Re: FCPX metadata--how significant is it? And why?

Oliver,

But isn't' the very concept of a "REEL ID" a contextual thing? I mean it's certainly important meta-data - to my knowledge there isn't actually a STANDARD for what a REEL is in the modern scheme of thing.

For one person it's a physical tape. For another it's a CF card. For yet another, it's a DISC IMAGE on a hard drive. And just to look at that last case, that DISC IMAGE can be cloned so that instead of residing on a particular drive, it might also simultaneously exist on a "home" server, and/or on a thumb drive on the road.

The point is that the very IDEA of a REEL ID, is going to be increasingly variable. One user may want it to be a 5 digit number. Another producer may want it to be 7 place alpha-numeric designation.

Presuming that's true, EVERY NLE manufacturer is going to need to do the same thing that Apple has done (and is clearly not the FIRST to do) here. Which is to provide a function where WHATEVER data is generated has a "capture pathway" into the DB.

My opinion is that if it's META-DATA by nature, all you can expect APPLE to do in the design phase is to provide ACCOMMODATION for any and all types of data that their range of users want to provide. Asking APPLE to be the entity that sifts and sort and pick winners and losers from among the REEL ID tagging schemes of a dozen manufacturers is a waste of time at this point, IMO. Also, parsing database information presented in a text stream (something ALL databases are built to do) is so simple that worrying about whether someone will write the correct "translator" to make a particular systems ID scheme work in FCP-X has got to be dismissively trivial. I can't fathom that since it appears that there are hundreds of thousands of X owners already - all camera manufacturers won't get around to making their camera ID data accessible to it.

So I guess I personally don't want Apple spending their time trying to determine and accommodate this manufacturer or that manufacturers particular REEL ID scheme. I want them concentrating on the GUTS of the program. Which is where they appear to be at this stage.

Trust me. In a capable database like the one underpinning FCP-X - if you have meta-data generated from ANYWHERE - there WILL be an easy way to leverage it.

(Heck, if I can CUT and PASTE text within it. (and I can!) then PASTE exists - and if it exists, then I can PASTE anything. Which is just another way of saying "general data import!" at a basic level.

Maybe they'll keep developing it so it someday has a dedicated "import text file" capability with some ordering or parsing of the data available on import - that would be nice. And would blow open the whole "can it read my XML (or even historical CMX files!) debate nicely. But I don't think asking them to concentrate on a front end at this point over "key features" is wise.

But that's just me.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor