51

(20 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Doctor Submarine wrote:

Terrible ending…

That was the part I liked best. There's a lot of very deep sci-fi buried in that ending, none of which was spoon-fed to the audience. I loved that.

Maybe I'm giving it too much credit, but it's kind of like Primer in a way. You can watch it for what it is, and that's fine, but if you have a thorough education in the philosophical interpretations of quantum physics, there are whole layers there that aren't at all evident otherwise. The tension in the last act is about whether, in the world of the story, the Bohr/Planck "Copenhagen school" interpretation is true, or whether Hugh Everett's idea is. During that one shot (you know the one I mean if you've seen it) I was on the edge of my seat, almost unbearably anxious to find out whether the story takes place in a unitary or a non-unitary universe.

Of course, it's entirely possible the writer, Ben Ripley, wouldn't know a wavefunction if one came up and introduced itself, and the whole nerdtastic intellectual layer of the movie is just purely accidental. But it works so well I have a hard time believing it was just a lucky guess.

52

(20 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Source Code might be one of the best science fiction movies I've ever seen.

53

(56 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I NEED A SPECIAL BUTTON TO CLICK TO INDICATE MY INDIFFERENCE. PLEASE ADD A "Meh" BUTTON.

54

(56 replies, posted in Off Topic)

At which point it would top out at about seven miles an hour, since a Tesla weighs just slightly less than a black hole of the same size.

55

(56 replies, posted in Off Topic)

As long as no one says the Porsche 911 GT3 RS, I think we're all gonna be okay.

56

(56 replies, posted in Off Topic)

And it's made of wood!

I will concede the point, though, that a Veyron is not the sort of car one really wants to see from the outside. In my defense, you can't see the outside if you're driving it.

Therefore I present to you the 1961 E-type Jaguar roadster. Look on it, ye mighty, and despair.

http://files.conceptcarz.com/img/Jaguar/1961_jaguar_etype_01.jpg

Free no-cost-to-you bonus? It is literally impossible to say the name of that car aloud without pronouncing it "Jegg-you-uh."

57

(56 replies, posted in Off Topic)

It's hard to beat that. But the Phantom is really a car to be driven in, not to drive, wouldn't you say? So I guess it depends on what your priorities are.

58

(12 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Can we say the whole Star Wars prequel trilogy? Is that allowed?

59

(56 replies, posted in Off Topic)

All you people who didn't say "Bugatti Veyron" have brought the wrong car.

60

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Agreed. I find myself wishing Twitter had some kind of visible reminder that the person you're looking at is set to private.

61

(90 replies, posted in Episodes)

Yeah, and he was great in Manhunter.

(Kidding, kidding. Chill.)

62

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Damn, I'm sorry. I forgot his twits are private. My bad.

63

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Teague, you fucking hypocrite.

;-)

64

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Here's the link, Eddie: https://twitter.com/markraudonis/status … 4821435392 I see now that I look at it that I paraphrased pretty … um … aggressively.

The fact that you got to work under him knocks me out, man. I got a really, really nice email from him last week about something I'd made, and I nearbouts peed myself in excitement.

Okay, I did pee myself. But only a little bit. I covered it up my dumping my nalgene in my lap … which in retrospect was kind of a bad move.

65

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

It's $15,000 for the software, about another $20,000 or so for the hardware. But I didn't buy it. They're sending me a non-rev copy. Just for being awesome, I guess. Plus I have a looooooong history with those guys, way back before they got bought by Autodesk.

66

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I think Paulou's absolutely right. It's too easy to become complacent. We all know the vendors will fuck you, but in the past it's been like not returning your emergency call at nine o'clock on Christmas Eve, or charging you ten grand a year for support. Taking a successful, widely used product and just dropping it is something I haven't had to experience before. It's a bit of a shock.

67

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Still no, mainly because the information I have on that event comes from somebody who was actually there, who says it was very different from what that rumor site alleges.

But first and foremost, FCP X dropped three weeks ago. That's an eternity. Everybody's already got their FCP-to-something-else transition plans well underway. For Apple to try to side-channel some incomplete and unhelpful info-drops that should have, at the very least, been printed on billboards on day one is just insulting. It smacks of "Oh, we've got it under control, and you never should've doubted us." Well no, you don't, Apple, and what's become blindingly obvious is that we should've doubted you long before this.

The thing about volume license sales? Yeah, no. What they said is that they are investigating the possibility of maybe allowing existing volume license holders to get additional keys on the licenses they've already bought. Which matters to virtually no one. As Mark Raudonis of Bunim-Murray said on Twitter last night, that doesn't mean a damn thing when you've got 125 individual licenses. The larger point, though, should not be lost: If you need an additional license for Final Cut Pro 7, tough. Apple will not sell you one. Period, end of discussion on that point.

The EDL thing seems to be an error. One person claimed to have heard it mentioned; I've not found anyone else who can confirm that.

The Xsan thing also appears to be erroneous. I think the person who reported that got confused by the fact that Lion is shipping in a few weeks with Xsan built into it, but FCP X ignores Xsan volumes even when running on Lion.

The XML thing is supposedly happening through third parties … but no third parties have announced any such thing. What Apple was saying there was apparently "We assume third parties will plug this gaping hole, probably. Whatever."

The broadcast monitoring thing appears to be a flat-out lie again. According to some people I've heard from at Aja, FCP X simply has no facility for third-party I/O boards. That function is not built in to the program. In order to get a preview, you have to reach into the graphics buffer and pull out a chunk of the program's main window, which is what Aja is doing right now with their recommended workaround. Rumor has it this is because FCP X does a lot of work in the graphics board itself … but in a profoundly stupid way. Rather than sending directives to the GPU and then reading rendered frames back into main memory for caching on disk (where they can be grabbed by third-party I/O drivers) it's just having the GPU pipe the output straight to the graphics monitor. This also goes to explain some of the rendering problems people have been reporting: Yes, FCP X is fast because it works this way, but you also never actually see any of your frames at any point while you work. Instead you just get a real-time preview which approximates what your final frames will look like. Which is, you know, kind of a problem if you're color-correcting!

The bottom line is still this: At best, Apple shipped an unfinished product. But that best-case scenario is becoming increasingly elusive, as more and more information comes out suggesting that FCP X is literally broken by design. Media management is a catastrophe, the trackless timeline means doing anything requires clumsy workarounds that oh by the way aren't actually figured out yet, and now we're hearing noise that FCP X can't even give you an accurate real-time preview because fidelity was sacrificed in the name of apparent speed.

So no, man. Not happy. Just increasingly indifferent. I've got Premiere here and it's meh whatever, Avid's on my to-do list and my copy of Smoke 2012 is in the mail. The world's moved on already.

68

(37 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Can I be Tank this time? I'm sick of always getting killed before the end of the second act.

69

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I've heard every one of those arguments used in anger except the "it's all FUD from Avid" one. I may've missed it, but I don't think so, since it seems like Avid is basically sitting there trying to be as still as possible, going, "Shhh, shhh, their vision's based on movement."

70

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Actually no, since you mention it. Let's go through it point by point.

The "trackless timeline" excuse is weak sauce. Setting aside whether FCP X should ever have had a trackless timeline in the first place — it shouldn't — the program still needed a way to import FCP 7 timelines on day one. It doesn't matter if it's imperfect; imperfect we can live with happily. The fact that there isn't even a fifty-percent solution is just insulting. It says Apple doesn't think old project files are important, which says they don't get commercial post.

The "you can import video directly just like before" thing is downright misleading. You can't, because there's no SDI input. You can import some things in a similar way to what you did in FCP 7, but not all, and not just-like-before.

"Final Cut Pro X does support FireWire import for DV, DVCPRO, DVCPRO 50, DVCPRO HD, and HDV." No, it doesn't, unless you mean crash-recording. There's no way to batch input. Which drops their "Yes, we do tape workflows in a limited way" thing down to "No, we really don't do tape workflows at all, lol."

"Does Final Cut Pro X support multicam editing?" No. It doesn't. "But it will," they say. Don't care. If it doesn't, it doesn't, which means you need a tool that does.

"Does Final Cut Pro X support external monitors?" Apple says yes, but that's a flat-out lie, frankly. It doesn't. Yes, Apple interpreted the question as, "Can you have multiple computer monitors hooked up?" and "Can you show an 8-bit RGB preview on a $20,000 10-bit NTSC broadcast monitor?" and said yes to both, but that's not what the question means. It means can you pipe real-time full-resolution full-depth full-quality program feed out an SDI spigot, and the answer to that is a shameless "no."

"Final Cut Pro X automatically saves your project during the editing process, so you never lose your work." Except when it doesn't, and you do, as a great many people trying out the software have discovered. Lol jk.

"Are keyboard shortcuts in Final Cut Pro X different from those in Final Cut Pro 7?" I don't even know why that's a FAQ. Nobody cares.

"You’ll be able to use [third-party plugins] as soon as they are updated." And they'll be updated as soon as Apple ships an SDK, which they didn't do before the software was released and still haven't done now. Stu Maschwitz said it best: "None of our new stuff works with FCP X … because after all, neither do you."

"Can I specify a scratch disk location?" Admittedly, a lot of early testers got this wrong. In their defense, Apple has gone out of their way to obscure how media and cached renders are stored on disk.

"Can I share projects with other editors?" Apple says yes, but the answer is really no … unless they happen to be using FCP X. There's absolutely no way to collaborate with other NLEs or finishing systems.

"Can I store media in locations other than my system drive?" Same as above: A lot of people got this wrong because the software seems deliberately designed to make it unclear.

"Can I hide Events that I am not working on?" Now this one just pisses me the fuck off. Apple says, "You can hide Events in Final Cut Pro X by moving them out of the Final Cut Events folder." Well whoopty shit. Here's this awesome media management infrastructure we've been working on for two years! All you need to do to take advantage of it is drop into the Finder and move shit around every hour or two, which means extra work for you and an increased chance of screwing something up! Yay!

"We will release a set of APIs in the next few weeks so that third-party developers can access the next-generation XML in Final Cut Pro X." No excuse — no excuse — for not shipping that months before FCP X was released to the public.

"Does Final Cut Pro X support OMF, AAF, and EDLs?" Yes, but it'll cost you nearly twice as much as your NLE did, because we just don't give a shit.

"Can I send my project to a sound editing application such as Pro Tools?" Yes. Except really no, because we just don't give a shit. See above.

"An update this summer will allow you to use metadata tags to categorize your audio clips by type and export them directly from Final Cut Pro X." Great! That's completely unrelated to what people actually need to be able to do! Metadata is an unacceptable solution, Apple, when the same bit of audio can show up on the dialogue track here, and later on the ambience track.

"Can I customize my export settings?" Nobody. Gives. A shit. The only thing anybody ever "exports" from FCP is a timeline-format master Quicktime that goes somewhere else for encoding. Every second you spent on this shit, Apple, is a second you didn't spend making the program useful for commercial post.

And finally: "Can I purchase a volume license?" Yes, if you are a crazy person. Or you can just install that copy of Adobe Premiere you already got when you bought the bundle because it was cheaper than buying After Effects and Photoshop separately.

This FAQ is nothing short of insulting. It's just a giant fuck-you to the post industry, brushing off legitimate and catastrophic design flaws in the app with PR-speak spin-language.

Pissed me off, is what it did.

71

(1 replies, posted in Off Topic)

So a buddy of mine recently lost his job when his company went under. He's in LA right now, looking for work as an editor. Any chance any of y'all wonderful people would be willing to pass on any leads, or maybe just meet up with the guy for a beer sometime?

72

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Dude. You think your day was weird? I woke up yesterday to find a hundred unread emails and ten new ones a minute, and before the day was over I had a conference call scheduled with Adobe's project managers to talk about why Premiere annoyed me.

Yesterday was just fucking bizarre on every level.

73

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Fixed is of course right. Maya, Nuke, Avid, After Effects, C4D, even Smoke now … the Mac is really the backbone of post production, and that's not going to change any time soon. Yes, you can do some of those things with Linux, but not unless you have a full-time staff of neckbeards. And you can do some of it with Windows, but not unless you have a full-time staff of overpaid neckbeards.

74

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I was talking to my best friend last night. He runs a medium-sized boutique post house that does mostly TVCs. His Avids, and he's got seven of them, are all four years old, four Mojos, an Adrenaline and two softs. FCP was never an option for him, because his editors are Avid guys and that's just fine for everybody. But right now he's faced with the prospect of having to upgrade those machines soon. Clients are making noise like they want to see HD in their offline sessions, the machines are underpowered, it's just time for something new.

Trouble is, now feels like — I said "feels like," I'm just speculating here — a rotten time to invest in Avid hardware. The software no; Media Composer's great and getting steadily better. But the hardware options still suck. If you don't want Nitris, your choices are either Mojo DX or the Matrox box, and both of those are these shitty little non-rack-mountable things with flimsy connectors on them.

If Media Composer were compatible with the Kona board, my friend said he'd upgrade today. Immediately. No hesitation.

Meanwhile, I'm about ready to download the MC demo for my Macbook Pro. I managed to completely skip my Avid education over the years, and it's high time I fixed that.

75

(81 replies, posted in Off Topic)

If all you're worried about is that EVENTUALLY it MIGHT become KINDA HARD to run FCP7 on your NEWEST Mac, then I understand the griping even less.

It's impossible to run FCP 7 on any Mac you purchase today, new, used or cobbled together from spare parts. Because Apple won't sell it to you any more. Maybe if you're lucky you can score a license on eBay or something, but Apple literally will not take your money.

This is a new, fantastic version of the software, and it seriously sucks that most of the pros I know aren't able to use it.

Exactly. Except for the "fantastic" part. This is a new version which sucks out loud. It's not just that it's different. It's not just that it's buggy (though oh my god seriously you guys). It's that it's wrong. "That thing you've been doing for twenty years? Do it this way now." No, Apple, that's lame, the other way is better. "Well tough, we're pulling FCP 7 from the channel." Hello, Avid sales guy who won't leave me alone? It is time.