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 5:32:29 am

You have nothing to worry about in terms of X bring EOL'd, because I don't use it. Typically, the only software that gets killed off is that which I become expert using, then build my company around,

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

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 5:42:28 am

[David Roth Weiss] "You have nothing to worry about in terms of X bring EOL'd, because I don't use it. Typically, the only software that gets killed off is that which I become expert using, then build my company around,"

Sounds like you should start your own protection racket. Nothing like gettin' paid for *not* using software. ;)


Return to posts index


Mark Suszko
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 2:09:33 pm

"You gots some nice software there, buddy. T'would be a shame, if'n somebody went and... USED it...." :-)

As polite as he was, you could tell just how stung Murch continues to feel about the 7/x change-over drama. Years from now, I'm sure it will remain a case study in business school lectures.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 2:23:30 pm

[Mark Suszko] "As polite as he was, you could tell just how stung Murch continues to feel about the 7/x change-over drama. Years from now, I'm sure it will remain a case study in business school lectures."

Mark, you just don't get it. The roll out of X was a perfect marketing plan, it's just that the dumb customers were too stupid to appreciate it. It had to be perfect because everything Apple does is perfect, therefore if people are still bugged it's obviously their fault.

"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves..."

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 5:17:34 pm

[Herb Sevush] "The roll out of X was a perfect marketing plan, it's just that the dumb customers were too stupid to appreciate it. It had to be perfect because everything Apple does is perfect, therefore if people are still bugged it's obviously their fault."

You know what they say about people reduced to having to play the tired "fanboi!" card...

- RK

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


Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 5:58:30 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "You know what they say about people reduced to having to play the tired "fanboi!" card..."

Yes, the say we are very good looking and debonair. I don't know if I agree with that characterization, but I do think we are attracted to stylish shoes.

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 6:05:00 pm

Herb, that was even better than Hillary's refusal to discuss Benghazi

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

Christian Schumacher
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 16, 2015 at 4:20:58 pm

[Mark Suszko] "As polite as he was, you could tell just how stung Murch continues to feel about the 7/x change-over drama."

“I just wanna play the piano” was precious and also the rental car analogy. Maybe he's on the cow?


Return to posts index


David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 17, 2015 at 11:38:49 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "To flesh out a bit more about his audio comment, it's not just the number (PPro being able to do more than Avid) but also the fact that there are still tracks. Murch spoke at Adobe's booth at IBC and it was semi-live Tweeted and, which his audio background, he pre-mixes a lot in the NLE and having tracks is not just familiar from his NLE experience but also from his DAW experience."

[Tim Wilson] "I'm not surprised to hear that audio is part of why he still relies on tracks. Watch, and LISTEN, again to The Conversation. It's easy to understand why he worked for a year on the audio, why he was nominated for an Oscar for it -- and it's easy for me to believe that he wouldn't have necessarily have saved all that much time with having it digital."

We had a nice conversation about this in 2011 ;)

NLEs, DAWs, Tracks and Audio-centric Workflows -- Continuing the Conversation...
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/16886

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 2:04:35 am

[David Lawrence] "We had a nice conversation about this in 2011 ;)"

Will the Davids (Lawrence and Roth Weiss) please stop showing off by pointing out they were talking about these things years ago. ;)


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 6:17:35 am

Agree with Walter's comments -- was an expert FCP 7 editor who relied on complex audio mixes (with the built in real time keyframable mixer) That vanished in FCP X and never returned.

Adobe's nearly dozen updates in the last few years is a company listening to it's customers and offering improvements every few months that make editors more efficient. I dive into FCP X every once in a while to use some nice easy to create effects with third party plug ins, but for every day editing - Premiere Pro is the FCP 8 most legacy FCP editors were waiting for.

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index


Robin S. Kurz
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 9:29:58 am

[Andy Field] "nearly dozen updates in the last few years is a company listening to it's customers and offering improvements every few months that make editors more efficient. "

So how exactly couldn't you just as well put an "Apple's" in front of that? Only that you'd of course have to change it to "well over a dozen". Just because they haven't put in something that you want?

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 10:45:32 am
Last Edited By Andy Field on Oct 18, 2015 at 10:47:03 am

Because I don't follow all of x's upgrades and because Adobe seems to listen and watch want editors want where Apple with FCP X tells editors "our way is better, so get used to it or take a hike". A lot of us took a hike.

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 10:54:17 am

[Andy Field] "Apple with FCP X tells editors "our way is better, so get used to it or take a hike". "

Oh yeah. I forgot. My bad. :-))))))

*facepalm*

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 1:24:37 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Oct 18, 2015 at 1:25:55 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "So how exactly couldn't you just as well put an "Apple's" in front of that? Only that you'd of course have to change it to "well over a dozen". Just because they haven't put in something that you want?"

I'm not sure that's a valid comparison. Everything up to 10.0.6 was likely in the original design but not ready at the time of launch. I think you can consider that version to be the true 1.0 release of FCP X and then start counting from there.

Now look at the last release, which gave us 3D text and little else. It seems pretty obvious that the development pace for FCP X has slowed considerably compared with PProCC, which seems to be accelerating. At least until we see what the next FCP X release includes. I imagine that will be a compatibility update for 10.11 or 10.11.1. But will it include customer-request features?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 10:00:54 am

[Oliver Peters] "I'm not sure that's a valid comparison."

Sure it is. If you're going to argue on mere update count, which he was doing, how couldn't it be? No mention of WHAT those individual updates brought with them.


[Oliver Peters] "Everything up to 10.0.6 was likely in the original design but not ready at the time of launch. "

Erm... even assuming that that wasn't pure conjecture...so? So only Apple knows what they're working on for future releases a few months (if not years) in advance but launch the current release anyway (knowing what is "missing") works out to being "too early" or "incomplete"? Not sure how that exactly works. But I guess then legacy FCP was only 1.0 with the actual 3.5 version? I'd say that's all very much a matter of personal perception and preference in the end, little more. An odd position to suggest as fact.


[Oliver Peters] "I think you can consider that version to be the true 1.0 release of FCP X and then start counting from there."

Well, I don't actually. That's a logic that can be said of any and every software that has ever been released and gotten an update shortly afterwards. Never mind that things such as the XML exchange, multicam, broadcast monitoring and a plethora of other things were already released a few months after its release. An easy six months before your 10.0.6/1.0. So again... no, not something I think I would logically consider. But then a large part of what came with 10.0.6 was comparatively irrelevant to me. Go figure. There were a lot of things that came much much later that were much more relevant. But I wouldn't go around calling that release the only true 1.0 because of it. I'm also still missing stuff, so I guess I'm still in beta? :D


[Oliver Peters] "Now look at the last release, which gave us 3D text and little else."

Sorry, wrong again. Aside from that in fact being TWO releases ago, there were, again, a long long list of other new and/or much improved features included. Whether those were of any use or interest to you (or me) personally is actually extraneous. Big flashy features to add to some already overcrowded PR bullet list? No. But certainly a LOT that clearly shows that Apple is listing to their users just as much as others... they just don't do it on public boards et al. But to seemingly suggest that every CC update in the same timeframe somehow ALL included some amazing new, life-changing features (such as the amazing, indispensable morph cut technology :P) in comparison and functionality would also be highly disingenuous at best imho. Not to mention that many of those "new" features looked strangely familiar or were also things that, according to it's users, many many years overdue. So I guess that door swings both ways.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 11:52:56 am

[Robin S. Kurz] "No. But certainly a LOT that clearly shows that Apple is listing to their users just as much as others"

Just for the sake of argument can you give us list of a LOT of things Apple have added in the last couple of years that us users have been asking for


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 12:56:16 pm

[Steve Connor] "Just for the sake of argument can you give us list"

I would think simply looking through the version history should be telling enough. On the other hand I can't know which of each change/addition was or wasn't something you or anyone else may or may not have been asking for or needed. It will obviously be more for some, less for others. But which in and of itself does not put the legitimacy of any one feature or function in question as a whole, just because someone may feel their unfulfilled request was way mo' betta important. I for example felt that the addition of a second viewer was completely superfluous, but that was definitely an option born out of user request. Did nothing for me, a LOT for others. So the overall definition of amount is a personal one in the end. I'm also not really interested in playing the game of listing a feature just to have the usual subjects answer with "Pffff, should have been in there since day one!" or "NLE xyz has had that for years!" yadda yadda yadda either. ;)

I just know that for me and my workflow there has been a lot, some big, some small, and all for just a small lump sum that I paid a very long time ago. And yeah, a number of things still pending. But I'm also very active in terms of feedback where many (oddly, often the ones screaming the loudest) don't even know that the feedback page even exists. Then maybe, some day, I too will have that utopian ultra-perfect NLE that some seem to already have found, where there is nothing left to be changed or improved!

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 1:03:41 pm

"I for example felt that the addition of a second viewer was completely superfluous, but that was definitely an option born out of user request. Did nothing for me, a LOT for others."

This is often cited as an example of Apple listening to customers and in fact it might be. But if so, it was poorly and half-heartedly implemented, which is why it's not very useful. All they did was split the existing features of the unified viewer into two windows. Hardly a functional dual-viewer situation.

Multicam is another feature said to be a response. That's one I view as always in the works, but just not ready at launch.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 1:09:45 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Oct 19, 2015 at 1:14:17 pm

I rest my case.

And not in all of four years have I ever heard anyone say that multicam was any such "response". That doesn't even make sense to me. I think it was a given from day one that it would and had to come.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 1:11:25 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "I rest my case."

So we'll let the Jury decide then?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 2:54:31 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Oct 19, 2015 at 2:58:57 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "I rest my case."

And so what's in your feature request list?

[Robin S. Kurz] "And not in all of four years have I ever heard anyone say that multicam was any such "response""

What? I'm amazed that you say that, since it was one of the main issues discussed in the early versions.

How about this from 2011:
http://9to5mac.com/2011/06/29/apple-officially-responds-to-final-cut-pro-x-...

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 3:08:15 pm

[Oliver Peters] "What? I'm amazed that you say that, since it was one of the main issues discussed in the early versions."

Of course it was. And like I said, it was a given that it would come and I happen to know that it was in fact on the road map from... let's say, very early on. The only question was when and what it would look like i.e. how it would work. Just because Apple didn't in fact announce that it was coming until several months after release (and only oder duress), says nothing about what was already in the making. That aside from the fact that you're essentially suggesting that they cranked out THAT multicam in a mere matter of a few months, which imho is a ludicrous notion. The testing alone takes that long.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 6:36:07 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Just because they haven't put in something that you want?"

We were ALL desperate for 3D Text, probably one of their most requested features.

Seriously, FCPX development has been very steady but in terms of adding features it's not in the same league as PPro


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 2:18:45 am

[Steve Connor] "Seriously, FCPX development has been very steady but in terms of adding features it's not in the same league as PPro"

As it should be I think. Once they went to that subscription, they had to really step up their game.

X is one and done so far, so they need to outpace Apple to justify that rental fee or folks might bulk.

You have to make that rental plan worth it to people, and so far it's working for many.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 1:04:02 am

[David Lawrence] "
We had a nice conversation about this in 2011 ;)
NLEs, DAWs, Tracks and Audio-centric Workflows -- Continuing the Conversation...
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/16886

Nice little trip down memory lane. Thanks David L.

Relevant to this discussion as Tim has stated is Murch's sound background. Of course he carries that sensibility into picture editing and I am not the least bit surprised he favours a track based NLE, simply because he knows that it is a better approach for complicated sound workflows. In the old thread I think I made the point that I wondered how magnetic timeline plus roles could ever hope to mirror the complex layering of mix processing that a clip, track, bus & master bus approach can give. Here we are these years later and many editors are still hoping Roles can be augmented by sub roles and roles based plugins/mix automation.

But X remains a tool with limitations in audio processing that an editor like Murch finds a deal breaker. Meanwhile Resolve pops out their first serious attempt at a finishing tool and gives, tracks & buses with VST plugins. Magnetic timeline with roles may be one Apple patented idea that no-one else will bother licensing.


Return to posts index

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 7:08:53 am

[Michael Gissing] "But X remains a tool with limitations in audio processing that an editor like Murch finds a deal breaker. "

Not sure how you get this from the interview. The only deal breaker Murch spoke of is Avid's 25 track limitation.
And what are the audio processing limitations in FCP X that were not present in FCP 7?


[Michael Gissing] "Of course he carries that sensibility into picture editing and I am not the least bit surprised he favours a track based NLE, simply because he knows that it is a better approach for complicated sound workflows."

Again - where does Murch say this or anything like this?

He has worked with traditional track-based editing systems. He has not worked with FCP X, except in an undefined casual, non-professional way. It very well could be that he will not favor the "trackless" system of X. But he hasn't made that judgment, since he hasn't really used X.

Furthermore, why is a traditional tracked system better for a complicated workflow? He never said that. I've never seen him offer that opinion in any book or interview thatI've seen.

[Michael Gissing] " I wondered how magnetic timeline plus roles could ever hope to mirror the complex layering of mix processing that a clip, track, bus & master bus approach can give. Here we are these years later and many editors are still hoping Roles can be augmented by sub roles and roles based plugins/mix automation.
"


Lack of implementation does not equal lack of ability.

Like most others, I would dearly love to see a means to buss audio in FCP X. I do think roles and subroles can provide adequate fine breakdown of audio. It's the bussing that's currently lacking. Compound clips and secondary storylines cover many of the functions one typically accomplishes with bussing, but both techniques have some limitations.

There's really no excuse for not having some kind of bussing architecture at this point. But I think it's quite a leap from Apple's lack of implementation back to some kind of inherent inability of X to allow for such a thing.

As far as automation, I guess that's where the bussing comes in. Applying automation to a track or to a group of tracks via a track-based mixer. Automating a mix via a role or subrole-based mixer is functionally equivalent. If X had it, it would be great. But, really, "track" = "role/subrole" is kinda obvious, isn't it.

For the record (not that it matters to someone who actually uses automated mixing in their NLE), I've never used nor seen any editor use the automated mixing capability of FCP7 or (I presume) PPro or the more limited version in Avid. Either via a mouse inside the program or via an outboard mixer. Ever. Well, maybe once or twice just to see if it worked. But never for real, on a real spot or a real promo or a real show segment or a real movie. That's what audio sweetening is for, with real mixers on a real stage who do it for living.

I get that many people on this forum do not and will not accept the "trackless" audio of X. OK. To each his own. But attributing such views to Walter Murch, who has not made any actual statements about the issue, is simply inaccurate.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 3:23:42 pm

[Jeff Markgraf] "I get that many people on this forum do not and will not accept the "trackless" audio of X. OK. To each his own. But attributing such views to Walter Murch, who has not made any actual statements about the issue, is simply inaccurate."

Yes, I think I may have watched a different interview than others on here : )

I enjoyed the piece. I have to admit that I was distracted right off the bat by the framing of the shot.
All of that wasted space over to the right and the reversed look space.

1. If you have to run the camera and conduct the interview yourself, reverse your key light and the position of the subject's chair so you can give the correct look space. Instead of him looking back across his should the way he did.

2. Tuck that mic cable behind his jacket, and position it on the side that he is looking so he is not speaking away from the mic

This of course is just the style I would use, he may have been going for the exact look he got. Just different opinions like a lot of this stuff.

I'm interested in his opinion like many here because of his talent and experience, but he admitted to not really having any experience with X

I really prefer to hear from people that have put the program through it's paces.

When he said that Adobe listened to him and "Joel Coen" ah............yeah.........of course they listened to Joel Coen. Does he really think that Apple would not take a call from Joel Coen if he said he wanted to cut his next film with X? They listen to those guy from Focus, why wouldn't they listen to Coen?
That made me smile.

He was very honest about his learning curve even on Pr

I respect that, and him.

Congrats Jeff on those cubbies beating my Cards, brother.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 4:06:35 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Oct 19, 2015 at 4:11:07 pm

[Tony West] "Does he really think that Apple would not take a call from Joel Coen if he said he wanted to cut his next film with X? They listen to those guy from Focus, why wouldn't they listen to Coen?"

His point was that Adobe has been integrating changes and features into Premiere Pro based on suggestions from Joel, Kirk Baxter and himself. As well as the editors of "Deadpool", which is being cut on Premiere Pro. This is something Apple did not do with "Focus" and have never done in the past with FCP "legacy".

The only direct assistance by Apple on-site with editors was early on when Joel was first using FCP. It's my understanding that Apple did have a person there at that time, as the Coens were coming from a film editing background without any other computer knowledge to relate to in learning FCP.

In the case of Premiere, there are Adobe engineers involved who are studying workflows and requests and seeing how to make these changes in Premiere. It extends into media optimizations with SANs, as well. This is something not even Avid has done very much of except maybe in the early days.

From what I do know of some of the people on the inside, they do study "pain points" and try to integrate solutions into the updates, but it never seems to take the form of direct features that are trackable to a certain person's input or request. That's what seems quite different in the eyes of these folks with Adobe compared with the other "A" companies.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 8:25:51 pm

Oliver, remember how Apple changed the whole Library-Project set up?

Who's idea was it for them to change that?

I thought the guys from Focus said they were in talks with Apple about that. (I'm too lazy to look it up)

Apple didn't just change that on their own. They would have just put it out that way to begin with if that's what they intended from the start right?

You guys might be right that Apple would not listen to Joel Coen but I won't believe that until I hear it from Joel himself. He is going to have to say "Tony, Apple won't take my call".
Then I will say "shame on them" : )


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 8:47:33 pm

[Tony West] "Apple didn't just change that on their own. They would have just put it out that way to begin with if that's what they intended from the start right?"

Actually, I think what happened is they released an alpha-level program with incomplete Q/A testing. The initial library structure was flawed. Remember the compound clip bloat issue? (link) That was a result of the library structure. They had to redo the library to fix it.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 9:46:42 pm

[Tony West] "Oliver, remember how Apple changed the whole Library-Project set up?
Who's idea was it for them to change that?"


I don't know. My opinion is that it was ProApps responding to negative customer feedback, but in a sense also a de facto admission they made a mistake. Maybe even through their own internal QA cycles they decided it wasn't the best approach.

[Tony West] "I thought the guys from Focus said they were in talks with Apple about that. (I'm too lazy to look it up)"

I don't recall that. Below, I've included all the relevant "Focus" articles.

[Tony West] "You guys might be right that Apple would not listen to Joel Coen but I won't believe that until I hear it from Joel himself. He is going to have to say "Tony, Apple won't take my call". "

It's not whether Apple would or wouldn't take their call. It's whether Apple would act on suggested feature requests. Murch did see it before it was unveiled publicly and that didn't make any difference.

- Oliver

"Focus" links:

http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/focus/
http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/1666-focus-editor-jan-kovac-in-q-a...
http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/1629-replay-the-light-iron-focus-e...
http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/1617-how-the-hollywood-feature-fil...
http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/1622-how-the-hollywood-feature-fil...
https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2015/03/31/focus/

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 3:36:54 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Tony West] "Oliver, remember how Apple changed the whole Library-Project set up?
Who's idea was it for them to change that?"

I don't know. My opinion is that it was ProApps responding to negative customer feedback, but in a sense also a de facto admission they made a mistake. Maybe even through their own internal QA cycles they decided it wasn't the best approach."




It looks like they were working fine with it the old way before the change

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/1622-how-the-hollywood-feature-fil...



Jan "We didn’t use a custom version of the software, it was the public version we used."

Which caused problems when Apple updated FCPX to 10.1 in December of 2013. The addition of the Library structure and the changes to the way Events and Projects were stored caused some headaches for the team, but they were solved pretty quickly.



Take a look at part 1 in this link http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/1629-replay-the-light-iron-focus-e...


Around 10:09 Cioni puts up a letter on screen that he wrote to Apple about how they are going to go about pulling this off. He is in communication with them from very early on.

This makes common sense to me. Apple had a great interest in this film being successful. It would be stupid for them to just leave them on their own and not help them.

If they failed. They would tell everybody that X ----fill in the blank

The success of this film would be Apple's success.

If you go to Apple's website now they have Focus on there as the first link, and why wouldn't they?

It's exactly what they wanted. A huge success with their software.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 1:54:05 pm

[Tony West] "It looks like they were working fine with it the old way before the change"

Agreed. I got that impression, too, in talking with them. I also have a film that went through FCPX at the same time, but I opted to stay with 10.0.9 until the final conform of the RED files.

[Tony West] "Around 10:09 Cioni puts up a letter on screen that he wrote to Apple about how they are going to go about pulling this off. He is in communication with them from very early on.
This makes common sense to me. Apple had a great interest in this film being successful. It would be stupid for them to just leave them on their own and not help them."


Apple is in communication with a lot of people. The question is whether they directly act on the suggestions.

[Tony West] "If they failed."

Actually if they failed, the editors would have been fired and a different team would have been put in place. It happens all the time. So the stakes were high for making X work, no matter what it took. That's why Mike ran a parallel FCP7 project all the way until the end, just to keep the studio happy and to have a fall-back position.

[Tony West] "The success of this film would be Apple's success."

While that's quite true, what it really means is that Apple is more than happy to enjoy the praise, but doesn't necessarily directly help or intercede in the process. That was the case with "Cold Mountain" and it was also the case when large post shops deployed Xsan for shared storage in mission critical environments.

Apple takes input and looks at how users perform their workflows, but in the end, they toss the software out that they've created and then it's up to users to use it or not.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 4:33:17 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Apple is in communication with a lot of people. "

Not like that.

[Oliver Peters] "The question is whether they directly act on the suggestions.
"


There is no need for them to be in that type of back in fourth with him if they are not going to do anything for
him.

I never saw him say anything negative about Apple

[Oliver Peters] "Actually if they failed, the editors would have been fired "

That wouldn't have helped Apple though. They had a vested interest in them succeeding. That's pretty obvious to me.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:02:55 pm

Let's not forget that all this hubbub about cutting the movie Focus gave some very need exposure to a pretty foul B-movie with a 56-rating on Rotten Tomatoes. The message to Apple was probably "Help, we've got a real mess on our hands here, if we fail so do you." Whooptie Doo, what an accomplishment, there have been better films spliced together by hand with Scotch Tape.

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

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:49:30 pm

Right David.

I'm sure if they had just cut Focus on an AVID it would have been a much better movie.

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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:51:59 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:52:42 pm

[Bill Davis] "I'm sure if they had just cut Focus on an AVID it would have been a much better movie.
"


You're getting dangerously close to guitar discussions again ;-)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 6:03:00 pm

[Oliver Peters] "
You're getting dangerously close to guitar discussions again ;-)
"


You mean to say there is some logic in Bill's response? Thanks for pointing it out Oliver, I was certainly fooled.

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

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:34:59 pm

[Tony West] "That wouldn't have helped Apple though. They had a vested interest in them succeeding. That's pretty obvious to me."

True, but there was no direct support.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 11:05:41 pm

[Oliver Peters] "True, but there was no direct support."

How do you know that Oliver?

Did he tell you that personally?

That's not what he is saying on stage


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 12:07:39 am

[Tony West] "How do you know that Oliver?
Did he tell you that personally?
That's not what he is saying on stage
"


What do understand as direct support? I'm going by what Mike, Jan and Glenn told me personally in interviews. By direct support, I mean direct assistance by Apple engineers either on-site or specific configuration/optimization assistance. To my knowledge that hasn't happened since the first days of the Coens originally using FCP "classic". Maybe you are thinking of more subtle interaction. If so, then probably yes. What is he saying specifically from the stage? And who?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 4:31:38 am

[Oliver Peters] "What do understand as direct support? "

What support means to me is "help" Here is the dictionary definition 2. give assistance to,

If I need help and ask Apple for it and they respond to solve my problem.

Michael Cioni is describing the letter he sent to Apple.

Did you ask Cioni why he sent that letter personally and what he expected back from it?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 2:05:30 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Oct 21, 2015 at 2:12:40 pm

[Tony West] "Michael Cioni is describing the letter he sent to Apple."

I re-watched those videos last night and his letter seems to be no different than what many of us have sent to Apple folks we know on the inside directly. Your own list of feature requests sent to Apple Feedback probably carries as much weight. I think you are making far too much out of this letter.

Note in his comment that it also went to Philip Hodgetts. From what I can tell it's Intelligent Assistance who created needed products based on those requests, not Apple. You'll note that nowhere in Cioni's comments did he say Apple added XYZ features out of these requests. IMHO, their contribution stopped at FCPXML.

I do know for a fact that Apple has encouraged many of the third-party developers to create add-on utilities that they didn't want to do in-house. So I'm sure there have been quite a few behind-the-scenes efforts in which Apple was involved that helped grow the overall ecosystem.

[Tony West] "Did you ask Cioni why he sent that letter personally and what he expected back from it?"

I haven't interviewed Michael Cioni on "Focus" - only Mike Matzdorff, Jan and Glenn. I have interviewed MC on other films. I will point out that he does not use FCPX other than on personal projects. His company is built on Quantel products and his company rents DIT systems and quite a number of Media Composer systems, because that best serves his market and customers.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 3:59:54 am

[Oliver Peters] " his letter seems to be"

But you don't know for certain what he is discussing with them? You are guessing?
Maybe you could get in touch with him and ask him about the details.
I'm curious.




[Oliver Peters] "his company rents DIT systems and quite a number of Media Composer systems, because that best serves his market and customers.
"


could be, but he is dong a good job demoing his product on X






Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 12:02:05 pm

"But you don't know for certain what he is discussing with them? You are guessing?
Maybe you could get in touch with him and ask him about the details. "


No I haven't discussed that specific with him. My interaction with him was to interview him for a story on workflow ("Dragon Tattoo", IRC). So, here I'm only going on what he said in this presentation. Quite frankly, it's not really that important to me what the letter said.

And sure, he's a great advocate for the product and as I said before, uses it personally. BUT his business is built around Quantel finishing and DIT tools developed in-house, not FCPX.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 2:09:58 pm

[Tony West] "If I need help and ask Apple for it and they respond to solve my problem.
"


PS: By that definition many - maybe all on this list - have received direct help from Apple through their Feedback page. I don't view that as the same thing in the context of this conversation.

FWIW - neither Apple nor Adobe come anywhere close to the direct help that Avid offers in the form of Marianna Montague. She's a incredible asset that any of these companies should strive to develop on their own side.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mark Suszko
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 5:28:24 pm

"I do know for a fact that Apple has encouraged many of the third-party developers to create add-on utilities that they didn't want to do in-house. So I'm sure there have been quite a few behind-the-scenes efforts in which Apple was involved that helped grow the overall ecosystem."


Ironically, I read this just after I got an email from the good folks at MotionVFX, announcing an inexpensive plug-in for FCPX that does the Premiere Pro "Morph Cut". Around fifty bucks. I think this is a great way to go forward and speed the improvement of FCPX, by getting more third-party plugs going.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 5:58:30 pm

[Mark Suszko] "I think this is a great way to go forward and speed the improvement of FCPX, by getting more third-party plugs going."

That's the way it's been from the very beginning. Apple apparently never intended to recreate FC Studio when it embarked on FCPX. Provide the hooks (FCPXML, Motion templates) and keep the cost low. Let third-party developers create what Apple deemed as niche tools. That's why I'm not very optimistic to see any of the major requested features that make so many lists added to FCPX. Hopefully the next update will prove me wrong.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 6:07:00 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Hopefully the next update will prove me wrong.
"


I imagine the next uptake will be an El Capitan maintenance release


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 8:20:26 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Provide the hooks (FCPXML, Motion templates) and keep the cost low. Let third-party developers create what Apple deemed as niche tools."

I'm a fan of this approach, actually. Keep the core development focused on core values.

It doesn't even need to be niche features. I'd originally thought it would be cool to have Apple outsource codecs, for example. Just do like After Effects and say, whatever you hand me, I promise not to mangle.

AE has this down to a science of course, and few NLEs have ever pulled it off consistently. "Introducing fields when rendering 720p/50 footage? Done! You're welcome!" But I thought it'd be slick to have 100% codec support from Day 1, automatically, from not having to wait for Apple. THAT would be revolutionary I says to myself.


[Oliver Peters] "That's why I'm not very optimistic to see any of the major requested features that make so many lists added to FCPX."

I agree that this is the most likely outcome. I'm happy to be wrong (I've certainly got plenty of practice), but I don't see any sign that Apple has even been working on better hooks for third parties.

I'm sure they have something up their sleeves -- right? RIGHT? -- but the trajectory for the first go-round was having all the major features in place halfway through the development cycles. Year 6 of 12: multicam. After that, refinement, including the admittedly major Pro Res in Year 8, but really, 6 years in was it.

So within the conversationally acknowledged 10 year product life cycle, we're probably within a release or two of everything currently on the whiteboard. Have the last couple of releases reflected any hurry to cross off some big requests as having been fulfilled?

I'm not asking rhetorically. I honestly don't know, but as a spectator, it doesn't appear to be the case.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 9:14:36 pm

[Tim Wilson] "So within the conversationally acknowledged 10 year product life cycle, we're probably within a release or two of everything currently on the whiteboard. Have the last couple of releases reflected any hurry to cross off some big requests as having been fulfilled?

I'm not asking rhetorically. I honestly don't know, but as a spectator, it doesn't appear to be the case."


Agreed.

For example, since we're talking about sound and DAWs in this thread, I really wonder how likely it is we'll ever see a roles mixer. I would say this particular request is a pretty big deal. Especially since it's always proposed as the solution whenever someone brings up the deficiencies of a trackless timeline for complex audio mixing.

It's year five and we don't even have color-coded roles yet. And that's an easy change. Integrating an automated roles mixer is a lot more challenging.

I really hope it happens but what you see may be what you get. I would like to be surprised but I wouldn't bet my business needs on being happily surprised by Apple.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 1:54:19 am

[David Lawrence] "Especially since it's always proposed as the solution whenever someone brings up the deficiencies of a trackless timeline for complex audio mixing."

This statement makes a rather bold assumption - one that I see repeated frequently, as if it were an accepted fact: the assumption that a "trackless" timeline is unsuitable for complex mixing. How so?


Point 1:
A roles-based mixer is proposed as a response to the desire to buss audio. As of the current release, putting audio into compound clips is one solution. It is a somewhat imperfect analogue to assigning tracks to a buss. I can put all the dialogue, or all of "Bob's" dialogue, into a compound clip, then process it as I wish. Same with any other group of clips. Assigning proper roles makes it simple to bundle specific clips into a compound. (Grouping clips as secondary storylines is a less effective means of dealing with audio bussing.)

Compound clips is not an ideal way of bussing. Perhaps the main flaw is that compounds can't be "opened" in place. They open in a new timeline, and so the clips are not heard in context with the main video in the main timeline. I find this limitation (both audio and video) frustrating and puzzling. Less frustrating with audio, but still...

Point 2:
The characterization of "trackless timelines" as being "deficient" for complex mixing. I keep asking, "why?"
How does not seeing audio visually linked to specific tracks prevent complex mixing? What can one NOT do in FCP X that one CAN do in Avid? Or Premiere Pro? X has virtually unlimited layers (think of them as tracks, if you wish), as does Premiere Pro. Avid is limited to 24 (or is it 25?). X has a large variety of filters and processors available (as do the others) which can be manipulated in real time (not so for Avid). Within any given audio clip container, one has multiple channels that can be turned on or off, set as stereo or mono or surround, even edited within the clip container. They can be viewed with all channels expanded for viewing, or collapsed into a single container. If the audio is attached to a video clip, the audio can be manipulated independently of the video, while staying in synch by default. Unless you choose to detach to audio.

Where, exactly, does this fall short for complex mixes? Compare to Avid and Premiere Pro. What makes either of them more suitable for complex mixing?

Not a "fanboi," not being defensive. Truly don't see the evidence to support the assumption.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 3:10:54 am

[Jeff Markgraf] "Not a "fanboi," not being defensive. Truly don't see the evidence to support the assumption."

Audio post has been my bread & butter since the mid 80s. So I will attempt to put simply the basic requirement of us audio oriented editors and the DAWs that they use to edit & mix.

Clip level. Gain, EQ and plugins are useful at this level for specifics like denoise or matching level & eq in a dialog edit. Ideally I want a DAW that allows me to stack clips non destructively on the one track. Spare takes perhaps or just layers I can go back to of the original audio plus the clip stack which might represent a denoising pass I have rendered so I can further edit the denoised audio as a clip.

Track processing. OK track level processing becomes more important than clip level because I want to apply EQ or dynamics processing to a whole track. I want to chose if that processing is pre or post fader and I want total automation of levels, FX and plugins.

Buss processing. Again I want exactly the same as the track level. I have used all three stages of processing to get a stem with the right combination of EQ and dynamics processing. Dynamics often works best when it cascades rather than a since instance. The effect is to control dynamics and envelope the sounds into each other.

Master bussing. All the split stems now need to combine to create the final balance. Guess what, I use plugins and on board master buss processing to control dynamics to envelope the music, FX and dialog elements. I also need tools to indicate loudness and meet various specifications regarding peak levels etc.

Finally when mixing a big monster of tracks down to the final 5.1 I want to be able to have a visual spatial organisation that lets me equate a sound to the fader it appears on in a mixer that combines it all. Magnetic breaks that visual association. In the same way that if you organise musical notes by colour and not spatial position in a score, it would be much more difficult to associate. Tracks like music notation gives vertical and horizontal association that is very much easier to follow, especially when track numbers get big. I also want to be able to very quickly resize the track height and scroll quickly to a specific track, jumping between seeing 96 tracks and just one quickly.

So an NLE doesn't need to match all that functionality but it sure makes it nice to be able to just grab two faders and adjust the music to fx to dialog relationship when sorting a complex dialog edit. You just want to do it while you cut the dialog so switching between automating a bus and simply moving faders with automation bypassed is a nice feature. This is different to soloing but sometimes that is nice too. Again when audio elements start getting very densely layered this layout matters. If you have seen any screen grabs of a Murch edit you will see he has tons of elements including alts stacked on many tracks.

So when spatial arrangements conventions are changed and a system to organise clips without regard to like type appears that is based on a metadata tagging like roles, I can't see why all of the power of DAWs cannot be similarly achieved. But with X it can't. Why not have a mode where clips are displayed based on roles, in other words rearranged on screen like tracks? Why can't we have the multi stage of mix and dynamics control that allows the same structure as clip/track/bus/master? I would love a system that allowed such quick and easy visual re arrangement. I feel the potential power of Roles is not going to be realised.

