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

More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
David Lawrence
More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 8, 2017 at 1:19:08 am

Great new post on Oliver's blog, deep diving into Simon's recent Bricklayers and Sculptors thread. Thanks for posting Oliver, and thanks Simon for giving us an in-depth look at how you organize and edit.

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2017/06/07/bricklayers-and-sculptors/

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 8, 2017 at 4:41:47 am

This is one way to do it. To each his or her own.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 8, 2017 at 11:25:30 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] " To each his or her own"

Remember, it's about the process, not the software application.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 12:53:58 am

I think this thread and the originating thread might be very helpful to other editors out there.

Bins don't really exist in many people's editing worlds. Personally, I make stringouts of all of my material to start and then use those stringouts to do all searches. It's a very efficient system overall and it eliminates the need to organize or tag material.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 12:55:59 am

[greg janza] "It's a very efficient system overall and it eliminates the need to organize or tag material"

I think that's been Simon's point all along.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 1:04:13 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[greg janza] "It's a very efficient system overall and it eliminates the need to organize or tag material"

I think that's been Simon's point all along."


Was it? I seem to remember a post by Simone that was all about organizing through one smart collection. So now no, organizing ?


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 2:15:59 pm

[Tony West] "Was it? I seem to remember a post by Simone that was all about organizing through one smart collection. So now no, organizing ?"

I don't think that was necessarily related to editing style. More about making the events/bins/collections go away completely, but still using FCPX's strengths to find things. For reference, here are the links:

https://library.creativecow.net/ubsdell_simon/fcpx_smart_collection/1

https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/89092

https://fcpxpert.net/2016/05/14/guest-post-one-smart-collection-to-rule-the...

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 10, 2017 at 5:07:37 am

Thanks for the links but I don't need them. The whole point of a Smart Collection is for organization.


Greg said he didn't organize. He literally wrote "it eliminates the need to organize"

So I don't see Simon agreeing with that unless he flipped flopped.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 10, 2017 at 12:41:39 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Jun 10, 2017 at 1:06:16 pm

[Tony West] "So I don't see Simon agreeing with that unless he flipped flopped."

Or maybe his system evolved into a better approach ☺

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 10, 2017 at 10:29:35 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Or maybe his system evolved into a better approach ☺"

Or he maybe he forgot about the last approach : )


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 1:37:54 am

[greg janza] "I make stringouts of all of my material to start and then use those stringouts to do all searches. It's a very efficient system overall and it eliminates the need to organize or tag material.
"


Using the skimmer in the Browser in FCPX is exactly the same as having a stringout of ALL your material. I rarely tag or organise material in FCPX as it's so quick to access all of the rushes


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 12:30:42 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Jun 9, 2017 at 12:44:13 pm

[Steve Connor] "Using the skimmer in the Browser in FCPX is exactly the same as having a stringout of ALL your material."

I don't believe that Simon would agree with you based on his arguments. I too feel that stringouts are faster. I would add that X's magnetic timeline actually plays well using stringouts.

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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 2:17:05 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I don't believe that Simon would agree with you based on his arguments. I too feel that stringouts are faster. I would add that X's magnetic timeline actually plays well using stringouts."

Agreed. I think this is because timeline string outs have an added benefit of spatial information that isn't available in the browser. I still wish FCPX would allow multiple primaries.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 2:40:58 pm

[David Lawrence] "I still wish FCPX would allow multiple primaries."

I also find FCPX's timeline history to be a very weak substitute for FCP7's and Premiere's tabbed timelines or ability to have multiple open timeline windows (with or without stacking). The use of stringouts is aided by the ability to edit between sequences. Harder to do that when cut & paste is your main option.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 5:19:09 pm

I would think have all those tabs of sequences would get confusing after awhile. As far as tagging goes, I would rather have organized my footage in case the client comes in and wants to see a certain part of the interview or something and for me as well to find what I need faster than trying to find it in 15 or so sequences. Clicking on a keyword or folder with keywords in it for an interview with all its information can then easily be put in the timeline, and then rearranged in the actual edit.


Return to posts index

Claude Lyneis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 5:44:28 pm

Where I find the browser and keywords to be very valuable is in the early stages. I edit lacrosse videos and the goal is to shrink 80 minutes to 4 minutes. With the clips in the browser, I can make rough selects of things of interest, for example, goals, hits, scoreboard, broll, etc which may be useful. Then using a smart collection to select keyworded sections, I can dump these into the time line. In one pass, I have gone from 80 minutes to 10 minutes. After that, the editing is more like Simon describes. Cutting away pieces, finding a rhythm and a story. In the days of FCP7, it was into a timeline and pairing down, which was very slow because it took forever to go through 80 minutes worth of stuff and time consuming to cut out all the useless parts.

The other thing that is useful about keywording to me, is six months later I can come back and make a new video with highlights only and easily combine this with other games in the same library, by just selecting the appropriate keywords.

So I agree with his point about working in the timeline as the edit comes together, but not so much as using early stringouts and I do miss the ability to have several sequences to slide back and fourth easily. Granted, this is a very different type of edit than a feature film.


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 6:06:26 pm

I would think have all those tabs of sequences would get confusing after awhile. As far as tagging goes, I would rather have organized my footage in case the client comes in and wants to see a certain part of the interview or something and for me as well to find what I need faster than trying to find it in 15 or so sequences. Clicking on a keyword or folder with keywords in it for an interview with all its information can then easily be put in the timeline, and then rearranged in the actual edit. You can add clips as you go


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 7:00:50 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] "I would think have all those tabs of sequences would get confusing after awhile. As far as tagging goes, I would rather have organized my footage in case the client comes in and wants to see a certain part of the interview or something and for me as well to find what I need faster than trying to find it in 15 or so sequences."

I mainly use sequences for organization and with the pancake method (broll and interview sequences on top, editing sequences on bottom) it's pretty straight forward to keep it organized. With regards to finding parts of interviews, I place all my interviews into their sequences and drop markers w/notes at the beginning of questions and answers, and whenever I think something very worthwhile is said. That way I can just open up the Marker window and read my notes (which are searchable). I can also export the Mark window into an spreadsheet if I want to print out a hard copy. Of course I try to work w/transcripts whenever possible so that usually negates me having to mark up things in the NLE.

I'm just not starting to use X, so I don't have a solid enough reference yet to really do a point to point comparison based on experience.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 10, 2017 at 10:37:02 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "I mainly use sequences for organization and with the pancake method (broll and interview sequences on top, editing sequences on bottom)"

How do you separate the B-roll?

Say you have b-roll from 6 different cities. Where is your b-roll kept? Do you just mix it all in together? Instead of Chicago b-roll separated from St. Louis B-roll and Missouri River Separated from Ohio River and so on?


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 10, 2017 at 10:49:19 pm

They would make more sequences. I would just create a keyword.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 11, 2017 at 5:59:14 am

[Tony West] "
Say you have b-roll from 6 different cities. Where is your b-roll kept? Do you just mix it all in together? Instead of Chicago b-roll separated from St. Louis B-roll and Missouri River Separated from Ohio River and so on?"


Depends on the situation though last year I worked on a doc project that had a 14hr long broll timeline. I used markers to organize it and played back never chocked. The Marker Window is searchable so it's pretty easy to narrow in on what I need.


-Andrew


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 11, 2017 at 12:17:36 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "a 14hr long broll timeline. I used markers to organize it and played back never chocked. The Marker Window is searchable so it's pretty easy to narrow in on what I need."

Wow, that's interesting. I can see how it could work.

I have never tried to load up a 14 hour timeline on my computer. It may be able to handle it but even if it did it would take longer than loading the shots in the browser after clicking on the Keyword because it would only be dealing with a certain group of shots.

do you label every every single b-roll clip with a marker?


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 11, 2017 at 2:35:34 pm

[Tony West] "Wow, that's interesting. I can see how it could work."

I kinda stumbled into it. On a doc project a director wanted to watch down all the broll he shot and since clicking on clip after clip in the Browser is tedious I started putting them into a single time. I kept adding more and more and Premiere never became sluggish so I ended up going "what hell" and put them all in. To my amazement the 14hr hour timeline played back fine. Even on my 2011 MBP it didn't lag.

What I've noticed with PPro is that timeline duration alone doesn't seem to cause lag, but a combination of a lot cuts plus long duration will get it to lag. So if I started editing in that 14hr timeline then it would start to lag once hundreds and then thousands of cuts started to appear. So super long timelines are great for selects/broll, but not great for editing in my experience.

I wouldn't label every clip, but I would label the beginning of each section with a blue marker, and then interesting bits of broll with a red marker. So a mix of color coding and markers w/notes for the organization. And since markers can ripple I can easily add new content as needed and not screw up my organization.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 11, 2017 at 4:14:50 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "On a doc project a director wanted to watch down all the broll he shot and since clicking on clip after clip in the Browser is tedious I started putting them into a single time."

The B-roll string-out is something I really embrace and is a good part of the way Simon's process is as well. Let's take this example - I'm working on a short segment about St. Thomas. The dailies include multicam/double-system sound interview with locals - guides, chefs, artists, etc. My process is something like this:

1. Import everything. In Premiere, according to day/camera/card. In X, into a single event.

2. Organize by rough categories. In Premiere that means to regroup clips by dragging into new bins. In X, sort by keyword collections. These would be categories, like sync sound interviews, b-roll pertaining to each person, general landmarks, aerials, etc. A short piece might have 5 or 6 bins. A longer one maybe a dozen or more.

3. Sync and group all multicam interviews. Slap these into a sequence for each person.

4. Slap all B-roll clips from each bin (or keyword collection) into a sequence fro the topic.

From this point forward, I'm only working in the sequences. Generally I make a few duplicates (snapshots) along the way, if I need to step back. But the next steps are to cut these down to their essence. The interviews may go from 30 minutes to 3 minutes each. The possible b-roll selects for each category might go from a few hours down to 10-20 minutes.

The last step is to build the final - dialogue-based "spine" with added B-roll. This is where Premiere's pancake method is great. For example, I can have a "master" sequence in one timeline window, and then tabbed sequences for the component string outs (now whittled down) in the other timeline window. Moving between the two is effortless and Premiere deals with this process very fluidly.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 11, 2017 at 11:12:13 pm

[Oliver Peters] " I can have a "master" sequence in one timeline window, and then tabbed sequences for the component string outs (now whittled down) in the other timeline window. Moving between the two is effortless and Premiere deals with this process very fluidly."

Wait, this process sounds very much to me like laying bricks???

Bring them out in a bin, take them one by one and add them to a separate construction.

I thought that was bad?

I thought the Premiere gestalt was supposed to be more "sculptural?"

And yet in X, what do we have?

Snapshot and "carve away" on the work until you whittle it down to the essence. Want another pass? Go back to your original, new snapshot - and carve a different shape out of the material.

I'm more confused than ever.

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


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 11, 2017 at 11:46:06 pm

Here is how I just did a 2 minute promo piece for a client in New Orleans this past week:

Import (leave in place) footage into FCP. Events for different locations and items (end cards, music, etc)

Filter via favorites in each event. Entire clips or just parts of clips.

Create version 1 project timeline by appending the sh** out of footage (E key). Rough, but I get an idea.

Trim to taste. Put multiple clips of music on and having one active at a time for review.

Snapshot version 2 and trim more, move clips around to create a better flow.

Snapshot version 3 with client feedback. Share to web for approval.

Bill job to client.


Am I a bricklayer or sculpture? Not that it matters because the client was happy and I got paid sooner.

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 12:28:38 am

*sculptor*

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 2:09:35 am

[Bill Davis] "Wait, this process sounds very much to me like laying bricks???
Bring them out in a bin, take them one by one and add them to a separate construction."


Organizing in bins and slapping together string outs is "laying bricks". The difference is that's about 10% of the time. After that it's purely "sculpting".

[Bill Davis] "I thought the Premiere gestalt was supposed to be more "sculptural?""

This was never positioned as a Premiere vs X thing. I follow that same process in either. Speaking only for me, I've done the purely X approach and have found it limiting and easy to miss things. So I've moved on and work X the way it best works for me.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 6:49:32 am

[Oliver Peters] "and have found it limiting and easy to miss things."

Strangely enough I've found it to be exactly the opposite


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 1:00:09 am

[Andrew Kimery] "since clicking on clip after clip in the Browser is tedious I started putting them into a single time."

Yes that would be tedious, but you can play through clips in the browser in X so to put them into the timeline just to play through would be kind of an unnecessary step.


I always have my shots organized in the finder anyway so as long as I have this box checked they are tagged inside X
automatically.



Once I click on the keyword I can see all of the shots from this view. If you strung all of these shots out they wouldn't all fit in the window of the timeline and then you have to start moving the playhead around to find different shots. I can see the shots right there, so if you were editing for me I would just say "Andrew, may I see all of my Granite City shots" You click once, then I would point to the screen and say "That sign shot right there Andrew"
I find myself more and more not even labeling broll shots because I can see what they are. I don't really have to type "front of plant" because I can see it.





Now on the other hand, I'm cutting a multi-cam interview right now that is almost two hours long. It's a life story deal. That one I'm doing in the timeline and using markers for where broll will go later(but I still won't be stringing out broll). I can come back through my timeline index to find the marker that says, put MLK pic here. So in that since I look like you and Oliver.

I guess it would depend on what you were cutting and for who and what kind of instructions you were given from the client.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 3:05:50 am

[Tony West] "Once I click on the keyword I can see all of the shots from this view."

This thread has become quite fascinating in that there are so many different approaches to prepping a project and then building it out.

One thing though that hasn't been mentioned is the importance of serendipity. Walter Murch was the first person that I heard discuss the role serendipity plays in his edit process and while I'm not cutting Hollywood films, I too rely heavily on serendipity to help me make my pieces better.

In the editorial realm, serendipity is finding accidental gems that can be incorporated into a final cut. These items might be camera mistakes, nat sound finds, music tracks that might be placed in your timeline in an accidental way but which work well. These serendipitous items can sometimes be the best material and oftentimes it takes awhile to find them.

If the browser viewer works for someone in FCPX to stumble onto serendipitous moments then that's great but for me I need a stringout that I can scrub through.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 3:40:42 am

[greg janza] "If the browser viewer works for someone in FCPX to stumble onto serendipitous moments then that's great but for me I need a stringout that I can scrub through.
"


But Greg, since the clips in the browser play through in X it's the same look as a stringout. Only you are not dropping anything into a timeline unless you want to.

When you play one clip, it gets to the end and the starts playing the next clip and so on.

If I covered up part of the screen accept for the canvas, you wouldn't know the difference from the browser and the timeline. You would just see clips playing one after another.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 4:01:52 am
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Jun 12, 2017 at 4:10:08 am

[greg janza] "In the editorial realm, serendipity is finding accidental gems that can be incorporated into a final cut. These items might be camera mistakes, nat sound finds, music tracks that might be placed in your timeline in an accidental way but which work well. "

What in the world makes you think X can't work EXACTLY that way?

Any stringout is a subset of everything, right?

If an editor likes, in X they're free to reject only what they think is pure crap. What's left IS a stringout EXACTLY as if it had been done it in a pancake. In their NON-rejects - serendipity can arise EXACTLY as it does in any other NLE.

There is a difference In that the X system allows one to designate as many virtual string-outs as they may like - (should they elect to) and access and navigate between them instantly.

Add Favorites and they have a subset of their stringout - just with more focus - AND if they want to troll their footage for more serendipity - switch to Hide Rejects and more connections reveal themselves. Not enough? Show ALL and every frame including their rejects re-appears to let them mine the entire body of frames for connections at will.

Saying the X approach restricts the ability of an editor to make intuitive leaps across categories or concepts is patently stupid, IMO.

A contention like that says to me that an editor NEVER understood or explored how the database actually works and IMAGINES that it's forcing them into some restriction that simply cannot exist unless they build it into their work habits via mis-applied effort or misunderstanding.

In the X database, the editor is given a box of information pastels, suitable for creating nearly infinite arrangements of data.

If an editors conditioning is such that given an organizational tool like that, all they can figure out how to do with it is to use use a few colors to write shopping lists - I don't know what to tell you.

Except to say that they are missing a HUGE array of possibilities here.

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 7:09:48 am
Last Edited By Andrew Kimery on Jun 12, 2017 at 7:10:22 am

[Bill Davis] "You know enough about the FCP X workflow, Andrew, to understand why the above sounds like a nightmare step backwards to any qualified FCP X editor."

I freely admit it sounds like a nightmare, and like I said I pretty much stumbled into it by accident, but it worked out very well and certainly expanded my organizational vocabulary. After fifteen years of using NLEs (Premiere, FCP Legend, Avid) I never would've thought to try something like that, but I guess you never really know until you try something new, even if it's out of your comfort zone and different than what you previously thought was viable. 😉


[Tony West] "I find myself more and more not even labeling broll shots because I can see what they are. I don't really have to type "front of plant" because I can see it."

Yeah, once tapeless took off and we became besieged by a relentless sea of clips I got away from labeling individual clips too. I think that helped push me towards crafting a more sequence-based approach.

I've been trying to make time to get more familiar with X (slowly making my way through the Ripple Training) but something always comes up. I'll get there eventually (though probably not until the end of August at the earliest since I have a big project about to start soon).


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 6:17:01 pm

Well, Andrew -

Regarding learning X.

If you get stuck anywhere - at least you know a few people who can help you over the rough spots!

😊

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 11:58:35 pm

I'm sure you guys will hear from me a some point. ;)


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 11, 2017 at 11:03:22 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "14hr long broll timeline."

You know enough about the FCP X workflow, Andrew, to understand why the above sounds like a nightmare step backwards to any qualified FCP X editor.

FWIW.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 8:54:23 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] " I would rather have organized my footage in case the client comes in and wants to see a certain part of the interview or something and for me"

I'd be curious how you would do that on an interview that's 35-90 minutes running (unedited), two-three cameras and double system sound.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 10:18:57 pm

I would create a multicam and then use keywords, markers, favorites and or notes. Simple.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 11:43:23 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] "I would create a multicam and then use keywords, markers, favorites and or notes. Simple."

That works for the source clip, however, at that point you really have no advantage in X over other NLEs. Yes, you could reject and hide sections, but that doesn't show you the re-arranged flow. Typically when I cut interviews, I do all of that in the timeline, saving and duplicating sequences for interim versions that I can revert to as needed. The re-arranging part goes faster, in theory, with the magnetic timeline (fewer keystrokes). But I find it easy to lose your place when moving a long distance up or down the sequence. Especially when dealing with the typical "frankenbites". Hence, copy & paste/insert seems to be more accurate - at least for me.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 10, 2017 at 3:59:36 am

As I keyword the footage I put in into the timeline and build the edit anyway I like. You are assuming I leave it in the browser. I can even divide my storyline into sections for other versions. I do hate the thought of managing tracks when it is time do finesse the edit. Oh wait, I don't have to worry about that.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 10, 2017 at 12:42:50 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] "Oh wait, I don't have to worry about that."

I've inherited projects from others where it looks like they didn't worry too much about tracks either. ☺

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 10:08:49 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] "I would rather have organized my footage in case the client comes in and wants to see a certain part of the interview or something"

With the introduction of digital anarchy's plugin Transcriptive, the need to even organize interviews will be reduced. I've tried the plugin out and it has a very high accuracy rate and as soon as an interview is transcribed through the plugin you can do a text search and click on a word and the source playhead matches. I will still stringout interviews but I plan on using the transcription plugin to do most of the work.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 6:09:50 pm

OliverHarder to do that when cut & paste is your main option. What are you referring to by saying "cut and paste"?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 8:52:24 pm

[Brian Seegmiller] "What are you referring to by saying "cut and paste"?"

I actually meant copy and paste. Basically to get material from one section of a project (sequence) over into another, while going back and forth through the timeline history. The alternate is to nest sequences, which I don't like either. Essentially you are using a sequence as a source to edit into another sequence.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 9, 2017 at 10:29:47 pm

That's what I thought you meant.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 5:21:08 am

[David Lawrence] "Great new post on Oliver's blog, deep diving into Simon's recent Bricklayers and Sculptors thread. Thanks for posting Oliver, and thanks Simon for giving us an in-depth look at how you organize and edit.

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2017/06/07/bricklayers-and-sculptors/"


And here is Simon's own deep dive, Always Be Editing: Sculptors & Bricklayers Revisited




My favorite passage, which very much describes my own style of editing:

Let me be clear that I am working exclusively subtractively. A lot of people approach string-outs by successively adding selected clips from the Browser or Bins, but with this method all my clips are already on the timeline and I am taking away anything I don't want. And by “removing” I mean performing Ripple Edits which reduce the overall length of my timeline.

(Some editors approach this subtractive method a different way, which is to shift the sections they don’t want onto a hidden track leaving gaps where it’s been removed. Although there’s a certain organisational elegance to this way of doing it, I believe it misses out on most of the key benefits of the method. You’re not getting the same instant feedback as to how much you are reducing the overall volume of source material and you are not reaping the huge benefits that flow from seeing one clip transition into another, which we’ll be looking at later.)

What is important for me about this process is that each edit is not a rough approximation but a very precise set of decisions about what I want to use. If you're "editing in the Browser" (or in Bins), you're simply not going to be making the kind of frame-accurate and value-laden edits that I am making every single time with this method.

The point to grasp is that instead of "making bricks" for use later on, I am already editing in the strictest sense. I am focused on a timeline that is going to form the basis of the final edit. I am already thinking editorially (in the sense of creative timeline-based editing) and not wasting any time merely thinking organisationally.


It's an elegant argument laid out with considerable context and nuance, so please don't respond too quickly to the comment here without reading that -- and by all means, feel free to comment directly on the article of course! -- but that really does get to the heart of it to me.

I used to feel guilty that I wasn't doing nonlinear editing the "right" way because I was eschewing so many of the NLE-specific media management tools I was offered. I'd tried to, but I found that it was taking me ridiculously longer to edit in an NLE vs. what I'd been spending on tape. By getting all of that back out of my way, I was finally liberated to focus on the EDIT.

I'll leave this part of the conversation to the folks who are still editing for a living, but I'm really enjoying this.

A reminder as you read it that Simon explicitly said that he wasn't talking about choices in NLEs, but choices in editing style.

Take a read, and dive back in, either there or here.

Always Be Editing: Sculptors & Bricklayers Revisited



Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 12:14:20 pm

[Tim Wilson] "If you're "editing in the Browser" (or in Bins), you're simply not going to be making the kind of frame-accurate and value-laden edits that I am making every single time with this method. "

This statement is saying, if you are not editing this way you are not a Frame-accurate editor. Or, in other words your doing it wrong.


I guess my main question with this approach is, what if after you get done cutting clips away you want a certain clip back. Say the producer or director liked a shot that he decided to cut away and wanted it back.
How would you find that clip, since you never bothered to organize anything in the bin or browser.

"The very first thing I did after importing the source material was to grab it all and put it on a timeline"


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 2:33:44 pm

[Tony West] "How would you find that clip, since you never bothered to organize anything in the bin or browser."

Exactly.

Talk about a imho near-sighted "instant gratification" approach. But I guess if you never ever have to consider anyone else's input (as in sitting over your shoulder asking questions and/or for shot XYZ) or have to share projects with anyone else, you're sitting' pretty and can do whatever you want. Of course if you do, I'd say you're screwed. Unfortunately, many of us do have a lot of other input and collaboration to consider.

And sorry to say, but even if the article wasn't meant to be about editing software but STYLE, it clearly should make the case for this only being a viable approach to be considered with certain software, but most definitely not all.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 3:01:28 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Unfortunately, many of us do have a lot of other input and collaboration to consider."

And so do the people advocating for the string-out concept. In my case, that's just about everything I do.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 11:47:47 pm

[Tony West] "[Tim Wilson] "If you're "editing in the Browser" (or in Bins), you're simply not going to be making the kind of frame-accurate and value-laden edits that I am making every single time with this method. "

This statement is saying, if you are not editing this way you are not a Frame-accurate editor. Or, in other words your doing it wrong.
"


A) To be precise, you're quoting me quoting Simon, and I wouldn't actually have said it that way, and B) it's not saying that at all.


[Tony West] "How would you find that clip, since you never bothered to organize anything in the bin or browser."

Who said that? I said I never organized FIRST. Did you think that when I deleted something from the timeline that I threw it away? Deleted the footage from my drives? No, of course not. When I deleted it from the timeline, I put it where everybody throws things away: the bin. 😂

Part of what we're getting into here is job roles. My jobs ALWAYS started with my shoot. I had every project two-thirds edited in my head before I shook the interviewee's hand and got back in my car to go start the edit, which really quite often did turn around just that quickly.

So not only did I label each tape, I marked what was on it. Shocking! I know!

Then when I digitized, each roll of tape had its own name. Again, shocking! I know!

Then I'd take that tape, put the whole thing on the timeline in one piece, and carve out the pieces I wanted. Anything that looked good went in a bin called....wait for it...B-roll....and anything else went in a bin called Unused. But in fact, most of my B-roll was SHOT as B-roll, literally as its own roll, so it was already in the bin as a reel. The reel just happened to be named B-roll.

One particularly complicated project was with a pair of scientists who were placing bands on sooty terns in the Dry Tortugas islands. I mic'd them both and let them work, with them talking to me and each other the whole time.

So maybe I'd be looking at Scientist A's hands banding a bird while Scientist B was talking, and maybe I didn't actually want the picture at all. So I'd use markers -- crazy, I know, why would anybody do that -- and sometimes even, wait for it, name the subclip based on what was in the clip!!!!!

Of course in this case, the shape of the conversation dictated where the B-roll was, so some of the b-roll never left the timeline. I just moved it to another track, directly connected to the A-roll. The bin was literally for nothing but footage I'd decided wasn't worth using. Anything useful was already on the timeline, so I never needed to hunt through bins for it.

This worked just fine for me, editing no less than 40 and as many as100 half-hour episodes of TV a year, each with 4-6 segments, many of which spanned multiple reels. This one bird story took an entire box of 30-minute tapes, which I intentionally limited myself to because the film guy in me still believes that it's part of your job as a shooter-producer to also be editing on location.

Always be editing.

(By the way, I wrote a story about one such shoot a few years back that somehow bubbled back up online and has been making the rounds on Twitter this week. I'm actually pretty proud of the writing on the article -- it's a story that involved me wading in the Everglades with alligators swimming around, and why I wasn't wearing any underwear -- but you'll quickly see what I mean when I say that I was shaping the stories while I was shooting. I bet that most of you can imagine exactly how you'd cut a story like this.

"Before I Forget, Don't Wear Any Underwear"



But I'll concede that some of my disregard for over-organizing came down to how organized my tapes were, and an exceptional memory. I can't tell you my phone number without looking it up, and I frequently get lost driving myself home, but this shoot was over 20 years ago, and I can tell you that I had 75 minutes of raw footage and the final package came in at 11 minutes.)


Now in practice, at the end of my A story, I had to start thinking somewhat more bricklike. Okay, this thing is 7 and a half minutes, the cold open is 45 seconds, credits are 1:10, intros to the next 2 stories add up to 1:15, I'm up to 10:40, leaving me 15:20 to get to 26 minutes, in two more segments with 2 minutes of black separating them.

Story 2 I'd usually keep pretty loose, and let it try to tell me something about how long it needed to be, but by the time I got to Story 3, the length was no longer flexible. It had to be exactly one length (ie, whatever was left) and not one frame more or less -- but I built it the same way. It was the #3 segment because it wasn't as important, so I never had as much footage, so it was still easy to throw it all on the timeline, and carve, carve, carve until I had what I needed.

To repeat the old joke about how to sculpt David -- start with a block of marble and carve away anything that doesn't look like David -- that's how I preferred to edit. Start with everything together, and carve away anything that doesn't look like the story.

This gets to a larger conversation about style, and that is, what's my role?

If my role is to collaborate as part of a larger team, maybe my only job is what we tend to assign to the function of assistant editors: log, group, rough edits, everything focused in a bin. I can imagine many AEs going for months without touching a timeline. Their work is no less editing, but it's one KIND of editing that never applied to me.

I wouldn't have wanted an assistant editor even if I could have afforded one, because it would have forced me to start my edits by looking at what's in bins and putting that stuff in the timeline, additively, rather than starting with EVERYTHING on the timeline, and editing subtractively.

This is also to underscore that people determined to make Simon out to be somehow casting shade on X when he insists that none of this is NLE-specific that, in fact, NONE OF THIS is NLE-specific. It's just not.

I'm going to make a casual observation that Simon did not, though, and it's not something I feel terribly strongly about...but despite my yet-to-be-surpassed or indeed, yet-to-be-equaled enthusiasm for X by ANYONE in this forum, the parts of X that many people seem most excited about are exactly the opposite of the way I want to be editing.

Me, personally. But that doesn't make me like X any less -- hence my unparalleled enthusiasm -- because I know that I could use it to edit the way I wanted to. One big window (ALWAYS my preference, going back to the 70s when I first started), one timeline, bins only being used for depositing things I'm not using.

I know you'll sputter that I'm missing all this great stuff about skimming or whatever, but that's the opposite of what I want to do. It just is.

Ironically enough, this is one reason I rejected Media Composer back in the day. The much-vaunted trim tools notwithstanding, it all felt way too binny in its approach. What they call "media management" is so oriented around "bin management" that it was irrelevant to me and the way I wanted to work.

My feeling in general about this kind of "prep every piece before you start putting things together" -- yes yes, to be finessed into place on the timeline -- approach is that it creates another job for me, when I already had plenty. I'm already the shooter, producer, writer, color grader, sound designer, music editor, compositor, animator, editor, AND NOW I get to also be the ASSISTANT EDITOR? No thanks.

It's lovely that X takes on so many of these assistant-ish burdens, but like I said, I explicitly rejected those roles for myself, so X streamlining a bunch of tasks that I never took on was never part of its appeal to me. Nor did I ever assume that I couldn't configure FCPX to work primarily subtractively. This isn't about NLE choices. It's about editing style.

Which is to say, the central metaphor holds. Do you prefer to start your project by tagging, sorting, trimming, etc., and THEN starting putting those somewhat polished pieces onto a timeline for final finessing, OR, do you prefer to start with everything in one place in the timeline, carving away everything that you feel doesn't belong?

Additive, or subtractive?

For me, subtractive, all the way, every day. But I certainly understand the appeal of editing additively, especially if you have assistants. To me, though, anything much more than naming the reels is an obstacle to my editing. An extreme position, perhaps, but surely you're not surprised by that. 😂

Always be editing!


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 1:03:19 am

[Tim Wilson] "This isn't about NLE choices. It's about editing style."

Amen Tim! I think several of us here have been trying (without much success) to make that same distinction in this discussion thread.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 12:41:51 pm

[greg janza] "[Tim Wilson] "This isn't about NLE choices. It's about editing style."

Amen Tim! I think several of us here have been trying (without much success) to make that same distinction in this discussion thread."



I think the reason you have not been successful is because some are saying that "X" makes this "editing style" irrelevant. Just by the nature of how it works.

The task is to convince people otherwise and so far that's been a fail.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 5:43:39 am

[Tim Wilson] "This statement is saying, if you are not editing this way you are not a Frame-accurate editor. Or, in other words your doing it wrong.
"

A) To be precise, you're quoting me quoting Simon, and I wouldn't actually have said it that way, and B) it's not saying that at all.
"


Go ahead and feel free to explain what it is saying then, instead of what it isn't saying.

[Tim Wilson] "[Tony West] "How would you find that clip, since you never bothered to organize anything in the bin or browser."

Who said that? I said I never organized FIRST. Did you think that when I deleted something from the timeline that I threw it away? Deleted the footage from my drives? No, of course not. When I deleted it from the timeline, I put it where everybody throws things away: the bin. "


Did you see me write that you threw it away?

First of all, I took this quote right out of his article

"The very first thing I did after importing the source material was to grab it all and put it on a timeline"

He didn't say, the first thing I did was organize it and then put it in the timeline.

At no point in the article did I see him write about organizing source material in a bin or browser so to me the whole point was he was using a string-out to organize instead.

So my question remains, did he organize in the browser AND in the timeline, or just the timeline and if it's just the timeline walk me through the process of finding shots in the bin that he did not organize.

His example was he had 4 hours of source material and through it all in timelines. That worked for him. I had 45 hours of just interviews, that's not counting broll, pictures, documents and other source material.



[Tim Wilson] "Additive, or subtractive?"

It depends on the project and how much of the source material is gong to remain.

I just never heard of anybody putting say, 45 hours of interviews into a timeline. I'm going to go ahead and say it.....It just sounds made up to me.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 12:14:03 pm

[Tony West] "I just never heard of anybody putting say, 45 hours of interviews into a timeline. I'm going to go ahead and say it.....It just sounds made up to me."

A bit dated, as this goes back to FCP 'legacy" days, but the concept works fine with any modern NLE:

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2010/07/22/one-bite-at-a-time/

Typically these days, nearly every project I'm doing is based on interviews with coverage. There isn't a single one of these that I don't approach by structuring the interviews in timelines. And yes, I've used X's "preferred" approach with favorites, markers, smart collections, etc. It simply doesn't do what I need it to do. Yes, I'll used keyword collections for coverage, but that's the same as grouping footage into specific bins by topic/subject matter/location. Each of the clips (even if favorites have been assigned first) gets tossed into a separate sequence for further cutdowns, re-ordering, etc.

For example, I was working on a show yesterday that was originally shot as a travel-style TV show (1/2 hour episode). It's getting repackaged for other use. There is 6 days of shooting, with 5-6 cameras per day (estimate about 4,000-5,000 clips total). I reorganized the Broll into about 20 bins (in Premiere), with each bin holding 100-200 clips. There are about 12 interviews (multicam, double-system sound) with each running about 1 hour in raw length.

For me, the stringout method is still the best choice. Create a sequence for each if these Broll groups and interviews and start whittling down from there.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 5:35:12 am

[Oliver Peters] "There are about 12 interviews (multicam, double-system sound)"

That's not the same thing. A multi-cam interview is of course going to be cut in the timeline. I think just about everybody does that.

I'm talking about a single cam interview that is 2 hours long that you only need 8 minutes out of.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 12:09:24 pm

[Tony West] "I'm talking about a single cam interview that is 2 hours long that you only need 8 minutes out of."

I guess I don't see the difference whether it is single camera or multicam. Assuming it's not just a single 8 minute piece that requires no editing, I would still put this into a timeline first and cut it down for the 8 minutes I want. This would become an interim sequence to be used as a source for the (potentially) final sequence.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 1:55:44 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I guess I don't see the difference whether it is single camera or multicam."

The difference is a multi-cam interview would have to be cut in a timeline and a single cam doesn't. More efficient to use your browser.


[Oliver Peters] "I would still put this into a timeline first and cut it down for the 8 minutes I want. This would become an interim sequence to be used as a source for the (potentially) final sequence."

and I wouldn't. That's the debate.

Each one of these people made the cut of my film. There are a few more that I couldn't fit on screen and this is only half of the folks that were interviewed but you get the idea. You can't name one of those people. You don't know who any of them are or what they are talking about, their work history or ANYTHING about them. The only way you would know, is if you sat there "on the clock" and watched all of their interviews. I would never pay you to sit there and watch 45 hours of interviews. I wouldn't pay you to watch b-roll footage that I shot myself. How would you possibly know more about footage that I shot myself. You would be told what's going to be used, simple as that. The funny thing is, most editors complain about stuff not being logged because they don't want to sit there and watch it all. I just don't believe you are working with that many producer/directors who are that lazy or willing to waste that kind of money to have you log all of their footage for their films. So that's why I'm giving you the side-eye.




Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 3:39:11 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Jun 16, 2017 at 3:44:41 pm

[Tony West] "I would never pay you to sit there and watch 45 hours of interviews. I wouldn't pay you to watch b-roll footage that I shot myself. How would you possibly know more about footage that I shot myself. You would be told what's going to be used, simple as that"

Well that may well be so. I would certainly also take notes, add markers, and possibly have transcripts. I personally would put each person in a sequence for each person and then mix and match by topic. Typically, an hour-long raw interview can be easily trimmed down to 10 min. or less before you really start cutting bone.

I work with plenty of people who shoot their own stuff and have an idea of what they shot that's important. However, most don't know the footage nearly as well as they think without going through it again themselves. Director/DPs who edit their own projects often lack the objectivity a editor brings. Not always true, but often so.

[Tony West] "I just don't believe you are working with that many producer/directors who are that lazy or willing to waste that kind of money to have you log all of their footage for their films. "

Believe it or not, if you like. It's not a question of lazy or wasteful. These aren't passion projects. The producers/directors involved are doing other things to generate more revenue. This is a team effort and editors are integral to the team. So it's unproductive to also have the producer/director review and log their own content. In larger productions, there would be assistant editors, but I rarely have that luxury.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 5:15:16 pm

[Oliver Peters] "However, most don't know the footage nearly as well as they think without going through it again themselves."

That's why they should be making their favorites before it even gets to you.

[Oliver Peters] "Director/DPs who edit their own projects often lack the objectivity a editor brings. "

Yeah, sometimes that's true.

[Oliver Peters] "So it's unproductive to also have the producer/director review and log their own content. "

Wow, it's unproductive to review the content of a film you are directing. It sounds like I need to come to that area and teach a seminar on how to produce a film and save time and money with X and prep.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 5:59:58 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Jun 16, 2017 at 6:18:32 pm

[Tony West] "It sounds like I need to come to that area and teach a seminar on how to produce a film and save time and money with X and prep"

You better start in Hollywood or NYC then, because that's pretty much the process for most docs and reality TV.

PS: I wonder why directors like Errol Morris and Alex Gibney hire editors and keep them on payroll for such a long time. They could simply log the footage and have the editor come in and cut for a couple of weeks and call it done.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 4:31:05 pm

[Tony West] "I just don't believe you are working with that many producer/directors who are that lazy or willing to waste that kind of money to have you log all of their footage for their films"

I don't know many producer/directors who log any of their footage themselves. If you do, hats off to you but you are not the norm.

One of the many reasons to hire an editor is to get an objective opinion on the material that's been gathered. Oftentimes, the producer or director is too close to the material to be able to assess it objectively.

[Tony West] "The only way you would know, is if you sat there "on the clock" and watched all of their interviews. "

that's what transcripts are for. In transcript form, it's possible to go through interviews very efficiently and much faster than real time.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 5:36:46 pm

[greg janza] "I don't know many producer/directors who log any of their footage themselves. If you do, hats off to you but you are not the norm."

That's the whole point many of us are making. X makes this process so simple. You watch your footage, you hit "I" and "O" and then "F" type in notes if you like. Then go to the editor ready.

[greg janza] "that's what transcripts are for. In transcript form, it's possible to go through interviews very efficiently and much faster than real time."

1. I don't see how that's faster 2. You can't tell by reading if the audio is good or bad on the take. 3. I wouldn't pay for transcripts on a small doc (because X makes it so easy and fast) 4. I wouldn't pay you to sit there and read them.

I'm speaking here this weekend http://www.stlwritersguild.org/gatewaycon.html

It will give me a chance to speak with up and coming filmmakers and I will ask for a show of hands on different topics. I will report back.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 6:39:56 pm

[Tony West] "1. I don't see how that's faster 2. You can't tell by reading if the audio is good or bad on the take. 3. I wouldn't pay for transcripts on a small doc (because X makes it so easy and fast) 4. I wouldn't pay you to sit there and read them."

Tony, transcripts are an absolutely essential bedrock element for all video production from non-fiction broadcast tv to corporate promo and anything in between. Traditionally, the first stage of post production has involved a "paper edit", which is obtained from the transcripts and which was usually created by a producer. This has changed over the years with the changing roles of producers and editors. Producers no longer sit with editors for the most part and so the paper edit no longer is a provided norm element. Editors now serve as producers by looking through transcripts and selecting the material that best suits the needs of the project.

I often work on projects where I do all of the story selection culling through the transcripts. In addition, I sometimes work with a client or producer who looks through the transcripts and makes their selects and then I also go through the material to see if there's anything else that might work in addition to what has been previously selected. An experienced editor who's forte is storytelling will be able to very quickly look through transcripts and pull the quotes that are gold. That's our job as editors. And now with Digital Anarchy's Transcriptive plugin the whole process is even more streamlined.

If you don't make use of transcripts I would simply advocate that you give them a try on your next project. I think you'd be amazed at how much transcripts can streamline the entire post process of determining what material best serves a project.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 7:52:18 pm

[greg janza] "Tony, transcripts are an absolutely essential bedrock element for all video production from non-fiction broadcast tv to corporate promo and anything in between."

That may well be Greg, but I didn't use transcripts when it came to source material and it didn't stop me from getting my film done and it playing in 20 cities so far.

I had a creative consultant on my film and as I wrote the narration I would show it to him and to my narrator who read it.
they gave their input on it which was great. I had a member of the scientific community to check my science but he didn't have input into the story accept to say he approved of how I handle the science.

Producing a documentary is all about doing the research. Sometimes years of research. You are burying yourself in the topic and most times there are few people who can apply that kind of time and commitment to the research. Therefore they are not as knowledgeable on the topic. It is what it is.


[greg janza] "I often work on projects where I do all of the story selection culling through the transcripts."

I'm sure you do, but you wouldn't be doing any of that for me.

Take a look at this quote from Ken Burns................

“It’s difficult deciding on what’s essential to the story and what isn’t. I think that’s what I do for a living,” says Burns. “I’m credited with being a director, a producer, cinematographer, and co-writer, but I think the thing that I do is try to figure out what’s in and what’s out. There’s a moment in the Milos Forman film Amadeus where the Emperor critiques Mozart by saying, “there’s too many notes.” As you write whatever you’re writing, you struggle with more raw material than you have space or time, or more importantly an audience has interest in. And so you will then do what I do every day of my life which is edit and cut and figure out how to have that complexity survive in the service of very challenging narratives, but not have too many notes.


See how he says "What I do everyday" HE makes those decisions. He didn't say I let my editor make them for me.

