Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Editing programs

1356789

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,852 ✭✭✭Hugh_C


    Lukiebaggs wrote:
    When you don't know what your talking about retorting by attacking my grammer and spelling on a web board is no kind of come back mycroft. I'm dyslexic - i get my points across - sue me.

    ...

    Dont quarrel with me mycroft - I do in fact know what I'm talking about.

    Girls! Girls! cool it - handbags outside if you please.

    Its' pretty much the custom in any facility NOT to expose a production machine to resources it doesn't strictly need to access. In the case of Avid, it specifically made you turn off filesharing on OS 9 when you kick into the application - although I can't speak for the new version running on OS X on the Mac. In some cases, the extra resources needed to run stuff like the Net or other network activities impinged on the performance of the machine - i.e. it affected the amount of CPU available to Avid to run. This may be something to do with the fact that a lot of Avids are run on machines near the end of their life cycle - this is the case in the Farm, Screenscene and Windbag for sure.

    As regards the use of cheap (FCP / whatever) editing systems being used outside of post houses - yeah, bring it on! Great! Sorts the wheat from the chaff. It means that post houses (which are traditionally suffer from inertia) will lose out. Overpriced anyway...

    On the other side of the coin though, amateurish and naive editing is also rearing it's ugly head quite a lot. I have seen some appalling stuff on our Glorious National Broadcaster that must've been made at home. Just awful, especially some cooking program with some poor eejit of a chef digging a hole in the ground to cook lamb. Forget the name but it was the most SHODDILY made piece of sh1te I've ever seen on TV.

    There's an old adage in editing:

    Good, Cheap, Fast;

    pick two.








    hc


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    Lukiebaggs wrote:
    When you don't know what your talking about retorting by attacking my grammer and spelling on a web board is no kind of come back mycroft. I'm dyslexic - i get my points across - sue me.


    You and You're aren't spelt "U" and "Ur", that's not a sign of dyslexia just laziness. Generally people with learning disorders for example, dyslexia, are mindful and appreciate of spell checkers, and dislike txt speak like "ur" or "u" because of the manner they see words, the focus their education gives them, text speak confuses them.

    The hey "I'm dyslexic" is the laziest excuse for shoddy spelling, if you'd misspelled something and I laughed at it, I'd agree with you that would be petty Ur just not bothering to write properly. (I shall be this motif to mock "U" throughout this post). I'm not saying you're lying about being dyslexic, it's just accusing me of being petty, when I focus on, not your many spelling or grammatical mistakes, but your lax "text speak", using this in your attempt attempt to scramble to the higher ground, well, it deserves to be laughed at.
    The simple fact is - HE Didn't know what he was talking about.

    No he did, from a bloke sitting on his computer chatting kind of way, in a he just was talking about processor power, on an Amateur form, he didnt deserve to be spoken to in the manner that you did.
    And for your Information - IF you had experience on all all kinds of edit systems you would know that Apples are far more stable and are not affected by Virus's - ergo laddy - puting your edit machines on a network with broadband poses little risk if they are apples.

    Utterly irrelevant as for starts he was talking about speed and power, not virus. And yes the word is more stable, not completely stable.

    And yes its not really risk for apples, as for example, theres yet been trojan horse for OSx or even a virus of note. But it is a concern, and if as you say you're serious about editing, then you need raw power, don't use it for anything else, don't run anything in the background, don't have an internet connection on the machine. I use my laptop for editing. And nothing less runs when it's running. I've got a special desktop config'd for editing with processor power set up. If "ur" serious about editing you should do that.
    Its not as commen in Ireland but jus check out the UK or the US, Ireland is fairly behind the pack in terms of using the right computers to get the job done any how. I do undstand why you'd keep windows machine off the internet however, they are far more likely to crash or pick up a virus then a mac.

    And this has what do with your original point?
    I've worked in Screen Screem and Tyrone Productions both of which had edit machines, both of which had PC's and Macs both of which had internet.



    All their files were safe, they were on External HD's behind firewalls so stop your bickering. And MR Snoot - WHO Exactly do you think your giving advice to here? How many people who are working in Production houses come on boards.ie for advice on editing software?

    What you mean like myself, Frted, Hughchal, Lump, Monkeyfudge, and Dustaz all the most frequent users of this board. And oh look, all industry professionals of varying experience.
    If you know anything about the modern film industry you must know that there are thousands of film makers world wide who can edit right out of their home on very cheap - and easy to use (yet increasingly powerfull software) Robert Roduiguez Edits out of his Garage - you proabibly havent heard of him though because your so BIG LEAGUE.

    I'm not sure what the point of this lame insult is, name dropping a household name director and suggesting I'm so clueless that I wouldn't have heard of him.

    This comes after a couple of paragraphs after boasting that you've worked for Both "Screen Scene" and "Tyrone". Respectively the cheapest and rough and ready post house, in Ireland, that'll take on anything and anyone for a quick buck, hires amateurs to scrimp on costs and corners, hell last summer one of the company's directors 21 yo nephew was running the overnight telecine, too friging cheap to install unity, the only reason their machines have internet connection is becaause they installed that godawful LAN, does it still have the 2 second lag? and Tyrone joined at the hip to SS, home of cheap ass godawful reality tv (celebrity farm, Cabin Fever) and riverdance DVDs a company that couldn't make "who wants to be a millionare" work, a format that works on just about every country on the planet. Work I'm sure "ur" proud of.

    Do you see what I did there? I demostrated that I do know the industry, and belittled "ur" boasting of "ur" experience in one fell swoop. I really wouldn't mind, but on this thread both myself and Hugh have discussed Screen Scene and working there.
    And since you know so much about PROFESSIONAL PRODUCTION HOUSES. <- I would just like to draw your attention to the FACT that They are beng uses less and less by aspireing film makers (there will always be a need for them - but increasingly just by Television networks) - more and more powerfull tools that 20 years ago had to be done in a Productiion house are now available in AVid Premiere Pro, or Final Cut Right out of the box and on your computer.

    And as hugh pointed out, they("film makers") don't know how use these tools. Hey I'm all for people doing more themselves, and a huge proportion of the work done by post houses is vastly overpriced.

    However the flip side is, now that every has the software to do this, everyone thinks they can do this. I almost did a job in April with a guy running three cracked copies of xpress pro claimed he was a artist, editor and online editor, he had to delay the job because he had to grade a tv show. I asked where, and he said here. There was no professional monitor in this room, hell, there were no blinds, no way of controling the natural light and the only artifcal light was a strip flourescent light. I was floored, yet this kind of bollox is becoming more and more common.
    Your a complete tool - these people are obviously Students or film makers who edit at home - on their own machines - which considering they are asking on Boards.ie - probably have the internet.

    This has what do with your original point?
    If u take ur video work seriously

    Which would suggest by "ur" post that "u" think "ur" talking to at least a semi professional, when you started off.

    This is just funny you start off by laying into someone for their lack of professional knowledge, and then when called on it, come back shouting about how this is just a forum for amateurs. When your first post here is belittling someone for not having as much "knowledge" as you. You've got a lousy attitude. You'd not last five seconds on any of the professional forums. This is a amateur form with an informal attitude, but "U" joined here
    sneering at people and arrogantly displayling what you claim to know, then trying to claw some moral superiority after your sneering and badly phrased first post, is just you digging yourself a deeper hole.
    In response to the questions about Final Cut HD - I highly reccommend it, Its got every tool available in Final Cut Pro 4 and deals with HD footage at alarming speeds.


    Dont quarrel with me mycroft - I do in fact know what I'm talking about.

    How does that response help FrTed?

    FCP HD should have "every tool" of FCP 4.0 it's an upgrade of FCP 4.0 that you download as a software update. And why wouldn't it handle HD footage at an alarming speed? Are you cutting HD native uncompressed? Cause thats just a matter raw processing power, I'm not even sure what you mean by "alarming speed". But I'm sure U do know what Ur talking about.

    Oh and again I'm not "quarreling". "U" came here, with a sneering attitude to an amateur and to blast us with "ur" knowledge, and all I pointed out that you'd said Sweet FA that hadn't been said better, and more polite in this thread before you stuck your beak in, with the undertone of "lose the attitude", but you've kept the attitude, and aren't saying anything that hasn't been said here before.

    You claim you're a professional, fine, then show some common courtsey to other professionals and to amateurs who want to learn more , and I'll treat you less condescendingly.
    HughChal wrote:
    As regards the use of cheap (FCP / whatever) editing systems being used outside of post houses - yeah, bring it on! Great! Sorts the wheat from the chaff. It means that post houses (which are traditionally suffer from inertia) will lose out. Overpriced anyway...

    [tease]

    Bring in on? Last bloke I know who said that was george bush and he rue'd saying it

    Just what is the going rate for a layback these days? :D [/tease]

    [off topic]

    BTW did you ever get that copy of automatic duck and are RTE promos still doing all their cutting on FCP?

    Beginning to despare of london these days, hugh, I did a job in a post house in Soho last week, all the clocks of the these programs said "TX master" yet they had offline audio, and one part was 14 seconds out of sync.[/off topic]


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,984 ✭✭✭✭Lump


    I've done some minor editing to this thread, removal of personal abuse and what not. Behave people, we all love each other here, don't we?

    *Off Topic* Mycroft, I have to laugh at your slowly worsening spelling and punctuation in that post, oh how I laughed. Nice píss taking :)

    John


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29 Lukiebaggs


    Alright man fair do's i didnt conduct myslef in a professional way. I was 'lazy' with my speach. I miss spealt things in my post and made gramatical errors.

    Great.

    Where are we again? Oh yeah - this is a online web board, not a professional conference room.

    In retrospect - I see your point of view, I was condescending, I was mean and arrogant. I admit that and I'll be more carefull with my tone in future. But that has absolutly nothing to do with Grammer and spelling - there is absolutly no point in being anal about such things on a relaxed informal discussion based web board community such as boards.ie.


    I aplogise to those I have offended.

    Secondly - Merely explaining what I am saying in child like terms to everyone is no way to reply. I had valid points. Points I still stand by, and just because you have some ignorant friend who works out of his bedroom or whatever and claims to be professional doesnt mean all film makers who work from home are like this. Final Cut does excellent & fast color grading.

    Most Film Students work from home. I work from home. I Edit on my G5 in a my Study which has curtains that can be drawn, a couch for viewings surround sound and several monitors.

    I do now see that the discussions and advice that seems to be floating around on this board seem to be mostly related to Production houses and for the most part - your advice does not cater to individual film makers who work from home in their own edit suits. I've worked in both enviroments, production house and edit suit. And for the type of work I do - Post- on Shorts and feature films primarily my own, my set up gets the work done faster, better and cheaper.

    Final Cut Pro, Soundtrack, Motion, Adobe After Effects, DVD Studio Pro. All native to the Mac - of course I run them without other things in the background, the work is saved to Raided External HD's. Apples are secure, what are you telling me? That I'm doing something wrong here?

    That is where I come from, that is where my advice comes from I adknoledge my mistakes and our differences Mycroft. But from your reply to my last post I can see you really didn't have much to critize regarding my adivice, merly my tone and linguistic skills - and that just strengthens my arguement.

    Thanks for making me feel better. - No really, I do actually feel better now.


    Have a nice day.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    Where are we again? Oh yeah - this is a online web board, not a professional conference room.

    Common courtsey was all that was required.

    In retrospect - I see your point of view, I was condescending, I was mean and arrogant. I admit that and I'll be more carefull with my tone in future. But that has absolutly nothing to do with Grammer and spelling - there is absolutly no point in being anal about such things on a relaxed informal discussion based web board community such as boards.ie.

    I was merely pointing out the obvious irony of someone who engages in txt speak, sneering at someone claiming that "ur trying to sound intelligent" is like you complaining that "dem foreigners don't speak engerlish no good"

    But that point has whistled over you head.

    I'll try it using flash card; I was mocking your insulting of someone's intelligence while you used that moronic abreviation. I haven't mocked your spelling, or your grammar, just your use of txt speak while deriding someone's intelligence.

    Now will you ever get down from there? It's Jesus's go on the cruifix.
    Secondly - Merely explaining what I am saying in child like terms to everyone is no way to reply. I had valid points. Points I still stand by, and just because you have some ignorant friend who works out of his bedroom or whatever and claims to be professional doesnt mean all film makers who work from home are like this. Final Cut does excellent & fast color grading.

    Not a friend, a client. When did I claim final cut doesn't have excellent colour grading?I have in fact said earlier on this thread, that some people find it superior to symphony's colour grading tool. You take a point made about something elses botched set up, and take it as a percieved slight.
    Most Film Students work from home. I work from home. I Edit on my G5 in a my Study which has curtains that can be drawn, a couch for viewings surround sound and several monitors.

    And again thats nice, What on earth does that have to do with the example I gave about a specific instance? Again another comment I made about someone else and you take as it's infered aganist you. Very touchy. I really don't know and don't care about your study.
    I do now see that the discussions and advice that seems to be floating around on this board seem to be mostly related to Production houses and for the most part - your advice does not cater to individual film makers who work from home in their own edit suits.

    Really? Cause you don't seem to be reading the same forum as the rest of us? Threads like;

    "begineer to home recording" ?
    "Camcorders with AV input.?"
    "DV Camcorder connection failed?"
    "VHS to DVD?"

    These are related to production houses?
    I've worked in both enviroments, production house and edit suit. And for the type of work I do - Post- on Shorts and feature films primarily my own, my set up gets the work done faster, better and cheaper.

    Uh huh, and again, my advise and the advise of those here, is dependent on who's asking and what they're asking. You came here, abusing someone, and sneering at them. Hardly fair. I am mildly curious to know what features you've done. And the faster, better and cheaper? See hugh's motto, you get two out of three.
    Final Cut Pro, Soundtrack, Motion, Adobe After Effects, DVD Studio Pro. All native to the Mac - of course I run them without other things in the background, the work is saved to Raided External HD's. Apples are secure, what are you telling me? That I'm doing something wrong here?

    And when did I critise your set up or your system? Again You seem to take general advise very personnaly.
    That is where I come from, that is where my advice comes from I adknoledge my mistakes and our differences Mycroft. But from your reply to my last post I can see you really didn't have much to critize regarding my adivice, merly my tone and linguistic skills - and that just strengthens my arguement.

    Thanks for making me feel better. - No really, I do actually feel better now.

    *LOL* Your arguments? What arguments?

    That Macs are better, without question?

    That FCP handles HD at "alarming speeds" (what does that mean anyway?)

    Or what orifice you think other posters are speaking out of?

    See the thing is I don't really disagree with your "arguments" just your attitude. Macs are my prefered system. However simplying put FCP is not in itself a justifible reason to switch from PC, for an amateur user, Premier is more than adequate, and the advance in processor power means that the Mac is no longer the undisputed king of AV.

    See you don't really have an argument, you came here sneered obnoxiously at someone, spouted a load of stuff about Macs, in a conscending attitude, nothing that's not already been said on this forum . When called on your hilarious "ur trying to sound intelligent" you got in a huff about being dyslexic (a claim you subsquently appeared to have dropped) and spouted some more blindingly obvious facts, then started saying this was a amateur forum, before making some bizarre claim about FCP HD being "alarmingly fast".

    You think we're arguing about software?

    Then make a coherent point or say something that hasn't been say here before.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,984 ✭✭✭✭Lump


    Lukiebaggs, have you got a grade 1 engineering monitor? Because having done tech reviews for work, the last stage in the production chain, I find that most errors are blanking errors because people are editing at home/cheap post houses and viewing on either domestic monitors or the computer monitor in regular scan.

    The majority of programmes that get sent back have blanking errors, so since I started my job I think that one of the most important pieces of equipment in an edit suite is the monitoring.

    John


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    Lump wrote:
    Lukiebaggs, have you got a grade 1 engineering monitor? Because having done tech reviews for work, the last stage in the production chain, I find that most errors are blanking errors because people are editing at home/cheap post houses and viewing on either domestic monitors or the computer monitor in regular scan.

    The majority of programmes that get sent back have blanking errors, so since I started my job I think that one of the most important pieces of equipment in an edit suite is the monitoring.

    John

    Not to mention a HD monitor to view that alarmingly fast HD footage he's handling. I hear speed bumps are becoming a safetly feature in modern post houses.

    It's a classic. On one of the becketts, we opened with a massive vista of a mountain on corfu, infortunately the first time the footage was projected was during the pre mix, thats the first time anyone spotted that damn boom.

    Many equip rental companies will try and fob you off with a domestic tv these days, and many more people are stupid enough to take one.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29 Lukiebaggs


    Lump i use 2 Lacie 19 inch CRT monitors for editing and I pipe the video throught to a 32 inch Sony Television for Title Safe checking etc. Its also great for showing your work - I know most of the online edit suits in Screen Scene use this method - granted with much more expensive hardware.

    Croftie - Here''s my Essay.

    The reason I told you about my edit set up was to explain where i edit - and to expalin that editing from home doesn't throw you in the same bag as your client working off illegally cracked programs. That was my point - I don't see why you think you sound superior to me by saying time and time again that you can't understand my points. I use basic english - as you so cleverly pointed out with your equally condescending tone.

    I'm getting bored rehashing the same points again, and again with you Mycroft- this is merely going in circles.

    Further Explaining:
    If you were to look at my origional post - which now seems to be mostly gone due to Lumps bias cencorship. You would see I was merely disagreeing with a poster who said apples are only good at AV - and cost an arm an a leg to buy. I disagreed - I believe he is wrong, I said he doesn't know what he is talking about and was just trying to sound intelligent.

    The use of txt abreviations, slang - and for that matter, speaking harshly have absolutly nothing to do with my argument - I was right.

