I come at this from being a finishing guy for 30 years.
In the film days we mostly eye matched in online. In commercials it was all 35mm offline and eye match to cut neg telecine transfers camera flash to camera flash.
In 88 we started conforming from d1 on Harry. With only 80 sec of storage eye matching was very wasteful of the framestore so we shot a timecode leader onto 35mm and putting that up against the cut neg and the cutting copy we could work out the timecode the neg would be at after transfer based on putting a hole punched frame on 1min.
We then had a couple of great easy years. The film guys did the synchronizer trick, the tape guys cut with window dubs and onlines got way faster.
Then avid happened. I initially it was back to eye matching as the early Avids were pretty much random number generators not helped by the fact that you could choose to not digitize timecode in which case time of day would be assigned. Whenever I saw a timecode of 8 hours I knew I was screwed and some assistant had messed up. Then people learnt and apart from every shot being 99.9% play speed (ah fit to fill) it was smooth sailing.
Until FCP.
It was back to 1991 for everyone. But the difference this time was the editors didn't want to listen or learn. The old avid guys who transitioned were great and got it quickly but the new to editing FCP guys were painful. They also were the ones who decided to bring me edited bases to 'just do the effects' on. Inverted fields were the least of the problems. I quickly learnt to just get projects and sort it out myself before online.
And I still do today. Probably 30% of my onlines have been cut in FCP and I'm still jumping in to remove merge fields in speed changes least now I get to make the XML and it conforms.
It's nothing to do with creative vs online and everything to do with knowing when to split the job. For me I prefer to prep the online - then it's my fault if I screw myself.
Mike
I think this is less an FCP vs. MC thing, and more of an offline vs. online / creative cut vs. finishing thing. In the past, offlines were done on simpler systems and the online editor cleaned up the mess. Creativity was the most important thing and technical skills de-emphasized.
FCP has been attractive to people who want an easy-to-use, creative tool with a certain freeform methodology. While there are certainly messy MC jobs, the software does impose a certain structure. I've watched a number of self-taught producer/editor types and really had to scratch my head to even figure out how they were working.FCP allowed certain solutions that MC (and most other NLEs) simply would never allow.- Oliver
__._,_.___
| Reply via web post | Reply to sender | Reply to group | Start a New Topic | Messages in this topic (24) |
.
__,_._,___
No comments:
Post a Comment