Creative COW SIGN IN :: SPONSORS :: ABOUT US :: CONTACT US
BLOGS: My COW BlogMacWorldEditingTechnologyAfter EffectsFinal CutEntertainment

TRANSITIONS

I was chatting with an editor friend of mine the other day about this and that...installing updates that won't break FCP, our various experiences with shows that we were/are working on, network nonsense...when the conversation turned to "transitions."

We were just talking about editing and concentrating on a good story were key, and how many productions/networks try to make shows better by adding fancy transitions. Complaining more like it. We are always asked to "make it better" or "more exciting" with "cool" transitions But, does it really? No...well, they may LOOK cool...I suppose...but does it make the show "better?" Or are we trying to fool people into THINKING it is better by adding the cool transitions? The latter is the case. If you don't tell a compelling story, then no amount of FANCY TRANSITIONS will make it better. But sometimes what we work on isn't exciting, so we are told to liven it up.

I see this on the forums too. People asking where they can get "really cool" transitions so they can make their project better. These same people think that adding the "film look" will make their projects better. That a CUBE SPIN will somehow make the story more compelling. Sorry guys...it doesn't.

My buddy commented how he was watching "housing porn" (home decorating show) on HGTV or somesuch network and in this show was a SPARKLE TRANSITION! I guess they thought that just the fact that you are showing off nice decorating tips wasn't enough. They wanted to GET YOUR ATTENTION..or "make it cool." I know this transition...it is part of the SAPPHIRE set that is available for Avid and FCP. I had the...pleasure...of using these on a VH1 show about a young female pop star. In fact, I used a bunch of these odd plugins, including that sparkle transition. WHY? Because I was told to. I didn't want to, but they wanted to ROCK the show and "liven" it up. Was the show good? No. It was all flash and no substance.

What transition do I use the most? Which is most effective? THE CUT. Simple cut from one scene to another. Sometimes a dissolve, to denote passage of time. The basic tools. Although I will admit that for Andrew Jackson I did a BLUR DISSOLVE (part of the <a href=http://www.nattress.com/Products/BigBox/Bigbox.htm target=_blank>Nattress Big Box of Tricks</a> instead of a regular dissolve. Because I knew the network would want something new...preemptive strike. I also added another cool transition that I discovered in FCP 5.1.4, the LIGHT ZOOM. I thought it was very cool, and used it as a transition to signify a flashback. It had a specific purpose. But then the network exec saw that, and REALLY liked it. "I want to see this transition used more!" I dug myself into a hole on that one. I wanted to use it ONCE as a flashback device, and now I had to "sprinkle" it about the rest of the show.

And I am ashamed to admit that I have worked on more than my share of no-substance-all-flash shows. Par for the course for the freelance editor. But in working on those shows, and employing all sorts of flash and trickery to try to make them better, I know that it is pointless. That without a good story, no sort of "plugin window dressing" will make it better.

Nothing beats a good story.

Posted by: Shane Ross on Aug 25, 2007 at 10:06:05 pm Comments (4) editing

Comments:
Dude, I BUILT transitions...
by Tim Wilson on Aug 31, 2007

...including heart wipes, which I never even considered until I was pummelled with demand when I was at Boris FX.

They were built with our (then) brand new vector shapes, and I was proud that they didn't look like anything else I'd ever seen before. They were included as a newsletter bonus, and we got crazy numbers of downloads.

BTW, a pretty elegant example from our peeps at Trapcode. I never explored using hearts in a particle system before, and I have to say, I really like this one quite a bit.

One of the things I like about it is that it shows a wipe exactly where transitions are best used...and most rarely used....which is for titling.

That said, one of the things I did while I was at Boris was dramatically increase the size of the transitions library. I can't even tell you how many hundreds it was....and the biggest single request I got, day in and day out, was for more.

One of the ways I fought back against the cheese was to focus on filter-based transitions rather than DVE...although I got some cool results from combining them. This also chummed the water for people who were always looking for newer looks and more of them.

Three more quick notes.

1) Home Improvement transitions were (I predict) once in a lifetime. I can't imagine topping them, so why would anyone bother.

2) Hollywood FX had a dandy set of Home Improvement-style transitions more than 10 years ago. Some of them were still fresh....and yet, nobody bought them. They had so many options they were hard to control (a problem because most of the presets were weak), they were overpriced (they came with a DONGLE for pete's sake), and they got bought by a company that buried them. But it really was a ridiculously powerful and customizable tool.

3) My boy Boris has some jaw-dropping tales to tell about about the early days of nonlinear effects. I asked him to write some of it down for me, and as soon as he gets me some pictures, I'm going to start turning it into articles.

One of the stories he tells is that there was overwhelming demand at the beginning for transitions that Boris is the first to say were pretty cheesy. But that was exactly exactly the point.

Many people who came up through linear editing, and the whole "computers are a fad" crowd, couldn't take NLEs seriously until they could AT LEAST do the weak-a** transitions that came with the basic Grass Valley 100.

How basic? Take a look.

See those 10 transitions I've circled. THAT basic. There were variations -- left, right, top, bottom, edged with color, etc. -- but that was pretty much it.

And computers couldn't do it for love or money. BTW, got a system that can handle 8 inputs with real-time, full-res transitions? Didn't think so. There's a reason why people still use hardware.

BTW, you can buy your own Grass Valley switcher. Or you can bid on eBay.

So anyway, it was a really big deal when computers could get around to doing full-sized video transitions.

One company had the Grass Valley switcher and its capabilities so firmly in its sights that they named their product to evoke it: Media 100.

Among their early claims to fame is that they could do INTERLACED video transitions. The launch t-shirt said "Friends don't let friends field double."

The interlacing part was just catching up. One of the ways that NLEs started to open the distance was to do MORE and BETTER transitions than the Grass Valley 100 could. That was the only play within reach, and for a while, the only one that mattered. Linear editing was light years faster, and ALWAYS more reliable, so computers had to do something NEW. At the time, this was it.

One of the amazing passages from Boris:

We signed a licensing agreement with Adobe allowing us to implement the newly released Adobe Premiere plug-in interface and even distribute the handful of plug-ins that Adobe provided with Premiere itself.

To this day I do not understand the logic that steered Adobe into this strange agreement. Media 100 was a strong competitor. I can only say that the licensed effects were so bad that Adobe may have benefited by being not the only one. Kind of a Trojan Horse maneuver.

Like I said, amazing.

He made an effort to go well past this, and succeeded. For YEARS, Boris was the only way to do a soft drop shadow in an NLE!! I almost can't believe that as I type it, but it's absolutely true. Boris also had what was for years the *only* decent page peel, and it was really outstanding. To this day, among the top 2 or 3.

And while some of the effects haven't aged especially well, they were considered screaming cutting edge at the time.

A lesson there kids: if it looks screaming cutting edge today, it won't age well. Period.

Anyway, transitions played among the very most important roles in establishing the viability of making a "transition" to nonlinear editing. They also helped create the very first visual vocabulary for the computer age of video editing.

Old school reperesenting. Respect.

action motivated wipes
by Mike Cohen on Aug 29, 2007

On a couple of occasions I have used wipes which follow some action, like when Chewbacca walks across the screen and the wipe follows. Your average home viewer will never notice such things, but it makes me happy.

Home Improvement wipes were the best, never to be duplicated in their originality.

Mike 

not even a heart wipe?
by Michael Duff on Aug 28, 2007

I agree with you guys.. and especially dislike when I see plug-ins used with default settings just for the sake of having something pretty going on ,...... but, i do think there is a place for fancy (and sometimes even sparklie) transitions ... but they need to have more of a purpose and context than just your producer saying "hey little operator guy, put some fancy particals/shine/3D stroke/etc over this transition so it looks cool"

oh, and I do love the transitions in "Home Improvement" ...   hmmm :-)

 

 

 

Amen
by Mike Cohen on Aug 28, 2007

If you can't resolve it, dissolve it.

I occasionally use a slide or a push, to show a change of scene. but normally a dissolve works just fine.

I know just the type of shows you are talking about. They are on most cable networks. Now don't get me wrong, there are some fine shows on HGTV, DIY and the MTV networks, but I agree, those sparkle transitions remind me of the Video Toaster.

Shane, i have been reading your blog for about a year and have enjoyed it, welcome to the COW blogs.

Mike Cohen 

Login to Comment
Shane Ross

Shane Ross



Blog FeedRSS


FORUMSTUTORIALSMAGAZINETRAININGVIDEOS - REELSPODCASTSEVENTSSERVICESNEWSLETTERNEWSBLOGS

© CreativeCOW.net All rights are reserved.

[Top]