I have no intention of putting words in Murch's mouth but when I indicated I understood why someone who is sound oriented would be unlikely to be able to use X and probably prefer tracks/bus/master arrangements with full FX & plugins plus automation at every level I meant I don't understand why they would chose a tool like X compared to Pr or Vegas if you really use and want the features that have been bread and butter for many years.


Return to posts index

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 3:46:54 am

Hi Michael.

Thanks for the detailed replay. It may surprise you that I truly do understand what you're talking about. While I am not a mixer, I do mix, and I completely understand the tools and needs of professional mixing on a real board with a real DAW on a real stage. For that reason, I would never presume to do serious mixing in ANY NLE. (Well, I've never even touched Vegas, so I can't speak to that...)

What you're describing is mostly beyond any NLE that I've ever worked with. I certainly do not consider X to be an exception to the rule. One can only do so much in an editing program.

What I am trying to clarify is, why the hate for X? Compared to Avid or PPro, why is X judged by some to be inferior in regards to audio? What can Avid do that X can't?

More specifically, where is the bussing and such that you speak of in your earlier post? I know PPro has a track mixer, so I guess you can link a couple of tracks and control them together. Not bussing, per se, but it may help get the job done. So in X, I would put the clips into a compound clip to do that. True, no actual mixer interface, and no "automation" (i.e., recording the mouse pulling the fader). As I said in an earlier post, I've never used it and don;t know know any editors who do, but it would be nice to have the option in X.

Again, no NLE has the kind of bussing and patching and sends and side chains that a real DAW/mixing stage has.

As far as organization, I understand organizing by track. It's logical, it's visual, it's traditional. Since I'm able to highlight timeline clips by role and subrole with the click of a button in X, I don't see the practical difference. If I really need the visual cues, I guess i could always borrow Charlie Austin's method of inserting "barrier strip" slugs between SOT and MX and FX. But I've never found the need to so do.

As far as sending to a real mixer, X2Pro works just fine. It creates a real ProTools session with clips organized by roles and subroles in the very organization mixers generally prefer.

When all is said and done, I really would like a roles-based mixer in X (roles being functionally equivalent to tracks). Whether from Apple or from a third party plugin.

In the meantime, I do mixes in X that are as complex and anything I've ever done in Avid or any other NLE.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 4:18:52 am

[Jeff Markgraf]"What I am trying to clarify is, why the hate for X? Compared to Avid or PPro, why is X judged by some to be inferior in regards to audio? What can Avid do that X can't? "

Personally I don't hate any NLE. Coming from a DAW like Fairlight to any NLE seems like a backward step so I am agnostic about NLEs. I use NLEs as finishing tools post grade which is my other hat. So lately I have been using Resolve and occasionally Pr and before that FCP7. Resolve 12 looks like it has many of the features that I am talking about with DAWs like clip/track/buss/master and CS6 which I have used occasionally also seems to have the same mixer structure.

Both Resolve & Pr also support VST plugins and I am not sure yet if they can be applied to all the track/buss/master stages and full automation of everything. I think they are closer to that goal than X and when it comes to AVID I have little practical experience but again with a limit of 24 tracks it would be a poor choice for complex edits like the screen grabs I have seen of Murch projects.

I find it interesting that Murch used FCP Legend because I found it terrible as an audio tool. I guess at the time the difference to AVID was simply the sheer number of tracks. Now editors have extra choice and that is terrific. Since tools like X2Pro I have had a few jobs that were cut on X and I trust the editors who prefer X to have both the skill and the right to prefer it as a platform. All my early concerns about getting xmls and AAF/OMF out of X have been long solved, so really my perspective is the simple one of comparing NLE features and offering opinion based on my experience with DAWs and if any editor is happy to work around the limitations of any system to get the best result and enjoy the process then go for it.

But of all the NLE methodologies, I find that X is the more radical departure and may spook the horses. What I am referring to in this particular discussion is the specifics of an experienced edited who demonstrably uses more tracks than many and uses tracks as an organisational tool and does a lot of mixing compared to a more typical offline approach would. If I was such an editor (and as a sound post person I do picture edit occasionally), I would naturally gravitate to the tool that didn't require the sort of work arounds you have mentioned. I get that many are prepared to do those sort of workarounds because so much else in the editing experience pleases and suits them. But this whole discussion has been about what an editor like Murch says he wants to use and what many of us have been second guessing as to why he may or may not chose a tool.

Roles certainly has the potential to do so much more and if they ever devlop it to the point where I think it as good or better than Pr or Resolve or Vegas for complex audio editing and mixing then I will be more than happy to cheer becasue we all win when tools develop to their potential.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 5:00:03 pm
Last Edited By Shawn Miller on Oct 23, 2015 at 5:02:18 pm

[Jeff Markgraf] "I know PPro has a track mixer, so I guess you can link a couple of tracks and control them together. Not bussing, per se, but it may help get the job done."

Premiere pro has a bussing structure. You can create submix channels (mono stereo and 5.1) and send any (or multiple) track output(s) to any submix. You can also assign any submix to any other (or multiple) submix channel(s). The same is true for Sony Vegas.

Shawn



Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 5:21:48 pm

[Shawn Miller] "
Premiere pro has a bussing structure. You can create submix channels (mono stereo and 5.1) and send any (or multiple) track output(s) to any submix. You can also assign any submix to any other (or multiple) submix channel(s). The same is true for Sony Vegas."


And, don't forget about Adobe Audition, a very capable app that's fully integrated with Premiere, which has very sophisticated busing and a plethora of other very sophisticated audio editing and processing tools.

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

Shawn Miller
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 5:31:05 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "[Shawn Miller] "
Premiere pro has a bussing structure. You can create submix channels (mono stereo and 5.1) and send any (or multiple) track output(s) to any submix. You can also assign any submix to any other (or multiple) submix channel(s). The same is true for Sony Vegas."

And, don't forget about Adobe Audition, a very capable app that's fully integrated with Premiere, which has very sophisticated busing and a plethora of other very sophisticated audio editing and processing tools."


Absolutely! I've been using Audition since it was Cool Edit Pro v1. I rarely complete a project without touching Audition at some point. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 6:04:35 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Absolutely! I've been using Audition since it was Cool Edit Pro v1. I rarely complete a project without touching Audition at some point. :-)"

Since you guys keep talking about Audition, how does its audio repair tools compare to something like iZotope's RX 5Audio Editor?


-Andrew


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 6:22:55 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "[Shawn Miller] "Absolutely! I've been using Audition since it was Cool Edit Pro v1. I rarely complete a project without touching Audition at some point. :-)"

Since you guys keep talking about Audition, how does its audio repair tools compare to something like iZotope's RX 5Audio Editor?


-Andrew"


I haven't used iZotope's repair tools, so I can't really compare them. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the RX 5 Audio Editor was more sophisticated though, those guys just make magic. I've always preferred their compression and EQ tools.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 24, 2015 at 1:19:13 am

[Shawn Miller] "I haven't used iZotope's repair tools, so I can't really compare them. I wouldn't be at all surprised if the RX 5 Audio Editor was more sophisticated though, those guys just make magic. I've always preferred their compression and EQ tools."

iZotope denoise, declipper etc are brilliant. I use them as VST plugins in Fairlight. I am about to upgrade to RX5 so I can't comment on their Editor yet. RX4 standalone was not really an editing tool so I am looking forward to RX5.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 6:48:05 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Since you guys keep talking about Audition, how does its audio repair tools compare to something like iZotope's RX 5Audio Editor?"

Audition has many of the same tools, but they're not quite as good. I have only played with RX5 but I am familiar with Sony Soundforge, which is similar to RX5 (it actually has some of the iZotope filters packaged with it)and the Izotope noise reduction filter in Soundforge gets better results and is easier to use than the same filters in Audition. also RX5 Pro has some filters that you won't find anywhere else - reverb/echo eliminator, ambiance filter (create room tone) to name two. On the other hand I'm thrilled to be able to use the spectral analysis tool in Audition because of it's very tight integration into Ppro. It might not be quite as good as the RX version, but it's plenty good enough for most of my needs.

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 6:52:24 pm

I can't compare them precisely, as I've never used them side by side, but I can tell you from my limited testing that the toolset is amazingly powerful, yet amazingly simple to use. Which, according to Al Mooney, is s major goal for the Adobe development team, because tools that go unused waste everyone's time and money.

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

Steve Connor
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 5:38:28 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "And, don't forget about Adobe Audition, a very capable app that's fully integrated with Premiere, which has very sophisticated busing and a plethora of other very sophisticated audio editing and processing tools."

If only Logic was as well integrated with FCPX


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 4:07:16 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Tony West] "If I need help and ask Apple for it and they respond to solve my problem.
"

PS: By that definition many - maybe all on this list - have received direct help from Apple through their Feedback page. I don't view that as the same thing in the context of this conversation.
"


You didn't really answer my question. Why was Cioni sending that letter in the first place. Do you KNOW or are you guess like anybody could do?


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 4:16:45 am

Because he was concerned he'd chosen the wrong NLE for the job and he needed help.

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

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 12:23:42 pm

"You didn't really answer my question. Why was Cioni sending that letter in the first place. Do you KNOW or are you guess like anybody could do?"

As I said in the other post, I'm going by what was said in the video. I really don't care what the letter said, because many people who have a contacts at Apple sent and continue to send similar inquiries and feature requests through various channels.

I know that at that time (before "Focus" started shooting) there were HUGE holes in the FCPX feature film workflow, which were filled by third party developers. These continue to be holes that Apple has chosen not to fix. That's why I drew attention to his mention of also appealing to Intelligent Assistance as part of this letter. Remember that at that stage there were no tools for EDLs, change lists, syncing, reports, audio transfer to Pro Tools, etc. These tools were either created in response to the need after this point or were just in the beginning development stages. So it seems pretty clear to me this was an appeal to address those issues, which in the end have been augmented by third party developers, not Apple.

This whole rabbit hole of a discussion seems to have started with the presumption that if Walter Murch had reached out to the Apple team he would have gotten exactly the same level of support that Adobe is providing. I just don't believe that's the case. It hasn't been true historically and doesn't appear to be true now. Is there some sort of interaction? Sure. Is it direct connection with seeded advanced versions of the apps to use in the production, maybe, but everyone seems to make a point that they were working with release versions of FCPX. Murch was given an advance look at X before it was launched and from that presentation, he said (paraphrasing), "Apple still likes us. But do they love us? I don't know." :-)

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 8:47:41 pm

[Oliver Peters] "This whole rabbit hole of a discussion seems to have started with the presumption that if Walter Murch had reached out to the Apple team he would have gotten exactly the same level of support that Adobe is providing. I just don't believe that's the case. "

It didn't really need to be a ribbit hole really. Ronny ended it with his comment about Apple listening to his big company.

You accepted that from him.

My point is that I believe if they listened to Ronny's company they would listen to Murch as well.
That's all.

Now climb out of the hole : )


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 9:12:05 pm

[Tony West] "My point is that I believe if they listened to Ronny's company they would listen to Murch as well.
That's all."


If I may inject myself into this subthread ;) I think the larger point here is even if Apple did listen to Murch, it wouldn't matter; because the fundamental design decisions behind the FCPX timeline don't work for Murch's needs. Unless you think they'd add audio tracks if he asked ;)

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 10:03:26 pm

[David Lawrence] "If I may inject myself into this subthread ;) I think the larger point here is even if Apple did listen to Murch, it wouldn't matter; because the fundamental design decisions behind the FCPX timeline don't work for Murch's needs. Unless you think they'd add audio tracks if he asked ;)"

I hear you, I don't think they would bring back tracks for him.

I would like to see if he changed his mind about X and using it if he knew more about it.

We won't truly know unless he decided to really kick the tires.

I'm going to use it even if he never does though hehehe


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 10:22:08 pm

[Tony West] "I would like to see if he changed his mind about X and using it if he knew more about it.

We won't truly know unless he decided to really kick the tires."


I'm willing to bet he has tried it. An editor of Murch's caliber and experience doesn't need to cut a feature in it to know it's not gonna work for him. It becomes clear pretty quickly, especially if you need your NLE to treat audio with as much flexibility as video. Audio is a second-class citizen on the FCPX timeline. As long as that remains true, I think it's unlikely editors like Murch will be interested.

[Tony West] "I'm going to use it even if he never does though hehehe"

Hey, even I use it too. Just not the timeline part, lol. Choice is a great thing! :)

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 10:29:58 pm

He says right in the video that he's tried X, so the argument that he'd like it better if he tried it is just not applicable.

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

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 2:05:21 am

He says he's tried X, but not on anything substantial, and definitely not on a paying gig.

So, for professional purposes, he hasn't tried X. He doesn't say he doesn't like it; nor does he say he likes it. He says nothing about its suitability for professional movie work. He says nothing about its audio capabilities or limitations.

Walter Murch certainly doesn't HAVE to play with or deep-dive-into or seriously use X. As far as I know, he doesn't use Resolve, either. Or Lightworks.

So what?

This willingness to put words in his mouth, and to then hold these supposed words up as evidence of X's deficiencies, is ludicrous.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 2:34:08 am

Sorry your Cubs got clobbered, I was pulling for them...

Meanwhile, Jeff there don't have to be deficiencies in certain tools or in the people who choose not to use them, for those tools to be rejected by some, adopted by others.

For the record, for those who work with tracks, have worked with tracks for their entire careers, and who don't find tracks inhibiting or in need of change, it should be easy to understand why they might not want to take the time to become proficient at X, especially as it has a fairly substantial learning curve.

In pointing out that tracks make the product unsuitable for them, why does that have mean that either X is deficient or the person rejecting it for their purposes is deficient?

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

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 3:27:11 am

Hi David.

Yeah, as a life-long Cubs fan, I didn't expect them to get as far as they did. But I was shocked to see them humiliated so completely by the Mets. The Mets! Sheesh. The leftover hate from '69 still burns strong..

Regarding tracks, etc.: Look. I've edited and mixed with systems using conventional tracks for 30 years with no problem. Got nothing against tracks. And I don't think a preference for working with traditional tracks is wrong, or an indication of incipient Luddite-ness, or any such thing. To each his own.

I've never been part of the "if you don't get with the program, you're old and calcified" crowd. But I surely do know how deeply conservative and change-aversive Hollywood is. That's okay. Just don't dismiss me as an amateur because I happen to like the way FCP X works. (Not directed at you...I'm speaking in general of the incredulous and sad "poor deluded child" reactions I get on a regular basis when I say I like the thing.)

What I'm responding to, and sincerely asking for clarification on, is the oft-repeated dismissal of X as being incapable of complex audio mixing. Look back at this thread. I've read it from you, from David, from several others - even from the lovely Tim Wilson, (may his name be praised). Significantly, in spite of some people's characterizations, I've never read or heard it from Walter Murch, the ostensible subject of this thread. All I've read is other people projecting their opinions onto Mr. Murch.

So I ask again, nicely, sincerely, with no axe to grind: in what way is X unsuited to complex audio work? Why do you say that? Please, anyone, provide actual evidence, actual examples. So far, no one - seriously, NO ONE - has actually answered my questions.


Oh - and there's always next season!


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 4:06:11 am

Michael Gissing's response should pretty much answer your questions Jeff.

However, let me just reiterate, whether roles in X ever adds the missing links that make X more acceptable to those who prefer tracks, is anyone's guess, but it's pretty clear that the magnetic timeline is a major hurdle for many experienced editors, most likely including Walter Murch. No, he doesn't state that clearly and emphatically, but that was pretty clearly the implication I think most viewers will take away from that interview.

The bottom line is, there is no doubt that Walter Murch could figure out a way to do his audio work in FCP X, but, he doesn't. And, I'd venture that there's just one reason, and it's probably pretty much the same as mine... It's pretty simple... Why? The industry is pretty much track-based, has been since its inception, and all other solutions require translation to tracks. That, combined with a hefty learning curve could make our heads explode, if we chose to allow it, but we don't consider it a solution for anything we need, so we simply reject it. We don't think you or other X users are deficient, inept, immature, or silly, we just wonder why so many if you are so attached to your software that you can't seem to tolerate that others might be similarly attached to their own software and workflows that are time-tested and simply work.

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

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 25, 2015 at 7:51:59 am

Hi David.

Got swamped with work and couldn't catch up with this thread until now.

Regarding exploding heads - I guess my poor little head is just too sensitive. All that grey matter splattered all over the walls... You should have seen the mess every time Trey Goudy and his merry band of a-holes opened their mouths to speak at that absurd and shameful house committee hearing a couple of days ago. Maybe I should get some netting to keep my poor head together.

As far as this discussion goes...well, I think it's time to give up the ghost. Except for some info from Shawn about the track patching & bussing capabilities of PPro's track mixer, no one has really addressed my actual questions. There have been a fair number of condescending and uninformative responses, along with a truly amazing variety of deflection. But very little real information. And not even halfhearted attempts to justify some of the more ridiculous statements of "fact" regarding audio mixing and the question of traditional track structure.

I get it. Positions have been staked out. Agendas must be furthered. Maybe Aindreas can visit and drop some more amusing word bombs for our entertainment. I had simply hoped for some real discussion.