    Intelligence has absolutly nothing to do with the fact that I spoke in this way - what's wrong with speaking like this while calling someone stupid for saying something that is uninformed and incorrect? It doesn't take away from the fact that he was both uninformed and incorrect.

    You seem to imply Mycroft that there is some kind of Irony that I spoke this way - whilst calling someone unintelligent. This implies that people who conduct their conversations in a relaxed or 'lazy' manner are in fact stupid. I think thats a lode of rubbish.

    I am dyslexic - I make spelling and gramatical mistakes all the time, you also seem to be critiqueing me for Forgetting to say that every time I post or something. Forgive me But I presumed that after I said it once, I wouldn't have to keep bringing it up just so that you Mycroft would remember it. I'm now trying to speak with 'Parlimentary language' so that you snobs won't keep critising my use of the english language.

    'Alarming Speeds' - Hmmmmm. I suppose that would have to do with the way FCP can work with HD footage - as fast as the lower resolution DV which I had been working on primarily up until now. Could you please try Reading a Sentance before you boldly say "I CAN"T UNDERSTAND THIS and its your fault".

    I'm looking forward to Mycrofts frightfully origional reply that no doubt will cleverly employ the use of the QUOTE Buttion in a barely noticable and exceedingly subtle way. Try directly replying for once, instead of repeating what I said in quotes in an feeble attempt to belittle me.


    I'm sick of explaing myself. Can we please just get back to proper discussion about Editing Software? Thats what I came here for origionally - before this became a pissing contest Mycroft is hell bent on winning.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,984 ✭✭✭✭Lump


    All I edited on your original post was the blatent personal abuse. Calling someone an ass.

    I'm not talking about safe titles. I'm talking about Horizontal Blanking Errors. I won't explain what they are, as you obviously know, what with all your experience. As Mycroft pointed out earlier people here are of varying experiences, I 'm one of those with less experience. I know what blanking errors are, so you clearly must.

    John


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 29 Lukiebaggs


    not working in television post production Horizontal and Vertical Blanking aren't tip top on my list of priorities while I'm editing. I'm far more concerned about more important things like - Look, Pacing and duration.

    Don't be so vindictive, using technical terms to try to catch people out is low.

    I've told you before, I'm a film maker - I also edit films. I don't work in an online offline post house in RTE.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 10,984 ✭✭✭✭Lump


    I'm interested.... What films do you make/have you made? Blanking errors may not be on the top of your list. How do you deliver the films you make, do you take the EDL and cut the negs? Do you deliver on tape? If you do, you should be worried about blanking errors. The majority of programmes that get sent back from where I work do so because they have blanking errors, as a rule by BBC Broadcast.

    It's fairly important to have a monitor that you can set contrast/brightness and colour up on and be sure it's not going to drift. Also position of pictures/credits etc need to be done on a monitor that won't drift. How do you measure safe title for credits? Masking tape on the monitor?

    I don't work in RTE, I work for (Apoligies to all who are fed up of me saying it) the BBC.

    John


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    Lukiebaggs wrote:
    Lump i use 2 Lacie 19 inch CRT monitors for editing and I pipe the video throught to a 32 inch Sony Television for Title Safe checking etc. Its also great for showing your work - I know most of the online edit suits in Screen Scene use this method - granted with much more expensive hardware.

    All online suites in Screen Scene have engineering grade monitors for the editor to work on and use the 32 inch for client screening.
    The reason I told you about my edit set up was to explain where i edit - and to expalin that editing from home doesn't throw you in the same bag as your client working off illegally cracked programs. That was my point - I don't see why you think you sound superior to me by saying time and time again that you can't understand my points. I use basic english - as you so cleverly pointed out with your equally condescending tone.

    Good for you. And my, and Hugh points have been the majority of these home set ups invariable suffer from some minor flaw., or arrogance, a trait you seem infused with.
    I'm getting bored rehashing the same points again, and again with you Mycroft- this is merely going in circles.

    Further Explaining:
    If you were to look at my origional post - which now seems to be mostly gone due to Lumps bias cencorship. You would see I was merely disagreeing with a poster who said apples are only good at AV - and cost an arm an a leg to buy. I disagreed - I believe he is wrong, I said he doesn't know what he is talking about and was just trying to sound intelligent.

    No he wasn't he was simply pointing out the percieved wisdom, you could have corrected him in a less obnoxious way.
    The use of txt abreviations, slang - and for that matter, speaking harshly have absolutly nothing to do with my argument - I was right.

    Thats nice, you were also behaving like an assho*e, which is what I called you on. Being right doesn't give you the right to act like a prat.
    Intelligence has absolutly nothing to do with the fact that I spoke in this way - what's wrong with speaking like this while calling someone stupid for saying something that is uninformed and incorrect?

    The base irony of using txt speak while deriding someone's intelligence?
    You seem to imply Mycroft that there is some kind of Irony that I spoke this way - whilst calling someone unintelligent. This implies that people who conduct their conversations in a relaxed or 'lazy' manner are in fact stupid. I think thats a lode of rubbish.

    Thats an intential spelling mistake of lode right? If you check I make a plethora of spelling mistakes, and I've never said you are stupid, just very rude.
    I am dyslexic - I make spelling and gramatical mistakes all the time, you also seem to be critiqueing me for Forgetting to say that every time I post or something. Forgive me But I presumed that after I said it once, I wouldn't have to keep bringing it up just so that you Mycroft would remember it. I'm now trying to speak with 'Parlimentary language' so that you snobs won't keep critising my use of the english language.

    Now if we can only get you to do something about that attitude.
    'Alarming Speeds' - Hmmmmm. I suppose that would have to do with the way FCP can work with HD footage - as fast as the lower resolution DV which I had been working on primarily up until now. Could you please try Reading a Sentance before you boldly say "I CAN"T UNDERSTAND THIS and its your fault".

    And my point is two fold.

    A) How does your OP help FrTed, remember he had a technical issue.

