Cut|Color|Post

excerpts, quips, and musings on the production and post-production industry, and other stuff of interest

It's All in What You Teach

Oliver Peters writing on his own blog:

Change is attractive to new users, with no preconceived preferences. FCP X acolytes like to say how much easier it is to teach new users FCP X than a track-based system, like FCP 7, Premiere Pro or Media Composer. As someone who’s taught film student editing workshops, my opinion is that it simply isn’t true. It’s all in what you teach, how you teach it and what you expect them to accomplish. In fact, I’ve had many who are eager to learn Media Composer, precisely because they know that it continues to be the “gold standard” for feature film editing software.

There are some concrete reasons why film editors prefer Media Composer. For many, it’s because Avid was their first NLE and it felt logical to them. For others, it’s because Avid has historically incorporated a lot of user input into the product. Here are a dozen factors that I believe keep the equation in favor of Avid Media Composer.

That's an interesting take down to the FCP X is the easiest NLE to teach/learn. Maybe some people gravitate to it faster than others. Maybe some teachers find it easier to explain. It may just be in the teacher. A good teacher can make learning interesting regardless of the tool, skill, or concept being taught. But as I've said before:

Let me be clear about this: nobody cares what NLE you use. If you're getting the job done and the client is happy that's all that matters. If a particular NLE caters to your workflow better then another. Fine. Use that NLE. If you need to adapt your workflow to better utilize the NLE then adapt your workflow. But seriously, stop with the "this software is faster" or "I'm 2x faster in..." All the NLE's on the market today - FCPX, Premiere Pro CC, MC7 (and yes, even you Autodesk Smoke) - work well and can get a story cut. All of them are fast, fluid, and when used by an expert, can accomplish the art of editing.