Creative COW SIGN IN :: SPONSORS :: ADVERTISING :: ABOUT US :: CONTACT US :: FAQ
Creative COW's LinkedIn GroupCreative COW's Facebook PageCreative COW on TwitterCreative COW's Google+ PageCreative COW on YouTube
APPLE FINAL CUT PRO:HomeFCP ForumFCP XFCPX TechniquesFCP TutorialsFC ServerBasics ForumPodcastFAQ

OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%

COW Forums : Apple FCPX or Not: The Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Share on Facebook
Chris JacekOT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 8:27:02 pm

I wanted to raise an issue regarding educational pricing for my institution. We are a small department, with a CLP license agreement for multiple seats of Production Premium. This year, I converted my program from Macs to PCs, and from an FCP/AE workflow to a Premiere/AE workflow. One of the main reasons was Apple's dramatic changes, including the very disappointing FCPX.

Another reason for the switch was Adobe's aggressive pricing for education. After buying our original seats for our CLP license, we were able to purchase maintenance licenses every two years. At a cost of about $150 for a 2-year contract, we got all of the updates to all of the products in the Production Premium. That works out to about $6.25 per month, per seat.

We recently learned that Adobe has cancelled its maintenance licensing, and once our current contract ends this summer, we will not be allowed to renew it. Any new releases after that, we will have to pay full price for. After numerous frustrating calls to Adobe, and Adobe sales reps, the only alternative I am offered is the Creative Cloud, at a cost of $39.95 per month.

That is a price increase of over 600%, and is not even close to an option for us. We are a small college with a small budget, and cannot possibly afford to keep current with the software unless Adobe drastically reduces this rate for us. We understand that the CC gives you the full Master Collection, but that does not really help us any more than offering a filet mignon to a vegetarian. We are strictly a video production program, and Production Premium includes everything we need. Thus far, Adobe has made no mention of offering other smaller subscription options for education, or any replacement for their maintenance license program.

I can understand Adobe's desire to go to a cloud based subscription solution, and I frankly have no problem with that. But how can they possibly justify jacking their prices up so severely on a loyal segment of their customer base.

Of course everyone's licensing costs are slightly different, but this seems to be about the same situation I am finding with other educational customers in the same boat. Does anyone else have a CLP license agreement? Do you have a maintenance contract? What's your plan when it runs out?

First Apple canceling their maintenance, now Adobe. Doesn't anybody want educational business any more? At this rate, they will price us all out of the market.

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Franz BieberkopfRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 8:36:41 pm

Chris,

I'm not sure about your information (or whether this impacts meaningfully on your budget) but I easily find "Student and Teacher Edition" postings for Creative Cloud at 19.99 / month.

Also, I wouldn't be surprised at price shifts before you current contracts end, but that's purely speculative on my part.

Franz.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 10:31:00 pm

-----I'm not sure about your information (or whether this impacts meaningfully on your budget) but I easily find "Student and Teacher Edition" postings for Creative Cloud at 19.99 / month.----

This is only a promotional price, good for one year. I must budget for 3 years. But even at $20 a month, my costs have more than tripled. There's no way I can get a 300% increase approved.

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Franz BieberkopfRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 10:47:58 pm

[Chris Jacek] " But even at $20 a month, my costs have more than tripled."

Chris,

I also see that the "institutional" rate is different (39.99 as you stated) from the educational rate (students and teachers).

One thing to consider - do you need year round licenses? Have you investigated only licensing for the months you need?

I'm very intrigued by Lightworks, but I've no experience to offer on that.

Franz.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Dennis RadekeRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 5, 2013 at 3:11:47 am

[Chris Jacek] "This is only a promotional price, good for one year. I must budget for 3 years. But even at $20 a month, my costs have more than tripled. There's no way I can get a 300% increase approved."

Apologies that I haven't hit this forum in the last few days. You are assuming a 300% increase is based on the same version never improving. If you knew that you would get a new version and/or new features regularly, that should change the equation considerably. Your value is also improved by the fact that you are getting all of the Adobe Creative Suite (InDesign, web tools, etc), plus additional software (Lightroom, Edge), plus cloud storage, plus some additional services, plus tablet apps, plus training. Phew!

A suite to suite upgrade costs today $375 for Production Premium assuming you have the immediate previous version of CS5.5. If you have CS5, it is more. A year of Creative Cloud at $19.99 is about $360, but comes with much more. Also, your institution can contact Adobe to look into 3 year plans which we offer.

In the end, not everyone will like this, but I will say that the value proposition is very squarely in favor of Creative Cloud and a subscription based model. I hope this clears some misunderstanding.

Cheers,
Dennis - Adobe guy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+1

Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 7, 2013 at 1:01:57 pm

[Dennis Radeke] "A suite to suite upgrade costs today $375 for Production Premium assuming you have the immediate previous version of CS5.5. If you have CS5, it is more. A year of Creative Cloud at $19.99 is about $360, but comes with much more. Also, your institution can contact Adobe to look into 3 year plans which we offer."

This isn't true. We have a CLP license with a maintenance contract. Our costs, before Adobe changed the rules by killing the maintenance licensing, are $150 for two years of upgrades, which is $6.25 a month. For that we DO get all the newest versions of the CS suite, immediately upon their release.

I though I'd made that pretty clear in my post.

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Herb SevushRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 9:48:17 pm

You could try Lightworks at $0 per month. If it's could enough for feature editing it should be good enough for your students.

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


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Lance BachelderRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 10:01:37 pm

Lightworks is actually really stable now and even the paid version has a lot of bang for the buck :) Best dynamic trimming I've ever seen. It's seems to be designed mainly for narrative work but editing is editing, you gotta learn the craft not just the software.

Funny had you not dumped Apple and FCPX you'd have paid once and had 7 free upgrades already and your students would love it.

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
-2

Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 10:27:50 pm

Actually, we still get the upgrades for FCPX, and my students quite vehemently hate it. Those who have the MAcs (last year's computer laptop requirement) have learned FCP7, Avid, Premiere, and FCPX. Most prefer Avid or Premiere. Nobody prefers FCPX. I may have tainted their attitude.

Plus this year's laptop purchase participants are getting 17" i7 laptops with dual 750GB hard drives, dedicated nVidia card, and a Blu-Ray burner for the same price as entry level 13" Macbook Pros from a year ago.

I haven't tried Lightworks yet, but I am intrigued. Do you guys really think it's ready for prime time?

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Lance BachelderRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 10:54:41 pm

I fully understand your feelings toward FCPX - I had gone back and forth with it through each revision and still wasn't convinced. Then I watched John Davidson's videos and everything changed for me - the workflow he espouses just makes sense and works fantastic. Sure it still lacks some features and there are things I'd change but running it on a new iMac has been great so far... a lot faster and more fun than any NLE I've used.

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Post removed.

Post removed.


Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:10:24 am

I don't argue the "eureka moment" premise, for someone who is fully engrained in post and likes to play with toys. But even as one of those people, I'm unlikely to pay the Mac tax just on the chance of that eureka moment happening for me. I got my first Windows machine in 20 years last summer, and can honestly say that the transition hasn't been bad at all. As a loyal Mac apologist for those 20 years, I always felt that the extra money you paid for a Mac was worth it. I cannot say that I believe that any more.

Lion and Mountain Lions are flawed in my opinion. Over the past year, all of the annoyances that I used to have with Windows machines are not part of the Mac experiences, and surprisingly, many of the little "wow, that's cool" moments are happening for me on Windows (W7, I haven't really used 8 much).

Even if the battle was a draw on the OS side of things, I'm not going to pay the heavy premium to buy a Mac whose operating system is now clearly geared toward things that Apple things are important, rather than things that I think are important. Once upon a time, Apple could do both at the same time. Now, they are only interested in making you do things the way THEY think you should do things. To me that is very Windows '98 thinking.

With no plans to buy any new Apple hardware in the foreseeable future, I suspect that the eureka moment will probably pass me by while I play with the new GoPro I bought with the money I saved by purchasing a beefy Windows laptop (which incidentally handles my GoPro footage much more easily in After Effects than a Mac does).

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+5

Chris KennyRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 7:38:42 am

[Chris Jacek] "I don't argue the "eureka moment" premise, for someone who is fully engrained in post and likes to play with toys. But even as one of those people, I'm unlikely to pay the Mac tax just on the chance of that eureka moment happening for me. I got my first Windows machine in 20 years last summer, and can honestly say that the transition hasn't been bad at all. As a loyal Mac apologist for those 20 years, I always felt that the extra money you paid for a Mac was worth it. I cannot say that I believe that any more. "

For what it's worth, I've had exactly the opposite experience. We built a Windows machine primarily as a Resolve grading system given last year's lack of a (real) Mac Pro update. I figured hey, I'm a Mac guy, but this system is going to pretty much run one app. How much difference can the OS make?

A lot, as it turns out. A few annoyances, some of which we anticipated, some of which we didn't:

- Explorer just isn't as 'rich' as the Finder is — you can't have it calculate folder sizes in list view (just when hovering over a folder), there's no column view, there's no QuickLook, its search features aren't as nice.

- Working with QuickTime media is frustrating — codec support is incomplete (no ProRes encoding, no XDCAM decoding, etc.), performance isn't great. I guess this is in some sense Apple's fault rather than Microsoft's, but either way it does make Windows worse for our use cases.

- The whole way Windows deals with drive letters and file paths ends up requiring us to either manually assign mount points for every drive we use with the system (like a six step process that's not easy to explain to interns), or constantly relink things when drive letters for external drives decide to change of their own volition.

- Virtually every client drive that passes through our hands is Mac formatted. We use MacDrive to work with these drives in Windows, and it's pretty good, but just not quite as solid as we'd like, honestly.

- Ejecting drives is also weird. Windows is back where OS X was with this prior to 10.6, where often drives would claim to be in use, and the system wouldn't tell you what process was using the drive or let you force eject it. Additionally, depending on what controller they're attached to (and there are a couple on the motherboard, plus we've got an SAS controller installed), Windows may decide a drive is internal (even if it's not) and not offer to let you eject it at all. I'm told there's some registry hack to fix this; I haven't tried that yet.

- Boot times are considerably worse than for any modern Mac, despite an SSD boot drive. Pretty painful if the system acts up and you have to reboot in a client-supervised session. Or (see previous point) if you have to reboot just to safely remove a drive.

- Windows just seems to be a little quirky with hardware support. The system sometimes, entirely at random, takes 15 extra seconds to notice the keyboard and mouse when it's booted. Sometimes USB 2.0 devices don't quite want to work when plugged into USB 3.0 ports, despite the fact that those should be 100% compatible. It took probably 30 hours of my time to really get the system up and running the way it should (all the right drivers installed, the right PCIe slot arrangements, everything properly updated), significantly longer than equivalent tasks have ever taken me on a Mac.

So... the system is fast, it was damned inexpensive by a Mac user's standards, and it does fundamentally perform the tasks it was 'hired' for. But we will immediately buy any new Mac Pro, or any plausible replacement Apple comes up with for it. It will easily be worth the extra expense to make these issues go away.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+3

Herb SevushRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 9:43:35 pm

[Chris Kenny] "- Explorer just isn't as 'rich' as the Finder is — you can't have it calculate folder sizes in list view (just when hovering over a folder), there's no column view, there's no QuickLook, its search features aren't as nice."

Agree. I miss the color labeling too.

[Chris Kenny] "- Working with QuickTime media is frustrating — codec support is incomplete (no ProRes encoding, no XDCAM decoding, etc.), performance isn't great. I guess this is in some sense Apple's fault rather than Microsoft's, but either way it does make Windows worse for our use cases."

Since Quicken for Mac sucks while Quicken for Windows is great does that mean that OSX isn't as good as Windows? I agree that if your working in ProRes you'd rather work on a Mac, but that is, as you admit, strictly Apple's fault.

[Chris Kenny] "- Virtually every client drive that passes through our hands is Mac formatted. We use MacDrive to work with these drives in Windows, and it's pretty good, but just not quite as solid as we'd like, honestly."

Another point that has nothing to do with the viability of Windows as an operating system. I understand that it affects your particular workflow, but I could easily come up with different workflows that would work in Windows favor.

[Chris Kenny] "- Boot times are considerably worse than for any modern Mac, despite an SSD boot drive. "

Agree.

[Chris Kenny] "- Windows just seems to be a little quirky with hardware support. The system sometimes, entirely at random, takes 15 extra seconds to notice the keyboard and mouse when it's booted. Sometimes USB 2.0 devices don't quite want to work when plugged into USB 3.0 ports, despite the fact that those should be 100% compatible. It took probably 30 hours of my time to really get the system up and running the way it should (all the right drivers installed, the right PCIe slot arrangements, everything properly updated), significantly longer than equivalent tasks have ever taken me on a Mac."

When I didn't know what I was doing it took me days to set up my first Mac. There is no reason that setting up a Windows box should take that much time. I will agree that a Mac is Quicker, by about an hour or so, in setup time if you know what you are doing. I would suggest getting a VAR supplied box next time around if your having that much trouble.

[Chris Kenny] "So... the system is fast, it was damned inexpensive by a Mac user's standards, and it does fundamentally perform the tasks it was 'hired' for. But we will immediately buy any new Mac Pro, or any plausible replacement Apple comes up with for it. It will easily be worth the extra expense to make these issues go away."

As long as you are working heavily with Quicktime and Mac formatted hard disks and you don't need the heaviest duty GPUs, that sounds like a wise decision. Provided Apple gives you that option.

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


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+1


Chris KennyRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 10:04:26 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Agree. I miss the color labeling too."

Yeah, I don't know how I forgot that one.

[Herb Sevush] "Since Quicken for Mac sucks while Quicken for Windows is great does that mean that OSX isn't as good as Windows?"

In some sort of abstract, 'fair' evaluation of the platforms? No. If your primary use case for the computer is running Quicken? Yes.

[Herb Sevush] "Another point that has nothing to do with the viability of Windows as an operating system. I understand that it affects your particular workflow, but I could easily come up with different workflows that would work in Windows favor."