    B) What on earth is alarming speed? Why shouldn't it "handle" the codec it was specifically designed to take in the exact manner it's supposed to. Are you editing uncompressed HD? I don't understand because you aren't explaining yourself very well.

    I'm looking forward to Mycrofts frightfully origional reply that no doubt will cleverly employ the use of the QUOTE Buttion in a barely noticable and exceedingly subtle way. Try directly replying for once, instead of repeating what I said in quotes in an feeble attempt to belittle me.

    See the use of quote tag means I can directly response, you see exactly what part of your post my post refers to.
    I'm sick of explaing myself. Can we please just get back to proper discussion about Editing Software? Thats what I came here for origionally - before this became a pissing contest Mycroft is hell bent on winning.

    Really I thought you came here to mock someone's attempt at looking intelligent, I'm still waiting for you to make a lucid or intelligent point.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    Lukiebaggs wrote:
    not working in television post production Horizontal and Vertical Blanking aren't tip top on my list of priorities while I'm editing. I'm far more concerned about more important things like - Look, Pacing and duration.

    Don't be so vindictive, using technical terms to try to catch people out is low.

    .

    And belittling someone's intelligence because you claim you know more than them is what?

    Nice backpeddling, first you come onto this thread throwing your weight around and assuring us U know what you're talking about, and when Lump enquiries about your set up then suddenly hey "you're an artist, technical details are mere trifles for me". Man if there was a Lance Armstrong award for back peddling you'd win it.

    As Robert Roduiguez (oh look I have heard of him) said in his book "rebel without a crew"; "a creative person can become technical, a technical person cannot become creative" If you're editing out of your home, with the support of a post house, and you want to be a professional, you have to know your technical stuff, thats why people assist at first, you need to know the technical stuff so you don't stress it when you're an editor and you can focus on the more important stuff like look and pacing, and rythmn, little point editing something thats **** hot but doesn't come up to scratch because you don't know how to strip a tape, well thats no good either.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,984 ✭✭✭✭Lump


    Naked Tapes..... Ummmmmmm

    John

    (I'll get in there before Lukiebaggs makes a smart comment) :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    Lump wrote:
    Naked Tapes..... Ummmmmmm

    John

    (I'll get in there before Lukiebaggs makes a smart comment) :)

    Har har, see luke you don't need to use the queens english to make a point, just don't be such an obnoxious as*hole.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,984 ✭✭✭✭Lump


    He's gone very quiet. Probably working on some block buster.....

    John


  • Registered Users Posts: 21 maxplanar


    This is a great thread. I'm only after blundering into it while looking for something else, but seeing as I know at least one of you, I'm completely amused. I myself have many many loud, voluble and relevant opinions on everything here (being in the biz myself), but I doubt I'd be as excellently vituperative or entertaining as the rest of you.

    Carry on chaps! What ho!


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,984 ✭✭✭✭Lump


    Make your opinions known then :)

    John


  • Registered Users Posts: 21 maxplanar


    Simple really. 15 year Avid user, with broad and deep industry experience, particularly in high-end digital commercial post, moves to FCP. Thinks it is a squillion times better than the entire pile of poo that is the Avid family of systems. Still work occasionally on Avid Adrenalines, but hates them. FCP all the way, friends, all the way.

    Here in 'Hollywood', you're seeing MOST of the MAJOR editorial houses either rip out and replace Avid bays with FCP, or double them up to support both, or dip a tow in the water. A year ago or so a huge Burbank TV editorial company ripped out 45 Avids and swapped in FCP.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21 maxplanar


    Typo moron - I never did learn to touch type. I meant 'toe' not 'tow'. Obviously.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    maxplanar wrote:
    Simple really. 15 year Avid user, with broad and deep industry experience, particularly in high-end digital commercial post, moves to FCP. Thinks it is a squillion times better than the entire pile of poo that is the Avid family of systems. Still work occasionally on Avid Adrenalines, but hates them. FCP all the way, friends, all the way.

    Here in 'Hollywood', you're seeing MOST of the MAJOR editorial houses either rip out and replace Avid bays with FCP, or double them up to support both, or dip a tow in the water. A year ago or so a huge Burbank TV editorial company ripped out 45 Avids and swapped in FCP.

    See lukiebaggs this is a discussion about systems.

    Can I ask max (I'm assuming you're a mate of Hugh's from his LA days) why you prefer or think it's a squillion times better than Avid. actual genuine questions.

    My issues with FCP are

    It's only had a sort of trim mode since FCP 4.0 The slip slide ripple and roll tolls are confusing and lack the the instinctive hands on interface of the trim mode.

    The media storage with fcp, while I appreciate years of work with avid in posts houses have made me very aware of the media tool and console on avid, i've yet to see an effective tool on fcp to match that.

    Sync. The Sync tool on fcp means you actually need to level the program to bring your sync clips into a project, working with 50 or 60 sync clips a day. It lacks the elegancy of Avid in this respect

    24fps, frankly the handling of 24fps in fcp 4 is just pathetic. It just doesn't really work.

    So I'm genuinely curious why you think FCP is superior to avid.

    Like many avid users I'm frustrated with avid's game plan, it like watching a company shoot themselves in the foot.

    I start working on Q edit from Quantell on tuesday because avid haven't been able to sustain a media network to support a 24 hour news room. Despite bizarrely creating the database tool that rules newsrooms.

    I guess I'm frustrated, Avid's move to NT with Symphony's is the the first mistake they've made, to watch their decline with the rise of FCP in the same four year time frame, is just depressing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21 maxplanar


    It's only had a sort of trim mode since FCP 4.0 The slip slide ripple and roll tolls are confusing and lack the the instinctive hands on interface of the trim mode.

    First up, FCP wasn't a real product until 3.02 - prior to that you couldn't even get an EDL out. And it has only been a real, effective product since 4.0, so I'm in total agreement with you as to the timeline. But as of 4.5, I've had no problem with the trim tool or any of the others - I find them very intuitive, very similar to Avid, and I'm a full-on keyboard guy who basically cuts in trim mode all the time.

    Plus, the Slip tools are in every version of FCP (like, there's only one). Unlike Avid, who like the idiots they are, removed the slip tools in Xpress Pro and other versions, which is like blinding yourself before a nighttime flight. Another reason to despise them - such deliberate cripppling of feature sets annoys the hell out of me, for the same reasons it annoyed the hell out of me when Discreet crippled the Flame colour corrector in Fire. You knew all the code was in there, and they'd simply commented it out or something.
    The media storage with fcp, while I appreciate years of work with avid in posts houses have made me very aware of the media tool and console on avid, i've yet to see an effective tool on fcp to match that.

    Media Management in FCP is weaker than Avid, though not by much. The Media Manager works adequately well, but is very un-Apple-like in its confusingness. But for me all the downsides are SO made up for by the simplicity of the underlying system. The fact that all media clips, regardless of their creation (master clips, renders, etc) are Quicktimes is so enormously beneficial to a productive workflow that what you lose on the roundabouts you make up for on the swings. A strict and anal attitude to the use of the Scratch Disk assignments is CRUCIAL. Once you (i.e. your assistant) are petty about that stuff, all the media management issues dissolve.
    Sync. The Sync tool on fcp means you actually need to level the program to bring your sync clips into a project, working with 50 or 60 sync clips a day. It lacks the elegancy of Avid in this respect.

    I'm afraid I can't comment on this - you may well be right. I have the good fortune to always have sync audio on the dailies. But I'm not entirely sure I understand your question either - wanna rephrase it for me?
    24fps, frankly the handling of 24fps in fcp 4 is just pathetic. It just doesn't really work.

    Not even remotely true. I just finished a 24fps HD project with not a single hitch or glitch (in FCP 5.02, anyway). And a features assistant colleague has for the past three or so years regularly kicked out FCP feature films to neg cut, online and DI from 29.97fps timelines without batting an eyelid, and since FCP 5 has done two features on a 24fps timeline. I can't comment on 25fps workflows, as I don't live in 25fpsLand any more. Sadly.

    Have you checked out Cinema Tools? Have you Reverse Telecined from within the app, with the Cinema Tools database being kept up-to-date? Awesome.
    So I'm genuinely curious why you think FCP is superior to avid.

    Ultimately it all comes down to an approach more relevant to a modern way of working. Using an Avid nowadays feels like using the bus. It will still get you from A to B, not a question about that, but is it the best and fastest way there? And will I enjoy getting there? Not a chance.

    As an unfortunate by-product of being the first to market, Avid have a longer user legacy to support than FCP, and their approach to the editing craft is one maroooned in the late eighties - it's a system designed around the central idea of convincing linear tape editors that this new-fangled non-linear thing was a great idea and one they could (relatively) easily adopt.

    Apple (or, really Macromedia, since it was originally theirs) have the benefit of starting to design a system in the year 2000. To me, the beauty of FCP is in its utter 'liveness' - in a world where you can think in terms of checkerboarding media, this is how you do it. You drag this bit here, shove that bunch of clips down there for later, varispeed that clip right there in the timeline (including the audio), toss that over there into that bin, zip out to the CG house FTP server and grab that latest clip, uprez to whatever def you're working in, dump straight into the timeline, Command-C that whole timeline and paste it onto the end of that other timeline at a a different rez in the same project, render it all into yet another rez, zap the DVD and split for some hang-gliding. (Well, apart from the hang-gliding part).

    Got a clip with fifteen different filters and colour corrections on it, with scaling animation and a crop? Want to copy all the effects except the scaling to another clip? Copy and Paste just the attributes you want, right there on the timeline. Want to buy a boatload of great effects for $99? Want a tracker for $69? Surf to the site, buy it, install it in one minute, you're done.

    Want to repo a clip? Why not just grab it and shove it around a bit, like in any other normal image app you'd use? Why do I have to go get a Reposition tool or whatever it's called? And why can't I rotate any picture I want, without having to stack effects tools? Want to adjust any clip's audio level during play, without pausing, from the keyboard? Why not?

    Want XML? YES! Want to cut without power on your laptop in Lugalla? For less than $4000? Sure?

    An editor friend of mine here recently excitedly told me he'd bought a used PeeCee Avid for his house and was so thrilled finally to be able to have an edit system in his house he could fart. I have two workstations and a laptop editing system, and all three combined cost less than his $19,000 boat anchor, and any of them is more capable. For once in my life, the bean counter decision is the one I'm in tune with.

    Avid to me feels like the application it once was designed to replace. Load the source tape into the source machine. Mark your ins and outs. Cut it across onto the Record Machine. WHY? There's no tape any more! Can't I just dump it here, there, wherever I want, and you figure it out? Of course I can!

    It's all just so Godamn EASY. And it costs NOTHING. And you get SO MUCH. DVD SP is killer. Soundtrack Pro is KILLER. Motion is awesome, though AE it's not. Cinema Tools works really well.

    Finally, after all this late night whiskey-fuelled ranting (no apologies if I've gone over the top, I love this software and it has utterly revolutionised and improved my life), some perspective. I came to this after many many years of Avid fandom. I am on record as having said some time in the late ninties that Avid was my favourite software ever. (Oh how sad!). And let me make clear that there are projects for which Avids are much more suitable - and I have spec'd that on two major jobs in the last two years. Both were large commercials with a ****load of effects. Both had major clients with considerable face-time with me. In that circumstance (> 25 layers), I'd always pick an Adrenaline. The hardware effects acceleration makes it worthwhile - in FCP I would have been finger-tapping while renders happened. But that's not to say I haven't done very similar jobs in FCP - it just depends on how up-close-and-personal the client's going to be. If I have breathing room or a remote client (happens to me often), I'll go FCP and take coffee breaks. And I see the hardware effects acceleration for FCP getting better and better, so I doubt even that margin will matter soon.