In my case I'm the editor also but even if I wasn't, I would be counting the notes.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 9:00:00 pm

[Tony West] "I had a creative consultant on my film and as I wrote the narration I would show it to him and to my narrator who read it.
they gave their input on it which was great. "


As the filmmaker, you certainly have the right to create your films any way that you'd like.

My previous thoughts were speaking to the idea of the editor as a story collaborator since at it's core, film making or video is a collaborative endeavor and that's what makes it so rewarding. And it sure sounds like you made use of your creative consultant in just that way. An editor is also a creative collaborator or at least the good ones are.

I recall editing a doc many years ago that involved about 50 interviews. Quite honestly, if we wouldn't have had a giant binder of transcripts from all of those interviews we would've never finished the film.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 3:30:06 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jun 12, 2017 at 3:35:54 pm

[greg janza] "I make stringouts of all of my material to start and then use those stringouts to do all searches. It's a very efficient system overall and it eliminates the need to organize or tag material."

Ironically, others would say the exact opposite. That organization (i.e favorites, rejects etc.) and tags eliminate the need for (imho complete outdated and comparatively highly inefficient) string outs.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 4:46:13 pm
Last Edited By greg janza on Jun 12, 2017 at 4:47:40 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Ironically, others would say the exact opposite. "

This thread shows clearly that everyone approaches the edit in their own way. I don't think of the edit process as an endless quest for speed. I like adding efficiency to my workflow but I also have learned over the years that the process of creating a compelling story takes time.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 6:20:03 pm

[greg janza] "but I also have learned over the years that the process of creating a compelling story takes time."

If you want to argue "only a SLOW edit is a GOOD edit"… that's your prerogative. But I certainly beg to differ. Speed says absolutely nothing about quality. I'd generally consider that a straw man, if anything. But then, I've never seen your edits. The may well blow me away. 😏

- RK


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 4:47:33 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "That organization (i.e favorites, rejects etc.) and tags eliminate the need for (imho complete outdated and comparatively highly inefficient) string outs.
"


Except that is breaks down when you need to make and retain direct comparisons.

For example, you have multiple good takes of several shots. You are only going to use one of each in the final at any given point. By sticking with the browser and being dependent on rejects/favorites, you are forced to reject/hide good alternate takes if you only want to see the "hero" take for each. If not, you always end up looking through all of the good options when you only want one.

OTOH, if you use stringouts, you can save a version with all the good takes, dupe the sequence, and then cut down the sequence to just one good option of each. You still have the earlier, longer sequence of all the options. Other editors might take the alternate options and slide them to the end of the sequence, just to have quick access to them.

One issue with browser organization and FCPX's ability to play through the visible clips is that you always see them in the sorting order of the browser. Clip 1, then 2, then 3, and so on. The stringout lets you rearrange. So if you want to see the clip order as 5,2,3,1,4 - no problem - just arrange them that way.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 5:27:59 pm

[Oliver Peters] "One issue with browser organization and FCPX's ability to play through the visible clips is that you always see them in the sorting order of the browser. Clip 1, then 2, then 3, and so on."

You could just change the number. IMG_4434 becomes IMG_ 4435


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 7:32:27 pm

[Tony West] "You could just change the number. IMG_4434 becomes IMG_ 4435"

Wait - you guys are trying to sell me on how great the browser organization is, but yet you are willing to mess it all up as a workaround?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 2:31:41 am

[Oliver Peters] "Wait - you guys are trying to sell me on how great the browser organization is, but yet you are willing to mess it all up as a workaround?"

It's not messing it up at all and it's not a work around. It's just a tit for tat for what I feel is a made up problem.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 12:31:55 pm

[Tony West] "It's just a tit for tat"

That's a really grown up way to have a discussion.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 5:46:04 am

[Oliver Peters] "That's a really grown up way to have a discussion.
"


I think it's more grown up than you twisting yourself into a pretzel to try to find a hole in X's swing.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 12:29:58 pm

[Tony West] "I think it's more grown up than you twisting yourself into a pretzel to try to find a hole in X's swing."

We'll simply have to disagree on that one.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 3:43:51 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Wait - you guys are trying to sell me on how great the browser organization is, but yet you are willing to mess it all up as a workaround?"

But it's NOT messing it up Oliver.

Based on my observations, X works with 3 levels of clip organization - the deep machine IDs in HEX never change once any asset is created - that is veiled from the user and essentially unchangeable. That is linked to a more persistent asset database entry that needs to be carefully managed. These are the links that can go "offline" and occasionally need "re-linking so that the database understands where the asset is located if the user moves things at the Finder Level. But there's a third level that rides on top of these others. That's the users database expression choices. These can be re-named and re-re-named at will without any damage to any of the database structures.

X allows you to "play" with the editor facing expressions all you like. They are just another form of user metadata that exists to help you tag, find, sort, and arrange things as you like.

Theres nothing to "mess up" with these since they are exclusively the users own decisions. If your shop has multiple editors touching the assets, it behooves that shop to come up with standards the entire team understands,, but X itself is agnostic about this third level. Use it as you like.

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


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 5:00:23 pm
Last Edited By greg janza on Jun 13, 2017 at 5:02:03 pm

[Bill Davis] "X allows you to "play" with the editor facing expressions all you like. "

Most of this discussion and debate over which edit system best supports an editorial method workflow is just a debate over which process is best suited to individual needs. And I think both FCPX and Premiere have strengths that allow editors to mold that process to each editors' liking.

However, the idea that renaming clips would be used to better serve organizational needs and might be an efficient use of time just makes no sense. An average piece that I work on these days will have two camera media for all interviews, main camera b-roll, second cam b-roll, drone footage, osmo footage and client provided material as well. I'm looking at hundreds of clips as my raw base. To change the naming conventions of these clips as a way to better catalog and isolate types of footage or to denote good takes vs unusable stuff would be a massive waste of my time.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 5:17:49 pm

[Bill Davis] "But it's NOT messing it up Oliver.
Based on my observations, X works with 3 levels of clip organization - the deep machine IDs in HEX never change once any asset is created "


You are missing the point. Yes, the internal workings have a unique file ID, regardless of what the user labels the file inside the NLE *. However, to purposefully rename a media file using the name of another valid media file name, simply to cheat the sorting system - thus creating duplicates or flopped file names - is asking for trouble. It's certainly possible from a technical standpoint, but something that will totally mess up your mind at some later point in time. It is extremely poor editing discipline.

* Avid invented that, BTW. FCP "legacy" developers chose not to use that, because they were tied to QuickTime. So maybe you didn't know that's been how other NLEs have always worked. My apologies if you already knew that. Not trying to be pedantic, just clarifying.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 6:22:32 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Except that is breaks down when you need to make and retain direct comparisons."

So, Auditions does not work for you here? If I were doing that, I would load the hero takes into an audition and play them back that way. Even in Avid and Legacy I would use subclips and bins for my material. Note, back in those "legacy days" I was doing mainly 30 second film spots so the footage was not overwhelming.

sw

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 7:36:55 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "So, Auditions does not work for you here? If I were doing that, I would load the hero takes into an audition and play them back that way"

As stated in other responses, too much to mess with. Takes you away from actually editing, just in prepping the auditions. Auditions are great for editors who can't make a decision. ☺

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 6:03:36 am

[Oliver Peters] " Auditions are great for editors who can't make a decision."

I see it as for editors who make the best decisions.... ;-)

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 6:22:39 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Except that is breaks down when you need to make and retain direct comparisons."

Certainly not the way I use them.


[Oliver Peters] "By sticking with the browser and being dependent on rejects/favorites, you are forced to reject/hide good alternate takes if you only want to see the "hero" take for each. If not, you always end up looking through all of the good options when you only want one."

Then you're simply using them wrong if you ask me. You can filter by favorites only and you can even tag individual favorites beyond that to whittle matters down even further. I don't see how that doesn't do exactly what it is you describe without a single clip hitting the timeline. If you do it right that is.


[Oliver Peters] "OTOH, if you use stringouts, you can save a version with all the good takes, dupe the sequence, and then cut down the sequence to just one good option of each."

And, for me, that's exactly where e.g. AUDITIONS come into play, if needed. But then I can for example see every Scene 2 line X, Y or Z in one fell swoop if I do my homework. Again, without a single clip hitting the timeline. And with one click I can call up any and all of said lines or takes for whomever wants to see them as well.


[Oliver Peters] "One issue with browser organization and FCPX's ability to play through the visible clips is that you always see them in the sorting order of the browser. Clip 1, then 2, then 3, and so on."

Again, there are easy ways around that, if you know how and that's what you need. There are various methods of filtering by any given criteria. By NAME is just one of MANY. No flipping through endless "selects" timelines etc. needed. Certainly no "pancaking".

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 7:35:18 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "You can filter by favorites only and you can even tag individual favorites beyond that to whittle matters down even further. I don't see how that doesn't do exactly what it is you describe without a single clip hitting the timeline."

So you spend 90% of your time messing around with browser organization instead of actually editing.

[Robin S. Kurz] "And, for me, that's exactly where e.g. AUDITIONS come into play, if needed"

Too much effort to prep for a relatively easy need.

[Robin S. Kurz] "Certainly no "pancaking""

Too bad. It would make X better, just like 7 used to be ☺

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 12, 2017 at 8:07:19 pm

Oliver Peters So you spend 90% of your time messing around with browser organization instead of actually editing.

Because of the organizing done up front, you are editing as you place those choices in the timeline as you go. And yes you can do precise edits in the browser unlike what Simon said.

Oh well, we all edit differently and like what we like.


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 12:23:40 pm

[Oliver Peters] "So you spend 90% of your time messing around with browser organization instead of actually editing.

[Robin S. Kurz] "Certainly no "pancaking""

Too bad. It would make X better, just like 7 used to be ☺"


Maybe I'm missing something here. But one reason I don't do string outs anymore is that the filmstrip view in the Browser is basically a string out. Is it tangibly different having a whole bunch of named sequence string outs versus having a bunch of keyworded selections? And given the way the skimmer works in the browser I'd say it's more efficient than a string out. Not to mention FCP X's weird timeline history makes string outs even less efficient. Plus it's easier to go from browser to timeline than timeline to timeline.

And to those that argue there is no spatial information in the browser, well that's just wrong and uninformed. Yes it has a horizontal and vertical orientation versus only a horizontal one, but one might argue that's a MORE efficient use of space.

I also find throwing a lot into a timeline really slows down the editing process. Maybe my brain's channel capacity is more limited than others. ☺ If you have the luxury of time, it's not a bad way to work. But, you essentially have to make decisions twice about whether a clip belongs in the edit. In my editing process I work with what I think belongs in there. Cut what's not working. When I don't quite have what I need, I go back to the browser. I just find it faster that way.

--------------------------
Brett Sherman
One Man Band (If it's video related I'll do it!)
I work for an institution that probably does not want to be associated with my babblings here.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 5:38:08 am

[Brett Sherman] "But, you essentially have to make decisions twice about whether a clip belongs in the edit. In my editing process I work with what I think belongs in there. Cut what's not working. When I don't quite have what I need, I go back to the browser. I just find it faster that way."

Yes


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 5:30:53 am

I guess stringouts is a nice workaround in PP since organizing in the project pane using bins is well....not that great.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 1:25:48 pm

Another variation to the theme:

https://www.provideocoalition.com/art-cut-doc-editing-maya-mumma/

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 2:35:37 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jun 13, 2017 at 2:40:11 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Another variation to the theme:"

Interesting choice to point to, considering…

"I have many, many bins, and many, many sequences where things are organized before I even start to “edit.” It makes the edit project fairly complex, but at the same time it’s where I start to find the story, and themes, and ideas: through the organization of the media itself."

I'd say pretty much proving everyone else's point, yes. 👍🏼 And is in complete contradiction to the article at hand.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 13, 2017 at 2:58:15 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "I'd say pretty much proving everyone else's point, yes. 👍🏼 And is in complete contradiction to the article at hand."

Only if you choose to view the world from a very limited perspective.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mark Smith
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 1:36:29 am

From afar, it seems like the PrPro advocates and the FCPX advocates are sort of arguing about the same thing just different ways to acheive that same thing. The Always BE Editing (is this the same as Always Be Closing as exemplified by the dialog in Glengarry Glenross? ) school seems to defy the fact that with complex projects there really does need to be an organizational scheme when you have lots of hours of footage.
It seems to me this discussion could be called "how do you get to know your material?" There is the Simon way - always be editing stringout method and the Robin Kurz- Bill Davis tagging, keywording mode.
I find it interesting that the editor cited in the second article Oliver posted uses DV tape as grounding metaphor for how she "processes" or gets to know her material.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 5:12:35 am

[Mark Smith] "I find it interesting that the editor cited in the second article Oliver posted uses DV tape as grounding metaphor for how she "processes" or gets to know her material"

Precisely. We all have mental constructs that make us comfortable, and what makes ANY process comfortable is repetition.

We are all "stuck in our ways", because to be anything else means you live in constant uncertainty and inefficiency. Our "normal" whatever that is - is what comforts us. It may be Walter Murch surveying his wall of index cards or knowing how the FileMaker Pro database is structured - it may be Simon imagining his storyline as a big block of Carrara Marble - and it just as easily be me skimming through footage expecting to REJECT everything between the last "cut" and the next "action" - only to see an unexpected whip pan while the camera (inadvertently left rolling while moving between setups) and settles on the company logo on the wall after a blaze of color. I'd probably tag that range as WOW before moving along - secure that I OWN that randomly discovered shot now - even if I have no clue whether or IF it may ever contribute to my work.

But apparently that's dumb.

Because there's no way when your being a SCULPTOR!! (Pause here for the trumpet volley) to tuck away a piece of marble that may or may not fit the eventual statue. (That just ain't how sculpture works, does it?) Once the chisel strikes, the surface falls away. You must KNOW with absolute certainty the shape of your vision hidden inside the Block of stone. Because gods forbid you accidentally chip off Venus's nipple.

What continues to bother me about much of this thread is the vague presumption that we even need to point out the imagined purported deficiencies in ANYBODY else's workflow. (Move along dude, there are SCULPTORS working here - Bricklayers meet in the basement.)

It's pretty overtly arrogant on its face, IMO.

