Editing video is a task that is all about speed and skill. The joy and challenge of the task is completing a project according to a clients timeline (if not sooner!) and spark a certain flare that generates excitement.
When it comes to a video editors weapon of choice there are plenty of options on the table. One such tool is Final Cut Pro-X (or 10).
There has been, as editors are still suffering headaches from, a lot of resistance to Apple’s Final Cut Pro-X in the light of other editing applications and, of course, it’s famous predecessor - Final Cut Pro 7. Typically the recipient of jeers resembling: “it’s iMovie - just a tad fancier”. Consequently, and the point to take away is, the program is not considered (at least presently) “industry standard”.
Now, all of this has been written before so I am not acclaiming something novel.
But what does that mean? - industry standard. Simply, that a group (though arguably a very large one) has declared another software to be the bar by which comparison is made - similar indeed to dreaded standardized tests plaguing student dreams.
It seems such “standardization” flies in the face of what video post-production could be. Video is an art medium whereby visuals tell a story. Post-production is all about infusing such a story with a style - resembling in many ways how an academic translates an ancient epic - attempting to understand the meaning and intention of the original author and communicating it through different language mediums.
There is, in truth, nothing “standard” about the content of a story (though an argument can be made regarding the form it takes - see Joseph Campbell). The same is true of the tools used to bring a story into living motion. No doubt, overlap occurs between available utilities. The writer may type the final version or conversely write out her brainstorming just as an editor may edit in one program and create graphics in another-nevertheless a story from the artist is created, and that’s the point.
Extrapolating out, regardless of the business medium one chooses to earn a living in, the "art of working" is done differently by every individual person. Passions are developed and maintained through working in a particular way - and loving it. Workflows are done differently for each business person, though of course similarities occur when a successful method is developed. Success comes from crafting and implementing a vision with passion that gets others excited - not by rehearsing and regurgitating standardization expectations. To promote one’s work as a unique specialty infuses it with a new meaning onto itself. Of course one should adapt and always grow - giving up old ways for the new if appropriate - but not collude with others for the sake of equalization.
Devon Young - firstname.lastname@example.org