    Right then, let the floodgates open. And yes, I know Hugh, but from Ireland, where this mess all began.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21 maxplanar


    By the way, I'm not sure my bus analogy is working there. I like buses. Just not for editing, or something.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,984 ✭✭✭✭Lump


    The BBC have started getting FCP in, well at least in the Factual and Learning Village, however, there's only a couple of people editing on it at the moment. They're trying to convince production to make the leap to FCP. It's a case of convincing them it'll work as well as apparently avid does :/

    Also BBC Post, isn't all that happy with Avid, they bring up issues about Adrenaline and bugs with it, but never get the support they require. So maybe there are hoping to make a big move in the future.... and cheaper systems means cheaper edit time = Happy Clients.

    John


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,862 ✭✭✭mycroft


    maxplanar wrote:
    First up, FCP wasn't a real product until 3.02 - prior to that you couldn't even get an EDL out. And it has only been a real, effective product since 4.0, so I'm in total agreement with you as to the timeline. But as of 4.5, I've had no problem with the trim tool or any of the others - I find them very intuitive, very similar to Avid, and I'm a full-on keyboard guy who basically cuts in trim mode all the time.

    Okay thats good to know may even dust off my copy of 4.5

    Media Management in FCP is weaker than Avid, though not by much. The Media Manager works adequately well, but is very un-Apple-like in its confusingness. But for me all the downsides are SO made up for by the simplicity of the underlying system. The fact that all media clips, regardless of their creation (master clips, renders, etc) are Quicktimes is so enormously beneficial to a productive workflow that what you lose on the roundabouts you make up for on the swings. A strict and anal attitude to the use of the Scratch Disk assignments is CRUCIAL. Once you (i.e. your assistant) are petty about that stuff, all the media management issues dissolve.

    Again and thats my issue with it, Avid's media management is very intuiative and makes sense to me, as an assistant. Hughchal can confirm I've assisted on a fair few beasts of jobs, and the media management on FCP seems like almost a full time job.

    Thats a minor gripe though, and hey who ever thought about a system and said, "nah we can't get it, my assistant wouldn't like it." You couldn't recommend a good book on FCP btw?
    I'm afraid I can't comment on this - you may well be right. I have the good fortune to always have sync audio on the dailies. But I'm not entirely sure I understand your question either - wanna rephrase it for me?

    It's been a while, but I've seen synching demostrated on fcp and essentially once you've sunk a clip, you need to leave the software, drag and drop the clip back into the project file, and then check it back.

    Which is annoying if you're synching up commericals rushes, it's incredibly annoying if say you're eye synching documentary rushes, with no IDs, or hand claps, and every time you need to check sync you need to go back out of FCP, copy the new clip into, yadda yadda yadda......

    It seems badly designed.....
    Not even remotely true. I just finished a 24fps HD project with not a single hitch or glitch (in FCP 5.02, anyway). And a features assistant colleague has for the past three or so years regularly kicked out FCP feature films to neg cut, online and DI from 29.97fps timelines without batting an eyelid, and since FCP 5 has done two features on a 24fps timeline. I can't comment on 25fps workflows, as I don't live in 25fpsLand any more. Sadly.

    I wasn't talking about EDL generating, I was refering to 24fps playback, Apple swore they had true FPS playback, but it seemed it was just the same as the usual 25fps/24fps gearboxing that avid use. I suspect it's different to the 3:2 pulldown.
    Have you checked out Cinema Tools? Have you Reverse Telecined from within the app, with the Cinema Tools database being kept up-to-date? Awesome.

    No, out of curiousity is the reverse telecine where you generate a flex file for telecine? Whats the advantage?
    Ultimately it all comes down to an approach more relevant to a modern way of working. Using an Avid nowadays feels like using the bus. It will still get you from A to B, not a question about that, but is it the best and fastest way there? And will I enjoy getting there? Not a chance.

    True that. I was assisting a lightworks editor on a job a few weeks ago on an avid, he wasn't familiar with it, it was ver 12 I think, anyway every time I hit snap to edit, it snapped to edit, but automatically went into trim mode. And I couldn't see the energy plot unless I had an in and an out marked on the timeline. I spent an hour trying to fix this going out of my friggin mind, until despairingly I called tech support, who informed me, that no I wasn't stupid, these were bugs......
    As an unfortunate by-product of being the first to market, Avid have a longer user legacy to support than FCP, and their approach to the editing craft is one maroooned in the late eighties - it's a system designed around the central idea of convincing linear tape editors that this new-fangled non-linear thing was a great idea and one they could (relatively) easily adopt.

    Apple (or, really Macromedia, since it was originally theirs) have the benefit of starting to design a system in the year 2000. To me, the beauty of FCP is in its utter 'liveness' - in a world where you can think in terms of checkerboarding media, this is how you do it. You drag this bit here, shove that bunch of clips down there for later, varispeed that clip right there in the timeline (including the audio), toss that over there into that bin, zip out to the CG house FTP server and grab that latest clip, uprez to whatever def you're working in, dump straight into the timeline, Command-C that whole timeline and paste it onto the end of that other timeline at a a different rez in the same project, render it all into yet another rez, zap the DVD and split for some hang-gliding. (Well, apart from the hang-gliding part).

    Head dizzy, world future opening........
    Finally, after all this late night whiskey-fuelled ranting (no apologies if I've gone over the top, I love this software and it has utterly revolutionised and improved my life), some perspective. I came to this after many many years of Avid fandom. I am on record as having said some time in the late ninties that Avid was my favourite software ever. (Oh how sad!). And let me make clear that there are projects for which Avids are much more suitable - and I have spec'd that on two major jobs in the last two years. Both were large commercials with a ****load of effects. Both had major clients with considerable face-time with me. In that circumstance (> 25 layers), I'd always pick an Adrenaline. The hardware effects acceleration makes it worthwhile - in FCP I would have been finger-tapping while renders happened. But that's not to say I haven't done very similar jobs in FCP - it just depends on how up-close-and-personal the client's going to be. If I have breathing room or a remote client (happens to me often), I'll go FCP and take coffee breaks. And I see the hardware effects acceleration for FCP getting better and better, so I doubt even that margin will matter soon.

