Interesting Observation on "Younger" FCP Editors

[David Parks]

http://www.studiodaily.com/blog/

I've seen this as well. Scott is right. You can continue to have a "bedroom edit suite" or reach and learn the craft.

[Richard Alvarez]

Yup, run up against it myself. And I don't even consider myself a 'pro-level' editor.

[Mike Barber]

(from linked article)

Many folks learned FCP and then began to call themselves and market themselves as an editor. But what I am consistently seeing [...] is a real lack of some basic post production knowledge.

No kidding. Knowing how to use software like FCP or Avid -- or even hardware like a Steinbeck -- does not make one an editor. There is much more to being an editor than being a technician, which I have found myself (one who is, in his early 30s, a young editor) having to explain to justify my existence... which feels odd.

(from linked article)

[...] there’s more to an online that high-rezing footage. There’s quality control with video levels, color correction and color grading [...]

I have to bite the inside of my cheek when I hear "isn't that what the plug-in is for?" during a discussion on NTSC legal limits. I guess the idea of actually looking at a waveform monitor is too "old school" nowadays.

(from linked article)

I’ve even been confronted with a project that needed to be rebuilt from a crashed, and very cheap, hard drive. It was unable to be recaptured as the editor used a cheap camera to capture the media and it didn’t capture the timecode.

Oh, oh, oh... how about a project that has footage on 9 tapes. It comes to you prepped for off-line with footage already captured on a harddrive... to discover that there are no tape/reel numbers associated with the tapes. Thanks.

(from linked article)

Why is this kind of thing so prevalent in a Final Cut Pro world?

It's not just the FCP world. I've seen it from young editors using Avid too. Even worse, IME, are young Premier editors. Don't get me started on them!
;-}D

Thanks for sharing the link... the others below it look great too. I'm off to learn me some lighting with the inverse square rule.

[Benjamin Hill]

It's not confined to young editors either- I've seen this attitude in guys that have been making a living in video production for decades. Call it "bare minimum" syndrome or whatever. Just makes it that much easier to set yourself apart with your own professionalism, if you ask me.

[Chris Harris]

I'll admit it... I don't know what an EDL is, I can't read a waveform monitor to save my life, and I certainly don't check to see that my projects are broadcast safe.

I guess now that I've been exposed, it's time to learn!

[Tim Dashwood]

That's an awesome blog. He really hit the nail on the head.

However, I think one of the biggest differences is that when I started at a commercial editing house (in 1994 mid-way through the full industry transition to Avid Media Composer) I was a true assistant... booking sessions at "online" houses, coordinating with the agency or production house producers, performing the "grunt work" on the Avid (usually regional versions of price & item supers,) sometimes 2 or 3 days in a row without sleep, supervising select-scene telecine transfers, attending Paintbox/Henry/Harry sessions, or assembling work prints for a negative cutter on a Steenbeck (back when they wouldn't accept an Avid neg cut list.)
I've relied on my experience as an assistant editor almost every day of my career as an editor (and cinematographer for that matter.) I receive resumes all the time from "editors" who have taken some 3-day weekend course in either Avid or FCP and are actually applying for editing gigs.
I've almost always had at least one of my own assistant editors on-call since 1998, most of whom have become successful editors themselves. I now will only either use someone I personally trained, or someone who was trained by one of my circle of peers.
I've been screwed too many times by untrained assistant editors who think they can just stick the tape in, capture the whole 60 minutes, and then sub-clip it later. This is not only a waste of hard drive space, but a huge tax on an Avid or FCP system and causes tiny delays every time you click around in a long sequence. (Spinning beach ball anyone?)
I always stress the importance of well logged and described clips to my assistants. Spend the time logging the tapes properly, then relax and just swap tapes while you are batch capturing. If we can even shave a day off the post schedule it is worth it to be well organized.

I should stop ranting now before I get myself in trouble!

[Richard Alvarez]

Its true that the shortcomings are not 'platform specific' - you can find Premire, Avid or Vegas editors that come up short. BUT - (and it's a big butt) Since Final Cut Pro can 'rightly' brag to have captured the indy/youth market and achieved maximum penetration - then you are more likely to find these faults in a 'young FCP editor'. (Or more likely to find a 'young FCP editor WITH these faults... take your pick)

Just a statistical fact.

[Bryan Gilchrist]

There are people like this in every craft.

Take DJ's for example. You've got your "bedroom DJ's" that mix in their house and do the occasional wedding, dance club or small corporate gig. Then you have legends like Cameron Paul and the infamous Clivillés & Cole who were masters of their work.

In the video world, you have those who just edit, your "bedroom editors", and you have those who understand the ART of editing.

[Nate Benson]

bitterness from the old folks to us youngins aside,
that article has a lot of good points.

let me explain some facts though.

FACT: schools don't teach EDL anymore
FACT: schools don't teach how to read waveform
FACT: schools don't teach what we need to know
FACT: schools teach the bare minimum b/c old timers are lazy when it comes to learning new equipment and software, and they're more worried about being tenured and not caring about actually teaching.

Those are the facts about schools in 2008 that have 'Film' programs, with the exceptions of the 5-10 MAJOR film schools.

The reason I ended up joining this forum was to learn what I wasn't learning in school, scary right?

But lets face the facts, clients, even mine in Buffalo, don't want to see an edl, they don't want to see a paper edit (which I'm probably like in the 2% that do). They want to see their project done. They have no patience, they want the 300 look, or the spielberg look for their corporate project or other media, not only do they want these looks, they want them now, b/c the technology exists NOW.

The reason why many young people consider themselves editors are because they have the associates and bachelors degrees that tell them so. I'm a realist, do I consider myself a true editor? not really. But am I above my game with several people who've been doing this 10+years and most of my fellow college students, I think so. And it's only by reading intensively, as well as posting/reading sites like this am I able to confidently say I'm a pretty good 'media' organizer.

[Richard Alvarez]

I think the point of the article, and what the thread here addresses in a sideways fashion, is that the 'democratization' of the technology - the fact that ANYBODY can 'make movies' nowadays, with professional level effects or resolutions - does not translate to PROFESSIONALISM in workflow or job skillsets.

As the article points out, the process, the standard practices, the 'professional courtesies' that come about from working on the collaborative process at the higher levels, the professional interchange -is not found when working alone in one's bedroom. (or garage, or basement, wherever.)

Those sorts of practices come about because you've assisted someone, you've watched the 'pro' work. You've learned the procedures for integrating into a high-level team or market.

When you work alone, you've got only yourself to please. Your creativity is 'liberated'. But being unconventional and 'non-standard' in your practices are not necessarily condusive to making a sale, or getting hired.

And to a certain extent, that can be said where ever technology has 'democratized' the previously expensive creative process. Audio production, desktop publishing, desktop graphics, 'Film' makers who don't understand film, etc.

[Benjamin Hill]

He's really preaching to the choir there, but I take issue with the idea that there is a "right way" or a "wrong way" to become an editor. If you do your job well and deliver value to your clients, it doesn't matter whether you do broadcast work for a big production company or local TV spots on iMovie (on your "bedroom edit suite"). It doesn't matter whether you have an actual waveform monitor or use the scopes in FCP.

If you want to work in an industry, you figure out the rules sooner or later. Final Cut Pro software is not going to put "professionals" like this guy out of a job, and he should realize also that the plethora of amateur editors out there actually increases his value as a knowledgeable video pro.

[David Parks]

Originally Posted by Nate Benson

bitterness from the old folks to us youngins aside,
that article has a lot of good points.

let me explain some facts though.

FACT: schools don't teach EDL anymore
FACT: schools don't teach how to read waveform
FACT: schools don't teach what we need to know
FACT: schools teach the bare minimum b/c old timers are lazy when it comes to learning new equipment and software, and they're more worried about being tenured and not caring about actually teaching.

Those are the facts about schools in 2008 that have 'Film' programs, with the exceptions of the 5-10 MAJOR film schools.

The reason I ended up joining this forum was to learn what I wasn't learning in school, scary right?

But lets face the facts, clients, even mine in Buffalo, don't want to see an edl, they don't want to see a paper edit (which I'm probably like in the 2% that do). They want to see their project done. They have no patience, they want the 300 look, or the spielberg look for their corporate project or other media, not only do they want these looks, they want them now, b/c the technology exists NOW.

.

Nate,

It's not bitterness form us older guys. Technology forces us all to adapt sometimes. I'm an editor who had to make the (what seemed painful at the time) transition from linear editing to non-linear practically overnight in 1993. Now i've had to learn FCP. Much easier transition than going from Linear A/B roll black box GPI editing to non-linear everything in one computer with your footage on hard drives transition.

In the linear world, I had older editors and especially one engineer scream at me for having bad levels (audio and video) after making 25 spot dubs. They made me start all over. After that, i sat down with the engineer and he gave me a lesson on how to properly set ,setup to 7.5 IRE, how to line up the color bars on a vector scope, how to ensure proper timecode starting at 1 hour, and setting audio tone. The really important basics that I was willing to get yelled at over so I would understand their value in the broadcast and even non-broadcast world. I didn't call him a grumpy old man.

Those reference standards are still very much in play and what we're seeing is some resistance on some (but certainly not all) newer editors to learning that level of "pro" editing best practices.

And, I agree it is not just younger editors. But us older guys are far from bitter, we're frustrated with the attitude that "as long as you have this editing software all you have to do is move a few sliders then walla!! It's done."

There are tricks of the trade that can be learned if you have the right listening and learning attitude.

BTW, my Bachelor of Science degree was almost worthless in 1985 too. So far as # of quality production schools, nothing has really changed there. Can't let that stop you from success.

Cheers, David

[David Parks]

Originally Posted by Benjamin Hill

It doesn't matter whether you have an actual waveform monitor or use the scopes in FCP.

.

$$##&*^&(*&*(&(*&)(*^^%&(^%()(*&***$$#@$$&&HHGGHUIHUIHUUIHIO)(U**))(U))U)U)U)U)U)U{UIHOHOH()((. +__+_+__44433@@@^&^||}{?><<JJBU&*(*((Y(BUTDF##&OLMJVDF^*G)HHH990055%%%%%Tghw223.

*%$# That's all I'm saying about that.

[Benjamin Hill]

Originally Posted by David Parks

$$##&*^&(*&*(&(*&)(*^^%&(^%()(*&***$$#@$$&&HHGGHUIHUIHUUIHIO)(U**))(U))U)U)U)U)U)U{UIHOHOH()((. +__+_+__44433@@@^&^||}{?><<JJBU&*(*((Y(BUTDF##&OLMJVDF^*G)HHH990055%%%%%Tghw223.

*%$# That's all I'm saying about that.

Well-put!

But take that in context. In any given instance, you use the most professional tool you have access to. Even if it is just the zebras on your LCD. You do what it takes to get the best image you can.

Anyone who wants to work at the most professional levels of an industry will learn that there conventions and practices, including the tools of the trade, and there is no shortcut around that. For those who don't want to be a professional, there is all this great new technology and software. There's no substitute for experience and knowledge and the most fabulous software in the world can't replace it.

[Ryan Mueller]

So basically what your saying David is that you were just like one of these younger editors when you entered the professional world? The younger generation will learn these techniques eventually, that is to say if they truly want to be professionals in a professional industry.

I can't agree with Nate enough! If schools aren't teaching these skills, which they aren't, where are the kids supposed to learn them besides just trial and error? What about the mentality of the teachers just not teaching these skills?

The industry is beginning to change faster than we can blink, with a new codec being introduced practically daily. New formats are being introduced almost as quickly. I don't think the older generation of Avid editors are alone in the frustration of the quickly advancing and very democratic world of video production. The younger generation is struggling just as much, even though they might be too naive to tell at the moment.

I think five years from now, there will probably be five more systems that will compete with FCP. Just watch out for that, then you will have 5 year olds cutting projects. LOL