What about if I have a nice tool

After Cher’s hit with Believe in 1998, the use of the auto-tune became widely known. This started the appearance of so-called “musical artist” with a great physical presence and little vocal talent. Because now it is essential that artists have the right look and it is no longer necessary that performers have a tuned vocal instrument because technology will take care of fixing what nature or work could not.
Reviewing in the history of the edition, linear and non-linear; technology has given huge jumps that have democratized access to editing rooms for people with a good knowledge of editing tools and poor performance as artisans.

What is happening with editors nowadays

More than once, in post-production rooms can be heard the same words. So-called Editors whom do not deliver a good quality result is because they don’t have a nice tool. That if they had the latest Avid or the full suite of Sapphire plugins, they could deliver a better product. Now in this decade when we observe a growing concept, easy-to-use applications like Final Cut Pro X. For a typical user of an iPad or an iPhone, understand the interface is very easy to do. Simple interface, ease of use, reduction to the minimum expression of buttons and functions that could generate confusion. Extensive use of the mouse pointer interacting like in touch screens.

Easy to find workers, hard to find talent

That has originated a new generation of editors who have learned their tool, but they will not necessarily understand art. Even though you could already hear “Yes if I had a nice tool”, just as an excuse for low performance. The proliferation of low-cost visual effects, easy-to-use tools and non-linear video operators with relatively little commitment to delivery. I do not want to dare to say that talent is absent, but it is difficult to see it. Because still there is resistance against doing the best you can with what you actually have. Often times, they prefer to take arguments out of their pocket to avoid taking responsibility.

Having a nice tool is not a guarantee of good professional performance. But what will the future hold? It is difficult to see. Maybe we will see some kind of marriage between artificial intelligence and future editors and post-producers. Perhaps the directors of cinema and television will interact directly with said artificial intelligence, dispensing with the editors. I do not know.
Behind us is the legacy of Sergei Eisenstein, Alfred Hitchcock and many other great creators, they did great things with the poor tools they had at their disposal, and next to them the hand of the editors and editors who worked at the artisan level, becoming the teachers that we once had.