    Theres too things, avid went and took the high road around 2001, and has kept its suites out of anything but the professional market place, and even now has begun to alienate the smaller post houses who took the risk on them all those years ago, treating their clients with rank indifference.

    They're heading for an entirely different client base now, hell look at their site they've a whole section dedicated to forensic video equipment, they appear to be dropping to a rarified client base. It's a shame I do love avid, I learnt non linear on the heavyworks, and coming from that to avid, was well man, it was like having concrete boots removed, I'm frustrated by some the decisions they made.

    And tomorrow I start editing on Q edit pro.......shudder........
    Lump wrote:
    and cheaper systems means cheaper edit time = Happy Clients.

    Got to admit that I'm not happy with this on the whole. Last time I was in london, editing systems were expensive and editors time was deemed important. The cheapness of the equipment can in some peoples eyes, devalue the editors job and the role they play, hey I'm only paying X for this guy he can't know what he's talking about.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21 maxplanar


    mycroft wrote:
    the media management on FCP seems like almost a full time job.

    Nah. Not once you get the hang of it isn't. I've just spent the last two months handling 1.25TB of data on two separate projects. No sweat.
    You couldn't recommend a good book on FCP btw?

    The manuals are the best, but the Visual Quickpro Guides are good.
    It's been a while, but I've seen synching demostrated on fcp and essentially once you've sunk a clip, you need to leave the software, drag and drop the clip back into the project file, and then check it back.

    Not so - it's extremely simple, with a caveat. Mark an In on your video, mark the corresponding In on the audio (up to 24 audio channels can be synced at once), and select Merge Clip. A new clip appears directly in the broswer, and that's it. There's no "leaving the project".

    The caveat is that this feature doesn't quite work properly at present, unless you're onlining in the system, in which case it's not a problem at all. In FCP 5, it suffers from the exact same bug that they have with Multicam editing, which is that all elements in Multicamera or Merged clips inherit the timecode of the first video layer. So you can't generate an EDL without a final round of overcutting after lock. It's a bug, and Apple knows about it.
    I wasn't talking about EDL generating, I was refering to 24fps playback, Apple swore they had true FPS playback, but it seemed it was just the same as the usual 25fps/24fps gearboxing that avid use. I suspect it's different to the 3:2 pulldown.

    Not true. 24fps playback of HD material on an HD monitor runs perfectly. If playing the 24fps material back on a TV monitor, the third-party video card will handle the gearboxing/3:2 pulldown.
    is the reverse telecine where you generate a flex file for telecine?

    Reverse Telecine (in NTSC land, anyway - I've almost forgotten my PAL roots, it's so sad...) is the process of removing the inserted 3:2 pulldown fields that allow 24fps film material to run at 30fps. i.e. when you have film TK'd to tape in NTSC-land, you have 30fps. If you want to now use that in a 24fps project, you need to remove the 'phantom frames' as they call them in features world - fields, to all others. Reverse Telecine strips those out and changes the frame rate, directly from within the application. Net effect is that you can cut a film project with video dailies, at 24fps. Fab.

    As a side note, importing of Flex files and Batch List generation is all handled in Cinema Tools, and adjunct appplication to FCP that tracks the keycode relationships to the FCP video timecodes. Works really well and has no major problems.
    The cheapness of the equipment can in some peoples eyes, devalue the editors job and the role they play, hey I'm only paying X for this guy he can't know what he's talking about.

    You're not wrong that this is a potential concern, but in my experience it hasn't been the case - although producers love that the equipment is cheaper, they are still prepared to pay for talent. They understand that the two things aren't equal.


  • Registered Users Posts: 21 maxplanar


    Lump wrote:
    cheaper systems means cheaper edit time

    And that means more edit time, and more flexible working requirements. Incidentally, since this would be relevant to an org the size of the Beeb, an assistant I worked with this year had set up the Sundance Channel's Park City post system, which was the first to use XSan in a large project. They had 15 editors working, with two of the systems online-only, and were banging out one hour-long show a day for two weeks called Festival Dailies, basically a daily news show of Sundance happenings. Apparently all went swimmingly well...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17 skantflock


    any body tried sony vegas and sound forge ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 21 maxplanar


    skantflock wrote:
    any body tried sony vegas and sound forge ?

    Yes, and you need not bother with these children's toys, frankly. I mean, really. Imagine LEGO. Now imagine the Mars Rovers. That's all you need to know.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17 skantflock


    I have used a variety of programs, avid pro, adobe premiere and a few of the cyberlink power directors, but i still find vegas the easiest to use, even I find avid confusing to use after all this time, so to a beginner it would be imposible to use, similarly adobe premiere and the cyberlink offerings are not the easiest to use, with their confusing graphical interface, sony vegas is simple drag and drop ur files into the mix no matter what frame, bit or sample rate, the editing is childsplay and adding a few graphic effects, text or video effects is quick and easy.

    It also supports direct audio editing from sound forge, just click edit with sound forge and it opens up, sound forge is still the quickest easiest and most precise audio editor available, thats why its already reached its 8th version. combine the two programs and you have a studio quality media editing suite, vegas now even supports the increasingly popular high defenitions standards from 720 to the highest 1080p witch is only supported by one company so far and thats sony for there upcoming ps3, although there is only three tv's avialable today that can play that resolution and they are 20,000 euro plasma's.

    Another excelent feature is that can render your files with networked computers. this is especially handy for high defenition files that will give even the fastest of modern pc's alot of trouble to process, i rendered a 2 minute high def file on a new top of the range dual core Amd 4800 and it still 17 minutes, so sharing the load is great, if you have two pc's on ur network both of them procees 50 % of the file if you have 4 its 25% and so on, witch will dramaticly shorten ur rendering time and avoid computer crashes.

    So you can say i am a fan of these two exelent programs i do alot of video editing and i dont bother with any other software except adobe audition for my multitrack work cause its a shed load cheaper than pro tolls and just as good if you have the right hardware


Advertisement