|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Avid vs. Final Cut Pro
|
|
|
Warren Smyth
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 158
From: Auckland ,New Zealand
Registered: Aug 2003
|
posted 02-03-2004 03:42 PM
I've used the Avid Media Composer for about twelve years and more recently the Quantel. The Avid gave us a few problems at the start with bugs. For example if you transferred a clip from a bin to the source monitor while the digitize tool was open, it would crash resulting in the loss of some of your work. With software updates, these have been rectified.
The Avid is now my first choice and is a wonderful tool. Keep in mind that whatever system you use, it is only a tool and yes, the training on one will benefit you for other systems. The terminology may change, but certain principals and methods remain the same.
Generally, editing falls into three main skill requirements.
1 There is the craft, which deals with the creative aspects such as film grammar, continuity, pacing etc.
2. The technical aspects of working and modifying pictures and multiple sound channels and all variations (trimming, split edits etc) and at the same time maintaining sync.
3 The actual operation of the particular editing system to achieve the first two as well as file management digitizing etc.
The first skill is the most important and that which takes the longest to develop. Editing is a craft where experience really does count, so the more editing decisions you can make to see what works and what doesn't, the better. A modest priced home system will enable you to do that.
The first and second set of skills really haven't changed since the days of editing on film with a work print. As an example, the ruler calibraited in frames along the edge of the Steenbeck or flat bed Moviola to measure off frames before cutting, has been replaced with a centre trim icon and sync reference numbers on the digital timeline. The traps and theory remain the same.
Unfortunately, there is plenty of literature about the third skill - operation of the system which you can get out of the manuals anyway (Avid produce good ones for their products), but not a lot to cover the first. Some of the best on editing theory were written in the film days. It's as if the technology has been alowed to dominate the creative aspect. The idea that there is fear (unfounded or not) that an editor should be chosen on the basis of the tool on which he or she has used, proves this. Would you employ a particular builder on the basis of his tools? You can be sure that any director that employs you on the basis of a particular editing system surely isn't going to value you for your craft skills. I can assure you it is your creativity that sets you apart as an editor. It is that which gives you the competitive edge.
Having emphasised the craft aspect, it is still a good idea to try to get a copy of an Avid manual before the course and read it. You may not be able to understand all of it but any prior knowledge is useful and don't get hung up on the effects palet options. The most common and usually effective transition is the cut. Finally, good luck and enjoy yourself.
I moved out of the projection room in my late twenties nearly thirty years ago and trained as a film editor. Never regretting it, Ive been editing continuously since.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 02-03-2004 07:52 PM
quote:
Unfortunately, there is plenty of literature about the third skill - operation of the system which you can get out of the manuals anyway.
This is a valid argument which can be made about how most classes are taught that involve digital-based creativity, be it video production/editing, graphic design, 3D, etc.
At times, I have thought about going back to school to earn a master of fine arts degree. I don't have the money to go back to School of Visual Arts in New York to do it. And I see too much computer application classes in the offerings at Oklahoma University and Cameron here in Lawton. There's not enough going on in the REAL PART of the creative process: getting the concepts together in your head and solving those visual problems quickly. Hell, there's such a lack of that going on that I've even thought about getting whatever qualifications I need to teach that stuff to others.
The thought process of art creation was one of the fundamental things when most people did their creative work in the "analog" realm (using film, oil paints, etc.). The big thing that needs to be flushed out of so many heads is the idea that the computer is doing the work. That's why there's this trap about just learning how to point and click in an application without really knowing how to create with it.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[beer]](graemlins/beer.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic