Re: The Fog Thickens

[Chris Kenny] "the discontinuation of 'classic' Final Cut has created a vacuum that didn't previously exist, making it easier for new products (a category in which I include FCP X) to succeed."

It has created a vacuum for a specific type of editor, not necessarily one interested in new paradigms. The companies poised to fill that vacuum are making it part of their marketing approach to emphasize how uninterested they are in creating new paradigms - to wit this from Autodesk:

(Smoke has) "An intuitive all-in-one creative workflow that combines track-based editorial, industry standard editing conventions and proven Autodesk creative tools."

Translation: we are nothing like FCPX, so it's safe for you to buy us. We don't have a magnetic timeline, we do have tracks, we do have source viewers, and a project is not an event and a timeline is not a project.

This article was not addressed to this Cow forum, it was addressed to the editing public at large, and it reflects Audtodesk's impression of what the world wide editing audience is thinking at the moment.

[Chris Kenny] "I'm keeping a close eye on Lightworks, but I'm skeptical if development of a serious NLE can really be funded in the way they propose."

I'm skeptical as well, but no more skeptical than I am that Apple won't toss the whole pro apps market to the wayside. Skepticism is good, but I apply it to all.

[Chris Kenny] "This implies that Apple intended to ship these features in the first release but was unable to complete them in time. There's zero evidence of this."

I would say the paper they published within days of the release outlining the features they were planning but hadn't had time to implement, like multicam, was plenty of evidence. They gave a timeline, which to give them credit they've mostly hit, of exactly which missing features would be restored by when. Do you think they just made up this list in the few days after the release. I don't.

[Chris Kenny] "What if FCP X had shipped with broadcast monitoring, stem exports, XML and multicam (which it all now has), but things like tagging, auditions, automated shot analysis, and 4K support had been subsequently added over the past 12 months? Would people be claiming there hadn't been rapid significant feature additions because FCP X was supposed to have those features in the first place?"

The missing features were standard to the industry and their lack crippled the product for many workflows. These items you mention are nice additions but, other than 4K support, describe one project that couldn't be completed without them. They made a car with a great GPS and autoparking but it lacked headlights and breaks. If your Chrysler you don't get a lot of love for finally putting the breaks back.

You can argue that X had so many innovations when it first came out that spending the next year or two on basic maintenance and functionality still leaves it the most innovative NLE out there. It might be true, but I don't see it succeeding the way you do. That might be because it does not work for my particular work flow, I'll give you that. I do know that I speak to many editors and all of them have written X off with the same line - "maybe in a few years."

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf