Larry Jordan Blog



Category: General

Thoughts on Lion

Posted by on July 20, 2011

We are all looking forward to the release of Lion on Wednesday this week.

So I thought I’d dust off a few thoughts from operating system upgrades from year’s past – just to prevent any problems.

First – and most important – NEVER upgrade anything in the middle of a project. Lion will be just as dandy if you wait to upgrade when your project is complete. Yes, Lion is new. Yes, Lion is exciting. But both of those pale into insignificance if the upgrade breaks something on your edit system.

ALWAYS upgrade between projects.

Second, Lion is a big upgrade. For this reason, I recommend not upgrading any production systems for at least three months after a new OS ships. Give the third-party developers time to make sure everything works properly. Nothing is worse than upgrading only to discover that one filter you REALLY need for your project doesn’t work.

Third, a couple of weeks ago, I contacted Apple to see if Lion would bring any new features to Final Cut Pro X. Apple told me that it would not. My hope is that Apple will have new updates for FCP X in the near future, however, I don’t expect that at the same time as a Lion release.

For all these reasons, I recommend taking a cautious approach to upgrading any systems that you depend upon for editing. If you have a machine that you can spare for testing, by all means, give Lion a whirl.

Just be really, really, really cautious about putting it on any systems you depend upon until Apple has released at least one maintenance update.

Practicing patience can be difficult. But not being able to output a project is far worse.

Larry

Ain’t Nothing Like It In the World

Posted by on June 21, 2011

UPDATE

David Pogue, New York Times, has written an excellent followup article with Apple’s response to missing features in Final Cut Pro X.

Read it here: http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/23/professional-video-editors-weigh-in-on-final-cut-pro-x/

- – -

Apple released Final Cut Pro X this morning at 5:30 AM LA time. You can read Apple’s announcement here — http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2011/06/21fcp.html

You can visit Apple’s new webpage here: http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/

In three words – speed, power, cutting-edge.

The first time I saw Final Cut Pro X, back in February, this quote from the title of Stephen Ambrose’s book on the transcontinental railroad flashed into my head.

Just as the transcontinental railroad permanently changed 19th century America – in a wide variety of ways – Final Cut Pro X has the same capability.

During the last several months, I’ve had extensive discussions with engineers and product managers at Apple, read virtually all the Help files and, more recently, been running the software itself.

I’m knee-deep in a long newsletter which will provide a lot more detail when it comes out next week (subscribe for your FREE issue here: larryjordan.biz/newsletter), so here, in this blog, I just want to provide a bigger picture approach.

In every conversation I’ve had with Apple, each person stressed: “The easy thing would be to just create an incremental upgrade. But, we felt that while the current version of Final Cut held up well for the last ten years, it wasn’t ready for the next ten. We needed to design something from the ground up to take us into the next ten years.”

With this release, Apple made four significant changes in direction:

* For the first time, two different versions of FCP can coexist on the same system. I’ve been running FCP 7 and FCP X on the same system for months.
* Maxing out performance to take full advantage of current hardware
* Almost exclusive support for tapeless workflows
* Distribution via the App Store

FINAL CUT PRO 7 IS NOT DEAD

To me, this is one of the highlights!

Installing FCP X does not remove FCP 7. So you can take your own sweet time deciding when to make the switch. And, in fact, you can use FCP 7 where it makes sense and FCP X when that is a better choice. For the first time ever, we can have two different versions of FCP on the same system at the same time, without partitioning hard disks and jumping through hoops.

PERFORMANCE

Its no secret that Final Cut Pro took forever to accomplish some tasks. (I have it on good authority that many families were significantly augmented while waiting for the render bar to complete its measured progress.)

Plus, the 4 GB RAM limit caused projects to corrupt, files to mysteriously disappear and spawned a new breed of tech: the Final Cut guru, who, with an apparent laying on of the hands, could bring nearly dead projects back to life. (That last may be a dramatic overstatement, but I like the allusion.)

This new version flies. Whenever Final Cut needs to think, it does so seamlessly, in the background, with a little indicator that tells you how its doing and a complete dashboard for the curious who want to monitor their system.

It allows editing files natively, but prefers to convert them to ProRes – a decision that I agree with, for both performance and image quality reasons.

Once you edit with the magnetic timeline, you’ll never want to go back. And, while the concept of connected clips is a bit weird initially, the benefits these provide are so well-thought out and obvious that I stopped worrying about them after the first couple of days.

Nesting is improved. Audio filters are amazing and first-rate. There is much tighter integration with Motion and Compressor.

There are as many ways to edit in the new version as the old and more ways to trim. Trimming can even be in real-time or slow-motion. Old barriers such as clips in the Browser, still image sizes, clips in a project, and tracks have all fallen away.

The context-sensitive nature of the Viewer window, and the speed it responds, make me completely comfortable editing with only one image window.

The whole system is designed for speed.

And, when it comes to keyboard shortcuts, there are already hundreds in the system and the new process for creating shortcuts is just amazingly powerful – and easy to use.

NOTE: Remind me to mention how much I like the new audio meters – big, fat, large, readable, and adjustable.

SOME OLD FRIENDS DIDN’T MAKE IT
Soundtrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro, and Color are not in this release. (LiveType was discontinued when FCP 7 came out.)

We all have our favorites, but I will miss Soundtrack Pro the most.

HOWEVER, keep in mind that if you own this software now, you’ll still be able to use it with FCP X. But it is no longer available.

DEALING WITH THE IMOVIE MONKEY

Much ink has been wasted and many pixels have died in the flame debate that FCP X is just a larger form of iMovie.

Yes, they share a similar approach to the interface.

Yes, FCP X imports iMovie projects and media. No, it doesn’t import FCP 7 projects. Yes, Apple should figure out a way to provide an FCP 7 translator. It can’t be that hard.

However, think about this for a minute. iMovie has been out for, what, eight years with ZERO ability to upgrade to Final Cut? Doesn’t it make just a little bit of sense to provide an upgrade option for the millions of future editors out there?

Of course it does.

There’s such in increase in power stepping from iMovie – which I’ve never liked – up to FCP X, that it would be like moving from a bike to a motorcycle. Yes, they both have two wheels and a handlebar, but there’s a huge difference in power in the seat!

APPLE IS MOVING TO TAPELESS

If tapeless media is your life, it will take you a week to stop giggling once you fire up FCP X.

However, FCP X has only limited support for tape. Tape ingest is from FireWire-attached devices, and streaming-only, no timecode controlled positioning of ingest or output to tape.

I’m reminded of the hand-wringing that occurred when Apple dropped floppy disks for optical media “back in the day,” now that Apple has decreed that tape is dead.

In this case, though, I side with the “tapists.” Apple controls the eco-system of the Mac. They don’t control the eco-system of Hollywood; then, again, I’m not sure anyone does. I have clients today that are using 3/4″ Umatic cassettes for sound design and music composition, and EDL lists are used daily for conforming major feature films. Both those formats were declared dead AGES ago!

While FCP X can ingest from a Firewire-attached deck, its output options to tape are limited to live streaming.

This lack of support for layback to video tape using RS-422 control protocol with timecode accuracy gives the perception that Apple is not meeting the needs of professional output. It remains to be seen if companies like AJA, Matrox, or Blackmagic Design will step into the breech. If they do, great. If not, this will cause many of us problems.

However, if you are shooting tapeless, this new software is designed for you. Easy ingest, background transcoding, background rendering, background analysis… Very cool. And, best of all, you can stop or cancel a background process at any time.

Plus, if you are someone that likes to organize their files, FCP X supports that. If you HATE organization, FCP X will organize your files for you. Now, we have a choice.

DISTRIBUTION VIA THE APP STORE

This is a real biggie, as Apple explained it to me. Because no physical media is involved (think packages in an Apple Store), Apple can push out updates faster and at much lower cost because they are using the App Store.

In the past, Apple used a 18 month, or so, cycle between updates. Now, Apple is telling me they are hoping to do an update once or twice a year.

This ability to respond faster to the market and deliver economical updates has already born fruit with the new low prices for Final Cut, Motion, and Compressor.

This gives me lots of hope for the future.

MONKEY #2: APPLE DOESN’T CARE ABOUT THE PRO MARKET

Writing software like this is not easy, not fast, and not cheap. Its taken Apple several years, dozens of millions of dollars, and an engineering crew big enough to fill a small cruise ship.

You don’t go to that effort to meet the needs of a market you aren’t interested in.

Apple tells me they are committed to quickly improving this version and building on it. They tell me they are committed to making changes quickly and bringing them to market. They tell me they are interested in hearing our reactions to the software.

I believe them and look forward to them fulfilling their promises.

THINGS I DON’T LIKE

Final Cut Pro X is very impressive, but it isn’t perfect. There are a variety of design decisions that I disagree with – and I’ve shared these many times with Apple.

There’s no multicam support.

The audio capabilities in FCP X are far superior to FCP 7 in terms of technical specs and filters. But a completely unintuitive method for adding audio cross-dissolves and lack of support for track-based audio mixing leaves me fondly missing the power of Soundtrack Pro.

The process of adding an audio cross-fade is dangerous, unintuitive and dumb.

Worse, there’s no native way to export a project to send it to either Soundtrack Pro or ProTools for sound mixing.

I’ve already mentioned there is no native ability to layback to tape using timecode control.

The autosave is great, but what we need is the ability to freeze specific project builds so that the client can review and approve a version and KNOW that if the project is opened in the future that nothing will be changed.

Preferences need to include the ability to use frames, not just hundredths of a second for all timing decisions.

A clip needs to remember the In and the Out when you deselect it.

There needs to be a way to remove a project from the Project List without having to resort to the Finder.

There needs to be a preference setting so that all new projects default to Stereo vs Surround.

There are others, and I’m sure you’ll have your own list.

SHOULD YOU BUY IT?

Look, you and I both know you’re going to buy it regardless of what I say. So here’s my main point. I think that within the next 18 months virtually all of us will be running FCP X and wondering how we lived without it.

It’s that good.

Is it perfect? No.

Whether this is right for you depends upon what you are doing. Here’s a list to help you decide:

* If you are exclusively shooting tapeless and outputting to the web, this product was designed with you in mind. However, some vendors – Sony comes first to mind – need to update their drivers to work with FCP X. Be sure to check the Sony website for updates before moving to FCP X.

* If you are shooting tape and sending XDCAM SR tapes to the network, you should stay with FCP 7 and complain to Apple to add improved support for video-tape output.

* If you are shooting (H)DSLR cameras, you’ll love the automatic transcoding, auto-image correction, and blinding speed built into the new system.

* If you shoot on DV or HDV and export your files for the web, Final Cut Pro X can make your life a lot simpler.

* If you shoot tapeless and distribute your files on DVD, you can use FCP X for your edit, export your footage, compress on Compressor (either old or new) and use DVD Studio Pro to create your DVD.

* If you simply need to burn your project to either DVD or Blu-ray, the new Final Cut makes this easy. If you need to author a DVD, or Blu-ray, you’ll need to use either DVD Studio Pro or Adobe Encore.

* If you are working in iMovie, you should step up to the new version and put some power in your pictures.

* If you are doing projects with complex audio mixes, stay with FCP 7 until Apple gives us improved audio mixing and audio export support.

* If you live for speed and high image quality, you have a new love in your life.

* If you are in the middle of an FCP 7 project, you should stay there. Don’t even think about trying to port your project into the new system. Finish your project. FCP X will be here when you are done.

* If you are responsible for meeting incredibly tight deadlines, stay with your current system. Buy FCP X – learn it. See what you like and what you don’t. Then, as it makes sense to you, roll it into production.

In other words, consider that your job is telling stories with pictures. Final Cut Pro X is another tool in your toolkit that can help you with your story-telling. For some of us, its perfect now. For others, it needs to mature a bit.

But, when the credits roll, it isn’t the power of the tool, its the power of your story that makes people care.

I’ll have much more in my newsletter next week. In the meantime, let me know what you think.

Larry

P.S. I’ve spent the last six weeks creating training for Final Cut Pro X. 88 movies, over eleven hours of in-depth training. All ready, right now, for you to discover the power and capability of this new software. Visit: larryjordan.biz/fcpx

Is the New Final Cut Pro Coming at NAB?

Posted by on April 05, 2011

I was happily answering questions from my latest Final Cut Studio newsletter which released this morning – you can sign up for it here – and getting ready for NAB, when, WHAM!

The ProVideo Coalition publishes a rumor that Apple is announcing the next version of Final Cut Pro at next week’s SuperMeet. Then, supplements it with lots of very interesting supporting quotes.

Frankly, I was stunned.

While all things are possible, there are many strange elements here. First, nothing is confirmed by anyone. I have sent emails to learn more, but there’s nothing official.

Second, as Rob Griffiths wrote on the IMUG mailing list: This seems “awfully heavy handed of Apple to kick all the other presenters out? Apple doesn’t have any trouble drawing a crowd. Why piss off so many vendors… that Apple has good relationships with… and put the SuperMeet folks in the awkward position of clearing the agenda a week before the show?”

Since I know the “Supermeet folks,” and understand what’s involved in putting together a show this massive, “awkward” does not begin to describe the position, and stress, they are in. This is a HUGE, last-minute, change in plans.

From my point of view, Apple has made a big deal of avoiding trade shows – especially NAB – because, as Rob points out, they can draw a crowd simply by standing on a street corner. I don’t see why they need to announce at the SuperMeet.

On the other hand, a lot of the folks they would like to reach will be there. And, as I’ve written before, whenever Apple announces the next version, what you see will be “jaw-dropping.”

Curiouser and curiouser…

I’m going to the SuperMeet next week – wouldn’t miss it, actually. And guaranteed that if anything is announced I’ll be covering it here in this blog, in my newsletter, and on our podcast – Digital Production Buzz.com. However, for now, I’m adopting a wait-and-see attitude.

Larry

UPDATE – 10 minutes later.

The SuperMeet Agenda has been changed to read:

“The Final Cut Pro User Group Network is excited to have a very special guest presentation at the 10th Annual Las Vegas FCPUG SuperMeet. Come to see a surprise sneak peek at something very special – you really do not want to miss this one!”

Looks like that makes it official. Prepare to be stunned.

A Tribute to Bernard Gribble, Editor

Posted by on March 26, 2011

Julian Semilian is an experimental filmmaker who teaches film editing and experimental filmmaking at the University of North Carolina School of the Arts, School of Filmmaking, after a twenty-four year career in Hollywood where he has edited 16 feature films and movies-of-the-week.

A few days ago, he sent me his tribute to Bernard Gribble, ACE, a film editor who died in 2004. I was so struck by what Julian wrote that I wanted to share it with you.

- – -

Bernie Gribble, my mentor, edited over a hundred features, TV shows, MOWs, and TV episodes. He never, to my knowledge, received an award. But he showed up to work everyday at 8 am and worked till late in the evening. Work was like a religious practice to him. His attention to detail was uncanny.

If there was a script problem that became apparent during the first cut, he would find a way to fix it: he would move a scene or two around, maybe take a scene from the middle and put it at the start of the movie, or split a scene in two and place each half at strategic points in the film, thus resolving the problem that the screenwriter or the director didn’t see, or was caused by a substandard performance.

And he was a master at fixing substandard performances: he would manage to mix a bad actor’s performance with good ones, cutting in just the right bits in such way that you didn’t notice the awkward moments; or he would spend hours taking lines or even words from a few different takes and set-ups in order to fix an embarrassing delivery. He scrupulously deliberated for hours, if necessary, over one cut. He knew how to fix awkward visual moments, create connectives that were not shot inside a scene or between scenes or just simply create great transitions.

He knew how to pace his cuts, he knew where the music belonged and where it didn’t. He was deeply involved in contributing ideas to the sound design and to the mix. He was a professional in the way he talked to the producers, the directors, his collaborators and took complete responsibility for the film. I have never seen anyone, director or producer, who was unhappy with Bernie’s work.

In other words, he was a master.

Bernie was also passionate about cinema: he went to see every film and could spend hours discussing the editing. He was deeply opinionated and had his own point of view.

He worked till his mid-seventies, when, unfortunately, people didn’t hire him very much because of his age. That was a big mistake. I would have loved to have him come and teach here. Even in his advanced years he was as sharp as ever. I always conferred with him even long after I began editing myself. And he was always the consummate teacher. In our discussions he would confide in me that he was always discovering new ways of editing.

Bernie died like a true film artist: following a heart attack in the editing room. Bernie’s award is that he gave his love and knowledge of editing to a number of his assistants, including yours truly. Bernie’s award is my dedication as an editor and editing professor. What I do at the school is a result of Bernie.

- – -

A passion for film, an eye for detail, a love of his craft, and a willingness to share his knowledge with others. I can’t think of a finer tribute.

Larry

Thunderbolt – A Video Editor’s Perspective

Posted by on March 03, 2011

[ The following article was taken from my FREE Final Cut Studio newsletter for February.
Subscribe here. ]

The release of any new hardware is exciting; as we saw last week with the release of the new MacBook Pros.

However, the stunning news is the new Thunderbolt (née Light Peak) I/O technology. The ONLY reason this exists is because of the Pro market. The greatest novelist, or spreadsheet junky, in the world has absolutely no reason to get excited about this. FireWire meets their needs perfectly.

But for people pushing pixels (or waveforms) this is a birthday present come early.

WHAT IS THUNDERBOLT?

Thunderbolt is a very, VERY fast I/O (input/output) communications protocol (10 Gbps or 1.25 GB/second) that supports both hard drives and monitors. This is faster than anything else on the market.

Apple’s Thunderbolt white paper states:

For time sensitive data, such as video and audio during creation and playback, data transfer can be critical to the success of the work. Thunderbolt technology was specifically designed with video and audio applications in mind with inherently low latency and highly accurate time synchronization capabilities.

Currently, Thunderbolt is supported only on MacBook Pros. However, I have every expectation that this connection protocol will be added to all future Mac systems. (I don’t see it being added to IOS devices simply because they don’t hold enough data to require these kinds of transfer speeds. Well, at least not yet.)

Today, Thunderbolt connects two devices using copper wires, but the protocol has already been developed to support optical fiber as well, which provides longer cable runs and faster speeds; though without the on-board 10 watts of power.

The great news is that, unlike FireWire and USB, the protocol does not slow down when you have multiple devices attached to it.

Additional features include:

  • Dual-channel, each 10 Gbps
  • Bi-directional, equally fast in both directions
  • Dual protocol, PCI Express for hard disks and DisplayPort for monitors
  • Daisy-chain-able, supports up to six devices per channel
  • Woks with both copper and fiber cabling, fiber allows longer cable runs
  • Low latency, very, VERY short delays in transferring signals
  • Delivers up to 10 watts of power over copper wiring, but not fiber, to support bus-powered devices. (Though this is not enough for most hard disks)

In short, this is some amazing technology!

For those that want an overview, here’s the relevant page from Apple on the technology: http://www.apple.com/thunderbolt/

For those that want more technical details, here’s Intel’s website on the new protocol: http://www.intel.com/technology/io/thunderbolt/index.htm

Here’s an additional analysis from Storage Newsletter: http://www.storagenewsletter.com/news/connection/analysis-intel-10gbs-thunderbolt

HOW FAST IS IT?

Remember the first time you saw Han Solo go into warp drive in Star Wars? It’s THAT fast!

It is:

  • 10 gigaBITS per second (10 Gbps)
  • 1.25 gigaBYTES per second (1.25 GB/s)
  • More than twelve times faster than FireWire 800
  • More than twenty times faster than USB 2
  • Faster than USB 3, mini-SAS, FibreChannel, and all flavors of SCSI.

It is dazzlingly fast.

(This chart was published on Apple’s website.) PLUS, the spec calls for speeds ten times faster – up to 100 Gbps – in the near future. (No, not next week.)

Keep in mind that the only way you can take advantage of this new system is using a RAID. A single hard drive, no matter how large, does not begin to provide the speed offered by this new protocol. To take advantage of all the speed, you’ll need to invest in a RAID system.

UPDATE – Mar. 3, 2011

Adam Lloyd Connell sent me the following link to an EndGadget demo using Final Cut Pro.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw

WHAT SUPPORTS THUNDERBOLT NOW?

Apple’s three latest MacBook Pros.

That’s it. No other hardware is currently shipping that supports the protocol.

On the other hand, until Apple ships a device containing this protocol, there is no incentive for any hardware manufacturer to create devices to support a protocol that doesn’t exist. First, Apple needs to ship something, then, the rest of the technology world can start to support it.

As always, this will take some time before we see actual products ship.

WHAT WILL SUPPORT THUNDERBOLT IN THE FUTURE?

Both Promise and LaCie have announced new hard drive systems that will support this protocol and both will be shipping in a few months.

I also sent emails to friends in the hard drive industry and every single one of them is frantically studying the new protocol so they can add it to their product line.

My expectation is that we will see Thunderbolt support on hard drives – more specifically RAIDs – sooner than on monitors. With nothing from any vendor before NAB in April. I expect most shipments to start in the early summer.

As one hardware vendor wrote:

Thunderbolt is THE hot topic of discussion everywhere. What happened is that when it was being developed, Apple went to Blackmagic Design, AJA, Promise, Western Digital, LaCie & even CalDigit to see if they’d be interested in being 1st onboard the tech, so it’ll be interesting to see what AJA, BMD & the rest will come out with. We already know Promise has a 4 bay and a 6 bay TB product line called "Pegasus" which doesn’t ship till April and LaCie has a new TB 2 bay, that I know of.

I don’t think it’ll kill FireWire anytime soon & our mini-SAS 8 bay product is still selling very solidly and will continue to do so at nearly 1000 MB/s with the ATTO R680 card.

CAN THUNDERBOLT BE RETROFIT ON EXISTING COMPUTERS OR STORAGE?

No.

Based on what I’ve learned so far, support for Thunderbolt can not be retrofit into current RAID technology. It requires a new chipset from Intel on both the computer and RAID to support the protocol. Also, the chipset does not look like it can be added via a PCIe card into a MacPro.

WHAT DOES THUNDERBOLT MEAN FOR THE FUTURE?

Thunderbolt is absolutely, and only, designed to meet the needs of the Pro market. No consumer needs speeds this fast – they can use it, they can appreciate it, but they don’t NEED it. Pros do.

To me, this is a strong indication that Apple has not forgotten the needs of Pro users. Which is a very good thing — for all of us.

Larry

I’ve Seen The New Version of Final Cut Pro…

Posted by on February 23, 2011

… and it’s a jaw-dropper.

Last week, Apple invited a few folks, including me, to a short meeting in Cupertino where they previewed the up-coming version of Final Cut Pro.

While I am under NDA and can’t talk about what I saw, I CAN tell you the meeting happened and that it showcased the new Final Cut Pro.

While the invited crowd was small, it was a Who’s Who of leaders in the post-production community. I felt like I was standing on the red carpet at an awards show, watching all the stars walk past.

There will be LOTS to talk about as this project gets closer. For now, I recommend you subscribe to my monthly Final Cut Studio newsletter – because I’ll share all the news that I’m allowed to share in there first.

Tell your friends … its gonna be a great year.

Larry

P.S. If you feel the urge to email me for more information, keep in mind that Apple’s lawyers are bigger than your lawyers. So, until Apple lifts the NDA, I’m telling you all I can … for now.

Inside Gossip: Aged to Perfection

Posted by on February 04, 2011

I get a ton of press releases every day. Many I post to the Latest News section of the Digital Production Buzz, so that you can keep up with what’s going on in our world. Others I just trash.

But every so often, one comes in that I want to share with you more directly. Like this one.

This morning, I received the following press release from Eric Philpott, at Philpott Communications. I was interested because this isn’t a part of the industry I cover very much, and because I found the story fascinating.

So, here it is – word for word as they sent it.

Larry

- – -

How Academy Award Nominee Adrien Morot Created the Makeup for Barney’s Version

Montreal, Que: February 3, 2011. Adrien Morot, head of makeup and hair on Barney’s Version, has been nominated for an Academy Award(r) in makeup. The film, directed by Richard J. Lewis and starring Golden Globe winner and Academy Award(r) nominee Paul Giamatti, is based on the popular novel by the late Mordecai Richler. The story spans a 35-year period in the life of Barney Panofsky, a Montreal TV producer reflecting back on the events of his life. As the same actors were used throughout, makeup involved the significant challenge of gradually altering their appearance as they age in a way that is convincing for the audience but that remains subtle enough not to be distracting.

Along with supervising the entire makeup department on the film, a primary task for Morot and his team was aging the main characters over the course of the film using a combination of prosthetics, subtle makeup, hairstyling and artificial facial hair. Much of the effort was focused on Paul Giamatti, whose character starts out in his early 30s and reaches his late 60s by the end of the story. Others included Golden Globe and Academy Award(r) winner Dustin Hoffman, who plays Barney’s father and Rosemund Pike, who plays Miriam, Barney’s third wife.

“I’ve seen aging makeup done on other people I’ve worked with,” said Pike. “I usually feel that the person is submerged in some way under layers of substance, and loses something of their essence, no matter how effective the transformation was. What Adrien managed to do was give Paul and I faces from which we could look with our own eyes and through our own expressions, that supported us, rendered the ageing of the characters believable, but left the whole process unobtrusive.”

One of the challenges on Barney’s Version was keeping the makeup subtle enough to allow the actors to deliver a full range of emotions for this performance-driven piece. Morot stressed that collaborating closely with the actors was the key to achieving this.

“Adrien started by asking me what I thought Barney should look like and how I thought he should age,” said Giamatti. “He had a wonderful distinct makeup at the get-go, but he was amazingly collaborative, and intensely sensitive to what would help me act the part. And he was so fluid with his own design, shaping it, changing it, constantly refining it.”

“Paul is an incredible actor ” said Morot, “He really made our job easier and the makeup more convincing by portraying Barney perfectly at each stage of his life and I am really grateful for that. The same goes for Rosamund, who gave Miriam such class and elegance.”

And although the audiences may not notice it, Giamatti is wearing makeup with various prosthetics throughout much of the film. “The alcohol bloat and weight gain were so convincing, people thought I had gained weight for the part,” said Giamatti.

Barney’s Beards
The standard approach to creating an artificial beard is to use an appliance, which is much like a wig with a special lace backing glued to the skin. However, lace beards cannot stretch with the actor’s facial movements, and can limit the actor’s expressions. “Even at a subconscious level, the actor can’t be free to play his part if he is worried about his beard falling off,” said Morot. “During our first makeup test, Paul asked if there was anything else we could do so that he didn’t feel so restricted by the beard.”

Morot opted to craft the beard by hand using a combination of human and yak hair. Each tuft was painstakingly glued down and the beard was built up layer by layer. Then a curling iron was applied to give it the look of real facial hair. Finally, the beard was trimmed and styled. “When we did the second makeup test with the new beard, no one realized it was fake. Paul was thrilled because without the lace backing, the beard moved with his skin. This was vital because it allowed him to feel natural and focus on giving his best performance without any distractions.”

Morot was able to apply Giamatti’s beard in under 30 minutes, from a total of the 2 hours and 15 minutes allotted for his prosthetic makeup application.

Aging Gracefully
Aging the character of Miriam, the love of Barney’s life, presented other challenges.

“I know I do not have the easiest face to age,” said Pike. “I think women in general, with a different quality of skin, are harder to age than men and Adrien had to be particularly subtle and inventive in his approach. He aged Miriam and then concealed the aging cosmetically, as any woman would. Adrien matched the skin tone of the prosthetics on my eyelids, cheeks and neck to my own, and then made the tone of my whole face uneven, as if it was aged. Then he concealed some of the aging with ‘beauty makeup.’ As a result Miriam had a face that was layered and real.”

Morot said that he was floored by the Oscar(r) nomination. “I don’t know if it’s really sunk in yet,” he said. “It’s a tremendous honour and I’m deeply thankful.”

Produced by Serendipity Point Films in association with Fandango, and distributed by Sony Pictures Classics, Barney’s Version premiered at the Venice Film Festival and the Toronto International Film Festival. The film stars Paul Giamatti, along with Dustin Hoffman, Rosamund Pike, Minnie Driver, Mark Addy, Rachelle Lafevre and Scott Speedman. The producer was Robert Lantos. Barney’s Version opened in theatres in December 2010.

About Adrien Morot
With over 20 years of experience in the makeup effects industry and having worked on over 100 feature film and broadcast projects, Adrien Morot has established his company as one of the leading fabricators of makeup effects in the field. For more information visit http://adrienmorotmakeupfx.com.

Wow! I Didn’t Know That…

Posted by on January 18, 2011

The good folks at Accusys sent me an 8-drive RAID to test recently. (You can read my review of their ExaSAN A08S-PS unit in the next issue of my newsletter; coming out later this month.)

However, what I want to share with you today was something I discovered during my testing that totally surprised me.

Video editing is the most difficult thing we can do on a personal computer, because it requires really top-notch gear and editing software to all mesh perfectly in order to get any work done.

But what REALLY pushes your system to the limit is multicam editing. Working with more than two or three streams of simultaneous video truly separates the weak from the strong, from a hard disk point of view.

So, I decided to test this RAID by editing some 720p/60 P2 (DVCPROHD) footage with it.

NOTE: A quick technical note. DVCPROHD requires a data transfer rate from your hard disk to your computer of about 15 MB/second in order to display video in real-time. So, two streams of P2 video require about 30 MB/second. The key number to watch in the charts below is the READ number.

FireWire 800 drives can deliver up to about 80 MB/second of data; which means they are limited to about five streams of HD video. In practical terms, they may play less, depending upon the video format.

Screen shot

So, I created a multiclip containing 10 DVCPROHD clips, edited it into the Timeline, and started to switch between shots during playback by clicking the appropriate image in the Viewer.

NOTE: All the images match because, for simplicity, I took one image and duplicated it. These are all separate video files, not aliases pointing to the same file.

Screen shot

ONE CLICK and I got the dreaded “Dropped Frame” warning. (I hate this thing!)

Sigh…

So, I scaled back the number of clips in the multiclip to six, and everything worked perfectly.

But, what’s the sense of spending all the money to buy a fast RAID if it only does six streams of HD video.

NOTE: And if THAT isn’t a snobbish sentence, I don’t know what is. Imagine what you would have paid ten years ago to edit six real-time streams of HD video. You would have KILLED for the chance. Today, pffft…, can’t be bothered.

Then, as I was about to give it up as a bad job, a little voice in my head said: “Larry, what happens if you edit using keyboard shortcuts?”

So, I selected Tools > Keyboard Layout > Multi-camera Editing. This allows me to use the numeric keyboard to switch between cameras.

Six streams of 720p60 HD worked perfectly. (Which I would expect, since it worked in the Viewer.)

But TEN streams of 720p60 HD also worked perfectly, provided I use the keyboard shortcuts. And this I did NOT expect. I would have expected the same performance from the keyboard shortcuts as I would in the Viewer.

Screen shot

So then I tried 16 streams of 720p60 HD video. Worked PERFECTLY using keyboard shortcuts!

Screen shot

Even though running 16 streams requires Read speeds of 231 MB/second from the RAID; far more than I could get from a single drive.

Hmm… Time to get serious about this.

Screen shot

I transcoded 22 clips of 1920×1080 60 fps AVCHD into ProRes 422. ProRes 422 requires 17.4 MB/sec, at a minimum, for real-time playback of a single 1080p HD stream. The images are gorgeous, but the files are not small.

I linked all 22 clips together, turned off the display of six tracks (because a multiclip in FCP only displays 16 tracks at one time).

NOTE: There’s that snobbery again… ONLY 16 tracks of real-time full-res HD clips…! Sheesh…

Screen shot

There they are. (Thanks, Joe Centeno, for the video!)

Screen shot

WOW! 271 MB/sec. Playing smoothly and editing perfectly — and I was editing to a new shot about once a second, with ZERO dropped frames. Perfect playback!!

Holy Smoke! I did not expect this.

So, here’s the key thought. The next time you are editing multicam work, make it a point to use the keyboard shortcuts. You’ll be stunned at how much easier this is and how few dropped frames you experience.

And having a fast RAID is critical when you start editing more than four streams of video.

Larry

P.S. Here’s a short video tutorial, available in my store, that shows how to create and edit Multiclips using the Viewer, keyboard shortcuts, and buttons.

Refreshing Hard Drives Revisited

Posted by on January 02, 2011

A year or so ago, I wrote about a problem of digital media slowly "evaporating" when a hard drive is powered down and stored on a shelf.

You can read the first article here.

The solution is to refresh the hard drive. You can read that solution here.

Bill Lauer now asks:

A couple of years ago you wrote an article on how to refresh a hard drive using the "sudo cat /dev/rdisk0> /dev/null" or "sudo badblocks -b 4096 -p 1 -c 32768 /dev/rdisk0". I was wondering if there is a better way yet?

I never was able to get the bad block method to work. I tried 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6. Does TECH TOOL PRO’s "scan drive" command do the same thing? I really want a safe way to do this. Fast would be good also.

Larry replies: At the time the article came out a number of developers contacted me saying they were going to work on an easier solution. As of today, I don’t know of any.

However, if any reader does, please let me know and I’ll share the information.

UPDATE – JAN. 2, 2011

Bob Gobeille, who originally provided the terminal script to fix this problem, wrote again in answer to Bill Lauer’s wish.

It’s been quite a while since I’ve used Tech Tool Pro, but anything that reads the entire disk (like drive scanning) should work fine.

I use Terminal windows all the time and forget that the commands I sent you can be intimidating to those that don’t.

Since Bill wanted an easier way, I’ve attached an AppleScript that will refresh a disk with two clicks (one to select the disk, the other to run the scan). Here is a sample screen shot from the script.

Once you select the disk you want to scan, click OK. The only feedback you will get is that your disk drive activity light should go on and stay on until the refresh is done. When it is finished — and it will take a LONG time — another dialog box will come up and let you know. Here’s a sample screenshot:

This is a sample screen shot of the message you get when scanning is complete.

If you aren’t familiar with installing AppleScript, copy this script to your Library > Scripts directory. Then when you click on the script icon in the OSX menu bar, you should see it. Like this:

If the script icon is not in your menu bar, add it by running: Applications > Utilities > AppleScript Editor.app

Then open the AppleScript preferences and click Show Script menu in menu bar.

BOB’S NOTES
I’ve never tried this on RAIDed drives (I don’t have any). This reads at almost 60 MB/s on my internal MacPro drives, which works out to about 200 GB / hour. This means a scan of a 500GB disk will take roughly 2.5 hours. Different computers will scan at different speeds.

My script will only scan one drive at a time at this point.

I was tempted to have this script also check for other types of disk errors (and attempt to fix them), but you can use Disk Utility to do the same thing, using the Verify Disk and Repair Disk buttons.

As with all software, test this on a drive you have backed up first. We believe this to be reliable, but do not guarantee it.

Larry replies: Bob, this is GREAT! Thanks for taking the time to create, explain, and share it with us.

Here’s the link to the AppleScript file. This is stored as a Zip file, double-click it to decompress it, then install it as Bob outlined above.

Larry

Looking Back to Look Ahead

Posted by on December 27, 2010

MUSING: LOOKING BACK TO LOOK AHEAD

NOTE: I first wrote about this in my blog, but got so many favorable comments, I want to share this with you here. Also see my blog for more comments about this.

In wrapping up the year, I was going to talk about technology, but there are a wide variety of other sites that are busily engaged in dissecting the latest technology, so I’ll leave them to play in their sandbox.

Um… well, OK. Here are three quick observations on technology for the coming year:

1. For 2011, camera technology will continue to change EXTREMELY quickly. This means that any camera you buy today will be out-of-date in less than 2 years. If you can’t make it pay off in that short a period of time, you are better off renting. I don’t see any incentive for camera technology to stabilize for another couple of years.

2. Apple will update Final Cut Studio in 2011 — probably early in 2011. Apple is not abandoning the platform. This is not the apocalypse. The world will not end. I’ll have more news on this when I’m allowed to talk about it.

3. The capabilities of your storage will become more important than the capabilities of your computer. And, as a corollary, tapeless media means that media asset management will become mission-critical for even small shops. Whichever company solves the puzzle of how to make asset management informationally-rich, while at the same time easy to access, will make a fortune. You can’t edit what you can’t find.

What I want to focus on, instead, are eleven trends for 2011 that showed up in 2010. These are:

  1. Budgets will never go back to where they were.
  2. The increasing expectation that one person should "do it all."
  3. Media technology is ubiquitous.
  4. There is a total disconnect between production and distribution, and neither side respects the other.
  5. Tapeless media is a fact of life.
  6. "The Cloud" is absolutely a two-edged sword.
  7. Our audience is impatient.
  8. It’s become a "download world."
  9. Audiences expect everything to be free, or, at least, really, REALLY cheap.
  10. The demise of traditional media means that marketing is more diversified, more complex, and more critical than ever before.
  11. "Good enough" is good enough.

1. BUDGETS WILL NEVER GO BACK TO WHAT THEY WERE

The recession has made everyone much more sensitive about price. Clients have many faults, but they can watch a bottom line with the best of them.

As long as these economic doldrums continue, expect continued pressure to do more for less. Don’t buy gear because you can use it, buy it because you can’t keep a client without it.

Never sell yourself as "having the lowest price." You’ll always lose. There’s always a college (or high school) kid more than happy to do it for free. You can’t pay the rent with "free." (I talk more about this in my Grow Your Business webinar.)

2. THE INCREASING EXPECTATION THAT ONE PERSON SHOULD "DO IT ALL"

Remember the phrase: "Jack of all trades, and master of none"? Technology is making media easier to use every day. But my email in-box is testament to the fact that "easier" is NOT the same as "easy."

Very, very few of us are gifted composers, musicians, writers, directors, editors, and designers. Not to mention all the other crafts that go into telling stories visually. Yet clients expect each of us to do everything.

I don’t see this trend abating. Which means we have two options: crawl back into bed and hide for a couple of years or reach out and build a team of free-lancers to serve as a mutual aid society.

I got caught in this trap for a while. I figured I needed to know everything about everything. As I discovered, this is an unattainable – and VERY frustrating – goal. What I REALLY needed was to know people who knew stuff I didn’t. Then, when I got stuck, I had someone to call.

So, start building your personal network, to supplement where you are weak. Since doing favors for someone, no matter how desperate they make it seem, wears really thin, really quickly, figure out how to pay them for their time. Payment means they will be willing to help you the next time you need it.

Then, when a client says: "Can you do this?" the answer is yes. From the client’s point of view, you are doing it all. From your point of view, you’re farming it out to someone in your network.

This means that you can accept jobs that you would not normally be able to take, thanks to your network. And the folks in your network are happy because they don’t need to worry about managing the client or looking for the gig.

Everyone wins.

3. MEDIA TECHNOLOGY IS UBIQUITOUS.

We need to compete based on our skills, talent, and contacts.

It is no longer sufficient for us to "have the best gear," nor the most creative skills. That will help you land a client, but not keep them.

When high school kids have the same gear you do (in fact, this last year, I’ve trained two sixth-graders that have gear a pro would be proud to own) gear is no longer what sets you apart in the market.

I have a friend that started in this business because he liked buying gear with his profits at the end of the year. Now, he’s got a bunch of out-of-date hardware, outstanding leases, and clients that aren’t interested.

We all know people who are far less qualified than ourselves, yet seem to get work.

First, keep your technical skills sharp – training is always a good thing (yes, I grant this is a bit self-serving, but it is still true).

But, second and even more important, sharpen your people and communication skills. Clients work with people they know and like more often than people they hate.

People and communication skills don’t require investment in technology, they require an investment in yourself. An investment that will pay dividends big time in our budget-challenged future.

4. THERE IS A TOTAL DISCONNECT BETWEEN PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION;
AND NEITHER SIDE RESPECTS THE OTHER.

Most of us are making money creating projects for the Web (even broadcast projects have a web component today). Yet Web distribution doesn’t care about the quality, cost, or content of your project. From Bit Torrent to YouTube, and the full spectrum in-between, they are just moving bits. A project that cost you hundreds of thousands of dollars to produce is reduced to digital 1’s and 0’s and transits virtually free across the web.

Distribution websites have no vested interest in providing quality, or content. They are not regulated by anyone. They just move bits to the largest number of eyeballs.

Which means they don’t value the projects you worked so hard on. Certainly, they don’t value them the same way you do. Which means they want to charge as little for them as possible in order to maximize viewers. Free is not a successful business model.

This also makes it hard on the other side of the equation: the folks that invest money in production have a very limited role in distribution. Which means it is harder to show how someone can make money by investing money in your production, when distribution is so disconnected. Production is really expensive. Distribution is really cheap. They have two different and incompatible pricing models.

However, if we can’t attract production dollars, we’ll have nothing to distribute.

The pirate sites have totally figured this out. They steal the content they distribute in order to sell advertising to the visitors they attract. They completely devalue production costs in order to build audience. Great for them, miserable for us. On the other hand, if they really cared, they wouldn’t have started a pirate site in the first place.

Which means, we need to figure out how we are going to make money on distributing our project BEFORE we start production.

5. TAPELESS MEDIA IS A FACT OF LIFE.

Tapeless media is the future. It is easy to use, flexible, reusable, and provides the capability of supporting every conceivable video format.

It also requires a complete shift in everything we know about media.

Tapeless media is so easy to use, we shoot too much of it, overwhelming our storage.

Tapeless media is so flexible, we tie ourselves in knots trying to untangle editing with incompatible media formats.

Tapeless media is so reusable, that we use the same card over and over, which means archiving our media is critical.

Tapeless media is so infinitely variable, that we need to invent entirely new systems to keep track of it.

Nothing beats good planning before starting production. However, now we need to add asset management and archiving to the list of critical decisions that need to be solved before we start production.

6. THE "CLOUD" IS ABSOLUTELY A TWO-EDGED SWORD.

The cloud is a great way to collaborate.

However, the cloud is a also great way to permanently lose all your data – if you aren’t careful. This week’s outage at Skype, and past data losses this year at Intuit, Twitter, Hosting.com and other vendors taught us that data on the cloud is no more, and no less, safe than data stored locally on our own gear that we back up.

So, if the cloud is in your future, be sure to make backups and store them locally. The Cloud is the future, but it’s reliability is still a question mark.

My favorite watch-phrase comes from Harry Potter: Never trust anything when you can’t see where it keeps its brain. My personal feeling is that business critical information should be stored locally, while information that you would not be upset if it were lost or hacked should be stored on the cloud.

7. THE AUDIENCE IS IMPATIENT

Consumers, and that includes clients, are conditioned to expect everything instantly. This also includes us. (Look at how incensed you get if your favorite application isn’t updated, say, weekly…)

Two examples from this year illustrate this point. The first is the brouhaha over Apple’s "abandoning" Final Cut Studio. Why? Because Avid and Adobe updated their products, while Apple did not. Somehow, in the minds of these doom-sayers, the lack of an instant update to respond to the competition equates to a lack of interest in the program.

Sigh…

I read somewhere that Apple spent almost 10 YEARS working on the iPad before release. Software the size of Final Cut Studio has development cycles that run between two and four years.

The only thing instant in software development is the press release. Everything else takes time.

Another example is Hollywood film marketing. Hollywood makes it seem that the amount of time needed to go from an idea to a finished film is the length of a 20-frame dissolve. Effects shots that can take 48 hours just to render magically "pop" on the screen during the behind-the-scenes video.

We are all guilty of minimizing the amount of time it takes to do anything. Unfortunately, our clients believe the hype, not the reality.

This means that we need to work really, REALLY hard in setting expectations at the start of a project. Clients have no concept of render or compression times — which means we need to educate them on the process or they’ll leave us for someone else with a smooth patter that glosses over the reality.

8. ITS BECOMING A DOWNLOAD WORLD.

Blu-ray Disc is slowly getting pigeon-holed into a distribution mechanism for the big six studios. As a format, it will never have the dominance of DVDs. Its death will take a while, but Blu-ray is not long for our world.

For the rest of us, the world is moving to downloads only.

This means that we need to develop a distribution strategy that allows us to make money on downloads. Compression skills, knowledge of download vs. streaming technology, and pricing geared around downloads (instead of optical media) are the survival skills for the future.

9. AUDIENCES EXPECT EVERYTHING TO BE FREE, OR, AT LEAST, REALLY CHEAP

This has been a big eye-opener for me this year.

The success of the App Store, where everything sells for 99 cents or, at most, a couple of bucks, sets expectations that all downloads should be priced as cheaply.

Complicating this is that the audience disconnects production costs from distribution costs. "Sharing files on the Internet is free, therefore, your downloads should be free," is the general theme. The problem is that this totally overlooks what it cost to create the content in the first place.

Low-cost pricing works when you are selling to the mass market. However, this pricing model doesn’t work when you are selling into niche markets.

I don’t see this expectation for lower prices changing in the future. Which means the only way we are going to make money is to sell our projects in significant quantity to make up for the lower individual price, or sell them to an audience that needs the information so badly that price is not the primary condition to a sale.

10. THE DEMISE OF TRADITIONAL MEDIA MEANS THAT MARKETING IS MORE DIVERSIFIED, MORE COMPLEX, AND MORE CRITICAL THAN EVER BEFORE.

"Going viral" is a great concept – but, very, very hard to achieve. And, even if you DO go viral, that doesn’t mean there’s any money in it.

In the past, we’d take out an ad in an industry publication. But, if you thought our industry has problems, they pale to what traditional media channels are going thru. Across the board, print publications are hurting, and so is broadcast. The traditional audiences for these media are vaporizing.

This means that we need to take a much more active role in marketing our products than ever before. And the term "marketing" includes more than ever before: print in all its forms, email, websites, and today’s newest buzz-word: "social media."

Social media – Facebook, Twitter, Linked-in, and the rest – have grown to such influence that I hired a marketing person just to focus on this new technology. There is no doubt that this media drives visibility and opinions. What I am not yet convinced of is whether they drive sales as well.

There is no question that Internet marketing and promotion is a moving target. What worked last year doesn’t necessarily work this year, or next. Analytics are critical and so is someone to sweat the details on your marketing.

The burden of marketing has fallen to our shoulders and needs to be part of the planning process for any new project. Even projects destined for "free" distribution need to think through how they are going to tell the world that they exist.

11. "GOOD ENOUGH" IS GOOD ENOUGH.

I grew up with the mantra: "The better the quality, the better the project." Or "better is better."

This is no longer the case — videos that are egregiously awful are getting millions of hits on YouTube. Clearly, quality is not a determining factor for many videos today.

Quality is in the eye of the beholder. Which means that if it is good enough for the client its good enough for me.

If budgets are falling – and they are – and deadlines are getting shorter – and they are, as well – then it is foolish for us to invest our time creating silk purses when the client is happy with a sow’s ear.

(Translation for those under the age of 50… "The client determines what is good enough.")

There is a time and place to pursue great quality. And, I suspect, each of us knows exactly when that is.

However, don’t pursue perfection when the client isn’t interested. We should ALWAYS meet and, preferably, exceed what the client expects. But what the client expects – and is paying for – isn’t perfection – it’s for it to be good enough.


Those are my thoughts. I look forward to your comments.

Larry