My 2 cents.

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


Return to posts index

Mark Smith
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 10:55:23 am

Bill Davis-
What continues to bother me about much of this thread is the vague presumption that we even need to point out the imagined purported deficiencies in ANYBODY else's workflow. (Move along dude, there are SCULPTORS working here - Bricklayers meet in the basement.)

I think that pretty much nails it. Sculptors are artists and bricklayers are pedestrian. So what if the bricklayer was some one creating a mosaic and not a bricklayer which is a perjorative term in this forum of artists. I can still vividly recall the mosaics left behind by the people who occupied the Matsada , an ancient mountain top city in southern Israel. Those mosaic compositions weren't waiting to be carved out of the abundandant rock of the mountain, but rather created 'additively' from thousands of little pieces that some artist organized and composed into their final form, with tiny 'bricks' by a bricklayer.
The additive-reductive argument seems more like a self justification for claiming one way you make 'art' and are therefore and artist and the other way you are a chump.
Maybe Simon would like to make a video of what his editing process is like so we can all learn something from him. Hopefully he doesn't edit as fast as Thomas Carter, I always need to watch his stuff frame by frame as he edits both addtiively and reductively a bit too fast .


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 12:46:41 pm

[Mark Smith] "Hopefully he doesn't edit as fast as Thomas Carter, I always need to watch his stuff frame by frame as he edits both addtiively and reductively a bit too fast ."

Ironically, TGC's demos are the epitome of a subtractive/sculpting workflow. ☺ And yes, there's organization at the front end. Which is why some of us have been arguing all along that this thread was never about NLE wars, but rather style.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mark Smith
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 3:29:55 pm

I don't have an NLE dog in this fight. While I don't use Premiere I don't have any grudges against it. I'd like see a demo video of what Simon is describing, maybe it will open my eyes to some new possibilities.

Editing is both constructive and reductive, so yeah TGC carves away as he edits, but he also builds as virtually every editor does. It could be that the sculptor metaphor is just ill suited in this case. Stone carvers are pure reductionists, editors are only somewhat reductionist. Editors also have 'snapshots' and tons of levels of 'undo'.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 6:27:09 am
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jun 14, 2017 at 7:01:03 am

[Oliver Peters] "Only if you choose to view the world from a very limited perspective."

😂… sure, Oliver. Talk about a arbitrary straw man. As if that had anything to do with anything. Just ignore the quote to cloak the actual context of what I meant as well as the capriciousness of your "argument".

"That's a really grown up way to have a discussion."…

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 12:34:22 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Just ignore the quote to cloak the actual context of what I meant as well as the capriciousness of your "argument"."

I'm not going to try to explain to you how cherry-picking quotes that support your particular POV is out of context.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 3:59:35 pm

In reading the comments here, I wonder if the majority of the posters in this thread have missed Simon's point entirely. It's right in the title: Always Be Editing.

Collections and bins hold clips. A string-out, being a sequence, is fundamentally different; it holds edits, or sets of clips that are juxtaposed linearly in time. That juxtaposition in time, the choices that Simon continuously iterates over in his method, is the "value" over a mere set of clips.

You have to start putting one clip after another eventually. Simon's ABE method does it from the beginning. That's a really interest shift in perspective from how a lot of us work.

Somewhere, Sergei Eisenstein is reading the comments in this thread that the browser IS a stringout, and he's weeping.

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

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 4:47:38 pm

[Walter Soyka] "In reading the comments here, I wonder if the majority of the posters in this thread have missed Simon's point entirely. It's right in the title: Always Be Editing. "

Has it occurred to you that they don't feel his method is effective?

The organizational tools in X are so effective it's hard to make an argument against them, so the case becomes.........oh, just by pass those tools and dump everything into timelines, (arguable taking away a key strength X)

No thanks


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 5:09:58 pm

[Tony West] "Has it occurred to you that they don't feel his method is effective?"

It's clear to me that they don't feel his method is effective. But I don't think enough people have thought the ABE method through -- or heaven forbid, actually tried it! -- before making a snap judgement on its efficacy. I know how much the regulars here hate it when someone trashes FCPX's new way of working without actually trying it, yet a number of folks have been very quick to do just that with Simon's NLE-agnostic approach.

ABE is not equivalent to "convert your bins to stringouts" and I doubt that many here have every actually work this way in any application.


[Tony West] "The organizational tools in X are so effective it's hard to make an argument against them, so the case becomes.........oh, just by pass those tools and dump everything into timelines, (arguable taking away a key strength X) No thanks"

Consider ABE with the same open-mindedness that you needed to adopt FCPX in the first place -- and remember that FCPX has a lot of other strengths! The magnetic timeline itself, the skimmer, roles, and the timeline index would all play nicely with the ABE approach.

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

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 11:01:39 pm

[Walter Soyka] "It's clear to me that they don't feel his method is effective. But I don't think enough people have thought the ABE method through -- or heaven forbid, actually tried it! -- before making a snap judgement on its efficacy. "

Oh my...

how I yearn to be able to go back 4 years, substitute the word Magnetic for ABE - and post this in this very forum.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 8:11:42 pm

[Bill Davis] "Oh my... how I yearn to be able to go back 4 years, substitute the word Magnetic for ABE - and post this in this very forum."

Surely, the biggest lesson of this forum is that one who says something is impossible should never interrupt another who is doing it!

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

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 7:00:11 am

[Walter Soyka] "But I don't think enough people have thought the ABE method through "

So you just can't imagine somebody looking at this and not agreeing with YOU. They must not be thinking right.

[Walter Soyka] "or heaven forbid, actually tried it!"

Have YOU tried it?

[Walter Soyka] " yet a number of folks have been very quick to do just that with Simon's NLE-agnostic approach."

I just asked people to explain how it's more efficient then using the browser. If they feel it's not, they can just say that.


[Walter Soyka] "Consider ABE with the same open-mindedness that you needed to adopt FCPX in the first place "

I didn't like X at first, until I found it was more efficient than the way I was working before. Maybe this way could be.

Are you working this way on docs Walter" If so how long have you been doing it?


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 6:38:35 pm

[Tony West] "So you just can't imagine somebody looking at this and not agreeing with YOU. They must not be thinking right."

Tony, I must have been unclear. I haven't expressed a value judgment on ABE-style sculpting yet, but more on that a little later. I'm just saying that a lot of people here are talking past Simon's article. They seem to have missed a key point in Simon's approach -- always cut in context -- and I was hoping that starting on the same page would make this discussion a lot more interesting.

There's a lot of emotion here, too. You summed it up:

[Tony West] "The debate breaks down right across NLE lines and anybody that can't see that is not being truthful. All the same people who use X as their favorite tool are against and folks who don't are for. Simple as that. I just don't happen to think that's a coincidence."

Let's drop that! Simon is describing a really interesting, non-traditional way of cutting that works in any NLE. That is the kind of conversation I hang out here for.

I'll start. My name is Walter, and I'm a bricklayer.

I'm a so-called digital native, but I learned to edit on a Sony RM-400 or 450 or the like, controlling a pair of U-Matic decks. Maybe I'm carrying some old-school linear baggage with me, but for me, editing has always been about what I choose to put in, not what I choose to take out.

When I was cutting full-time in FCP Legend, I spent a lot of time in the Browser. Like a hipster burning his mouth on his coffee, I was drinking metadata before it was cool. I subclipped the heck out of my footage. I used color-coding and scene/take columns and the Good Take checkbox. I wore out the Alt key on my keyboard scrubbing picons, then I freely switched to column view and pretended the browser was Excel. I gave myself fake smart collections with constant Find operations.

I appreciate the browser-first approach Bill preaches for FCPX, and I appreciate the strength of the toolset in FCPX. I even actually use FCPX from time to time!

But I use the browser everywhere: FCPX, Pr, even After Effects. I avoid Photoshop and do stills work in Ae, in part Photoshop has no browser equivalent!

I cut a piece a couple weeks ago in Premiere, and I did my entire rough cut in the browser in icon view. I made my view of a couple of bins full-screen, I did a bunch of hover scrubbing and poster framing, and I re-arranged the clips within the bin like one big storyboard. Simon's first step is to make a sequence from his footage; here, that was my very last step.

But it strikes me that Simon and I still have something in common in our approaches here, even though mine was additive and oversimplified while his is subtractive and rich: we were both working in context. I could see in my pseudo-storyboard what I was putting before and after each shot, and that juxtaposition of sequential shots was more important than any one shot in particular. I cut a lot of good shots out because they didn't fit with their neighbors, and I went out to find others that did. There's an interesting contrast here between the other browser-first methodology described in this thread of prepping selections is isolation, then combining them later.

Anyway, I can't answer all the questions that you and Jeremy and Bill and Robin are asking. ABE isn't my go-to approach. But it obviously works well for Simon, and I'm eager to hear more about how other people work so I can learn.

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

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 8:52:07 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Jun 15, 2017 at 9:25:23 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I'm a so-called digital native, but I learned to edit on a Sony RM-400 or 450 or the like, controlling a pair of U-Matic decks. Maybe I'm carrying some old-school linear baggage with me, but for me, editing has always been about what I choose to put in, not what I choose to take out. "

It's interesting you mention this because "my method" (it really isn't my method - many, many editors use it in one form or another across every genre) originated in working with tape (and film).

Cutting on tape, you could either laboriously go to your box of tapes and stuff a new one in your deck and shuttle up or down until you found the next shot you needed. Eject the tape, find the next tape, shuttle up or down, find the next shot. And so on. A lot of fun if your idea of fun was stuffing tapes and waiting while they shuttled to the right place.

Or you could create a single selects reel from your source tapes and edit from there with an absolute minimum of stuffing and shuttling. Of course, generation loss made this less than ideal and you would usually have to rebuild the final edit from the original tapes, but the time saved in the actual creative part of the edit made this an overwhelmingly preferable route.

Which is why when NLEs came along ...

I think you can probably see how this feeds into the current discussion.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 11:30:25 pm

[Oliver Peters] "In many docs, the editor is the de facto director and even writer. Yes, there may be a director in name, but it's often the editor who shapes the story and does indeed make the decisions of what to keep and remove. And what to re-arrange to tell a cogent story. So yes, it is your call."

That's mainly my experience as well. I take on a producing/writing role as the editor and the director and/or producer expect me to know the footage better than anyone. They'll of course have their ideas and input, but usually it's more of a skeleton. They want to go from A to B to C, but exactly how to create a cohesive and compelling narrative path in order to get from A to B to C falls on me. Sometimes A to B to C doesn't work so I have to know the footage well enough to be able to create a new order and a new narrative path. More than once we've been three months into an edit, hit a snag (or an epiphany) and back to the raw we go reanalyzing it in a way that wasn't conceivable three months prior. This is a big reason why I love transcripts. It's so quick and easy to go back and skim (or keyword search) though them long after memories of who said exactly what, when and where have faded.

That's not to say I haven't worked on projects where I basically walk into a waiting string out (or paper cut) and I never have to have a working knowledge of the raw footage, it's just not typical for me.



[Walter Soyka] "When I was cutting full-time in FCP Legend, I spent a lot of time in the Browser. Like a hipster burning his mouth on his coffee, I was drinking metadata before it was cool. I subclipped the heck out of my footage. I used color-coding and scene/take columns and the Good Take checkbox. I wore out the Alt key on my keyboard scrubbing picons, then I freely switched to column view and pretended the browser was Excel. I gave myself fake smart collections with constant Find operations."

I used to work very similar to that too, but I started drifting more towards subtractive editing when tapeless media became more popular. Someone might record 100 different shots to tape on a shoot, but when it got ingested you could do the whole tape at once and those 100 different shots would all be contained w/in a single piece of media. With tapeless you end up with 100 piece of media. When I was trying to figure out how to organize it all (renaming hundreds upon hundreds of clips every day or so wasn't feasible) I had the idea of putting all the media shot to a card in its own sequence and treating that sequence like a tape (CamA01, CamA02, CamA03 etc.,). For me the switch from mainly additive to mainly subtractive wasn't some sort of philosophical shift or 'awakening' it was just a pragmatic way to adapt to a changing post world. Over the years I just kept experimenting and refining my methods to best suit the work I do (which is almost exclusively doc/unscripted) and the manner in which I like to work.

It wasn't until this thread that I really thought about how my approached to editing has changed over the last fifteen years.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 5:52:11 am

[Andrew Kimery] "So yes, it is your call."

That's mainly my experience as well. I take on a producing/writing role as the editor and the director and/or producer expect me to know the footage better than anyone. They'll of course have their ideas and input, but usually it's more of a skeleton. "


I thought about this later. I wrote, directed, shot and edited my film. I knew exactly what I was doing, but yeah you might be working with some clueless people that need you to help them tell their own story.

I would make your job easy because I would actually be...............directing.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 5:24:40 am

[Walter Soyka] "There's a lot of emotion here"

I will try to tone it down Walter. Sorry for the miscommunication.

[Walter Soyka] " I'm eager to hear more about how other people work so I can learn."

That's actually why I'm on here also Walter. That's why I was asking people about their experience using this method on a
doc as a producer, and why I was getting a little frustrated. I'm not here for performance art.

It seemed like people were speaking in theory instead of actual practice and I prefer to learn from the work.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 5:20:33 pm

[Tony West] "The organizational tools in X are so effective it's hard to make an argument against them, so the case becomes.........oh, just by pass those tools and dump everything into timelines, (arguable taking away a key strength X)"

Where the communications break down in this discussion is that the folks that advocate for only X's approach don't want to acknowledge that others have also been using X for 6 years and come to a different conclusion. That's why it's unproductive to frame this as an X versus others discussion.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 5:40:23 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Where the communications break down in this discussion is that the folks that advocate for only X's approach don't want to acknowledge that others have also been using X for 6 years and come to a different conclusion. That's why it's unproductive to frame this as an X versus others discussion.
"


That's exactly what it is.

The debate breaks down right across NLE lines and anybody that can't see that is not being truthful.

All the same people who use X as their favorite tool are against and folks who don't are for. Simple as that.

I just don't happen to think that's a coincidence.

BTW you still haven't answered my simple question. What is the method to find the clips that you cut out of the timeline? Just explain it. It shouldn't be that hard since you supposedly use this method all the time.


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 5:53:37 pm

[Tony West] "BTW you still haven't answered my simple question. What is the method to find the clips that you cut out of the timeline? Just explain it. It shouldn't be that hard since you supposedly use this method all the time."

Not to answer for Oliver, but Simon covers this in his article.

"I duplicated that sequence five times to make sequences of all the material for each woman. Then I made duplicates of those duplicates and began removing everything I didn’t want."

You string everything out, then duplicate your sequence. Cut away. If you need to go back to a clip, you open the original string out and grab it.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 6:03:06 pm

[Michael Hancock] ""I duplicated that sequence five times to make sequences of all the material for each woman. Then I made duplicates of those duplicates and began removing everything I didn’t want."

You string everything out, then duplicate your sequence. Cut away. If you need to go back to a clip, you open the original string out and grab it."


I'm glad you posted that Michael because when I saw that section in the article it became really clear that it wouldn't be more efficient.

Now that you have gotten this far go ahead and explain how that method would be more efficient than the two clicks to see the shot I want, as I posted in here earlier in the thread.


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 6:17:44 pm

Which NLE are you using? In Avid, you load your original stringout into your source monitor and your cutdown into your record. When you need to find a shot you've cut out you just toggle your timeline view to the source monitor and everything is there.

In Premiere you pancake so everything is always visible to you, all the time. Or tab the sequences.

In FCPX you load the original stringout, toggle to it, find the clip you want and copy it, the toggle back and paste it. Ironically, FCPX is least friendly to this method. So maybe it's because of this the browser seems to be the best option? If FCPX allowed you to skim a sequence in the event browser and see the edits in that sequence in a toggled timeline (like Avid) it wouldn't be such a hassle. Or if they had tabbed sequences like FCP7 or Premiere so you could just click directly one sequence to another, it would be easier.

And remember, you can add markers like Andrew does to subdivide sections so it's easy to find what you're looking for, or to even add notes that are searchable.

Have you tried Simon's method? I've never worked like he does but I'm trying it on two projects right now, and my early feelings are that I like it a lot. I typically use favorites, keywords, smart collections and detailed notes when I edit (in FCPX), and so far I haven't felt like I'm missing anything by using string outs. It's surprised me.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 6:35:38 pm

[Michael Hancock] "Which NLE are you using?"

You must not have scrolled back to read my post if you are asking : ) That's OK


[Michael Hancock] "Have you tried Simon's method?"

I'm using a string-outt right now on a multi-cam interview but I'm keeping most of the material so it makes since.

In cutting something where you are using only say, 10 percent of the source material it makes less sense to me.


[Michael Hancock] "In FCPX you load the original stringout, toggle to it, find the clip you want and copy it, the toggle back and paste it."

Now for me, that's not more efficient than what I explained above in this thread but if it is for you, then keep doing it.


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 7:59:34 pm

[Tony West] "You must not have scrolled back to read my post if you are asking : ) That's OK"

I know which NLE you use. ☺ My comment was more to illustrate how Avid and Premiere seem more adept at the stringout method because of FCPXs handling of sequences.

[Tony West] "Now for me, that's not more efficient than what I explained above in this thread but if it is for you, then keep doing it."

It's less than ideal - I'd prefer to have a tabbed sequence, pancake, or better yet be able to scrub a sequence in the event browser and edit clips directly from it (without having to make a sequence a compound clip and lose all reference to the individual edits). I'll send Apple another feature request.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 6:44:55 am

[Michael Hancock] "I know which NLE you use. ☺"

Maybe next time go ahead a skip this part then "Which NLE are you using?" : )



[Michael Hancock] "My comment was more to illustrate how Avid and Premiere seem more adept at the stringout method because of FCPXs handling of sequences. "

Probably because if you are using X the way it was designed to be used you wouldn't need string-outs.

[Michael Hancock] "It's less than ideal"

Have you cut a doc using this method as a director or producer?


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 8:01:17 pm

[Michael Hancock] "It's surprised me."

I'm very glad to hear you have found it useful, Michael.

I didn't mean to start a war here.

I just wanted to share a method that I have found extremely useful both practically and creatively over many, many years of editing across many different genres. A lot of the editors that I have trained and worked with have agreed as to its benefits which in my view are many and varied. Some will disagree and prefer their own method and that's all fine by me.

And apologies to everyone for my clumsy bricklayer metaphor. I have great respect for bricklayers of all kinds whether real or metaphorical.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 11:51:53 pm
Last Edited By Andrew Kimery on Jun 14, 2017 at 11:53:33 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "And apologies to everyone for my clumsy bricklayer metaphor. I have great respect for bricklayers of all kinds whether real or metaphorical.
"


So sculptors and painters then, bricklayers are out? ;)


Edit: Sculptors and Stone Masons, maybe?


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 10:42:50 am
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jun 15, 2017 at 11:18:38 am

[Michael Hancock] "In FCPX you load the original stringout, toggle to it, find the clip you want and copy it, the toggle back and paste it."

Wow. That describes THE most counterproductive, hobbling, inefficient workflow I can think of in the context of X, yes. Whether "pancaked" or not.


[Michael Hancock] "Ironically, FCPX is least friendly to this method."

Er, yeah. And why? Because: it makes absolutely no sense i.e. that would be by far the least efficient approach. So… absolutely no irony anywhere to be seen actually. Just common sense and unneeded. If you know the software and aren't just simply bogged down but old habits of yesteryear.


[Michael Hancock] "you can add markers like Andrew does to subdivide sections so it's easy to find what you're looking for, or to even add notes that are searchable."

I have no idea why I would want to do that, when I can get any and everything I'm looking for in a single click. Done. No marking, no skimming, no switching, not anything of such a convoluted nature. Be it I use Favorites, Keywords, Smart Keywords or any of the other endless filtering options X offers me.

And mind you, I'm not saying that the whole classic "string-out" method as described is a bad or useless approach per se (I'll actually do it occasionally do it for e.g. interviews, to whittle them down to what it is I want/need said). I am — and I'd venture to say every other X user here arguing similarly are — merely saying it may be GREAT for any number of other NLEs and by all means, if it works for you and even improves something, go for it! But if that's what someone's doing in X, then they just plain haven't understood the software and could be much more efficient using various other methods. With that, they're just using X as if it were their old NLE, whichever that may have been. And they need to actually learn the software and their options and allow for at least a bit of rethinking, after which they'll realize that this isn't an efficient approach in comparison to what other options you're given. Cuz sorry, but… five timelines??! 🤦🏼‍♂️ Ouch.


[Michael Hancock] "Have you tried Simon's method?"

Yeah. I.e. something that only differed in some minor points. For well over 10 years prior to X. Which is why I can say from personal experience, that it's a convoluted, messy habit I couldn't have been happier to drop asap. Everything described can be done and done better long before you ever even create a timeline. In X.

- RK


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 6:45:02 pm

[Tony West] "What is the method to find the clips that you cut out of the timeline? Just explain it. It shouldn't be that hard since you supposedly use this method all the time."

Simply go back to the earlier version of the duped sequence/snapshot and look. Same as you would do in X, once you delete a clip from a project (sequence) in X.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 7:07:11 am

[Oliver Peters] "Simply go back to the earlier version of the duped sequence/snapshot and look. Same as you would do in X, once you delete a clip from a project (sequence) in X."

Doesn't sound more efficient than favorites.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 11:40:54 am

[Tony West] "Doesn't sound more efficient than favorites."

OK. So let me turn the question around based on your scenario. You've assigned favorites and cut them into your sequence. After revisions, you decide to drop a lot of the shots. How do you know which of the favorites is no longer used in your cut? FCPX assigns "used" metadata, but no "previously used but removed" indicators. Seems like the same situation.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 12:34:10 pm

[Oliver Peters] "FCPX assigns "used" metadata, but no "previously used but removed" indicators."

What could I possibly need that information for? Quite the red herring if you ask me. Never mind that there are always snapshots or various other options to give or retain that information to/for me if I actually think I might need it in the future.

So even if, for whatever abstrus reason I need that particular info, if I've done my homework, and that's what this is all about, then I will know exactly what is or was where if needed. I for one know exactly where which footage is that could be or could have been of any interest at any time when I edit. Again, if not, then one simply doesn't know the tools.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 1:52:27 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "What could I possibly need that information for? Quite the red herring if you ask me. Never mind that there are always snapshots or various other options to give or retain that information to/for me if I actually think I might need it in the future."

It was a response to Tony's original question about finding clips that were cut out of sequences in a stringout method. I already spelled out snapshots, etc. in my earlier reply.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 2:13:09 pm

[Oliver Peters] "It was a response to Tony's original question"

Which still doesn't answer mine.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 2:16:41 pm

[Oliver Peters] "no "previously used but removed" indicators."

Robin already beat me to it so I will just say, anybody that has ever cut a doc as a producer or director knows that out of a 2 hour interview you are going to end up using maybe 10 minutes if that. You are looking for very specific sound bites on the topic being covered. Once they say that, THAT'S what's going in the film. Most times you hear it when they say it during the interview. It was never a question in my mind which bites were going in.

If you are not the director it's not going to be your call anyway, of what goes in my story. Back in the day they walked in and said go to this tc and go to that tc. They already had that info to cut down on the time they have to pay you. If they didn't do that, then they don't have a clue.

The concept of dumping hours and hours of footage into the timeline that you know very little of is going to stay, is not an efficient way of going about your work, and as somebody that has experience producing a doc I know would never pay anybody to sit there and do that.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 3:26:45 pm

[Tony West] "If you are not the director it's not going to be your call anyway, of what goes in my story. Back in the day they walked in and said go to this tc and go to that tc. They already had that info to cut down on the time they have to pay you. If they didn't do that, then they don't have a clue."

In many docs, the editor is the de facto director and even writer. Yes, there may be a director in name, but it's often the editor who shapes the story and does indeed make the decisions of what to keep and remove. And what to re-arrange to tell a cogent story. So yes, it is your call.

The director may review your work and ask for alternates, but in my experience, they almost never have the patience to sit through the raw interviews and make such decisions.

That's often the way reality TV works, too, although usually editors work in tandem with story producers. The days of a producer knowing what TC to go to have long passed. I rarely ever work with producers or directors who still have that discipline anymore.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 6:00:25 pm

[Oliver Peters] "FCPX assigns "used" metadata, but no "previously used but removed" indicators."

A "tried this and it didn't work" tag? Wouldn't the mean that it didn't work before but it might work again? And wouldn't that simply be a favorite that doesn't have a "used" tag?


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 2:29:04 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "And wouldn't that simply be a favorite that doesn't have a "used" tag?"

Exactly. That or simply tagged somehow else. That was pretty much my previous point as well, yes.

As I do my first review of all the footage (obviously something I have to do no matter what, with or without director or producer) I simply Favorite or have the first top five relevant keywords (automatically) mapped to ctrl-1 thru 5. One of many examples: I recently edited a promo for a pet shop of sorts and immediately tagged Cat, Dog, or BOTH for the same clip, names of people etc. Rejecting (e.g. slates, flubs etc.) removes everything that most definitely won't make it to the timeline, never to be seen again, unless I want to.

All this happens in multiples of realtime while skimming through the media. Skim click, skim click, skim click… After that I could, if I wanted, have a stringout of any and everything of any interest to me in just two clicks. Be it my favorites, my cats, my dogs… yadda yadda. OR I simply have a perfect overview of everything in my event in filmstrip view for me, a director, a producer, my mom to say "ooh, THAT shot". Always ONLY seeing what is of any overall relevance to me as per the first run through. Ergo: the least amount of clutter possible.

And yes, I'm 110% sure that that is exponentially more efficient than shuffling through 5 timelines. Especially as the edit progresses!

With interviews I skim through, select the parts I want, favorite them and then, in the order I select those favorites on a single clip, that's the order they land in the timeline with a simple click of the E-key for a perfect frankenbite. Try that from one timeline to the next. 😏

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 11:49:21 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Where the communications break down in this discussion is that the folks that advocate for only X's approach don't want to acknowledge that others have also been using X for 6 years and come to a different conclusion. That's why it's unproductive to frame this as an X versus others discussion."

Well, theres' actually another equally valid interpretation of this thread.

That the original post "as written" was pretty rude.

And NOT because it was about FCP X.

It was rude on a level beyond that.

The reasoning would be that it artificially divided people who are working editors - into distinct classes (whatever those classes might have been) and offered a clear implication that one of those classes of people was "better" than the other.

If the opinion expressed had been was ONLY those who cut on AVID are trimming "sculptors" and if someone elects to trim in Premiere that makes them a dismissible trimming "bricklayer" - wouldn't that have been just as rude a concept to express in a professional editing forum?

Rude because if you simply ACCEPT that as true, you would be implying that an entire class of editors is less worthy of esteem than another not by virtue of their skill, but exclusively by virtue of their professional tool choice.

And publicly implying that type of thing is kinda what rude means, doesn't it?

I'm just asking.

😊

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


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 12:46:43 am

[Bill Davis] "That the original post "as written" was pretty rude.

And NOT because it was about FCP X. "


I think there's been an attempt by a sub-group of folks within this thread to emphasize that the debate isn't really about the edit systems and instead it's about the overall approach to the editorial process.

What seems to be getting lost in all of this is the fact that the tools used to craft visual stories are ever-changing. For me, my NLE experience began on a media100 system and then I migrated to Avid, then to FCP and now Premiere and on occasion FCPX. And over the years the tools have always just been a means to an end. The most important things I've learned from other editors are stylistic items related to how to most effectively tell a visual story.

It's good to learn technical tricks with each toolset but since the tools are ever-changing, developing solid storytelling skills are much more important in becoming a good editor.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 1:15:21 am

[Bill Davis] "And publicly implying that type of thing is kinda what rude means, doesn't it? "

I think you are reading an intention into the article that wasn't there. But it is about mindset and I do agree that editors fall into one camp or the other, but not necessarily always. I see that from personal observation of other editors that I work along side. Some editors shift between these modes, dependent on the stage of a project or type of project. No value judgement attached.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 9:58:59 am

[Bill Davis] "That the original post "as written" was pretty rude. "

Call me an unreconstructed Marxist but I choose not to rank one person above another according to their socio-economic status.

I would certainly not rank a bricklayer above a sculptor and I would not think highly of anyone who did.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 1:53:35 am

[Simon Ubsdell] "[Bill Davis] "That the original post "as written" was pretty rude. "

Call me an unreconstructed Marxist but I choose not to rank one person above another according to their socio-economic status.

I would certainly not rank a bricklayer above a sculptor and I would not think highly of anyone who did."


Accepted as fair at face value.

I sorta do wish you'd chosen to use the terms "Sculpting" and Bricklaying" in your original post to clearly make it about technique - not people.

Oh well.

Moving on.

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 9:45:04 am

[Bill Davis] "I sorta do wish you'd chosen to use the terms "Sculpting" and Bricklaying" in your original post to clearly make it about technique - not people. "

My French father-in-law, who died just six months ago after a cruel struggle with lung cancer, was a parqueteur all his working life - and what is a layer of parquet other than a bricklayer who works with wood?

Il portait ses bleus avec fierté, secure in the belief that he was "worth" just as much as anyone else in French society.

When you next go to Versailles you will be walking on floors that he painstakingly restored. That's something I would be very proud to be remembered for but for him pride was about doing an honest day's work and providing for his family. It was a privilege to have known him.

All his life he voted staunchly for the partie communiste and in a week like this when, barely a mile from where I live, scores, if not hundreds of lives have been lost in an inferno because poor people matter less than rich people, I can see his point.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 5:34:23 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Collections and bins hold clips. A string-out, being a sequence, is fundamentally different; it holds edits, or sets of clips that are juxtaposed linearly in time. That juxtaposition in time, the choices that Simon continuously iterates over in his method, is the "value" over a mere set of clips."

This is one area where FCP X is different from other programs. The browser can be a "set of clips that are juxtaposed linearly in time" in the filmstrip view. Now you can't reorder clips within it, but usually that defeats the purpose of the string out anyways. I would argue it provides MORE temporal information with Favorites, Keyword indicators, and Used Clip Indicators.

--------------------------
Brett Sherman
One Man Band (If it's video related I'll do it!)
I work for an institution that probably does not want to be associated with my babblings here.


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 6:46:32 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Collections and bins hold clips. A string-out, being a sequence, is fundamentally different; it holds edits, or sets of clips that are juxtaposed linearly in time. That juxtaposition in time, the choices that Simon continuously iterates over in his method, is the "value" over a mere set of clips."

The string-out method starts out with all the clips laid out in the sequence in no order other than how the clips were shot and will be a sequence of clips in alphabetical order. So I see no difference than the clips in the FCP X browser. The clips are not juxtaposed until you start taking away clips you don't want, (rejecting in FCP X) and creating another sequence, (keywording in FCP X or creating a new event).


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 5:56:59 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Collections and bins hold clips. A string-out, being a sequence, is fundamentally different; it holds edits, or sets of clips that are juxtaposed linearly in time. That juxtaposition in time, the choices that Simon continuously iterates over in his method, is the "value" over a mere set of clips."

But how many sets of edits do you need to complete a project? When I send out a review copy, I am only sending one set of edits.

I used to use string outs all of the time, only because it was the best way to handle all of the material in FCP7 (and Premiere). It was the easiest way to slog through lots and lots of footage. After a while, it becomes cumbersome, because you make many sequences, some for "organization" and some for the edit. I think ABE is still alive and well with FCPX. I am always editing in FCPX, even when I'm in the Browser. It is a constant mark up process, and I can choose when or where to get more granular with all the different sort and tag options. With FCPX I am a brick sculptor (get it?). And I know people have said the Auditions don't work, but in my life, they do work. Auditions allow to store a set of different ideas, the difference being that they are right there in the timeline, instead of in some other timeline that I have to search for and implement (usually by making yet a different version of my current sequence all calling it v#b). With FCPX, some of the\ose options and decisions are in the timeline ready to go.

There is also nothing like twirling up (hiding) all of the keywords and collections, selecting one or more Events at root level, and simply skimming footage in FCPX. The skimmed event is a huge repository of organized piles of clay/bricks/stone/rebar/whatever the hell you need it to be. The Project timeline is the foundation from which all of the material is added, formed, and dried. Personally, it is that difference that originally drew me to X, and it has been working. I feel like I have been doing the best work I've ever done, and I owe a smidge of that to FCPX because it is such a creative tool for me.

And as far as happy accidents, they still happen. When skimming footage and seeing a lot of images all at once, you may see two images put together that aren't together in space in the Browser or Timeline, but fit together visually. Those sets of images that zoom past inform ideas, and I then transfer those ideas to the timeline for further sculpting. This process works for me, and may not work for others. I get that, too.

Also, with FCPX, you can have different levels of organization in one area of the interface that aren't as easy to implement in other NLEs, or at least not as easy to use.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 3:54:11 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I used to use string outs all of the time, only because it was the best way to handle all of the material in FCP7 (and Premiere). It was the easiest way to slog through lots and lots of footage. After a while, it becomes cumbersome, because you make many sequences, some for "organization" and some for the edit."

I think it's all ultimately about what makes you comfortable and gets rid of the mental clutter.

In this case, what constitutes mental clutter is what differs from editor to editor:

For you "too many sequences" creates mental clutter.

For editors like me it's "too many bins/keywords/tags/markers/notes".

I can totally accept that your objection to "too many sequences" is a real, lived experience. But then so is my preference for sequences over "proliferating bins, etc."

I never find I have "too many sequences" because for me they are a way of reducing the "clutter" not increasing it.

For both of us the "clutter" that we prefer reduces the "clutter" that we dislike.

Does that make sense?

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 5:44:57 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "I think it's all ultimately about what makes you comfortable and gets rid of the mental clutter.

In this case, what constitutes mental clutter is what differs from editor to editor:"


No question. Too many sequences and I tend to get bogged down in where everything has ended up. And, as has been mentioned, FCPX isn't great a multiple timelines. I would certainly welcome tabbed timelines, even just for mastering, let alone organization of selects.

What I like about the FCPX tagging and mark up is that it allows multiple ways to organize, which is something that bins can't do very well, at least without a lot of media duplication (i.e. Clutter). For instance, the current non-scripted project I'm working on has keywords for the five different cameras that shot this piece. This information doesn't really matter to me, but it does to the director. When he walks in and says "there's a shot where I used the Osmo," I can go to all of the Osmo shots quickly, and then he tells me a day, and I can sort the bin by date and drill down further very quickly. I also have keywords for each location, of which there are 12, so when he is looking for a shot from a particular location, I can go to that keyword and it has all of the footage from that location from all of the cameras used in that location. This would be hard to do with certainly a single bin or even series of bins or sequences. It gets cluttered quickly.

Then I have the keywords that matter to me, the keywords that inform my thought process in editing, and then from there I can simply favorite shots/comments I like for whatever reason, and create a smart collection that dynamically gathers all of my favorites (a group of selects). To me and this probably points to the way I create, it is much easier to keep track of elements and reduce the amount of duplication and clutter.

Also, just for the record, I didn't see your article as a class division between artists and craftsman, but rather different means to the end product of an edited program. Certainly, everyone creates differently and uses the right tool for the right job, even if the goal of the job is more or less the same, and the tool may or may not work as well for another artisan craftsman.

I also think different programs have different needs. Movies/Scripted pieces come in with what is already an established linear organization that starts from the script on paper, and moves the script that was shot on set, to each scene. Once the edit begins, that organization can be fluid, but those boundaries are still present. Docs differ, commercials differ, taking heads differ, and all can require more or less self imposed organization beyond what's on the written page, and can also depend how much has been done in production before the edit even reaches the editor.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 8:29:14 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "To me and this probably points to the way I create, it is much easier to keep track of elements and reduce the amount of duplication and clutter. "

I completely get what you're saying here, even though it's not the way my editing mind works. For me working with sequences rather than conventional organisational methods is about dramatically cutting down on the number of "entities" that I am juggling - fewer bins, fewer keywords, fewer notes, fewer markers, fewer distractions, and most of all less time spent organising and more time spent cutting, cutting, cutting.

For you "unnecessary" sequences are a distraction and simply not helpful. Organisational tools are your gateway to shaping your thinking about the edit.

For me a relatively small number of sequences become repositories for an immense wealth of organisational data and even more importantly creative decision-making. And because I have been editing from so early on, I feel I am getting way ahead of the game. That to me is important too - I want to get a feeling for how it's all going to come together at the earliest possible stage. I just don't get that sort of early feedback from working with the Bin/Browser type method.

But I cannot stress enough that this is a personal choice. To me it makes perfect sense. To you it makes no sense at all. And that's all good.

However, one of the most important things for me about the method that I use is that from the earliest stage of the entire process I am building what I have called "editorial chunks". (I guess you could say these are my version of "bricks"!)

On my timeline, as I work through the material, I am constructing mini units that are going to be doing a lot of heavy lifting for me later on. This is a non-trivial point. It is extremely important to me to be able to construct these elements on the fly and have them readily to hand at any time. I don't want to have to think about "storing" them anywhere except on my evolving timeline and I want to be able to juggle them instantly without having to go looking for them.

A unit might consist of Clip A13 + Clip B2 + Clip C12 + Clip A6, where A-Z represents the stop/start of the entire clip and 1-1000 represents selections from a clip.

I will want to experiment with putting Unit AAA before or after Unit JJJ, or maybe try it next to Unit MMM, and I will want to be doing this long before I have committed to any sort of final shape for my timeline.

That to me is very different from selecting a single range out of a clip in a browser type situation or even playing through from one browser selection to another. These are non-volatile units that persist and persist usefully because they are already edited.

How might you go about doing something similar with your method?

Or maybe this is something you just don't find useful or important?

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 10:46:52 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "How might you go about doing something similar with your method?

Or maybe this is something you just don't find useful or important?"


It is absolutely important.

I think that I put those moments in my timeline, and there they sit. I don't put them in a separate sequence, and marry them to my main sequence.

I used to work the exact way you describe in FCP7, and currently in Pr. It's the only way, really, to put clips together in "mini edits" because bins are difficult to manage in this way. With FCPX, I may keyword or mark the clips of a mini edit, put those clips in the Project and sequence them to my liking. Sometimes, if that mini edit isn't working, I will snapshot the sequence and keep working, or more often, I will put those clips in a secondary storyline or compound, and disable them, and keep them attached to that place in the edit while I work on a new mini edit for that section. That way, it is nearly always in front of me. And that can get a little heavy too, admittedly. It is at that point, that I do snapshot the Project, and delete the stuff I am truly not using out of my main project. And if I did compound the mini edit, that edit (although now, literally, one brick) is recallable from the Browser, and can be edited in to my Project and decompounded. I usually name my Compounds something useful like "*edit" or if I compound clips, say to make one transform on a series of clips (like a slow push in on three shots) I will name them *move and set up smart collections to collect those particular tags. That way, all of those mini edit choices are not in my timeline, but in the browser, and I didn't even have to really put them anywhere as FCPX tracks them in a smart collection that looks for *edit, which is separate from the collection that's looking for *move. Sometimes I make a separate Event for Compounds (you can choose which event the compounds are directed when you make a new compound) or I sometimes make library level smart collections. It really depends on the job.

So really, the principles we are working towards are very similar, we just go about it in a very different way, using the strengths of each NLE's UI and tools. This isn't new knowledge, of course, as it's been hashed out in this thread already.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 11:46:30 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "With FCPX, I may keyword or mark the clips of a mini edit, put those clips in the Project and sequence them to my liking. Sometimes, if that mini edit isn't working, I will snapshot the sequence and keep working, or more often, I will put those clips in a secondary storyline or compound, and disable them, and keep them attached to that place in the edit while I work on a new mini edit for that section. That way, it is nearly always in front of me. "

I think it could be said that what you are doing here is constructing editorial units on the timeline that don't yet have a definitive home on the timeline.

Would that be a fair description?

In which case what you are doing in this instance is the same thing that I am doing, with the difference that you approach this as just one part of your overall editing strategy, whereas for me and others it's the entire editing strategy.

You are sometimes editing "in context" but more often not, whereas we are editing in context all the time. I won't belabour what I mean by this here because I covered it in a lot of specific detail in the article.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 6:24:23 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "I think it could be said that what you are doing here is constructing editorial units on the timeline that don't yet have a definitive home on the timeline.

Would that be a fair description?
"


It would be very fair, if not extremely accurate.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 9:28:42 pm

If anybody cares, that's called X-Bar theory.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 12:18:28 am

So now we have to come up with FCP X-Bar theory.

It's Friday, so first and fifth round's on me!


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 19, 2017 at 8:22:50 pm

At least we're paying attention. :)


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 2:50:06 am

[Simon Ubsdell] "However, one of the most important things for me about the method that I use is that from the earliest stage of the entire process I am building what I have called "editorial chunks". (I guess you could say these are my version of "bricks"!)"

And it strikes me that you have just ideally described the way I think about a vertically and horizontally magnetically connected assembly of assets in X's magnetic timeline!

"Editorial chunks" is EXACTLY how I think about them!

Everything in the total raw material pool unfiltered and sortable not just in such "instant string-outs" as I might wish -, but available with or without whatever curation and/or sorting as I might wish to impose upon it!

All I'm doing is cutting out what I see as "the workflow middleman" that you're describing above.

And cutting out the middleman is often a nice path to better results.

Not always, obviously. There's always systems where additional steps in the supply chain will add value. But in this era, real wealth is being generated by those who learn to work direct as well.

YMMV.

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


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 2:57:52 am

I know you're swamped. But a tutorial video would be awesome. Thanks!


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 3:51:21 am

[Richard Herd] "I know you're swamped. But a tutorial video would be awesome. Thanks!"

A tutorial from both FCPX and Premiere Pro would be nice but an editing contest might be even better. Maybe the folks here http://www.lafcpug.org could do it.

They could provide clips, VOs and images that neither editor has seen and have them edit it on the fly while a few guest speakers talk. It seems like something that should have been done by now. They could output the computer screen of each editor to a projector while the guest speakers are talking. After the guest speakers are done let the two editors explain their techniques and thought process. They may not get a completed edit but it would be interesting to watch. Tutorials are nice but usually edited so that things can seem more fluid than they really are.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 11:16:08 pm

[Walter Soyka] "In reading the comments here, I wonder if the majority of the posters in this thread have missed Simon's point entirely. It's right in the title: Always Be Editing. "

Well Walter, I just don't see this point as consistent with sculpturalists acknowledge that when I started talking about making precision edits inside my event browser some six years ago - what I was doing was an equally valuable form of l "always be editing." - just in a form more consistent with my desire not to LEAVE the benefits of reproducible decisions behind whilst doing it.

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but if one just dumps everything on a Timeline and then goes all sculptural - EVERYTIME you make a removal choice, you can't really easily reconsider. You have to go out and get the whole chunk you've sculpted from - and start all over with it.

Which, in a sense, it's kinda willfully adding destructive alongside reductive isn't it?

Oh well. The sculptor is the ARTIST because he or she must COMMIT, don't you know.

But of course, silly me in thinking I was building ACTUAL useful constructions before I entered my storyline - not sculpting like the big boys - so I suppose I must remain, merely a bricklayer.

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


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 14, 2017 at 11:48:34 pm

Bill -

Have you tried Simon's method?

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 12:13:54 am

As if we need another perspective... 😉

"...subtractive editing can rarely do more than shorten the ordeal of watching the result.

Genuine video editing is not subtractive, but additive. Starting with nothing, you purposefully select and place one shot after another until they add up to a program. Notice that you don't select what to take out but what to put in."

http://www.personal.kent.edu/~lhanson/whatisediting.htm


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 9:10:20 am

From the same article:

If you're a subtractive editor, Grandma gets most of the footage, except maybe where snow splattered on the lens, where a direct shot of the sun flared the image out to blinding white, and where you fell over a pile of snowboards with the camcorder. The result: heeeere's Susie, zigzagging back and forth and back and forth and back and forth across the slope in a numbing repetition brightened only by brief interludes of windmilling into the powder.

Damn!

So that's why my videos of Grandma are so bad.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 12:30:48 pm

[Bill Davis] "Perhaps I'm mistaken, but if one just dumps everything on a Timeline and then goes all sculptural - EVERYTIME you make a removal choice, you can't really easily reconsider. You have to go out and get the whole chunk you've sculpted from - and start all over with it. "

But sculpting sounds so much superior to bricklaying. I must be so. ☺

I'm sure that this method works well for Simon and others. I'm also sure it doesn't work well for me - because I apparently have a lot less time to put edits together than they do. What troubles me about this discussion is the superiority posturing.

--------------------------
Brett Sherman
One Man Band (If it's video related I'll do it!)
I work for an institution that probably does not want to be associated with my babblings here.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 15, 2017 at 6:50:25 pm

[Bill Davis] "Well Walter, I just don't see this point as consistent with sculpturalists acknowledge that when I started talking about making precision edits inside my event browser some six years ago - what I was doing was an equally valuable form of l "always be editing." - just in a form more consistent with my desire not to LEAVE the benefits of reproducible decisions behind whilst doing it."

Bill, this is exactly the nuance that I hope we can explore here.

I'd argue that you are making precision SELECTIONS in the event browser. They're not precision EDITS until they're made in the context of their neighbors in a timeline. There's something to montage theory.

I see the value of context -- please see my other post where I talk about my storyboard edit as a way of achieving some form of browser-side context. You prefer to evaluate clips in isolation. I'm curious to understand better what benefit you are trying to keep ("reproducible decisions") as you trade away context.

Yours in bricklaying,

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

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 16, 2017 at 5:58:00 pm

For those who feel more comfortable with X's methods for extensive browser metadata, selections, and annotation, T Payton posted a very good 2-part blog at FrameIO:

https://blog.frame.io/2016/10/18/make-fcp-x-log-better-1/

https://blog.frame.io/2016/11/02/make-fcp-x-log-better-2/

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 4:49:52 am

[Walter Soyka] "I'd argue that you are making precision SELECTIONS in the event browser. They're not precision EDITS until they're made in the context of their neighbors in a timeline. There's something to montage theory"

OK, I'll bite.

And argue (a bit tongue in cheek) that your fully "sculptural" editor is needlessly forcing themselves into starting with a massively huge block of marble every time they go to make a statue. And it's silly in an era where we now have better tools that let the carver rough out the shape they envision without having to cut through so much dreck.

I don't know any actual sculptors, but the ones I've read about seem to iterate endlessly.

And the ALL universally start out with a subset of a larger body of materials to face.
(The Mt Rushmore guy not withstanding)

But I've never seen anyone carve a finished work at the first pass.

Big chunks fall and fall until the sculptor sees the form start to emerge. Simon apparently argues that the real sculptor must start with the largest block and know before the mallet strikes the chisel if the removal being contemplated is righteous.

And heck, no one wise would castigate a process that has led to a universe of great works.

But I wonder if he might be making the same mistake I've been accused of - to wit, having a beloved hammer and thereby seeing every serious problem as too much like a nail?

Editorial adjacency. The ability to "see" the effect of one shot against another? Nobody argues that isn't an important or even a critical thing.

But the central thing? The thing that causes you to value one editorial approach over all others.

By arguing for "large stringout pile reductive focused editing" to coin an ugly descriptor - as the de facto standard, you're fighting against the major benefit of a HUGE part of the progress we've made in the digital age.

The ability to carve away, but if you feel unsatisfied, to Uncarve!

Hint: this is why we generally prefer word processors to typewriters, right?

And if you remain unsatisfied - ADD.

It FEELS to me, perhaps, that those arguing for the sculptural approach may be doing so (at least partially) because they expect every project really should start with a block of marble or wood and needs to end up looking like a statue.

And I think that's increasingly worth questioning. Not Always. Some gigs definitely needs lots and lots of sculpture.

But many, many, many (perhaps even most) projects don't.

I think I prefer a system that values subtractive and additive in more balance and encourages the user by delivering a wider range of tools - and lets the editor elect which approach to use and when.

Fun to discuss, anyway.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 2:36:03 pm

Metaphors are always imperfect and messy. I think for many of us working methods have evolved as the industry has evolved. The change from film/tape to digital files has coincided with increased shooting ratios, which has necessitated changes in technique just for editors to cope.

This transition also overlapped with the rise of FCP 1-7, which enabled certain changes in style not really available to Media Composer, EMC2, Lightworks, and others. So how I might have cut with early versions of Avid is different than how I cut today. As we've changed, the options have increased and our own style have diverged, which is probably a large part of why this thread has become so polarized.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 4:48:53 pm

[Oliver Peters] "This transition also overlapped with the rise of FCP 1-7, which enabled certain changes in style not really available to Media Composer, EMC2, Lightworks, and others. So how I might have cut with early versions of Avid is different than how I cut today. "

While I think you're probably right here about how this style has become more popular since the turn of the century, I was starting to gravitate towards it while working in Media Composer, probably around 1995.

I'd certainly agree that Media Composer doesn't lend itself naturally to working this way, but for all that I still found it faster and more productive to do so and many of the editors I trained and worked with back then felt the same. We would watch other editors "doing it the right way", diligently organising their material using MC's many excellent organisational tools, and we couldn't honestly say that they were working faster or more productively.

Over the years, as first FCP came along, then FCP X, and finally (I was a late adopter) Premiere, I've looked at going back to conventional "pre-organisation" to see if I was missing out on its benefits, but I remain unconvinced in terms of my own experience. I simply don't find that it helps to make me work faster or more productively.

Perhaps it's because I've been working the way I (and my colleagues) do for so long that it simply feels more natural to us and that's why it's so much faster. Perhaps it's simply because it fits with the way I like to think about editing: in other words, to be fully productive you need to be immersed in the strategy that most suits the way your editing brain works.

Everyone is different. I find that fascinating. How dull if we were all the same.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 6:33:52 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "While I think you're probably right here about how this style has become more popular since the turn of the century, I was starting to gravitate towards it while working in Media Composer, probably around 1995. "

The process goes back to film, of course, which is why we still refer to string outs as KEM rolls. But, in my experience, it wasn't followed as much in linear editing, since we were worried about generation loss and often had multiple source machines. Edited master tapes were often only the second generation from the camera image.

When Media Composer came out, you typically only had to deal with a few bins (maybe a dozen at most) and 10-20 clips in each bins. So just about any organizational system worked. In that sense, early NLE structures were more like linear tape editing than film editing.

These days it's not uncommon to have dozens of bins (or keyword collections) and 100-200 source clips in each bin/collection. So it takes a different clip management workflow to wrangle these, whether it's X's method or using sequences as interim sources.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 8:27:20 pm

[Oliver Peters] "The process goes back to film, of course, which is why we still refer to string outs as KEM rolls. But, in my experience, it wasn't followed as much in linear editing, since we were worried about generation loss and often had multiple source machines. Edited master tapes were often only the second generation from the camera image."

Interestingly, my experience was quite different in respect of what happened with tape.

We almost always operated on an offline/online principle, in which we built the edit with U-matic tapes with BITC and sometimes (if we were lucky) VITC as well. Once the creative edit was complete we would take an EDL into the online suite. (Oh, floppy disks, whatever happened to you?)

With VITC we were usually able to run the offline master through a VITC reader and extract a workable EDL, although we typically needed to manually edit the EDL (using an excellent EDL editor whose name I can no longer recall) in order to sort out how the audio edits were meant to work, and of course clean up any errors.

When all we had was BITC, we would manually log the edits and enter them into our EDL editor, which was not a lot of fun, but pretty good for sharpening up your numerical entry skills.

The reason I'm mentioning all this ancient history here is that we would usually create a U-matic sub-master from our source U-matics that was conceptually the same as a string-out or KEM roll. Obviously the point of this was to avoid having to load each individual source tape and shuttle down to find the next shot that we wanted. The sub-master string-out saved a huge amount of time and meant that we could keep some sort of creative momentum. (Often we would create a further sub-master from the sub-master to refine the selection - not easy when you had to worry about generation loss, but still well worthwhile in terms of the time saved.) Loading tapes was seriously disruptive to the creative process and I still think of excessive reliance on Bins/Browsers or what-have-you in the same way. Not unreasonably, I think.

For me, the notion of working with string-outs originated here in this tape-based method, and of course with what you call KEM rolls, but which in Europe we didn't refer to as such.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 9:35:48 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "We almost always operated on an offline/online principle, in which we built the edit with U-matic tapes with BITC and sometimes (if we were lucky) VITC as well. Once the creative edit was complete we would take an EDL into the online suite. (Oh, floppy disks, whatever happened to you?)"

I didn't really have that luxury at first. Our clients went straight to online editing. We did have a few who cut their "offline" on a flatbed and my boss had a system for matching back their edits from work print to the film transfer of the negative. At that facility we did eventually put in a cuts-only 3/4" room, but cutting was strictly from burn-ins.

Most of our shoots (single-cam production vehicle) or film transfers for commercials yielded 1-2 reels of raw footage. Then we'd make a "B-roll dub" (as in the sense of A and B-rolls) of each reel, which was just a dupe of the full reel - for dissolves. This was in the mid-70s.

It was really only in the 90s - working on TV series - when the "traditional" offline/online workflow was a normal way to work at the facility I was at. Of course in major commercial markets like NYC, LA, Miami, Chicago - a lot of the previous film editors had transitioned to owning full, computer-assisted, offline edit suites much earlier. That was in order to have less money slip through their fingers on their post bids.

[Simon Ubsdell] " Obviously the point of this was to avoid having to load each individual source tape and shuttle down to find the next shot that we wanted. The sub-master string-out saved a huge amount of time and meant that we could keep some sort of creative momentum."

In the first facility mentioned above, we had a similar process for one house client - a grocery retail chain. Our prod/post pipeline was a bit of a one-off for their needs. TCs were picked in the studio during production and at the end of the day you received a stack of scripts with all TCs selected for each item to be shown. The editing commenced overnight, unsupervised, and was completed, reviewed, and revised the next day.

To facilitate this process - and because we also used a series of library reels with saved shots from earlier shoots - the editors created checker-boarded A and B-roll submasters. Once created for all of the spots in that session, the editor would sync-roll these two source A and B-rolls and then cut or dissolve between items in real-time according to the script. The process happened 2 and later 3 nights a week, enabling us to bang out 40-80 unique spots a week.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 18, 2017 at 1:54:05 am

[Simon Ubsdell] " we typically needed to manually edit the EDL (using an excellent EDL editor whose name I can no longer recall) in order to sort out how the audio edits were meant to work, and of course clean up any errors."

Perhaps you were using Shotlister? Invented by my friends Nick Repin & Jack Swart in Sydney it was an EDL manager system that then became a capture system for U-Matics whilst editing with an RM440 controller. Brilliant software and I still have use for it these days to display and manage EDLs for doco reversioning.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 18, 2017 at 9:23:08 am

Yes, you're quite right - it was Shotlister!

(Scary to find oneself forgetting the names of things one used to use every day.)

It was a really great tool.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 20, 2017 at 2:49:13 am

If you want a copy it was released into the wild by Digiteyes without needing a dongle. It runs on every version of WIN OS I have ever used and also runs on Linux Mint via WINE. It was developed for Win3.1!

I can send you a copy if you feel a need for it.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: More Bricklayers and Sculptors from Oliver and Simon
on Jun 17, 2017 at 9:21:08 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "I'd certainly agree that Media Composer doesn't lend itself naturally to working this way, but for all that I still found it faster and more productive to do so and many of the editors I trained and worked with back then felt the same. "

I would add that Avid for me remains the single fastest NLE system. I've abandoned Avid now for several years but I've yet to be able to duplicate the editing workflow that Avid allows. It was considered the superior NLE for many years because of it's phenomenal design and overall ease of use.

And even after several years of working on Premiere and some FCPX experience, I can't duplicate the perfect efficiency of Avid's user interface.

Adobe Premiere 2017.1.1
Windows 10 Pro
Samsung SSD 850 EVO system
Samsung SSD 850 EVO Adobe cache
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970
OWC Thunderbay 12t x 2 in Raid10 configuration (thru Storage Spaces and Disk Management)


Return to posts index

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