Honestly, we have zero choice here. Literally the only occasions on which we ever get Windows formatted drives from clients are when drives come formatted FAT32 out of the box and clients erroneously neglect to reformat them (often causing problems with large media files). Maybe it's different elsewhere, but that's the reality of the NYC indie film post production world right now.

[Herb Sevush] "When I didn't know what I was doing it took me days to set up my first Mac. There is no reason that setting up a Windows box should take that much time. I will agree that a Mac is Quicker, by about an hour or so, in setup time if you know what you are doing. I would suggest getting a VAR supplied box next time around if your having that much trouble."

This isn't a "know what you're doing" kind of thing. I wasn't installing PCIe cards in the wrong speed slots or something. It is, rather, a matter of things that are supposed to work a certain way not really working that way, and having to try various combinations at random until an acceptable solution is found. There's less of this quirkiness in the Mac world, in my experience, and because there are fewer configurations out there in the wild, when there are quirky issues it tends to be a lot easier to find out about them.

Getting a VAR-supplied box wipes out a lot of the cost/flexibility advantages Wintel supposedly has. This odd period with no Mac Pro updates aside, if a VAR-supplied box is required on the Windows side, in many cases you might as well just get a Mac.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Herb SevushRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 11:11:42 pm

[Chris Kenny] "This odd period with no Mac Pro updates aside, if a VAR-supplied box is required on the Windows side, in many cases you might as well just get a Mac."

Not if GPU speed or multiple PCIe lanes are of interest. I agree that the price difference gets wiped out by using a VAR, but you said price wasn't the most significant factor. You make a big deal over the ease of Mac setup but which wastes more time over the course of a year, PC setup or MAC renders?

Let's agree that you should get a system that matches your workflow requirements; that Mac's are slightly easier to work with and faster to setup and that PCs have more powerful processing options.

At the moment I work mostly with ProRes and am stuck in the Mac world. If Aja adds MXF options to the KiPro, which is what we use to record our shows, my options will multiply and I'll be happy to use them.

As someone once said, being bi-sexual doubles your chances for a date on saturday nite.

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


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+1

Post removed.


Post removed.

Post removed.

T. PaytonRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 5:03:45 am

FWIW My buddy teaches editing and FCP X at our state university. His fist time editing students take to FCP X "like a fish to water." i.e. they understand it and are up and editing quickly.

As someone who has taught FCP X to several students and employees who have had no editing background, I find that they are able to understand FCP X very quickly and get to storytelling process faster. In the past, I never had much success teaching FCP 7 to my employees or interns or even fellow creatives. They would quickly become discouraged as they tried to memorize the steps and the locations for how to do what I would consider basic tasks. If you think about it simply rearranging clips in FCP 7 or other "second generation" NLEs is very complicated and practically impossible to discover on your own. On the other hand I've never had a student or employee EVEN ASK me how to rearrange clips in FCP X. They just pick them up and move them!

At my office, several years ago we actually started doing offline editing in the iMovie (the one that works like FCP X, not the track based one) and finishing in FCP 7 because it enabled us to not focus on the details of editing and instead concentrate on making the story the best it could be. We found that our end results were not only better, but took substantially less time. We started having conversations about making adjustments to make the story better, not just concentrating on getting the project out on time. For our corporate documentary work FCP X is the best tool for the job by a long shot and in my opinion the best visual storytelling tool available.

On the other hand I can completely understand students and editors who are used to approaching editing as a precise "production task". Those who are so used to a track based NLEs are of course going to be frustrated by the magnetic timeline where elements seem to have a will of their own.

BTW. I too am bothered by Adobe's Creative Cloud. I feel like I am paying for things I don't need and I don't feel right about the fact that if I stop paying my tools will suddenly stop working.

------
T. Payton
OneCreative, Albuquerque


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Post removed.

Gary SlickmanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 4:38:12 pm

I believe that personal attacks such as these Aindreas are in violation of the spirit and intent of these forums. It displays a lack of class and integrity while adding nothing of merit to the debate.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Post removed.


Post removed.

Post removed.

Post removed.


Post removed.

Post removed.

Post removed.


Aindreas GallagherRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 11:12:17 pm

[Chris Jacek] "Actually, we still get the upgrades for FCPX, and my students quite vehemently hate it."

sorry I've got to do this: Craig Seeman below in other thread:

"That's why I think it will be young people. Future video post entrepreneurs. It'll happen by attrition."

well yes quite indeed.

that said, there is an issue with adobe drifting us all to the cloud with first year discounts - things could turn olive oil brando sales in no time.
Adobe guys like Kevin and Dennis are on here no end - I would be very surprised if they touch this particular thread with a radioactive barge pole.

did anyone catch this one?






take a moment to note how completely insincere the CEO is there - he is merrily deaf and on robo-pilot.

If adobe want to capture editing, along with photography, print design and mograph- you would think they would not put the screws to the educators engaged in training an endless stream of future PPro/suite customers.

Teaching editing is teaching editing? its not teaching the entire disparate adobe suite?

Again: adobe are really likely to tiptoe completely past this discussion. the guys who come in here likely have no say in what is pretty rabid short term dollar hungry policy from the top.

poor show, and highly dumb - strategically and PR wise, as C.C baxter would say.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+3

Craig SeemanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 1:53:24 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "[Chris Jacek] "Actually, we still get the upgrades for FCPX, and my students quite vehemently hate it."

sorry I've got to do this: Craig Seeman below in other thread:

"That's why I think it will be young people. Future video post entrepreneurs. It'll happen by attrition."

well yes quite indeed."


But he did say it was a "small department."
And this is a teacher who apparently isn't willing to teach it.
Who also finds Adobe expensive.
Wait 'till the see Avid pricing once they go from education to "adult" prices. Priced "right" for eduction. The company that loves expensive upgrades.
I hope they like Lightworks.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:48:10 pm

[Craig Seeman] "But he did say it was a "small department."
And this is a teacher who apparently isn't willing to teach it.
Who also finds Adobe expensive.
Wait 'till the see Avid pricing once they go from education to "adult" prices. Priced "right" for eduction. The company that loves expensive upgrades.
I hope they like Lightworks."


I'm going to have to call "passive aggressive" on you Craig, perhaps with a bit of arrogant myopia on the side. The implication of your post is that I am so sort of small town simpleton locked away in my little ivory tower with no idea how the real world works.

Let's look at why I am "not willing to teach it." And let's remove the fact that I, like many on this board, have been working in post since the days of CMX and the Ampex Ace, and I personally think that FCPX is still a highly flawed editing tool. But let's look at some of my "real world" problems.

I'm trying to run a program that gives me a whopping $3000 annual budget for equipment, and I had to fight for 2 years to get that raised from its original $1000. Also, like most people who work for an organization that does things other than video production, I have to deal with blank stares from accounting, and flat-out aggression from IT, at the mere mention of a Mac-based computer purchase program. I'm sure many of you in the "real world" have been there too.

My task is to provide an education, and to somehow get the necessary tools within our always constrained budget. After doing all the heavy lifting to sell my bean counters on the idea of forcing our students to buy a laptop and software, and front them the financing to do so, Adobe suddenly hits us with a 600% increase on our existing costs for their software. These are costs that we budgeted three years into the future, based on Adobe's own philosophy that our maintenance contract would "provide us with predictable budgeting." Somebody tell me what's predictable about canceling said program, and offering no other solution than the before-mentioned 600% price increase for their Creative Cloud. That may not seem expensive by 1990s-era giant post-house standards, but any time a vendor sextuples their price without warning, I think it's fair to call that expensive.

So before you cast me as naive, try once to look at this from a perspective other than myopic post-production-professional. Your comment: "Wait 'till the see Avid pricing once they go from education to "adult" prices" makes a pretty baffling assumption. In what scenario do you think that the cost of commercial licenses will be relevant to fresh-out-of-college graduates? Do you think their entry-level jobs will smack them in the face with the "harsh reality" of "real world" pricing? They are most likely going to get paid to edit on whatever system their employer thinks is best, and more than likely be asked to wear a bunch of other hats. Purchasing decisions and budgeting are likely years away. So please save your snarky "I hope they like Lightworks" comments. They offend the sensibilities of us bumpkins who don't live in the "real world."

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Craig SeemanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 2:24:56 pm

[Chris Jacek] "I'm going to have to call "passive aggressive" on you Craig,"

Yep, I was very deliberate too. Actually aggressive aggressive IMHO.

[Chris Jacek] "I personally think that FCPX is still a highly flawed editing tool."

I rest my case on that one. Not that a personal opinion is wrong but that's not the person to teach the tool or even be open minded on student preference.

[Chris Jacek] "I have to deal with blank stares from accounting, and flat-out aggression from IT, at the mere mention of a Mac-based computer purchase program."

I even had to deal with it as an engineer at a post facility that did mostly TV broadcast work mostly for a major network. .... They bought Macs to edit and the even apologized when the editors, who had worked on Macs at other facilities. practically rebelled when the first PC rolled. in. Of course a broadcast environment isn't a school and they obviously had other "bottom line" considerations such as making sure good editors wanted to work there so they had good product.

[Chris Jacek] "Adobe suddenly hits us with a 600% increase on our existing costs for their software. "

I can't speak for your specific budget but Adobe doesn't want to be Avid. They've changed there business model. Instead of outright big ticket purchases, which can cost heavy up front, followed by people skipping upgrades, which probably had a pattern of: high price discourage sales, lack of paid upgrades undercut development costs, they came up with a monthly rent model. It may cost many people more money in the long run but a very easy point of entry. Of course those who deal with annual budgets and multiyear plans see the costs because they're looking at cost over three years rather than one month revenue vs one month expense.

[Chris Jacek] "In what scenario do you think that the cost of commercial licenses will be relevant to fresh-out-of-college graduates? Do you think their entry-level jobs will smack them in the face with the "harsh reality" of "real world" pricing?"

Unless something changes most will wan't something for "home" use just as in the early 00s people used Avid at work and bought FCP for their "home" use. Their "home" use became their "business" use when they began to get their own clients. That's the "attrition" route I keep mentioning for FCPX. Youth will use it and it'll be their opening business tool.

When you're ambition and maybe even talented and living on Ramen Noodles $300 looks better than $2500 or even $1500. Adobe has a different but viable approach as well because the monthly cost isn't any worse that what that kid is spending monthly on her smartphone bill that she'll keep along with the Ramen Noodle dinner.

While Avid might seem like a bargain at $300 or so educational, the chasm is big when one has to jump to the "real world" pricing and while on one level the chasm is small compared to 2000 pricing, in today's downward economic spiral in which the young educated jobless are hit the worst, the Avid chasm is actually widening. Even if they actually do get a job in the industry and get to touch an Avid as an assistant (and how many of those jobs are there?) they're going to look for something they can afford for "home" use... or they'll use the educational version they can't upgrade (just the thing that helps Avid's bottom line of course [obvious sarcasm].

There's Lightworks, costs nothing now. Seems like it'll cost nothing later. A kid can go into business with that. Tangentially maybe EditShare has a business model that Avid doesn't (not that I know that's really what EditShare's motives are). For you as an educator on a budget it might be your best bet.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Post removed.

Andy MeesRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 4:25:25 pm

[Craig Seeman] "There's Lightworks, costs nothing now. ... "

Yeah, it kinda costs nothing, at least theres a "costs nothing" option which may work in a educational environment, but for any kind so called "pro" workflow you really do need to pay the annual "pro" license fee ... which is fair enough, and its only the equivalent of $5 a month.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Post removed.

Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 1:31:36 am

[Craig Seeman] "[Chris Jacek] "I'm going to have to call "passive aggressive" on you Craig,"

Yep, I was very deliberate too. Actually aggressive aggressive IMHO.

[Chris Jacek] "I personally think that FCPX is still a highly flawed editing tool."

I rest my case on that one. Not that a personal opinion is wrong but that's not the person to teach the tool or even be open minded on student preference. "


Okay, then let me clarify. I thought I'd meant that you were being myopic and arrogant. What I really mean is that you're being a flat-out asshole. How dare you question my teaching methods, and choices for what my department, and my students have to pay for. What the hell do you know about my teaching? I'm sorry Craig, but I'm not closed minded. I've used them all, and have made my decisions. So have my students.

Last year my students learned four editing platforms in about 6 months time, including your precious FCPX. Getting them to learn FCP7, Premiere, Avid, and FCPX was not the hard part. They absorbed all of it like a sponge. These kids are way more intelligent than you give them credit for. And way more savvy to BS than your and me combined. They made their choice about what THEY consider to be useful and professional. Despite whatever biases I bring to the table, they are capable of making their own decisions.

Not a one of them who spent the same exact price for their entry-level Macbook Pro is happy when compared to their classmates who got a high-end PC laptop. Their render times in After Effects are more than twice as long, often longer. This may be because their RAM is half, and their storage less than a quarter of the students with the same priced PC setup, which has a dedicated graphics card and Blu-Ray burner too. They understand workflow. They understand cost/benefit. They don't care what is the easiest program to re-arrange clips on. Easy is for day one. Doing good work is for days 2-n. They want the platform and program that does the best trim editing, integrates the best with After Effects, renders the fastest, and crashes the least. They aren't looking for the EASIEST tool, they are looking for the BEST tool. And because my opinion of what the BEST tool is does not agree with yours, you're going to tell me that I'm not the person for the job. And who is the person for the job, Craig? You? If you're as much of a prick in front of young adults as you are in this message, I don't think you'd be a very good teacher.

We've had our run-ins before, Craig, and sometimes it's really fun. But this time really pissed me off (obviously). I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on this particular exchange, and assume that the cruelty and rudeness contained within is not really who you are. I hope you'll do the same with my off-color response.

CJ

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Craig SeemanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 5:45:43 am

[Chris Jacek] "Last year my students learned four editing platforms in about 6 months time, including your precious FCPX. "

FCPX progressed significantly since last year.
When many are revisiting it to evaluate again and some don't. The latter position does tell me something. Granted many may move on but I wouldn't describe that as "vehement." Last years failure can be this year's success or at least improved. To me that does reflect an attitude towards the industry and the ongoing changes (well beyond FCPX). Sorry if that offends you but this has always been my personal opinion about the tools of the industry which do change over time.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Steve ConnorRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 9:00:47 am

Any chance we could cut back on the personal insults?

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Post removed.

Steve ConnorRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 5:10:19 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Chris was quite a bit more straight forward in his reply.
"


Don't care in the slightest, we simply don't call each other assholes on the COW whatever the attitude of other posters.

BTW I have invented a new drinking game where you have to down a shot every time you post the words "passive aggressive" It's going to cost me a fortune in Jack Daniels at the rate you are going.

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Post removed.

Chris HarlanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 5:16:22 am

Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Shut up Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Go away Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Cloud Creative Fork OFF Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud Creative cloud

Message received


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+2

Aindreas GallagherRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 12:43:51 am

nice.

nearly a zang tumb tumb concrete poetry moment there.

http://testpressing.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/01marinetti-zang-tumb-tu...

got to love the futurists.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Franz BieberkopfRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 1:27:12 am







(contains no emotion directed at any corporation)

Franz.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+3

Chris HarlanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 6:11:08 am

That's a hoot!


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Herb SevushRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 2:28:45 pm

Love the Da da. Thanks.

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


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Aindreas GallagherRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 7:55:53 pm

well that was an entertaining watch eh?.

any thread where nomme de plume Bieberkopf drops a nugget is, I think we can all agree, a good thread.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris HarlanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 6:10:13 am

Well, now--all I was doin' was just directly quotin' that suit and how he was respondin' to the questions they was askin'. I did it from memory, so maybe I didn't get it word for word, but I think I got the gist of it, all right.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+1

Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 5:05:50 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Again: adobe are really likely to tiptoe completely past this discussion. the guys who come in here likely have no say in what is pretty rabid short term dollar hungry policy from the top."

Aindreas, I thought you might find this post interesting. I started this same thread on the Premiere forum, in the hopes of hearing something from somebody from Adobe. I actually got one, which I pasted below. It is not very encouraging, however. It seems that I have been getting this same song and dance from several directions and division from within Adobe, and each time I call, I am never even allowed to escalate to a supervisor. I'm simply told "that's all I can offer you at this time." Very disturbing. As you can see from my response (pasted after the Adobe response), my patience for this situation is wearing thin. Shady corporate ethos from Apple and Adobe, and the possible death of Avid, may eventually drive us all into the arms of open-source products.

Hi Guys,

To be clear about the way maintenance giving you upgrade rights on top of the original purchase and how the creative cloud offering works - the per seat fee for Master Collection (which is platform agnostic! being on a Mac or PC the same account access knows which installer you require), with other services including training videos across the entire toolset, a space for social from behance (coming) and free new feature based upgrades drops (can be as frequent as per month if they are ready to drop) is in the constant pricing model that's subscribed to the plan.

The cost of per seat is locked in and can be budgeted in forecasts. Getting Team allows you to allow access to students based on an admin assigned sign in and when students leave, graduate that account is closed and reassigned. Seats can be scaled mid-way too.

CLP licenses won't have access to the new feature rich (innovation based) updates - legally. This meant in the past that updates of this nature required waiting until a full year/18month cycle was released before the features could be passed on at the extra cost.

The Cloud based subscription bypasses the innovation lag.

So effectively $40 per seat is $40 per seat even when a major update drops. If you a in subscription timeframe you effectively have maintenance built into the price.

From the sites I saw you would otherwise be paying about $600 for the Prod Premium only software, then the maintenance on top. If the students want to learn where video goes across digital publishing, web etc, you need to buy more software. This is just software there are no extended services included in this product line.

Reapply the mathematics knowing the maintenance is included in the pricing and consider the extent of allowing students access to the software on their computers too. They get access to 2 Adobe Expert lessons per seat/year and 100G of cloud based storage.

Hope this helps a little more about understanding the value of Creative Cloud.

:)

JB
Adobe Systems,
Video Solutoins Consultatnt, A/NZ

Jon Barrie
Adobe Video Solutions Consultant ANZ
Jon's YouTube Tutorial Page
follow Jon with twitter




Re: Price increase of 600% for Production Premium for our college
by Chris Jacek on Mar 2, 2013 at 9:24:47 pm


I understand how it works, and everything you mention sounds great. Except for the price. The fact that there is no longer an upfront cost means little to us, because we have already paid the upfront costs of the perpetual license. We retain our license when the student leaves, and can then re-assign it to another of our students when they join the program. Since the computers are portable, they ARE using them at home, even though they actually belong to the college until the day they graduate or leave the school otherwise. All this, we are already receiving, but for only $6.25 a month. I know it is only software, but that is truly only what we need, and more importantly, what we can afford. Are you suggesting that the extras you mention are worth over $33 per month? They certainly are not worth that to us.

I think the Cloud is a great idea, but your pricing structure is exploitative to educators as compared to your previous licensing system. And frankly, we will NEVER be able to afford it, which leaves us with 2 choices: Keep using our old stuff, or look elsewhere. Adobe used to be a company that valued its educational users by aggressively discounting their products 75-80% over the commercial prices. That's why we chose Adobe in the first place. This will also be the reason we STOP using Adobe products if this new policy is not improved. To keep with your traditional aggressive educational pricing, you should be offering the Creative Cloud for about $10-12 per month.

If this new pricing structure is such a great deal, then why kill the old system so quickly? If it is such a great deal, people would certainly flock to the new system and abandon the one we've been using. But Adobe's decision to quickly kill the old licensing system, shows that they know they are screwing over their educational customers. I noticed that Adobe still offers "Upgrade Plan" for CLP licensees on the commercial side, but not education.

I think it's pretty obvious that Adobe no longer wants to court education with the aggressive discounts that they used to. How long do you think that educational institutions are going to support Adobe when you jack up the prices so much so fast?

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Chris ConleeRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 11:50:00 pm

[Chris Jacek] "I haven't tried Lightworks yet, but I am intrigued. Do you guys really think it's ready for prime time?"

Definitely ready for prime time, but unfortunately PC only at the moment. A Mac version is promised, but no definitive timetable has been given as far as I know.

You could also go with Avid at $295 per seat for academic, and VidSharX for a shared networking system. This would give your students a REAL perspective on what it's like in the broadcast world with shared systems.

http://www.vidsharx.com/

Chris


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:44:01 pm

I am genuinely curious why they vehemently hate fcpx.

I prefer certain tools to others, and I can understand needing to teach a broad spectrum of tools and workflows, and I also get why one might not find fcpx suitable, but vehemently hate?


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris KennyRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 10:06:57 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I prefer certain tools to others, and I can understand needing to teach a broad spectrum of tools and workflows, and I also get why one might not find fcpx suitable, but vehemently hate?"

It's social signaling. The early narrative about FCP X was that it wasn't suitable for serious professionals. Thus one way to signal that one is a serious professional is to disapprove of FCP X. The more thoroughly one disapproves of it, the more serious one is. Frankly this industry is full of this kind of thing — it's unfortunately not just restricted to film students.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 4:05:55 am

And what if it really ISN'T suitable to professionals? That seems to be a possibility that FCPX lovers fail to recognize. If people criticize something new, why is it always assumed that they "are not open minded to change"? The new thing could just simply suck.

I'm not necessarily saying this is the case with FCPX as it stands now. But when it came out, it was not usable to me, and to many others. As is the case with the Mac Pro, many did not, and do not, have the luxury to wait and hope for the best.

Though I have not spent much time lately with FCPX, because I had to alter my media program, it seems to be catching up to its original promise, and maybe even becoming a true "professional tool." But you know what? The Ampex Ace was also a professional tool. But it was bassackwards and never fully embraced by the post-production community. There was a segment of editors who swore by it, but that didn't make it a good product.

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 1:34:11 am

Admittedly, because of timing, they got the worst possible incarnation of FCPX, circa Sept 2011. Unfortunately, the decision about what to do for 2012 had to come before FCPX matured to its current state. But that is also the unfortunate aspect of releasing something that isn't quite ready, and forcing people to make a decision.

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Gary HuffRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 10:20:39 pm

[Herb Sevush] "You could try Lightworks at $0 per month. If it's could enough for feature editing it should be good enough for your students."

Film editing is a different beast than what most students will be doing, I would imagine. From what I can tell, it's simply an editor, with not much in the "finishing" department. If all you need to do is stitch clips together and then export an EDL/XML for online finishing, that's one thing, but when you need the NLE to basically run it from selects to final export, I don't know if Lightworks is good for that.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Oliver PetersRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 11:03:12 pm

[Gary Huff] "From what I can tell, it's simply an editor, with not much in the "finishing" department."

Go back and look again. There's an FX plug-in architecture, color correction, node-based compositing and mixing capabilities. It can master to AVC-Intra with the $60/year Pro version. Add to that multi-cam and stereo3D and this certainly makes it far more than a basic editor for 90% of the work most editors do. Plus they will preview a Mac version at NAB.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Shawn MillerRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 11:15:53 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Go back and look again. There's an FX plug-in architecture, color correction, node-based compositing and mixing capabilities. It can master to AVC-Intra with the $60/year Pro version. Add to that multi-cam and stereo3D and this certainly makes it far more than a basic editor for 90% of the work most editors do. Plus they will preview a Mac version at NAB."

I didn't know about the node based compositing... that is worth a look.

Shawn



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Aindreas GallagherRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 11:16:20 pm

[Oliver Peters] "node-based compositing"

?????? - I go to google.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Oliver PetersRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 11:26:34 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "[Oliver Peters] "node-based compositing"

?????? - I go to google."


http://www.lwks.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=24&Itemid=...

Scroll down towards the bottom of this page of features.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Aindreas GallagherRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 11:40:56 pm

that's a bit mad - it feels as looney as wikipedia once did? you sort of can't believe that could keep standing up straight.

Lightworks was the first in action edit system I ever saw, in '98. college had avid. my old station had three, in wired in porta-cabins out the back, in the connemara bog.

god be with the days of doors attics and sharks.
I'd love to see the likes of this re-order affairs - as long as no one ever asks me to learn another editing software system, because then I might actually go postal.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 1, 2013 at 11:51:16 pm

Too many Editors suffering from PFCPSD (Post Final Cut Stress Disorder) to take in another choice of NLE, even if it is free.

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Aindreas GallagherRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:13:23 am

hey hey - that is the first edit system I ever played with when I was still mograph. there is an issue that we are in a sea here - hence I have not gotten off my behind.
I'm inclined to belly float with FCP classic until the last possible moment.

Ask any 3D guy if they are Lightworks... and 3DSMax... and Maya... and Cinema 4D.

That is a ludicrous proposition. I was a 3DSMax guy in the day.

I understand 3DSMax particle systems, their deform stack, their camera system, their keyframe system.

We cannot ersatz, and en masse, learn all editing incarnations here.
that is just way too crazy. And to be fair Steve - even by your sound of it - BVE was not dripping with FCPX.

I personally think it broadly plops for PPro - it seems to make the most sense to me given their focus, and the indicators are getting pretty damn strong.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Steve ConnorRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:29:01 am

Aindreas I feel your pain, if I was a Freelancer in London I wouldn't be spending much time with FCPX either. I would have re-learned Avid and brushed up my PPro skills but it's still anyone's guess by the look of it, there were no clues at BVE. However I had a nice chat with one of the guys in charge at. Bournemouth University and he said they switched from FCP7 to Avid.

Luckily I get to choose what I edit on mostly so I'm happy with FCPX, however now I'm on top of it I'm brushing up on PPro too just in case Adobe are the first to give me native 4K XAVC editing on my Mac, I'm also toying with SpeedGrade as well so I'm hoping for a nice round trip solution with PPro on the next release.

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+3

Aindreas GallagherRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:54:00 am

ah god love you steven.

no pain mate.

say this piece right: PWC for the NHS. Click the "all years" link whatnot for the 10 min. piece with oodles of archive.

http://www.pwc.co.uk/government-public-sector/healthcare/nhs75/index.jhtml?...

All the green screen noise control is AE custom, final grade MB.
type animation routines - AE with custom java script, main editor FCP7. seven days to completion with ITNSource buyout.

as an editor - some of the responses wooden - hopefully hidden with the various type and image animations.

My point being that there is no conception that I or anyone who comes after me, in the minimal AE FCP skills blend currently underway
(that will become AE/PPro), would touch FCPX with a ten foot barge pole simply because it lacks any benefit Steve.

there is no logistical reason to go there. Its a nutty editing system with absolutely no friends.

next time I pull this kind of thing in that timeframe - I rather hope I get to have PPro.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Andrew KimeryRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:29:10 am

[Bill Davis] "BEM camp or NBEM camp.
(Before Eureka! Moment or Not Before Eureka! Moment)"


Yes, if only the dirty heathens would hurry up and realize how wrong they are for not recognizing the pending perfection that is FCPX.

Lord.. and I thought nothing could approach the asinine level of late 90's PC/Mac flame wars.




Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Bill DavisRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 12:55:01 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Yes, if only the dirty heathens would hurry up and realize how wrong they are for not recognizing the pending perfection that is FCPX.

Lord.. and I thought nothing could approach the asinine level of late 90's PC/Mac flame wars."


Oh dude, trust me, there are subterranean caverns of assininity that we've not even started to plumb yet.

(Just look at the current TV season ratings for evidence!)

And for the record. Nobody that I know has ever argued that X is "perfect." What it is is fast and fabulous and fun IF it fits your needs. If it doesn't - well then all the magnetism or clip connections in the world won't make a gnat's breaths worth of difference to you.

But really, lighten up. That it makes some people happy, doesn't mean it has to make YOU angry. That's just silly. It's software, as folks often note here, not religion. Course now that I think of it, I wonder if in 18 months people will still be talking about the Pope's resignation - in a fashion similar to how so many here are still obsessed with debating FCP-X.

Weird thought.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris HarlanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 5:28:42 am

[Bill Davis] " It's software, as folks often note here, not religion. "

Ys, Bill. But usually they are noting it when talking to you. ;)


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+2


Craig AlanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 8:54:56 pm

[Bill Davis] "It's software, as folks often note here, not religion"

Software and religion are cut from the same cloth. They are both tools to remake reality in your own image.

MacPro4,1 2.66GHz 8 core 12gigs of ram. GPU: Nvidia Geoforce GT120 with Vram 512. OS X 10.6.x; Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170, Sony Z7U, Canon HV30/40, Sony vx2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 1:35:55 am

[Craig Alan] "Software and religion are cut from the same cloth. They are both tools to remake reality in your own image.
"


Nice. Can I steal that?

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Craig AlanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 4:03:26 am

I'd like credit. But feel free. I too am an educator.
The best deal right now is AVID MC - $300 and good for 4 years of free updates. Now AVID might go under and MC is a slightly tougher learning curve. People might complain about the dated interface, but no one will accuse them of not being professional. It is cross platform. It plays well with others.

I chose FCP X for my classes because they are HS students. However i got 10 copies of MC so I can have serious students learn it too. Plus if I change my mind based on what happens to FCP X, I can switch over to MC. I miss FCP 7. But I have no doubts that FCP X is plenty powerful enough for the type of videos that are done in schools, and events, and weddings, and industrials, and and and. (Please put back multiple tracks! They just work.) And a fast turn around would be welcome.

My only regrets was possibly not going with PPro. But given your post maybe I made the right decision. Not sure how they could just up their rates that radically after institutions bought in. What happens when the term expires? Can you just continue to use the non-updated software until you can afford to renew? That's the case with FCP X as far as I know. But the renewal isn't 600% higher either. Not a smart move on Adobe's part. They have an opportunity here to take over FCP 7's share of the pro world. Why make it hard for schools to offer it?

MacPro4,1 2.66GHz 8 core 12gigs of ram. GPU: Nvidia Geoforce GT120 with Vram 512. OS X 10.6.x; Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170, Sony Z7U, Canon HV30/40, Sony vx2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 4:20:25 am

[Craig Alan] "My only regrets was possibly not going with PPro. But given your post maybe I made the right decision. Not sure how they could just up their rates that radically after institutions bought in. What happens when the term expires? Can you just continue to use the non-updated software until you can afford to renew? That's the case with FCP X as far as I know. But the renewal isn't 600% higher either. Not a smart move on Adobe's part. They have an opportunity here to take over FCP 7's share of the pro world. Why make it hard for schools to offer it?"

I think you may be right. I never would have expected this from Adobe, given their long history of aggressive educational pricing. Just to be clear, our licenses are perpetual, so we will get to keep using whatever version we have last. We'll keep getting our updates until our maintenance contract runs out, so I'm obviously hoping for some nice updates between now and then. That would buy me a year or so. By then I'm hoping we'll have a clearer picture of the fate of Avid. I could certainly go back to Avid if they keep with their great $299 deal for 4 years. But that still leaves me stuck when it comes to After Effects, which is a large part of my curriculum.

For what it's worth, I don't know if Adobe plans to raise their price at all for new licenses. For all I know, they may keep with their aggressive academic pricing in that instance. But I never intended on having to buy another new license unless my program grew large enough to expand beyond what we have. The maintenance contract guaranteed that I wouldn't have to. Now Adobe won't even let me renew that contract, and the only solutions they offer to my situation are 1) Buy a new full license for the product that I already bought a full license for (no upgrade pricing) or 2) Pay $40 a month per seat for the Creative Cloud Team.

Ironically, we will probably go with option #3, which is to keep using our last version of the software for as long as possible. I call this irony because this is exactly what Adobe's new system was designed to avoid: People skipping versions.

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Craig AlanRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 7:01:55 am

Ah yes the monthly cloud bill. Taking their cue from cable and cell companies. The problem here: in education, we tend to get funding as yearly one shot deals that may or may not recur. The rationale to buy certain equipment in order to offer specific training to students is that that is what the industry demands. When in fact industries are moving targets and the only important thing to learn is how to learn and the basic principals behind the need.

MacPro4,1 2.66GHz 8 core 12gigs of ram. GPU: Nvidia Geoforce GT120 with Vram 512. OS X 10.6.x; Camcorders: Panasonic AG-HPX170, Sony Z7U, Canon HV30/40, Sony vx2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Andrew KimeryRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 2, 2013 at 9:08:19 pm

Not angry Bill. Only mildly annoyed with your continued refrain about how people that don't like/use FCP X just don't 'get it' and if they got it they'd surely use and surely love it. You can love whatever you want all you want but don't dicate to others why they like/dislike what they do. That type of evangelism just grates on my nerves.

Of course since you said that no matter how awesome you think FCP X is it won't meet everyone's needs I guess that means editors aren't in two simple camps anymore? ;)




Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+2


Bill DavisRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 3:19:05 am

[Andrew Kimery] "You can love whatever you want all you want but don't dicate to others why they like/dislike what they do. That type of evangelism just grates on my nerves. "

Sorry you're so sensitive to this, but honestly, if you think posting opinions in a public forum for debate is "dictating to others" then you have a perception problem.

I'm dictating nothing to no one. Dictating indicates the power to force something on them.

We're in free will land here. You dislike my opinions, post countervailing ones. If you think I'm wrong about why I like the changes that X had generated in my business you have two options. Learn about it and dispute them on the merits (as MANY here do) or disengate from the discussion if you don't have the time, energy or inclination to understand the software being debated here (you know, the forum with FCP-X in it's NAME!)

Walking onto a football field and arguing that football is LAME might be something you enjoy. But you wouldn't REALLY do that and expect those who love the game to look at you with anything less than the classic hairy eyeball.

Debate, disengage, or simply move along. Personally, I hope you stay and engage. But please argue the merits of the REALITY of X. Not the smoke and mirror stuff. You think it's NOT good at something say what. We can discuss that.

But I'm likely going to continue to write about having fun using X - regardless of anyone else's opinion - first because it's my reality - and second, because that's a solid part of what this forum is FOR.

Kinda simple as that.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Andrew KimeryRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 5:27:10 am

[Bill Davis] "Sorry you're so sensitive to this, but honestly, if you think posting opinions in a public forum for debate is "dictating to others" then you have a perception problem."

Like I said in my previous post, you can love what you want all you want but preaching in absolutes (like below quote) just undercuts any reasonable discussion you are attempting to have.

[Bill Davis] "Editors in two simple camps.

BEM camp or NBEM camp.
(Before Eureka! Moment or Not Before Eureka! Moment)"


Not much room left for people that have given it an honest try but just don't like it as much as other NLEs (maybe they were holding it wrong?) or people that have a workflow that X can't easily fit into.

If your comment was meant to be cheeky then toss in a ;) or something as cheeky is hard to glean on the internet.

[Bill Davis] "Debate, disengage, or simply move along. Personally, I hope you stay and engage. But please argue the merits of the REALITY of X. Not the smoke and mirror stuff. You think it's NOT good at something say what. We can discuss that."