Oh well. Back to doing real work. And maybe the Cubbies will take it all the way next year. ;-)


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 25, 2015 at 8:04:29 am

[Jeff Markgraf] "I get it. Positions have been staked out. Agendas must be furthered. Maybe Aindreas can visit and drop some more amusing word bombs for our entertainment. I had simply hoped for some real discussion. "

Hi Jeff,

I've been meaning to post a response but have been pretty swamped myself lately. ;) As I pointed out above, we actually a very long and thoughtful discussion about this topic in 2011. Please check it out:

NLEs, DAWs, Tracks and Audio-centric Workflows -- Continuing the Conversation...
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/16886

I'll also try to make some time to write some more in response to your question.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 22, 2015 at 10:24:40 pm

Tony, what you keep forgetting is that you can't just kick the tires on FCP X, which is the application's #1 problem for experienced editors. There's a significant learning curve for X that many experienced editors simply aren't willing to invest their time in.

You can try your best to counter that argument, but I'll tell you in advance that even your own home team will probably not agree with you.

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

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 4:29:33 am

[David Roth Weiss] "Tony, what you keep forgetting is that you can't just kick the tires on FCP X, which is the application's #1 problem for experienced editors. There's a significant learning curve for X that many experienced editors simply aren't willing to invest their time in."

I don't really disagree with this statement David. I understand if he doesn't have time to really dig into it.

I'm not mad at him : )

I was just saying I would be interested to know what he would think if he really gave it a go that's all.

When I watched the video I was hoping to hear his opinion from his use and just break the program down.

Instead he was really honest about how he didn't really have much experience with it.

"I can't speak from an informed base as if I were using it" That's a very honest comment from him.

I very much enjoyed his interview. I was very impressed with him. I'm not upset that he doesn't use X in the least.

I never tell people they "should" use X

I tell people why "I" like using X

I have converted a number of people over to X and not one of those people did I ever tell "you should use it"

It's up to them what they want to use. I think you can do a great job with any of these programs if you have talent.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 3:19:53 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Oct 23, 2015 at 3:22:06 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "There's a significant learning curve for X "

That that is in fact not true, but rather the exact opposite more often than not, has been said by many here. Repeatedly. By both users and teachers/trainers, who⎯I'm going to go out on a limb to say⎯are actually the ones that are in the best (if not only) position to be the judge of that. Even if we've established that it's anecdotal, there's certainly a pattern. That is, people that in fact didn't make "the decision after just three edits" but dared give it a serious, legitimate shot and had the willingness to learn the few differences X presents them with.

Are there exceptions to the (learning) rule? Sure. As there is to everything. For many of those exceptions, simple habit and lack of familiarity gets in the way of the most simple but key concepts. But then the basics are the exact same in X. "Bins", clips, timeline. The rest is just up to said habit and familiarity.


[David Roth Weiss] "many experienced editors simply aren't willing to invest their time in."

But still... so many have. Weird. Makes you wonder which are the better for it? Willingness is certainly a pre-requisite. You're definitely right about that. Or maybe that is now some "deficiency" of those that chose to invest that time? They somehow had no other options? I guess they had to force themselves and hated it every inch of the way and saw no gain in it in the end? My experience tells me: nope.


[David Roth Weiss] "Does your head explode when your clients disagree with you or when they opt to choose a different creative direction from the one you've chosen?"

From everything you have written, I actually find it rather ironic that you should be asking others that. But then I don't see how the creative choices of my clients, people I edit for, are in any way relevant to my own. Hasn't been in 20+ years.


[David Roth Weiss] "As I've said for more than four years, as far I'm concerned, the trackless timeline is a solution looking for a problem."

And you can go on saying it for another 10 years. But that thought certainly does not come into play for those that have understood the idea and concept behind roles and, again, learned their benefits. ( http://bit.ly/1MX0xMW ) In which case roles are recognized to be far more powerful and certainly far more flexible than working with tracks in most any situation. As e.g. in this very real example http://bit.ly/1Xoc7DN clearly illustrating how roles are superior for that task (and many others).

May not have "solved a problem" (which nobody ever claimed roles do per se anyway) in any sense that it couldn't have been done otherwise (he says how), but sure makes for some very welcome, more efficient alternatives.

Unless of course you want to argue the "do it the good ol', familiar way, because that's the only way I know" approach. Never mind it being more tedious. Then, I guess you're right. I can only speak for myself and say that roles/trackless editing make loads of sense and may not solve any "problem", but certainly offer me many possibilities and alternatives that I FAR prefer. And yes, a far more efficient workflow overall.

Again, those that have actually shown the willingness to learn what those things mean and use them (kind of a key part that), know how, why and where they're far superior to tracks. Anyone that thinks that Apple could ever consider bringing tracks back simply doesn't understand the most basic concept of X and for me that's a completely ludicrous notion. If someone's world only allows for tracks, there are options. Everyone's happy.


[Michael Gissing] "Why not have a mode where clips are displayed based on roles,"

Erm... there is. There are in fact a couple of ways of doing that.

- RK


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 24, 2015 at 1:14:55 am

[Robin Kurz] "[Michael Gissing] "Why not have a mode where clips are displayed based on roles,"

Erm... there is. There are in fact a couple of ways of doing that."

Nice move Robin, taking just the first part of the sentence out of context. Here's the complete sentence... "Why not have a mode where clips are displayed based on roles, in other words rearranged on screen like tracks?"

So does X have that specific ability? Yes? No?


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 1:44:21 am

[Tony West] "I would like to see if he changed his mind about X and using it if he knew more about it."

[David Lawrence] "Audio is a second-class citizen on the FCPX timeline. As long as that remains true, I think it's unlikely editors like Murch will be interested."


This exchange. This one right here.

Tony, I don't mean to suggest that you're one of THOSE Guys, because you are NOT one of Those Guys, but it's still a very easy easily to fall into the conversational habits of Those Guys, and use language that suggests that somebody choosing not-X as some deficiency on THEIR part -- they haven't tried it, they don't understand, they haven't tried it LONG enough, they haven't tried the new version, they're not flexible, they're stuck in old ways....on and on. Take your pick.

Again noting that I know you get this...but it really is an easy habit.

But as David notes, Walter has very simple needs, really. Two of them. Picture and Sound.

The reason why I mentioned that IMDb lists him first as a sound guy, and the biggest films he's worked on have been as a sound guy (exception being Apocalypse, in which he did the almost inconceivable feat of BOTH picture AND sound) is that the whole English Patient (won an Oscar for editing a picture he cut with Avid Film Composer)/ Cold Mountain (nominated for editing for a picture he cut with FCP) thing is obscuring the fact that HE'S NOT PRIMARILY A PICTURE EDITOR.

He obviously IS a picture editor, and a great one....but as long as sound is AT LEAST as important to him, and for some movies he works on, the MAIN thing...FCPX is a non-starter.

This is not at ALL disrespectful to FCPX. It has other strengths. But there's no point in saying that this is one of them.

In a little fairness (and I'm rarely more than a LITTLE fair LOL), I'm not sure that there's ANY NLE that's equally adept at video and audio (maybe Sony Vegas?)....but at least Media Composer and Premiere Pro acknowledge that the best way to work with both picture and sound on one project is an organizational structure that works for both picture and sound, and robustly roundtrips with Pro Tools sessions in particular as a core value.

So it is NEITHER the case that Walter doesn't understand FCPX or that FCPX doesn't understand Walter. It's that Apple absolutely DID understand what Walter needs, and used to provide it (!!!! no argument there, RIGHT?), and at a certain point, explicitly chose NOT to continue to provide it!!!!



[Ronny Courtens] "I felt I needed to set this straight to keep the discussion honest."

Quite so. I continue my essay here trying to meet that standard.

We rightly talk about Randy Ubillos, and we should, but in doing so, we ignore somebody we should not: Steve Bayes, who has been the senior product manager for FCP/X since January 2006.

I just doublechecked at LinkedIn -- yep, 9 years 10 months. Is there anybody at Apple who has managed a product that long? Not that I'm aware of. Maybe ever.

I'm not calling him out for any reason but to praise him. A terrific guy. Call him the father of Avid Symphony if you want o. He was at Avid for 10 years, becoming Principle Product Designer at Avid just after Avid bought Pro Tools. Before that, he was an online editor, and has a film degree from Northeastern (arguably the best east coast film program that's not NYU), and was the world's first certified Avid instructor.

(In a bizarre little coincidence, he interviewed me for the job I wound up taking at Avid in 2003, left before I took the job, and a year later, had taken the job I'd left at Boris FX!!!)

In other words, he knows EXACTLY how important sound is to picture....and the product team he leads at Apple CHOSE to go in a different direction.


[Ronny Courtens] "I felt I needed to set this straight to keep the discussion honest."

Likewise. :-)

WHICH IS FINE for Apple to have done. Product teams SHOULD follow their own visions. They SHOULD focus their visions over team. They SHOULD be willing to sacrifice products, features, and even business models AND CUSTOMERS if that's what they believe it takes for them to reach their highest goals.

And it's fine for those teams to expect US to follow follow THEM. I'm 100% onboard with this.

But more than 4 years into this thing, I'm sorry and a little surprised to not hear reflected more often that Apple knew what EXACTLY they were doing, and explicitly CHOSE not to meet all the customer needs they used to reach.

WHICH IS FINE.

And some users with those needs -- intelligent, capable, bold, visionary, willing-to-try-anything users who love Apple -- have acknowledged Apple's choice to go in other directions, WHICH APPLE HAS, and have chosen from among contemporary options for their next project. NOT because of any deficiency in themselves, but BECAUSE of choices that Apple made KNOWING that Apple was leaving those customers behind.

And the not-X choosers like Walter aren't necessarily riled up about it. They understand that it's not all about them. It was nothing personal. But another alternative is in order.

WHICH IS FINE.


[Tony West] "I'm going to use it even if he never does though hehehe"

Which is also fine. LOL

I don't take your choice as any kind of disrespect for other options, though. Nor do I assume that you haven't spent enough time kicking other people's tires, so to speak.

I'd love to see more people who chose X assume that people who choose anything else are as reasonable and forward-looking anyone was in choosing X.


A final observation following Ronny's exhortation to keep the discussion honest:


[David Lawrence] "I would like to be surprised but I wouldn't bet my business needs on being happily surprised by Apple."

There ya go.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 2:37:34 am

[Tim Wilson] "I'd love to see more people who chose X assume that people who choose anything else are as reasonable and forward-looking anyone was in choosing X."

Amen brother.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 2:52:47 am

I'm not religious, but I'll ditto that amen...

And, just as one does not have to jump off a cliff to know it's not right for them, no experienced editor has to become fully proficient with an app to know its not a good fit for there needs. I made the decision after just three edits... I later went back and cut a project with X, and arrived at the same conclusion. Does that make me somehow deficient?

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

Dennis Radeke
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 10:50:15 am

Here, here!


Return to posts index

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 2:53:57 am

Tim, I don't generally respond to your posts, because they are unfailingly well though out, and "me too" is just a waste of bandwidth. But, in this case...


[Tim Wilson] "for some movies he works on, the MAIN thing...FCPX is a non-starter.
"


I know I'm a broken record on this, but I still can't get an answer. Why is X a non-starter? The only system Murch called a non-starter is Avid, because of only 25 audio tracks. He never addresses X. So why do you consider X a non-starter for audio?


[Tim Wilson] "the best way to work with both picture and sound on one project is an organizational structure that works for both picture and sound, and robustly roundtrips with Pro Tools sessions in particular as a core value."

Avid and PPro don't roundtrip with Pro Tools. It's a one way trip with AAF to Pro Tools, and a final mix back into the NLE. Unless I've missed something really big, you can't open a Pro tools session in Avid or in PPro. You take the mix as provided, and whatever stems the mixer may provide. I don't consider importing that final mix from an AAF file vs. an AIFF or a QT as "roundtrip."


[Tim Wilson] "at a certain point, explicitly chose NOT to continue to provide it!!!! "

Umm...evidence to support this? Again, Murch says nothing about X's capabilities or limitations.

As far as Apple not being responsive, ala Adobe: very true. Same to be said for Avid. So we have evidence of Apple being Apple, not of X being inherently unable to do the job. And this is news, why?

[Tim Wilson] "In other words, he knows EXACTLY how important sound is to picture....and the product team he leads at Apple CHOSE to go in a different direction."

Again...what? What different direction? Someone, PLEASE explain this. My head explodes every time I see this notion that Apple and X have abandoned audio presented as gospel truth.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 3:18:21 am

[Jeff Markgraf] "
Again...what? What different direction? Someone, PLEASE explain this. My head explodes every time I see this notion that Apple and X have abandoned audio presented as gospel truth."


Jeff, first of all, you really need to examine why this makes your head explode. Does your head explode when your clients disagree with you or when they opt to choose a different creative direction from the one you've chosen?

And next, you work in a biz that's mostly track-based, and the entire discussion of the forthcoming roles editor, which may or may not actually be forthcoming, is about a translation tool that's an abstraction layer that makes a trackless app function more like it does have tracks.

As I've said for more than four years, as far I'm concerned, the trackless timeline is a solution looking for a problem. So, since I see no benefits that apply to my workflows, and since the unrealized fix that's talked about is to make it more tracklike, should I need to worry that expressing that here makes your head explode?

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

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 3:06:18 pm

Tim, thanks for this post and I must say, this thread more than any other in a long time opens my eyes.


[Tim Wilson] "The reason why I mentioned that IMDb lists him first as a sound guy, "

I think I finally see it. THIS is not me as an editor.

I have always been about the visual first. I understand the power the visual image has on people.

What made the Ray Rice incident worst than other fools who beat up woman is there was a "video" of it.
You could 'see" it and that was jarring to people. In a way that talking about other incidents weren't.

The reason that those fishermen fought so hard in Japan to keep that crew from shooting the Cove was because they knew that if the world ever "saw" what they were doing it would be over for them.

When you walk out of THE COVE you are not thinking about the sound mix. It's the slaughter scene that will stay with you the rest of your life. It's the violence and the blood in the water. It's seeing someone lay their emotions out there in a way that makes you care about them even though you have never met them.

That is the power of images. I always tell people, if a picture is worth a thousand words then a video is worth a million.

When I cut, most times my focus begins with the images, it's not that I don't think audio is important, I know it is. But I'm all about the way the images come on that screen and effect people, and that's why I love X. I can move images around quickly so I can "see" how effective the images will effect the audience.

I care more about organizing my IMAGES and finding them than organizing my audio in the timeline.

I thought that Murch was going to get into the weeds in that interview in a way that would allow me to learn something that I didn't already know about X

I actually got more out of that discussion that Michael and Jeff had because they both got into details that Murch didn't. That's fine, it's hard to do in a interview.

But their back and fourth opened my eyes. I can not mix like Michael, but I know what bad audio sounds like and I know how to fix it. I might have to do it differently in X but that doesn't matter to me. What matters is what it sounds like in the end.

Everyone has their own priorities and I respect them.

I just want to make it clear for those who don't know.
My priority is not being a fan of Apple or any other company. It's not about ignoring deficiencies.

My priority, is blood in the water.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 3:54:17 pm

[Tony West] "I hear you, I don't think they would bring back tracks for him."

Mostly because that would simply not make any sense whatsoever and undermine the most basic principle/concept of X. Essentially rendering the brilliance of the magnetic timeline (and various other things) ineffective.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 3:59:23 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "[Tony West] "I hear you, I don't think they would bring back tracks for him."

Mostly because that would simply not make any sense whatsoever and undermine the most basic principle/concept of X. Essentially rendering the brilliance of the magnetic timeline (and various other things) ineffective.

- RK"


Agree totally


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 8:30:06 pm

[Oliver Peters] "
In the case of Premiere, there are Adobe engineers involved who are studying workflows and requests and seeing how to make these changes in Premiere. It extends into media optimizations with SANs, as well. This is something not even Avid has done very much of except maybe in the early days.

From what I do know of some of the people on the inside, they do study "pain points" and try to integrate solutions into the updates, but it never seems to take the form of direct features that are trackable to a certain person's input or request. That's what seems quite different in the eyes of these folks with Adobe compared with the other "A" companies."


I can confirm all of this as a regular practice for us and I'm on record as saying this is a large contributing factor to Adobe's success.

Dennis - Adobe guy


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 11:03:26 am

[Dennis Radeke] "In the case of Premiere, there are Adobe engineers involved who are studying workflows and requests and seeing how to make these changes in Premiere. It extends into media optimizations with SANs, as well. This is something not even Avid has done very much of except maybe in the early days.

I can confirm all of this as a regular practice for us and I'm on record as saying this is a large contributing factor to Adobe's success."


This is something that makes some of us non PP users peek through the keyhole into Adobe land with some envy. How do you go through this process and decide what is a genuine "good" feature request?

And out of interest what are the chances of introducing a magnetic timeline option within PP? (not kidding).


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 12:48:11 pm

[James Ewart] "This is something that makes some of us non PP users peek through the keyhole into Adobe land with some envy. How do you go through this process and decide what is a genuine "good" feature request?"

Hi James, complicated question though it's posed simply enough. I think the answer is multi-faceted. First off, I think that all of the DVA (digital video and audio) folks in Adobe generally have the same customer focused goal in mind and it makes us come together in a number of important ways. The second answer is that we have a lot of field folks like myself who work actively with customers and feed in problems and issues to our engineering teams. There are over a dozen of us worldwide and we bring up requests from all different kinds of customers. We also maintain the public wishlist and actually look at it (my goodness!)

We also go out and actively seek customers input in an open forum. This week, I was proud to have helped host our annual broadcast round table where we outline what our product road map (under non-disclosure) and seek feedback from our customers. It is always a lively discussion and we get a lot of insight from it.

Because of my location (New York area), I mostly focus on large media accounts and I tend to think that what big media companies need generally benefits all users. Things like small edit tools (improving trimming for example) or things like performance with 3rd party I/O are examples.

What makes a genuine good feature request also varies. However, since we have so many different kinds of input coming in, generally if you've got a problem with something, chances are others feel the same pain and consequently we see a trend and work to address it.

I think that our attentiveness to our customers is a key differentiator and what has propelled Adobe forward in the marketplace. If you have to choose between two vendors but one of them listens to your needs, I think you go with the one you trust to meet your needs more effectively.

[James Ewart] "And out of interest what are the chances of introducing a magnetic timeline option within PP? (not kidding)."

Officially: I honestly have no idea. My own (non-Adobe!) opinion is thus: If it hasn't been a runaway success for the majority of NLE users, I don't see it coming in the near future. HOWEVER, if customers request it, Adobe would probably look it.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 5:22:04 pm

[Tony West] "This of course is just the style I would use, he may have been going for the exact look he got. Just different opinions like a lot of this stuff."

I can't imagine poor mic placement is a stylistic choice anyone pines for. ;) I was listening to the interview while I was working so I didn't even notice the bare mic cable flapping around or the odd body position Murch was in. I used to shoot a lot in my younger days and I probably would've made the same adjustments you mentioned Tony. Maybe it's poetic license, maybe it's an unintentional visual grammar error.


[Tony West] "I really prefer to hear from people that have put the program through it's paces."

I agree but unfortunately Murch was at the mercy of the questions being asked. I feel like the interviewer was hoping for a sensationalistic answer that never materialized.


[Tony West] "When he said that Adobe listened to him and "Joel Coen" ah............yeah.........of course they listened to Joel Coen. Does he really think that Apple would not take a call from Joel Coen if he said he wanted to cut his next film with X? They listen to those guy from Focus, why wouldn't they listen to Coen?
That made me smile."


But would they do anything once the call ended? ;) I've talked with people that run decent size facilities in LA and they used to have a direct line to a rep from the Pro Apps team but that ended after X came out. Now they have direct lines to the PPro team. One place, and granted it's a big name, was even able to get a custom bug fix from Adobe to solve a show stopping issue with a third party product.

Saying "Apple doesn't listen at all" is hyperbole but Apple doesn't listen nearly as much as other companies do and they never have. It's just not how they work. Murch's comments about user feedback and 'baby sitting pros' are pretty much the same as what Ron Brinkmann said his experience was when Apple bought Nothing Real (maker of Shake). When Shake was made by Nothing Real there was a lot of interaction with the users and that was key in driving the software development. When Shake was made by Apple there was little interaction with users and Apple's own idea of what Shake should be was key in driving software development.

Apple makes products following its own, internal vision and, basically, users can either take it or leave it. Even with FCP Legend, Apple was making the NLE that it wanted to make and it just happened to jive with many pros. When Apple decided that it wanted to rethink the NLE many people felt that Apple abandoned them, but Apple was never making FCP for them in the first place. It's sorta like when Dylan went electric and many fans were upset and thought he was betraying his acoustic/folk roots. Dylan wasn't making music for anyone but Dylan though and it was up to the audience to decide if they liked it or not.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 6:10:17 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Even with FCP Legend, Apple was making the NLE that it wanted to make and it just happened to jive with many pros. "

This ^^^^^ You and Tony are dead right. "It's not about you."

I still think that iMovie is where the work was being done to make the NLE that Apple REALLY wanted to make. Not to dig up the iMovie Pro argument that I've rejected since Day 1...but Legend always struck me as one of the least Apple-like applications to ever bear the Apple name.

(The others were Shake and Color. OOOPS.)

X, on the other hand, has Apple and nobody BUT Apple written all over it, as has the VERY Apple-like iMovie.

(It's also always worth recalling that Apple only bought Final Cut when Adobe refused to sell Premiere to Apple, to fulfill Steve's vision of a consumer video editing application on every iMac.)

So maybe call iMovie the skunkworks for X. Not exactly the right word, but it's clear in retrospect that significant parts of the core development for X was "secretly" being done in the full light of day in iMovie.

Which is still not for you, me, or anyone else, except to the extent that Apple will do what they do for their own reasons, and you'll either like it or you won't.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 8:49:56 am

Maybe there was a bit of method to that iMovie madness all along.

Steve Martin and Mark Spencer discuss iMovie for iOS as a "front end" to a workflow that ends up in FCP X in this link from day before yesterday.

Why do I think about 80% of the news reports we'll be seeing in the next few years will be done this way? Oh yeah. Because an iPhone or iPad simple pre-edit lets the reporter get a teaser or promo for a breaking event uploaded SUPER FAST to the news providers website - and then the real segment editor can polish for broadcast. It's Perfect for news coverage. Not to mention Twitter, Instagram and all the social media eyeball drivers.

Now even a laptop might be too much kit!







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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 6:25:01 pm

[Andrew Kimery] " It's just not how they work. Murch's comments about user feedback and 'baby sitting pros' are pretty much the same as what Ron Brinkmann said his experience was when Apple bought Nothing Real (maker of Shake). "

As brilliant of a programmer as Randy Ubilos is, the fact is that he never really designed editing software that was intended to be targeted at video editing pros.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 8:44:45 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Apple makes products following its own, internal vision and, basically, users can either take it or leave it. "

I agree to certain point Andrew, this is just a matter of how much and to whom they will listen to right?

I don't think if Joel told them to put tracks back they would, but I don't think they would completely ignore him either. It's semantics right?

I think they have a short list of folks they listen to and if anything they might be snubs about it : )

I'm sure there are folks telling Adobe to get rid of that subscription. They are not going to listen to that hahaha


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:07:53 am

[Tony West] "I don't think if Joel told them to put tracks back they would, but I don't think they would completely ignore him either. It's semantics right?"

If his one request was tracks and they didn't do it wouldn't that be completely ignoring him? ;)

Predominantly following their own path has become very lucrative for Apple so I see no reason for them to change up their MO. Ever since I got into Macs about 15yrs ago it was obvious that they approached things differently than other companies (such as dropping all legacy ports in favor of USB and ditching the floppy drive before there was really a replacement for it), but I never really understand how deeply ingrained it was in Jobs (and therefore in Apple) until I read the Isaacson biography. Every Apple product was like a work of art, a creative expression for Jobs like a song to a song writer. Sure there are confidants and influencers during the dev process, and tweaks/refinements once the product hits the market, but the vision remained Jobs' vision. Sometimes it worked (iPhone) and sometimes not so much (hockey puck mouse) but Apple has always been more about bringing people to them than going to the people.


Return to posts index

Ronny Courtens
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 9:35:42 pm

I've talked with people that run decent size facilities in LA and they used to have a direct line to a rep from the Pro Apps team but that ended after X came out.

To be fair, I have no problem whatsoever contacting people from the FCP X team directly and getting responses. And in one particular case there has been an update to FCP X that included a very specific little feature that was requested by a company I work with. So I have no complaints at all about Apple listening to my clients, and acting to it. Granted, I only work with big companies. But I felt I needed to set this straight to keep the discussion honest.

- Ronny


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 9:52:48 pm

[Ronny Courtens] "But I felt I needed to set this straight to keep the discussion honest."

Thanks. Good to hear.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 11:21:24 pm

[Michael Gissing] "I am not the least bit surprised he favours a track based NLE, simply because he knows that it is a better approach for complicated sound workflows"

For what little it's worth, at IMDb, the "Sound Department" listing is on top, and "Editor" second. Some of the biggest movies he's worked on were sound, rather than picture. Not that he hasn't done plenty of both. He was nominated for picture AND sound editing on Apocalypse (how often has THAT happened???), winning for sound.

In my head anyway, I rank the achievements of Apocalypse in order:

1) Writing/directing (inextricable to me in this case)
2) acting
3)a) "sound montage" 3)b) Carmine Coppola's score...of course integrated into the sound montage, but having a degree of independence
4) cinematography,
5) picture editing.

Visuals at the end of list? Yes. Just for grins, watch it sometime with the picture turned off. His work and Carmine Coppola's score will make you realize the extent of his mastery of every aspect of sound. Then watch another time with the sound turned off. Not even vaguely comparable.

He's done other great stuff obviously, but the only way he could have pulled off Conversation (worthy of a much longer "conversation" on its own) and Apocalypse in particular was if he was willing to try everything, regardless of whether or not it was conventional....

...getting back to my thinking that an awful lot of ALL of this has mainly to do with predisposition, not "technology." If Walter wasn't ready to just "roll with it" he'd have never lasted with Francis, regardless of the editing platform.

That's why I think it's especially interesting to keep inner dynamics front and center for these discussions.

It's a shame that discussion of deep, inner motivations are so often framed as pejorative accusations about the other side of the debate, rather than held up to the light alongside our own.

Migration and settlement are fundamental, equally important human social behaviors. They work themselves into our own choices, too: do we prefer our skills to migrate, or to develop a richness of expertise that constant migration doesn't allow?

Not that these are either/or states of course, any more than X or not-X is binary. Many people here (most people?) use both. I think that some X-philes find this perplexing, if not distressing. If we are more than a monoculture, we must surely be anti-Apple!

Uhm, no. Not that monocultures are bad. It speaks to the richness of expertise of "settlement" rather than "migration." There's an awful lot to be said for getting reinforcement from people who agree with you. It's what most of us covet, most of the time. You can move more quickly when you minimize friction.



To get back to Andrew's point about Fincher and Premiere Pro, I remember reading that pretty much every shot in his recent movies has gone through After Effects at some point in the process. From what I hear, Premiere offers some nifty affinities for just such an eventuality.

One reason why After Effects is so important to Fincher is that he's inclined to change framing in post. For nearly all of his shots iirc, but I'm sure plenty of folks here can correct me.

That's anathema to most directors I'd think, and surely even more cinematographers. The DP has historically been the owner of the frame, and I think David's revolution in this respect is no, I'M the owner of the frame, and I'm not through framing shots until I'm through editing.

Hence, AFTER effects. So, yeah, Premiere is the best tool for him, but as much the best tool for his personality as his his approach to technology....which is also driven by his personality.

And to swing back around to Murch as philosopher, not that he goes as far as they did, but he's quite like the early Russians that way. Maybe the first American to popularize among film nerds the things that Russian film nerds have been talking about for nearly a century. The cutting itself reveals a higher truth that exists separately from story and above it.

Philosophy, truth, ownership, personality -- technology takes a back seat. (CARS!) A seat in the boot. Bound and gagged in the boot. Thrown bound and gagged from the boot at high speeds.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 11:33:59 pm

[Tim Wilson] "To get back to Andrew's point about Fincher and Premiere Pro, I remember reading that pretty much every shot in his recent movies has gone through After Effects at some point in the process. From what I hear, Premiere offers some nifty affinities for just such an eventuality."

The assistant processes a lot of the footage using SynthEyes for tracking and AE for processing. This means a significant number of shots in the editor's timeline are AE comps. The "render and replace" function that's now in Premiere Pro was largely created based on this experience. This directly goes to the topic - direct interaction between editor and developer.

- Oliver

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2014/11/07/gone-girl/
https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2012/01/13/the-girl-with-the-dragon-tatt...

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


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 11:52:51 pm

[Tim Wilson] "Migration and settlement are fundamental, equally important human social behaviors. They work themselves into our own choices, too: do we prefer our skills to migrate, or to develop a richness of expertise that constant migration doesn't allow?"

I have done both over my career. Teen film maker and kit drummer to telecine grader, to film processing, then news camera & sound followed by running a facilities company and producing broadcast documentaries. That was before I was thirty.

Even when I concentrated on sound post production it was totally led by exploring digital audio in the mid eighties. So it was a constant migration through different skill sets and technologies. Although I settled into audio post for 25 years it was always with a view to developing DAWs. The decision to go back to grade & online 10 years ago was motivated by my desire to do a physical migration and move to the tiny state of Tasmania and live on a farm. Down here at the bottom of the world there is almost no other facilities that can do complete picture sound post.

So in a way I think it is possible to both migrate and bring along and develop skill sets, even things like grading that had thirty years in between. I don't know Murch but I do know that as a sound editor I was shocked at some of the crudeness of NLE functionality. So many key strokes or mouse clicks and such annoying overwriting behaviors. I do know what I prefer and am happy to argue for things that I wish would make driving an NLE to do grade & finishing work as elegant as the audio tools that I use.


Return to posts index

Trevor Asquerthian
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 9:23:37 am

Edit manufacturers listening to editors and implementing their requests is not new, but did seem to get out of the habit for a while.

Cmx, gvg, sony, Bosch, ampex, paltex etc were all driven forward by the very few editors that used the (very expensive) product. Avid & Lightworks early days was pushed on by feedback & Softimage DS was developed from the way linear editors were working in A84/Kadenza rooms.

Then came the ´democritization' and price falls (although FCP3-7 certainly had top quality editor input). Coupled with management, rather than editors, making buying decisions.

The increase in noise, and the increase in signal, coupled with the decrease in profit margins and ignorance of 'big' purchasers meant that marketing would want an easy to understand big flashy announcement in April and September. Rather than useful incremental improvements. Adobe have turned this around a bit, although they are announcing features that have been in avid for quite a while then failing to deliver on them properly (script sync & morph cut are two that spring to mind)

I get the feeling that stability becomes an issue with this rate of dev too - lots of places sticking with cc14



Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 12:15:59 pm

Why do we care what he edits on or thinks about other NLE's?

Just asking, because it makes not a bit of difference to me and my work.

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 1:27:35 pm

[Bret Williams] "And you can even do a morph cut in FCP X manually with a few edits and optical flow."

I'm personally not a big fan of the whole thing, since from experience it really only delivers when very specific prerequisites are met, otherwise it's in fact useless imho. Look at any and all demos and it becomes apparent before you even use it yourself why they chose the material they did. In which case I'd rather just look for/shoot decent b-roll (which I find much more appealing than a talking head anyway) and use that. In fact I noticed it being used in a broadcast interview just the other night (from whatever NLE, I don't know) and I found it to be distracting, even if ever so subtly. It just plain looks wrong and is off-putting to me, like a badly done key.

But MotionVFX are on a plugin btw:



(after I already rolled my own long ago with Motion for someone else)

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 6:04:08 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "Why do we care what he edits on or thinks about other NLE's?

Just asking, because it makes not a bit of difference to me and my work.
"


Some people like discussing/learning things even if those things might not be directly related to their own work/workflow. Discussing what other people use is kinda the gist of this Debate forum don't you think?

I assume Focus and the recent OJ doc make a difference to you and your work?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 7:27:45 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Oct 18, 2015 at 7:29:02 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "Why do we care what he edits on or thinks about other NLE's? "

Because that's how you learn about the craft that you are part of. Murch, more so than any other notable editor, is as much philosopher as editor, so there's a value in hearing what he has to say, even if you don't use the same tools or cut feature films.

It's also good to identify trends. For example, I don't get to make the choice of NLEs on most of my projects. So it's good to see what things might influence changes. If everyone were going to FCPX, you'd see more clients deploy FCPX. But, for now that's not the case.

The same is true for checking out which cameras top DPs use and why. Or why mixing engineers use different types of consoles, mics or DAWs.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 5:55:27 am

[Oliver Peters] "The same is true for checking out which cameras top DPs use and why. Or why mixing engineers use different types of consoles, mics or DAWs."

Yeah, but you've got to admit it's different now, Oliver. There used to be a chasm between the top end and the low end in performance. Now the top end is slowly coming down (Panavision to Red/Alexa) while the low end has made AMAZING strides. I was on my weekly Google Hangout with my global production and editing friends and Iain in Australia was demoing his iPhone 6 on a $299 hand-held 3-axis gimbal that he bought last week off Amazon for US $299. The shots were totally stunning. As smooth as Garrett running his original Steadicam at NAB.
Point isn't that the aspirational high end isn't still viable or necessary. It always will be. It's more that the bottom has encroached to a massive degree. A Sennheiser MK2 into an iPod touch via the Apogee converter - produces a way better sound file than what my $2500 Otari half-track could do in the 80s.
Tech marches on and all.

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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 12:48:42 pm

"Yeah, but you've got to admit it's different now, Oliver. There used to be a chasm between the top end and the low end in performance. Now the top end is slowly coming down (Panavision to Red/Alexa) while the low end has made AMAZING strides."

Sure, the cost of ownership for end-to-end prod, post and finishing has come down drastically, but if we're talking about creative editing, it has always been at the low end of the relative cost scale. Moviolas versus a full fledged film lab to complete the process. Low-res Avids versus large online suites. So I don't think that much has changed, merely that cost as a bar to entry has dropped.

But I'm not sure how that ties into the discussion, which has nothing to do with cost. However, there is relevance in listening to folks who are at the top of their game if you are at a different point. Mainly you learn ideas, concepts, techniques and processes that might be applicable to lower cost productions or systems. Even if Walter Murch isn't using X, it has relevance, just like absorbing the workflow Mike Matzdorff set up for "Focus" or the facility-wide X implementations being done by Ronny Courtens and others. And these are definitely not low-cost solutions.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mark Suszko
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 1:07:05 pm

If you take anything away from reading about Murch's workflow, it's all about the meticulous, really meticulous logging, studying, tagging, and setting up of the raw footage, storyboarding shots all over the place. If I had to speculate, I'd say Walter would love the FCPX system for organizing and intake of the footage, because of all the metadata access. It would remind him of the thumbnail boards he used to surround himself with when working the flatbed and even the Avid. He might hate the audio functionality, but he might enjoy logging and pre-comping in FCPX before exporting to another platform for finishing. But from what I know about Avid and Premiere, this metadata organization ability isn't something FCPX dominates alone in the market. The running joke about Avid for years was that it was a mediocre NLE, grafted onto the best filmmaking footage database system. The joke about Premiere was that it was the dongle for getting your copy of AfterEffects. The joke about FCPX is/was that it's for young "bros" editing casual skateboard videos.

Each joke has or had a kernal of truth to it. Once. But jokes can go stale, eventually.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 4:55:23 pm

[Mark Suszko] "If you take anything away from reading about Murch's workflow, it's all about the meticulous, really meticulous logging, studying, tagging, and setting up of the raw footage, storyboarding shots all over the place. If I had to speculate, I'd say Walter would love the FCPX system for organizing and intake of the footage, because of all the metadata access. "

I doubt that it's relevant to him. If metadata inside an NLE was critical to him, he'd never have left Media Composer for FCP.

Here's the thing. The sources of metadata aren't mysterious. Some is generated by cameras, but most of it is collected by production assistants. You'd be astonished how much of it is hand written. An assistant editor then type type types all that information into fields.

But not fields in an NLE. Because you know who has the best database? A database. An actual database.

I don't know what he's using these days, but historically speaking, his favorite database is FileMaker Pro. There's a terrific story about Walter's use of FileMaker Pro on the FileMaker Pro website.

Did I mention FileMaker Pro? Because he used (and may still use) FileMaker Pro. So take a look at the story about Walter using FileMaker Pro at the FileMaker website.

There's another coupla takeaways for you from Walter's story, going back to Cold Mountain with FCP, The English Patient with Avid Film Composer, and many years before that with film:

1) Need a database? Use a database.

2) Gonna use a database to manage metadata? You need assistance from assistants for both collecting the metadata and managing it.

3) Not using databases and (not "or," but "AND") assistants? Nobody is more articulate than Walter about the inner truths of Editing than Walter, but vast swaths of his actual experience editing may not be as applicable to you as you thought.

But then again, the applicability of various analogies and examples has never slowed us down before. LOL No reason to start now.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 6:33:36 pm

[Tim Wilson] "I don't know what he's using these days, but historically speaking, his favorite database is FileMaker Pro. There's a terrific story about Walter's use of FileMaker Pro on the FileMaker Pro website."

He still does. It provides a constant across various editing platforms, just like the scene wall (note cards).

[Tim Wilson] "1) Need a database? Use a database."

I interview a lot of film editors for some of the stories I write and a lot of them have many different ways of organizing material as they go from raw footage to rough cuts to finished cuts. In some cases X's or Avid's bin metadata is very useful and in other cases, it's completely unused. It really gets down to personal preferences.

The Coens edit electronically the same way they edited (as a two-person team) on flatbeds. Murch uses tracks very heavily as a method to pre-edit audio, but also as a form of visual organization of the material (see any of the screen grabs of his timelines). Some editors swear by Avid's script integration (ScriptSync) and others prefer to create a string-out of every dialogue line from every take in scene order first before they edit.

It gets down to preferences, so whether or not X has superior database tools (which I don't believe it does for feature film editing) is irrelevant, if that doesn't mesh with the editor's style.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 10:46:56 pm

[Oliver Peters] "It gets down to preferences, so whether or not X has superior database tools (which I don't believe it does for feature film editing) is irrelevant, if that doesn't mesh with the editor's style."

Quite so, which is why I've been pushing so hard on the idea that choices are made for personal reasons at least as much as technology reasons, and frankly, the reason why one tech choice is more compelling than another is probably mostly personal. Entirely personal? Maybe.

But my point was about takeaways from Walter's specific example, even if I stated it more broadly than I intended. (Who? ME?)

My point about Walter is that an NLE's database approach is irrelevant to him. He doesn't use them, for exactly the reasons you mention, to which I'll add that no matter how good a bin is for METAdata, index cards probably work better for tracking DATA. :-) At least for Walter.

I'm glad to hear that he still uses index cards and FileMaker. The other thing I'd been thinking about this is that it means his workflow isn't affected by things as trivial as NLEs. Honestly, that's the least interesting part of the process. LOL

Instead, he has a team that's on top of what he wants from FileMaker and index cards or what have you, and almost none of those people experience much of a blip as he moves from one editing platform to another. I'd think that their input and output process hasn't changed all that much in decades, right?

Once Walter is editing using the blink of his eye in his Google Glasses, I bet he's still going to want to see index cards on the HUD of his self-driving Tesla.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 10:58:56 pm

[Tim Wilson] "index cards probably work better for tracking DATA. :-) At least for Walter."

Actually this is a very common practice for many editors - not just Walter. You can shuffle around the index cards and see the affect of these changes on the story flow in a far better fashion than first doing the manipulation of those scenes within the NLE. It's a form of shorthand. Walter's approach is more detailed than that of many others, but the use of a scene wall with index cards is a widespread practice among film editors.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 11:16:14 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Actually this is a very common practice for many editors - not just Walter. You can shuffle around the index cards and see the affect of these changes on the story flow in a far better fashion than first doing the manipulation of those scenes within the NLE. It's a form of shorthand. Walter's approach is more detailed than that of many others, but the use of a scene wall with index cards is a widespread practice among film editors."

Not just editors, but writers too. Filling a wall with notecards and moving them around at will is a great way to get an overview of a story structure. It also enables collaboration at this level in a much more fluid and interactive way than any software I'm aware of.

One of my favorite past clients, IDEO is legendary for their use of post-it notes and 4'x8' foam core panels to quickly document and iterate ideas. No matter how big your monitor is, it can't compete with 4'x8' foam core. Metadata is hard to share if it's kept in a proprietary database and hidden on a tiny screen. Murch's system works well for him for the same reason IDEO's works well for their teams.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 7:19:49 pm

[Mark Suszko] " The running joke about Avid for years was that it was a mediocre NLE, grafted onto the best filmmaking footage database system. The joke about Premiere was that it was the dongle for getting your copy of AfterEffects. The joke about FCPX is/was that it's for young "bros" editing casual skateboard videos."

Don't forgot the running joke about FCP Legend which was that it's what you settled for if you couldn't afford a real NLE like Avid.


[Tim Wilson] "Here's the thing. The sources of metadata aren't mysterious. Some is generated by cameras, but most of it is collected by production assistants. You'd be astonished how much of it is hand written. An assistant editor then type type types all that information into fields."

Just to riff on this, the system with the metadata also has to be available (readable and/or modifiable) to a network of people that may or may not be in the same physical location as you. Having a lot of metadata inside the NLE (regardless of which NLE it is) is great for the editor, but what about the assistant editors? The producers? The director? The VFX team in another city? This is where the need for real time collaborative tools start coming into play and somethings are just easier to do in an actual database vs an NLE.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 9:42:09 pm
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Oct 19, 2015 at 9:47:28 pm

I can't let this one go by Tim.

Nobody was and is a bigger fan of FileMaker Pro then I have been for 20 years. All my scripts, production notes, schedules and call sheets were done in it.

Those FMPro scripts printed as checklists and scene notes were how I made sense of my edits in post.

And now I haven't TOUCHED it during editing in the 4 years I've been using X.

The database in X blows it away for visual tracking of footage. BLOWS it away.

What I can do in 5 seconds in X to tag a range would have consumed 10 minutes in FMPro if I had used still picons (which I used to do) to represent scenes. Live footage? A non-starter.

Used properly - X IS a database. One for video content.

Period.

I can't speak for Mr Murch having only met and interacted with him twice briefly, but I suspect that for exclusively the things he did in FileMaker Pro for project organization if the capabilities built into X were ever demonstrated to him competently, it would delight him. Maybe it has and other aspects of the system don't mesh with his approach - but it's not because the construct isn't brilliant for an organized editing brain - because it is. Period. That's opinion and speculation only. But based on how much I loved the FMPro capabilities - and how much MORE useful the X system is than that for managing video content in an edit session.

My 2 cents.

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

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 8:40:08 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "Why do we care what he edits on or thinks about other NLE's? "

my God - the adherents on this forum sometimes.

http://www.amazon.com/Walter-Murch/e/B000APSYY4

in the blink of an eye is one of the more ludicrously interesting books you could ever read as an editor. Or at least I found it so - Murch found philosophy in editing. he's a terrifyingly intelligent person. He has a brain roughly the size of a cow. And he never show boats it. I'd listen to Walter Murch reading out the phonebook.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 10:38:24 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "in the blink of an eye is one of the more ludicrously interesting books you could ever read as an editor."

I think the point that you and Oliver are making about him as a philosopher is on the money. We talk all the time here about calcification. Well, Walter is one of the smallest handful of guys who's willing to try anything. Every project gets evaluated in the context of every tool.

The only other guy in this category is Fincher, who's admittedly not as publicly philosophical about such things. He moved from Final Cut to Premiere, but the danger in invoking both him and Murch to ratify one's own choices -- "See? I was right! FCPX really IS straight legit for high-level film work" -- is yes, true, but the thing that neither Walter nor Fincher feels is legit is sticking with the same thing just because it worked last time.

That's a luxury that most of us don't have. We just don't. And if we do, THAT's the lesson to take away from both Murch and Fincher -- whatever we're using today, we're NOT going to be using in a few years. Not because the old thing stopped working, but because there's something new that works better.

The X-philes will point to that and say "Woo-hoo! Tolja so," and miss the point. The point is that somebody like Fincher isn't sticking with it -- not necessarily because of any deficiencies, but because of Premiere's advantages. AS AN EXAMPLE. Not saying that Premiere is better for you...

...but if we're going to talk about lessons to learn from Walter or David or anyone else, let's be clear on the lessons. Even if you've adapted to X or anything else, this step in your development isn't complete until you adapt to the next thing.

Never forget: the first NLE that Walter "legitimized" was Avid Film Composer. The NEXT one that he legitimizes has perhaps not been invented yet.

So c'mon kids! Don't settle on X forever! Follow the example of the much more flexible OLD GUY and keep looking for the NEXT thing. LOL


++++++

Which again, might not be a luxury for you, or more important, might not seem fun.

As has been noted here many times, X-philes tend to talk about non-X-ers as having personality deficiencies of some sort (set in their ways, don't get it, etc) without acknowledging that for an equal number of people, chasing the next new thing is every bit as deficient, and arguably more inefficient.


+++++++

The last thing I'll note about caring about what other people do: it's human. It's built into us since the days when we first began forming tribes. Just as wise elders look for the next new thing (or place to live, or, yes, tool to use), the fact is that people who follow the lead of communal wisdom have traditionally been the ones to live to tell the tale.

After all, the wise elder in question might be Steve Jobs or Tim Cook, neither of whom were/are all that old, but elders nonetheless.

Variations abound, and innovation becomes tradition, and the cycle continues -- but the primary thrust of the human social evolutionary imperative has been written into our genes for 3 million years.


+++++++

Where's "3 million" coming from? I'm picking Australopithecus afarensis as my starting point, just because that's the oldest one whose name I can remember.

Even if your worldview leads you to some Babylon-ish starting point with no room for biological evolution, the social evolutionary imperative is the same. Your mileage may vary, but the drive doesn't.


+++++++


My favorite story along these lines, as many of my favorite stories are, is about my wife. A truly rock and roll girl, she skipped her prom to go see Led Zeppelin on the 77 Tour of the Americas. Best decision of her life I think. Marrying me is maybe third or fourth on the list, but this is why marrying her is #1 on mine.

She had no respect at all for anyone whose attachment to Zeppelin was for Robert Plant. She was all about Jimmy Page from the instant she heard him in 1969. But when it came time to choose a guitar for herself, she chose the Les Paul Junior that Pete Townshend first played on Who's Next in 1971. (He still has it, btw.)

But she didn't choose it because Pete played it, per se.

Jimmy was a wizard who bent space and time to his will, but Pete spoke to the simultaneous isolation and quest for insight that drove her too. Jimmy was the GUITARIST she admired more, but even more than sharing Pete's inner demons and angels, at the end of the day, she responded to the roar that Pete was uniquely making, and wanted to likewise roar.

Not that another guitar couldn't make a proper racket of course. Certainly not that this was the only guitar Pete played. It wasn't even his primary guitar. But she started with the SOUND she was looking for, spent time with her fingers on the frets of a lot of different guitars, and kept coming back to the Gibsons.

She didn't want a lot of folderol, so she went with the Junior for the same reason Pete did: one pickup, so stop talking, stay out of my way, I'm spending my time focused on what I'm playing instead of finessing the gear, and I'm turning it the fug up.


+++++++


And THAT's why we care what Walter says. That's why we read stories about editors or VFX artists at the COW or watch behind the scenes featurettes. We want to explore the passions that drive the masters, to see what their quest can tell us about our own.

We eventually still have to put our own fingers on the frets, but the roots of this drive are in a part of our humanity that existed millions of years before our race formed its first words.


+++++++


(And if Bill or anyone else is still reading this far, I have a LOT more to say about guitars as analogues to choosing NLEs, and arguments about guitars being a thousand times hotter than anything here, maybe hotter than anything you can even imagine. LOL

Politics? Religion? Feh. Ask a roomful of guitarists about the opening chord of "A Hard Day's Night" and watch the dugouts empty.)


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 11:06:15 pm

I enjoyed your epic tome there Tim...

In response to Scott's question, I'd like to add... By paying attention to highly successful individuals, especially those in our own industry, same sector or not, we increase our knowledge and understanding, and though there is no guarantee, we hopefully improve our chances for greater success. The book, The Habits of Highly Succesful People comes to mind...

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

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 12:00:55 am

[Tim Wilson] "The only other guy in this category is Fincher, who's admittedly not as publicly philosophical about such things. He moved from Final Cut to Premiere, but the danger in invoking both him and Murch to ratify one's own choices -- "See? I was right! FCPX really IS straight legit for high-level film work" -- is yes, true, but the thing that neither Walter nor Fincher feels is legit is sticking with the same thing just because it worked last time."

Fincher was also on the early side of using digital cameras. I believe Zodiac in 2007 was his first time using the Viper. At a panel discussion I was at a few years ago one of the panelists was an AE that has worked on a number of Fincher's films and he talked about how the workflow is always evolving as new tech comes out. Going back to one of your points, PPro for Fincher (and Murch) certainly won't be the last NLE they use.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 5:22:42 am

Yeah,

The changes in NLEs will affect a few of us for better or worse.

I'm still convinced the actual damage being done to ALL of us is actually the changing landscape of MONEY flow that Adobe has elected (their legal option) to be an early leader in.

In Rock and Roll, Saul Zance famously royally screwed John Fogerty of Creedence Clearwater Revival by diverting his attention from the money play while keeping the discussion on the bands personnel dynamics - so much so that after the dust settled Fogerty couldn't even publicaly preform the many huge hit songs he had written for decades without gaulingly crawling to his enemy for permission.

Oddly, I was reading this expose of how the modern "for profit" private prison industry soaks inmates for massively overpriced phone calls. Imagine my surprise when I ran across this quote:

Reference: Inside the Shadowy Business of Prison Phone Calls

An IBTimes investigation into the secretive world of selling phone calls to inmates and their families.
ERIC MARKOWITZ

(Excerpt from the long article)

How Their Business Is Changing
Though some may consider it an unsavory business, the prison technology industry appears to be an attractive bet for investors.
In 2013, Abry Partners of Boston bought a major stake in Securus. One of the private equity group’s core values is to invest in high-growth businesses that have “predictable, recurring revenues -- such as subscription-like businesses with high customer retention rates.”
-------
Let's be clear here. I am NOT in any way saying that subscription is bad per se, and definitely not that any particular company is necessarily bad for employing it. There are plenty of companies that deploy it in a way that also respects customers wants and needs. I AM saying that subscription is a rapidly growing corporate "thing" that many consider a financial power play designed to shift economic leverage away from consumers and to the businesses that make it mandatory. And I find that unacceptable.

While we debate the edit functions - the executives are delighted. Their real play is sticky subscription lock in. Period. Could they provide options? Sure. Will they? Don't hold your breath. The model isn't about the product. It's about the subscription model period.

Others will surely disagree and find nothing wrong with it.
But just like the music industry history is rife with business people screwing artists. There ARE in my opinions lessons there to take as we move forward in the creative arts.

FWIW.

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

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 8:02:14 am

[Bill Davis] "I'm still convinced the actual damage being done to ALL of us is actually the changing landscape of MONEY flow that Adobe has elected (their legal option) to be an early leader in. "


I'm just quoting you for context Bill, but I'm not meaning to single you out because many people have said the similar things.

While picking on Adobe's decision to go subscription-only is en vogue I rarely see a broader discussion about possibly why Adobe went the route it did or even an acknowledgment of the changing face of software monetization in general (increasing use of subscriptions, ad supported and/or freemium business models). Apple and Blackmagic get a lot of love these days in part because they give away/practically give away fully functioning software that's tied to their hardware. Everyone loves 'free', right? But what's the long term effect of treating professional software like an add-on?

