I also have a WACOM Cintiq that I use for PS and will switch to in a pinch for more precision when drawing more detailed masks in AE or PPro. A mouse has NOTHING on a stylus when it comes to precision.
Like others said, back in the linear days using shuttle wheels and buttons worked well because it was a physical console sitting there with dials, wheels, & sliders. You knew what you were touching by feel. A screen doesn't offer anything truly tactile. A screen just feels like a screen. You have to look down to see what you're doing which sort of eliminates the whole point of efficiency. Unless, you're working directly on the screen(Ipad or Surface are far too small)....something I look forward to in the future. I'd like to edit by touch right on my 34" Dell Ultrawide=)
Someone wasn't listening or fell asleep=)
Eventually, I'll be curious what he could do with a 90min pre-scripted narrative, if he ever gets the opportunity or chooses to do it. His style works very well for what he does, short & snappy, reality/real life/doc experiences. But that doesn't always translate.
It's more about him, his personality and him motivating those watching, even if he doesn't mean to.
You can call yourself whatever you want. But your work speaks for itself. I go through quite a lot of design contractors and their definition of expert often gets thrown around a bit loosely. Even reels don't tell the whole story because I don't know who's standing over their shoulder directing or managing the project. I really don't know someone's level of expertise until I see them work. How quick do they navigate the software? How many shortcuts are they using? Do they understand project and file structure? Are they a power user or do they just know how to start and quit software? Can they communicate their vision to a client who doesn't understand what a keyframe or a codec is? There are numerous factors that contribute to what I feel is a senior level designer/artist.
Even having certification doesn't necessarily tell the story. Can you use the software or can you really USE the software? I've worked with editors who can slap together a fast cutting music video, but stick them in front of a 45 min interview and have the coherently compress it down to 3 mins and they're shell shocked=)
Make sure your green is as evenly lit as possible, around 60 IRE. A 10-bit codec makes the process a bit easier. Keying through reflections is slightly more difficult, but you'll have to do a lot of tweaking, adding fake reflection back in to create a sense of movement. Your car is obviously not moving but REAL light is always shifting, with reflections and shadows always changing. Take into a account all those subtle touches that sell it. Shoot test footage in a real car and observe all the nuances that you have to recreate.
If its at night, you'll have to build some sort of rig to have lights spin by to represent street lamps. There are explanations online I believe. Your actors have to sell that they're actually driving as well, not just holding onto a wheel and talking;)
Focal lengths are all up to you. There is no right or wrong. But the more you show the more you have to fake, so think about that. Wider makes it more difficult. CUs are obviously easier, but then there is more detail with the hair, which cause further difficulties. The more in the frame, the less a slight issue won't be noticed. The less in frame the more the errors stand out=)
That's from central FL to the Atlanta area, for corporate event coverage or a standard interview. And we've paid a lot more for lower quality. Inability to properly light a green/white screen seems to be more difficult for some.
Your time is worth what its worth but you can only get paid what people are willing to pay. I'm quite glad I'm not a freelancer=)