I think you have me confused with someone else as I've never spent my time here randomly bashing anything. From the day X was released my position has been that if it grows into a tool I need then I'll pick it up. Currently what I find most lacking in X is that none of my perspective employers use it and that's a pretty big deterrent as an editor for hire. If I get the feeling that's changing then I'll learn X but until then it behoves me to spend my professional development time improving my skills on Avid MC, AE and Resolve (and to a lesser extent PPro) since those will land me jobs today and for the foreseeable future. FCP X and a dollar will get you a cup of coffee in LA these days. ;) <--- cheeky


[Bill Davis] "But I'm likely going to continue to write about having fun using X - regardless of anyone else's opinion - first because it's my reality - and second, because that's a solid part of what this forum is FOR."

That's great. I wouldn't want anything different. It's only when you seem to forget that the experiences & needs of others will not necessarily mirror your experiences & needs that my eyes roll.


As a slight aside, I wish I was able to attend and meet you at the LACPUG. I feel like online communication is less obtuse (for lack of a better word) when people have met offline.




Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Miko MeloniRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 2:59:39 pm

Maybe Autodesk Smoke?
It's free for students.

http://usa.autodesk.com/adsk/servlet/item?siteID=123112&id=14185424


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Sandeep SajeevRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 5:14:49 pm

Personally I benefitted from Adobe's educational discounts when I was a student, and it made a big difference when I graduated and was looking for work as an assistant editor (I'd do After Effects comps along with logging, syncing etc as an assist). To get to the point where some programs can't afford the seats is really disappointing. In education, ideally (I understand that reality is quite different), one must never make choices based on cost and as Adobe's package is full featured it makes sense for general media programs to teach some video editing, some effects work, and some sound editing to their students.

Hopefully Adobe will re-evaluate this policy. If, as it is claimed, Production Premium is making inroads into the FCP Studio market, then surely there is room to be flexible when it comes to the bottom line.

I also agree that Smoke is worth a look. It's free as are all the Autodesk 3D tools for 3 years. And you're entitled to all maintenance upgrades and service packs.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Tim WilsonDad steps in
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 6:01:34 pm

If you're looking back at this thread remembering a bunch of posts here that aren't anymore, yeah, that was me.

A reminder of Rule #1 here: no postings about posters.

Overall, I think the thread reads better with the detritus excised, with apologies if you feel that I've overstepped. Maybe I've gone a post or two too far. Nothing personal. Inevitable to pull a few carrots when you're trying to pull weeds.

Drop me a line if you want to talk about anything. tim at creativecow.net

Don't make me stop this car,

Tim

Tim Wilson
Vice President, Editor-in-Chief
Creative COW



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+1

Bill DavisRe: Dad steps in
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 7:27:24 pm

Tim,

Delete at will from my perspective. Particular anything I post.

An early editor of mine once told me that writers are paid for ideas - and editors are paid to clarify or even KILL those ideas if they go too far.

Figuring out where the lines are is half the fun!

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Aindreas GallagherRe: Dad steps in
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 7:43:21 pm

[Bill Davis] "Delete at will from my perspective. Particular anything I post."

ditto.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Chris JacekRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 6:28:59 pm

[Miko Meloni] "Maybe Autodesk Smoke?
It's free for students."


I was not aware of this. Thanks for the tip. Very impressive of Autodesk to go "above and beyond" like this.

Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Bill DavisRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 3, 2013 at 7:22:04 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "[Bill Davis] "Editors in two simple camps.

BEM camp or NBEM camp.
(Before Eureka! Moment or Not Before Eureka! Moment)"

Not much room left for people that have given it an honest try but just don't like it as much as other NLEs (maybe they were holding it wrong?) or people that have a workflow that X can't easily fit into.

If your comment was meant to be cheeky then toss in a ;) or something as cheeky is hard to glean on the internet.
"


Point 1 - when every anyone drags out the hoary "you're holding it wrong" diss, I always flash back to when my son and I had some fun taking fencing lessons together. The first time our coach set us up and watched us the VERY first thing he said to us was "you're holding it wrong." Because, of course, we WERE. (iPhone antenna-gate reference understood, but wasn't the larger lesson there the effect that the whole problem had on successful adoption of the device? Which was largely NONE. The device's value was NOT linked to what the few early professional fault finders who focused on a problem that turned out NOT to be particularly important to the vast majority of their target customers. The sum of the device was pleasing to a wide body of potential users no matter HOW they held it... huh, wonder if there's an X parallel burried anywhere here? )

Even when someone tells you something that makes you bristle - you can get offended and disengage - OR - you can see for yourself if there's something worth learning.

Point 2 - Oops, you failed to add the emoticon after your own "you're holding it wrong" line directed at me - indicating that you MUST have felt THAT was a serious diss and not a cheeky comment? Essentially, haven't you just done EXACTLY what you're criticizing me for?

The truth here, is that in fast ebb and flow of daily discussion here, we ALL make semantic mistakes and often fail to write with "tonal clarity" - and I'm likely guilty as sin of that.

But I don't have time to polish everything I write here. So mistakes will happen. And onto those mistakes, people will overlay their impressions of what they think my "tone" was meant to be whether fair or not.

I can live with that.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Andrew KimeryRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 4, 2013 at 1:06:50 am

[Bill Davis] "Even when someone tells you something that makes you bristle - you can get offended and disengage - OR - you can see for yourself if there's something worth learning.

Point 2 - Oops, you failed to add the emoticon after your own "you're holding it wrong" line directed at me - indicating that you MUST have felt THAT was a serious diss and not a cheeky comment? Essentially, haven't you just done EXACTLY what you're criticizing me for? "


The "you're holding it wrong" meme is well known so I figured it would be recognized, which it was, w/o the need for an emoticon to underscore the intent.

A minority of comments make me bristle and I'm still here gleaning things in spite of that. Like I said before, I have no ill will towards FCPX and will pick it up if it becomes viable in my neck of the woods. I think the engage/disengage aspect has been covered.


[Bill Davis] "The truth here, is that in fast ebb and flow of daily discussion here, we ALL make semantic mistakes and often fail to write with "tonal clarity" - and I'm likely guilty as sin of that. "

I think we are all at various times which is why I suggested the emoticon. I know some people don't care to use them but they can certainly help.




Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Herb SevushRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 4, 2013 at 3:49:45 pm

Lightworks does seem to be getting more and more interesting. At the moment I don't have a powerful enough PC to really test it but when the Mac version comes out I will definitely give it a spin.

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


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jok DanielRe: OT: Adobe raising our costs by 600%
by on Mar 4, 2013 at 4:13:20 pm

[Herb Sevush] " At the moment I don't have a powerful enough PC"

It does work with Boot Camp, in case you have access to a suitable Mac and space to spare on your boot disk.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Share on Facebook


FORUMSTUTORIALSFEATURESVIDEOSPODCASTSEVENTSSERVICESNEWSLETTERNEWSBLOGS

Creative COW LinkedIn Group Creative COW Facebook Page Creative COW on Twitter
© 2014 CreativeCOW.net All rights are reserved. - Privacy Policy

[Top]