Could devaluation of software make it harder for software companies to charge a profitable price for their wares? Might they then have to explore other business models to make ends meet? Could hardware companies offering software at everyday low prices actually be detrimental in the long term even though they are so attractive in the short term?

Let's say the whole subscription-only thing fails, Adobe's stock crashes and AJA ends up buying them and tries to mirror Blackmagic. So now perpetual licenses of Adobe software are basically free yet the catch is the software isn't fully functional unless you have an piece of AJA hardware. Oh joy. So now I'm compelled to buy AJA hardware to get Premiere to work and compelled to buy BM hardware to get Resolve to work. What could possibly go wrong? Mmmm... I'm already getting flashbacks to the mid 2000's where it was pretty much one NLE per computer due to headaches caused by hardware/driver conflicts.

Are there potential pitfalls with Adobe's business model? Sure. There are also potential pitfalls with Apple's and Blackmagic's business model too.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 6:51:24 pm

[Bill Davis] "Let's be clear here. I am NOT in any way saying that subscription is bad per se, and definitely not that any particular company is necessarily bad for employing it. There are plenty of companies that deploy it in a way that also respects customers wants and needs. I AM saying that subscription is a rapidly growing corporate "thing" that many consider a financial power play designed to shift economic leverage away from consumers and to the businesses that make it mandatory. And I find that unacceptable.

While we debate the edit functions - the executives are delighted. Their real play is sticky subscription lock in. Period. Could they provide options? Sure. Will they? Don't hold your breath. The model isn't about the product. It's about the subscription model period.

Others will surely disagree and find nothing wrong with it.
But just like the music industry history is rife with business people screwing artists. There ARE in my opinions lessons there to take as we move forward in the creative arts. "



Well said, Bill!

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 6:47:43 pm

[Tim Wilson] "Politics? Religion? Feh. Ask a roomful of guitarists about the opening chord of "A Hard Day's Night" and watch the dugouts empty.)"


Got that covered ;)






_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 10:19:55 pm

[David Lawrence] "Got that covered ;)"

Awesome!

But not even close to a consensus answer. LOL

This got me thinking about the dueling scholars and guitarists who've written about that note, savaging other people's research, the forensic science involved...but I don't think that anyone has written a book about the controversy yet. I've started work on a little essay about it, but as it's turning into a big essay, I really may yet turn it into a book.


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 2:30:52 pm

Lennon....FCPX....

"I'm an artist/editor, you give me a tuba/Sony Vegas, I'll bring you something out of it..."

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 5:56:03 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "my God - the adherents on this forum sometimes. "

My sentiments exactly, but not directed at Scott in this case. Yep looking' at you, AG...and DRW, and the rest of the old men in the balcony yelling at the Muppets. (NB: I'm almost an old man myself, so let's not get hung up on the age thing.)

Murch's book is a great read. Lots of very wise and thoughtful things to say about the art and craft of editing.
Not so much to say about Avid vs. FCP7 or tracks vs. the alleged horrors of FCP X.

Trying to frame his book or his talks as evidence of the failings of X is absurd. He's a great editor. Not a platform whore.

As far as his complex audio mixes in the editing process...that's his thing. He's comfortable working with audio in a traditional tracks structure. He finds Avid's 24 track limit to be...well, limiting. On the other hand, he's never worked in X, either in audio or video. So what can we infer from this? Just that he's never worked in X and so has no real basis to judge the good or bad of the so-called "trackless" methodology.

Someone earlier (Andrew?) pointed out that the 99 (or whatever) tracks available in FCP Legacy, which Murch used so effectively for his complex audio mixes, disappeared in X. True. The tracks disappeared. Did the ability to do complex mixes also disappear in X? Says who? Why would anyone say that? Seriously? Complex mixes are not possible in X? Nonsense. Complex multi-track mixes are not possible, duh, because no tracks, in the conventional sense. Nevertheless, I'm certain if Walter Murch decided to learn FCPX, he'd do the same kind of complex mixes. Because that's what he does.

Honestly, your guys and your track fetish are really getting tiresome. Even in a debate forum.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 6:46:09 am

[Jeff Markgraf] "Nevertheless, I'm certain if Walter Murch decided to learn FCPX, he'd do the same kind of complex mixes. Because that's what he does. "

Maybe or maybe he'd find X not to his liking and he'd decide not to use it because something else suits his personal needs/wants better. That's basically what happened with Avid. It's not that he can't edit in Avid it's just he finds it easier to edit how he likes in FCP Legend and now PPro (and possibly X down the road). Reasons like these aren't indicative of anything other than personal workflow preferences.


Return to posts index

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 7:15:09 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Reasons like these aren't indicative of anything other than personal workflow preferences."

Exactly. Hence my frustration with those in this thread who are essentially putting words in Murch's mouth. It would be just fine with me if Murch someday gives X a serious spin and ends up hating it. But he's done nothing of the sort at this point. And the number of posts this thread suggesting Murch doesn't care for X or "trackless" audio (or video, for that matter), even finding it unsuitable for professional work, is disheartening. I though we'd moved beyond this silliness.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 12:43:38 am

Who was it that reminded us that there is no paper in the Star Trek universe?

And things are always done the way they're done ... Right up until they're not. Such is life.

Just last month I had a producer disappear for an hour and come back with a white board covered with color printouts of the storyboard PDFs that he set up in the edit suite. It was nice. But at lunch we were talking about a scene order issue and I had my laptop along, so I fired up X and my Storyboards keyword collection and there it was. All the storyboard PDFs laid out in order. Functionally the same thing hanging on the wall back in the studio. If I'd imported them into Keynote or even just did a quick stringout in X we could have played with scene order all day long. Could have sorted on an iPad or who knows, maybe on my iWatch someday - so I wouldn't have to interrupt our meal. When we got back we went back to using the physical thing, cuz why not?

Thing is without the wall version, reference stops when you aren't at the wall. You might like that - or not.

To each their own.

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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 12:51:12 am

[Bill Davis] "so I fired up X and my Storyboards keyword collection and there it was. All the storyboard PDFs laid out in order. "

Nice trick, but try that with 150 cards (or more) and 5 or 6 people in the room. ;-)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:28:43 am

[Bill Davis] "And now I haven't TOUCHED it during editing in the 4 years I've been using X."

How often do you work as part of a large post team though? If metadata has to be generated, shared, read and modified by a dozen (or dozens) of people (whom may or may not all be in the same physical location) then that changes the playing field. When I'm working as a solo flyer I can mostly keep things local and it's rarely a problem. If I'm working with a group where multiple people are creating, sharing, and viewing info (maybe locally, maybe remotely) then I have to think about a collaborative workflow. Different solution to a different problem.

Murch kinda touched on this in the interview where it sound liked he was willing to use PPro on "Tomorrowland" but given the level of collaboration that "Tomorrowland" would require he didn't think he could find enough collaborators that had both the workflow experience and the PPro experience required to do the job.


[David Lawrence] "One of my favorite past clients, IDEO is legendary for their use of post-it notes and 4'x8' foam core panels to quickly document and iterate ideas. No matter how big your monitor is, it can't compete with 4'x8' foam core. Metadata is hard to share if it's kept in a proprietary database and hidden on a tiny screen. Murch's system works well for him for the same reason IDEO's works well for their teams.
"


This, this, this 1000x this!

If there is a collaborative team in the same office I can't think of anything more effective than a wall of cards if you are trying to get a birds-eye view of a big project. Anyone can access it, anyone can modify it and all the cards can be viewed at once (no scrolling required). I hate the process of making cards because my handwriting is horrible but it's such an effective, easy way to consolidate an entire story.

And to be honest there's just something nice about NOT having to stare at another screen for once.


[Bill Davis] "When we got back we went back to using the physical thing, cuz why not? "

Cuz it's more comfortable than two grown me sitting shoulder to shoulder starring at a 13" laptop screen for an extended period of time? ;)

I've tried different outlining apps, various organization methods in my NLE, even a free, web-based app from Amazon that creates a virtual cork board with cards, but in a group setting I haven't found anything as quick, inexpensive, easy to use and ergonomic as a board with cards. Maybe when we finally get those paper thin, roll-up touch screen monitors that can be hung like a poster the board & card days will be over.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 8:22:47 am

Oh that's just silly, Andrew. I can attach my ASUS USB second screen - tell X to display the event browser on it, and bingo - 3 or 4 stakeholders can collaborate just fine. Need more? A pico projector can put it on the wall for the whole room. And unlike cards tacked to a wall - it SAVES every arrangement in memory with instant undo. I'm all for tactile, but we moved from manual typewriters to word processors for a reason. Efficiency. I like dabbling in retro tech as much as the next guy - and typically carry a Moleskien reporter notebook into interviews in case the tech fails - but cards on the wall is just way too inefficient after years where an auto save history has saved my butt so many times. Something pinned cards just don't feature.

Oh wait, Maybe someone can be assigned to snap cel phone photos of the cards tacked to the wall with every change?

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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 8:42:28 am

[Bill Davis] "Oh that's just silly, Andrew. I can attach my ASUS USB second screen - tell X to display the event browser on it, and bingo - 3 or 4 stakeholders can collaborate just fine. Need more? A pico projector can put it on the wall for the whole room. And unlike cards tacked to a wall - it SAVES every arrangement in memory with instant undo. I'm all for tactile, but we moved from manual typewriters to word processors for a reason. Efficiency. I like dabbling in retro tech as much as the next guy - and typically carry a Moleskien reporter notebook into interviews in case the tech fails - but cards on the wall is just way too inefficient after years where an auto save history has saved my butt so many times. Something pinned cards just don't feature.

Oh wait, Maybe someone can be assigned to snap cel phone photos of the cards tacked to the wall with every change?
"


You clearly haven't worked on large collaborative projects - you know it is possible that FCPX may not be the future for EVERY type of workflow scenario


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 9:15:46 am

Nope. And neither has 95% of the working editors on the planet. I thought everyone was quite aware of my crusade not to let the conversation here in "or not" focus exclusively on the needs of the top sliver of the industry. When a tool like Legacy or X or Premiere Pro works for a movie OR a YouTube video great. But when it developes ONLY by listening to the editors working as a part of 30 person teams - that kinda sucks too. What David Fincher needs may or may not be what the 10,000 editors working closest to his geographic location also need. I don't want him not to have the tools he needs - but I'm pretty sure somebody will be right there to take care of him. Wait. I KNOW that's true cuz Dennis just told us Adobe Corporate is all over it! So he and Mr. Murch are good to go! Now I can spare some time to think about who's looking out for the young woman, editing for fun since she was 16, and just now at 25 assigned to edit a business video for her boss. She's stoked to move to 4K and somebody's got to have her back too. ; )

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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 10:05:53 am

[Bill Davis] "ope. And neither has 95% of the working editors on the planet. I thought everyone was quite aware of my crusade not to let the conversation here in "or not" focus exclusively on the needs of the top sliver of the industry. When a tool like Legacy or X or Premiere Pro works for a movie OR a YouTube video great. But when it developes ONLY by listening to the editors working as a part of 30 person teams - that kinda sucks too. "

Adobe listening to the needs of teams hasn't been to the detriment of Premiere Pro, it actually improves it for everyone - including the "95%" of Editors who don't work in teams.


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 10:17:12 am

I think you may be missing the larger point which is that we're actively listening (easy to do) and responding (much harder to do) to a broad cross section of users. Simply put it isn't Fincher and the Coens. Nor is it solely larger media companies (what I tend to focus on). We have demonstrated that for several years now and I think most people would acknowledge that.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 1:32:59 pm

[Bill Davis] "What David Fincher needs may or may not be what the 10,000 editors working closest to his geographic location also need"

Except that better trimming tools and features like "render and replace" DO benefit EVERY editor that uses the software. In many cases feature film editors function as the "canary in the coal mine".

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 1:51:37 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Except that better trimming tools and features like "render and replace" DO benefit EVERY editor that uses the software. In many cases feature film editors function as the "canary in the coal mine"."

I think in some cases, feature film editors might be more the "squeaky wheels that get the grease."

Good features always lead to more feature requests. Render and replace has really been needed since dynamic link was introduced. Gone Girl wasn't the first project where someone realized it'd be great if those comps were real, usable, manageable media. The rest of us had just been jumping through hoops with manual renders and project links.

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

vashi nedomansky
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 2:35:31 am

I think feature film editors working long days for over a year give a very realistic long term case study on how to best improve any NLE. The daily issues that pop up, no matter how minor, are compounded by the sheer fact that they must be addressed so many times in one day that you want to lose your shit.

3 years ago I was hired to work on Gone Girl. I trained and supervised editor Kirk Baxter and AE Tyler Nelson as they transitioned into Premiere Pro from FCP7. As a feature film editor myself, I've cut features on AVID, FCP7 and Premiere Pro and the process went very smoothly as the problems and limitations in FCP7 were the same I had gone through so many times. I had 3 weeks to share my experiences with Fincher's team but the mechanical editing transition was accomplished in the first 3 days. Their biggest questions were: how do I mark in, out, insert, overwrite, delete, ripple delete, trim. Those were the only core essentials they needed to physically edit and plow forward.

After over a year of editing, The latest version of Premiere Pro CC carries probably 70+ new features that were requested directly by Fincher's post team. They were not hypothetical features that a company thinks editors will want but rather critical and essential needs that must be addressed and refined to optimize a workflow. Anyone using PP has the demanding requests of those editors and the responsive reactions by Adobe to thank.

The tools are all so similar today that any platform will allow for functional editorial. The biggest difference in my view is making the changes that editors actually require and ask for. The smallest changes can bolster efficiency and productivity allowing more time for the creative process to flourish.

I feel Adobe is very selective to the projects they jump on board so they can hone in to fill the gaps to their existing functionality. Over the last 6 months I've worked on Deadpool in the same capacity. The 6 person edit team led by Julian Clarke (District 9, Oblivion) were all AVID based editors and never worked on Premiere Pro. I trained them all and optimized their workflow so that the transition was as painless as possible. Once I customized Julian's keyboard shortcuts and workspaces, he was editing naturally and smoothly in 3 days much like Baxter. I translated their AVID workflow into something that functioned the same inside another NLE but the editing mechanics remained the same.

I wasn't teaching editing. I was sharing my knowledge of what works for me and how to translate AVID to PP. I learned as much as I taught because I was asked how to reverse engineer their previous workflows and make it work in PP. I'm sure that the next versions of PP will incorporate their requests for features needed at the highest level so that technology is made invisible and the creative can be the main focus.

Sorry for rambling! Just wanted to chime in with my first hand thoughts and experiences. Bottom line...I think it's best when editors can give direct feedback and see it implemented in a reasonable time frame. Like during the project you are working on!

Vashi Nedomansky
Film Editor
vashivisuals.com
@vashikoo


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 3:19:40 am

Nice post Vashi! And don't be even slightly concerned you were rambling, your real life accounts are welcome here where conjecture typically rules the day.

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

Herb Sevush
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 12:19:50 pm

Vashi -

Thank you for that informative post.

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:19:09 pm

[Bill Davis] "Nope. And neither has 95% of the working editors on the planet. I thought everyone was quite aware of my crusade not to let the conversation here in "or not" focus exclusively on the needs of the top sliver of the industry. "

Odd how the 'the conversation is too narrowly focused to be relevant' card doesn't seem to get played when we are talking about how can FCP X serve the needs of the top sliver of the industry.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 9:00:28 am

[Bill Davis] "Oh wait, Maybe someone can be assigned to snap cel phone photos of the cards tacked to the wall with every change?"

Actually, that's exactly what they do at IDEO. Cellphone photos of the 4'x8' boards emailed to team members after a session. I've done many edit sessions from emailed board photos which I would print out and tape to my wall. Why print them out? Because it's so much easier than scrolling a screen! You may laugh but your USB second screen will never match what's possible for group collaboration with wall space as big as 24'x 8' or more.

BTW, everyone there uses a laptop too, but collaborative content and process happens on Post-Its on the wall first. Sometimes the best tools are the simplest tools.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 9:27:29 am

No doubt some things benefit from many collaborative minds. So if that's your space, embrace it!

But not always.

There's an old saying that just popped to mind... "If it takes nine months for one woman to have a baby - how long will it take if you assign three?"

We expect most written work to arrive needing colaborative help and editing - but expect plays and poems to arrive with a singular voice.

Neither rules in my book.

FWIW.

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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 10:08:16 am

[Bill Davis] "No doubt some things benefit from many collaborative minds. So if that's your space, embrace it!
"


"Some things" = Almost all of the Visual Entertainment Industry


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 4:23:46 pm

The traditional media sure.

But you and I have probably "consumed" as much single source creative content as we have collaborative - if you accept that every email, tweet, snapchat and vine consumed was created largely by a single brain.

It's easier to make the collaborative rule stick if you start out being able to define and restrict "entertainment" in the narrow way you've been traditionally conditioned.

Heck, I just racked up another few seconds of you and a lot of others spending time consuming MY "creative content" right here.

; )

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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:03:14 pm

[Bill Davis] "The traditional media sure.

But you and I have probably "consumed" as much single source creative content as we have collaborative - if you accept that every email, tweet, snapchat and vine consumed was created largely by a single brain.

It's easier to make the collaborative rule stick if you start out being able to define and restrict "entertainment" in the narrow way you've been traditionally conditioned.

Heck, I just racked up another few seconds of you and a lot of others spending time consuming MY "creative content" right here."


Quite some distance from your original point I think


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:43:32 pm

Well - discussions that keep to a single rigid "track" have never been a hallmark of THIS forum.

Huh, now that you bring it up - I wonder why?

; )

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

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:13:18 pm

[Bill Davis] "Oh that's just silly, Andrew. "

What's silly about something that's inexpensive, effective and easy to use? Because it doesn't require electricity or a shiny new gadget?

Like I said in my previous post, I've tried a number of different technologies for reasons like you've mentioned but they've all failed to displace cards on a wall as a viable option for reasons I, and others, have mentioned. Oh no, choices. The horror.


Return to posts index

Mark Suszko
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:30:27 pm

The Murches, Coens, Finchers... they serve the same purpose in NLE development that NASCAR and INDYcar racing serve in stimulating developments and tech advances in the auto industry. WHat is invented to get around the track faster or beat a restriction with an innovation, eventually winds up in some form on the family car. So keeping an eye on what they do and what they like and use, is useful in a broad sense to anyone with a stake in the industry.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 5:57:28 pm

[Mark Suszko] "The Murches, Coens, Finchers... they serve the same purpose in NLE development that NASCAR and INDYcar racing serve in stimulating developments and tech advances in the auto industry. WHat is invented to get around the track faster or beat a restriction with an innovation, eventually winds up in some form on the family car. So keeping an eye on what they do and what they like and use, is useful in a broad sense to anyone with a stake in the industry."

That's the classic, top-down model for innovation. The new, bottom-up model suggests that the Murch/Coen/Fincher NASCAR drivers of the world are benefiting from new family car designs.

I don't think innovation only goes one way anymore.

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

Tim Wilson
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 4:27:51 am

[Walter Soyka] "The new, bottom-up model suggests that the Murch/Coen/Fincher NASCAR drivers of the world are benefiting from new family car designs.

I don't think innovation only goes one way anymore."


I could be wrong, but I think that the race-car proving ground model is largely gone. Now, racing is mostly marketing to a passionate, attentive audience with money to spend. I'm more of a funny car guy, but racing is fine by me.





So I'm thinking about virtually every improvement in cars in the last few years that means anything to me or my loved ones...or to the many many people I hate LOL...and I'm coming up with things like backup cameras and Bluetooth.

Do NASCAR drivers use Bluetooth? If so, they surely don't need sat nav. "Left turn approaching. Left turn approaching. Left turn approaching."

They don't need automatic parallel parking either. Frankly, I don't NEED my car to park itself for me, but have you done it? It's like a mini-Disneyland. I use it even when I don't have to because it makes me giddy.

But it's also cool tech, based on simple math. The car knows where the curb is, knows what its own turning radius is, knows how to operate the accelerator and brakes -- once you know the very few numbers to plug into the very few formulas, even a chimp could do the calculations. This is what smart cars SHOULD be doing for us: simple math and low-level adjustments.

Parallel parking is almost a distraction from the lifesaving innovation that comes from applying this principle of "my car has eyes and hands and feet and can do math." Cars stopping themselves when they're backing up if they sense an object in the way, bringing themselves back into lanes, etc.

Anyway, you get the gist. The most innovative work that car companies are doing is no longer in the production vehicles and race cars. It's going straight into driveways.


(BTW, have any of y'all seen the Tesla autopilot? Holy cow. Outta the way, Google. Timmy like!)


If we're really going to take yet another car analogy a little further, let's do it. Maybe we can say that X is the example of innovation that can only occur once you start ignoring the needs of the high-performance driver.

Not that it's an either-or in real life as applied to NLEs, but for Apple, I think it still comes back around to the idea of low-hanging fruit.

Apple will gladly take every customer they can get, provided that that customer doesn't want anything out of Apple beyond what the product and AppleCare can provide.

That is, when Apple ignores pros who could benefit from the kind of direct help that Apple USED to provide, and that dozens of companies represented in Creative COW still DO provide every single day, in every segment of our business...

...I don't think Apple ignores video and film pros more than it ignores anyone else. I think they ignore us all equally. We're ALL low hanging fruit. Apple does what it does, and is happy to harvest any of us that they can, as long as they don't have to change their direction to do it.

At a certain point, I think we have to embrace that we don't love their stuff in spite of that. We love their stuff BECAUSE they ignore customers, since that's how the stuff winds up so awesome.

The idea that it would be even better if they DID cater to us is strictly academic. In order for us to test the hypothesis, Apple would have to start catering to us. LOL

Of course, we're all about the academic arguments and untestable hypotheses.

And cars and guitars. LOL



At least according to Apple, and I'm willing to take their word for it.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 6:01:34 pm

I found the argument silly - NOT any of the organizational methods it discussed.

I'll tape a script to the wall too when it serves my needs. I just don't mistake that because it serves my needs in one setting - that's the only viable way to approach Every edit every time.

A paper edit of any type is "a" workflow.

Not "the" workflow.

And I've seen a LOT of common "paper edits" that I did for decades become obsolete as superior replacements emerged. I'm reminded of the snapshot of Tomas Grove Carter tagging the dailies of those Honda ads that won all the big awards in Europe from the back seat of an automobile with his shoes off. Be kinda tough to get a 4 X 8 piece of foamcore storyboard in there!

Keep the tradition or move on. It's totally an individual editors choice. And that's fine by me.

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

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 20, 2015 at 10:25:07 pm

[Bill Davis] "I found the argument silly"

I too find it silly that you are arguing that Filemaker and using cards on a board are inefficient, antiquated and/or outdated options yet here we are, complete with straw man arguments like the one below.

[Bill Davis] "Be kinda tough to get a 4 X 8 piece of foamcore storyboard in there!"



[Bill Davis] "I just don't mistake that because it serves my needs in one setting - that's the only viable way to approach Every edit every time.
"


Let me know the next time you do a comparative analysis of various NLEs. ;)


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 2:09:21 am

[Andrew Kimery] ""Be kinda tough to get a 4 X 8 piece of foamcore storyboard in there!""

ALERT: This is a quip. Not an argument.



[Andrew Kimery] "Let me know the next time you do a comparative analysis of various NLEs. ;)
"


Why would I? I have an NLE that fulfills ALL my needs - was paid for 4 years ago - and has far more capabilities now than it did when I paid for it... Once. Not monthly. Forever.

BTW, in the spirit of raprochment - I'm flying in for the FCP X thing at Able Cinema in LA on Saturday specifically to see my LA friends - will you be there? First round's on me afterwards if you are.

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

Andrew Kimery
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 5:31:59 am

[Bill Davis] "ALERT: This is a quip. Not an argument."

I'll meet you half way and say it's an argue-quip. quip-grument?


[Bill Davis] "BTW, in the spirit of raprochment - I'm flying in for the FCP X thing at Able Cinema in LA on Saturday specifically to see my LA friends - will you be there? First round's on me afterwards if you are."

Unfortunately it's a working weekend for me otherwise I would be there.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 12:25:06 pm

What's wrong with Premiere's morph cut? The one in Resolve has been saving my butt lately. Really works nicely. And you can even do a morph cut in FCP X manually with a few edits and optical flow.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 19, 2015 at 6:05:25 am
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Oct 19, 2015 at 6:07:29 am

Now Morph Cut for FCP X thanks to Szymon and the elves at MotionVFX...
https://www.facebook.com/motionvfx/videos/903340409743758/

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

Dennis Radeke
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 18, 2015 at 12:53:40 pm

[Trevor Asquerthian] "Adobe have turned this around a bit, although they are announcing features that have been in avid for quite a while then failing to deliver on them properly (script sync & morph cut are two that spring to mind)"

With ScriptSync, we took a very different approach technology wise than Avid. The technology we licensed never matured and if no one is using it, we feel we should reset and come at it again. We do think this is an important idea and will continue to look at it. It should be of note that Nexidia makes a plugin that provides some of this functionality and also was the license partner that Avid had for their ScriptSync which is now a $1000 add-on. We also continue to have Adobe Story which is another way to create some of this functionality.

MorphCut is new by us but again a different technology built in house than what was created or licensed by Avid. In this case, I would argue that our end results are visually much better than other solutions. Give it a try and let us know what you think.

So - yes we do add some technology or features after others have blazed a trail. We do this because we've heard from customers that we should do this or because we believe something improves the editing experience for all editors. Honestly, all manufacturers have a bit of 'me too' in addition to new ideas.

For Adobe, I would point to GPU hardware acceleration, native editing, 1st 64-bit native, closed caption, embracing 4k and above workflows and probably some others as things that have blazed a trail.

Dennis - Adobe guy


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 21, 2015 at 6:53:51 am

Let's face it - the tide has well and truly turned.


Return to posts index

Devin Crane
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 1:16:19 am

Maybe the tide has turned, however FCPX is a well capable editor and is hear to stay. It truly works wonderfully for our production and don't every seeing us pay per month for an edit suite.



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 7:10:04 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Oct 23, 2015 at 7:15:48 pm

The discussion of sound brings up some interesting points. First off, although Walter Murch has experimented with NLEs, he has stayed pretty loyal to Pro Tools. I'm not quite sure why no experimentation there. Either there's no solid competitor to PT in the Hollywood film community or it's still the best tool. Post production sound is much more of a team sport than picture editing so it helps to be on the same page.

In addition, Avid has expanded the mixing desk offerings, so many shows and films are mixed on computer-assisted Avid consoles that include integrated PT workstations. These often include integrated Avid video hardware to play picture files out to monitors or projection, without the QuickTime movie kludge. So the mixing desk is really just a glorified control surface, although that's quite an oversimplification.

For someone who is just as involved with sound as with picture, having a consistent timeline layout between both tools makes tracks a familiar paradigm and makes the crossover between applications more fluid. If you check out Walter's credits on his most recent films, he's the picture editor and the re-recording mixer, but he isn't necessarily the only sound person in-between picture and mix. Plus in the film mixing world, large films are mixed with a 2 or 3-person team at the console. Add a few more for dialogue, ADR, Foley, SFX and music editing before it gets to the mix.

If you look at the timeline of most top feature film editors who get involved with sound as part of their edit, there's a hierarchical structure to where dialogue, SFX and music is placed - often with blank tracks as a type of "guard band" in between sections. Right away, you can tell which element is on a given track just by looking at the placement on the tracks.

It's here that FCPX actually offers some advantages, but it takes a bit of work. First of all, location sound. Broadcast WAV files usually carry several isolated channels embedded in each file. If you have 8 channels in one file, that consumes 8 tracks in a track-based system. If you overlap clips, you now take up 16. With X, these are neatly tucked into the primary clip until you need to expand and work on them.

The workaround that a lot of Avid editors use is that you can sync clips using only one of the tracks of the BWAV file. This works because Ch.1 of the BWAV is typically the location mixer's composite mix of all iso mics. If you need to access an iso channel, match-frame to the BWAV and cut in only that one channel. The point here is that the film editor knows PT will be used for sound post. In PT, you can use the Ch.1 that's in the timeline and link back to the original file, thus bringing in all the other channels. This is a workaround to reduce the number of tracks that you tie up in the edit.

With X, it's a lot easier to edit with all channels available on the timeline in a fashion that's far less cumbersome than trying to do the same in a track-based system. And you can deliver all channels as part of the timeline when you turn it over to audio post.

The big issue is visual organization on the timeline. While you can use Roles to isolate just dialogue or SFX, etc. it's an extra step that isn't needed in a track-based system. This is where an FCPX editor might add connected gap clips in order to create the vertical, visual separation between sound elements. Here, some type of "zone" system sure would be handy. Unfortunately the process using gap clips can require you to pull connected clips above or below such gap clips to keep dialogue, FX and music separated.

Clearly FCPX can be used for good sound and has some advantages for the picture editor working heavily in sound. However, there is a mental adjustment that has to take place if you routinely go between both worlds.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 7:25:42 pm
Last Edited By David Roth Weiss on Oct 23, 2015 at 8:27:03 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Clearly FCPX can be used for good sound and has some advantages for the picture editor working heavily in sound."

Oliver, do you happen to know precisely what sub-pixel audio editing capabilities are supported in X?

***Oops, I mean to "sub-frame" not "sub-pixel" above...

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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 9:00:12 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "what sub-pixel audio editing capabilities are supported in X?"

Down to 1/80th of a frame.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 9:06:04 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Down to 1/80th of a frame."

Actually, I just looked it up on the Apple site where they claim 1/100th of a frame...

See my next new post in a new thread where I discuss this...

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

Oliver Peters
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 9:12:06 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Actually, I just looked it up on the Apple site where they claim 1/100th of a frame..."

The odd thing that some folks have experienced is that it if you make the primary storyline an audio clip it can cause problems with accurate frame boundaries. Connected clips don't actually match up against each other, but instead leave gaps. However, these gaps don't seem to be visible during actual video playback.

- oliver

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 9:30:50 pm

[Oliver Peters] "The odd thing that some folks have experienced is that it if you make the primary storyline an audio clip it can cause problems with accurate frame boundaries. Connected clips don't actually match up against each other, but instead leave gaps. However, these gaps don't seem to be visible during actual video playback."

I just quoted you in the new thread I created about the BIG difference in sub-frame audio editing bewteen FCP X and Audition.

For the record, audition can edit down to the sample rate of 1/48000th of a frame vs FCP X which edits to just 1/100th of a frame. This may not sound all that important to many here who probably typically edit at the frame level and find that satisfactory for many of their projects. But, for those more audio-centric pros like you, like me, like Michael Gissing, and for Walter Murch, it represents a huge benefit.

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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 10:01:01 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "For the record, audition can edit down to the sample rate of 1/48000th of a frame"

Sure. We'll also just ignore that comparing an NLE with a DAW is nonsense to begin with. Or that there's always Logic that will go down to the sample as well. But I wouldn't want to rain on your crusade, so never mind... :D

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 10:21:11 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "[David Roth Weiss] "For the record, audition can edit down to the sample rate of 1/48000th of a frame"

Sure. We'll also just ignore that comparing an NLE with a DAW is nonsense to begin with. Or that there's always Logic that will go down to the sample as well. But I wouldn't want to rain on your crusade, so never mind... :D

- RK"


As David Lawrence already pointed out, Premiere Pro will also edit down to the sample level.

Shawn



Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 10:32:12 pm

[Shawn Miller] "As David Lawrence already pointed out, Premiere Pro will also edit down to the sample level."

I'll add that with VST/AU plugins, flexible bussing, clip and track level automation, the ability to make tracks as big as and as many you want, Premiere Pro is actually a very robust DAW for 80-90% of what I need everyday. Is it a substitute for ProTools or a full-fledged DAW? Of course not. But anyone saying a well designed NLE can't also share the functionality of a DAW doesn't know what they don't know.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 10:44:52 pm

[David Lawrence] "[Shawn Miller] "As David Lawrence already pointed out, Premiere Pro will also edit down to the sample level."

I'll add that with VST/AU plugins, flexible bussing, clip and track level automation, the ability to make tracks as big as and as many you want, Premiere Pro is actually a very robust DAW for 80-90% of what I need everyday. Is it a substitute for ProTools or a full-fledged DAW? Of course not. But anyone saying a well designed NLE can't also share the functionality of a DAW doesn't know what they don't know."


Very true, that's one of the reasons I hope that Vegas comes to the Mac someday. I think a lot of people would like it, especially those who are fond of building up complex audio mixes for video.

Shawn



Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 11:35:27 pm

[David Lawrence] "I'll add that with VST/AU plugins, flexible bussing, clip and track level automation, the ability to make tracks as big as and as many you want, Premiere Pro is actually a very robust DAW for 80-90% of what I need everyday. Is it a substitute for ProTools or a full-fledged DAW? Of course not. But anyone saying a well designed NLE can't also share the functionality of a DAW doesn't know what they don't know."

Well, I guess we can take the off the kid gloves now -- it's no wonder Walter Murch appreciates Premiere.

The stand-alone audio capabilities of Premiere are in fact well beyond what I'd been told, and I think it's fair to say they are now certainly well beyond those of both FCP X and Avid.

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: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 24, 2015 at 1:26:35 am

[David Lawrence] "I'll add that with VST/AU plugins, flexible bussing, clip and track level automation, the ability to make tracks as big as and as many you want, Premiere Pro is actually a very robust DAW for 80-90% of what I need everyday. Is it a substitute for ProTools or a full-fledged DAW? Of course not. But anyone saying a well designed NLE can't also share the functionality of a DAW doesn't know what they don't know."

And don't forget Resolve 12 is getting there too with similar audio capability.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Murch and NLEs from IBC
on Oct 23, 2015 at 10:42:39 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Sure. We'll also just ignore that comparing an NLE with a DAW is nonsense to begin with. Or that there's always Logic that will go down to the sample as well. But I wouldn't want to rain on your crusade, so never mind... :D"

So, Master Robin, sorry to rain on your parade, but how does it strike you that Mr. Lawrence has added that Premiere also supports audio editing at the same 1/48000 sub-pixel sample rate? What, no retraction? Cat got your tongue?

I can just see you now, griping all alone in your little cave:

RobIn Kurz as Golum



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

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