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

Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"

COW Forums : Apple FCPX or Not: The Debate

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Share on Facebook
Terence CurrenInteresting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 1:12:27 am

http://sachin.posterous.com/why-apple-built-final-cut-pro-x

Terence Curren
http://www.alphadogs.tv
http://www.digitalservicestation.com
Burbank,Ca


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 2:21:09 am

I'm not defending FCPx, but:

Isn't that how FCP 1 started? Everyone laughed and thought it was a joke.

It grew, got 3rd party hardware support which brought professional deck connectivity and uncompressed codecs when Apple didn't provide them, and then it grew some more. A lot more.

FCP up until about v5 was still WAY cheaper than hardware tied system from Avid and Media 100. So much so that eventually, all other NLE companies bent to a more software centric approach and provided cheaper hardware. It almost killed M100 completely, and Avid wasn't doing really well for a while there either.

If it weren't for third party support, FCP wouldn't have been that "pro" either and would have been for firewire DV based products only.

So, this should be no surprise. FCP/Apple never really had the pro in mind did they? Yet, a lot of people used their software with third party hardware in professional environments around the globe.

I don't know for sure, but I feel this story isn't over.

Jeremy


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

James CulbertsonRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 3:09:38 am

Yep. FCP v1 was considered a toy.

Certainly Premiere Pro was considered a toy fairly recently by most, but is now being considered by "pros" as an alternative to FCPX.

After Effects was considered a toy in the mid to late '90s.

MiniDV was also considered non-pro.

I wonder what "pros" thought of the first AVID release?

Same story repeated over and over.

I wouldn't want to bet at this point that FCPX isn't history repeating.

James


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Tangier ClarkeRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 6:50:36 am

Perhaps we can think of this release like the release of the Wii. Nintendo decidedly realized and enacted on the fact that they didn't have to make the most powerful system. Frankly there wasn't enough market penetration of HD televisions to warrant the expense of a heftier system. They decided to rethink how gameplay happens; the human interaction and experience. Low and behold, Wii sales trumped PS3 and XBOX 360 combined for a while and yet it was a technically inferior system. It didn't have to do everything, be the most powerful, play movies, or be loved by hardcore gamers to qualify it as a competitive system. Nintendo brought people to gaming who never played and never thought they would. Nintendo shocked the world and many nay-sayers with their inferior-system-that-could and just like FCPX, people screamed bloody murder about how Nintendo screwed up big time and the screamed very prematurely

This is perhaps one way to perceive Apple's FCPX and if you really think about it, it is what happened with Final Cut Pro prior to X. FCPX represents a new paradigm in editorial and it's relationship to digital acquisition, organization, and delivery. It is a now application that is unfinished with it's sites on the future. The old stuff will be rolled in later or brought to you by a third party near you.

Apple (in my opinion) did not abandon the pro. I can't make that assertion yet and I am actively using FCPX by the way. Rather, Apple built an application that can be applied to many differing "pro" spaces that's more accessible, prepared for the future, and of course to sell it's hardware.

Sure I'm not happy about a few things that just really make FCPX an inconvenience, but so far I am really enjoying it and significantly more productive with it.

Tangier


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jim GibertiRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 7:34:46 am

Regarding Tangler Clarke - to paraphrase Burt Reynolds from Boogie Nights, "that's a great name".
And I agree with your general take on X.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Dennis RadekeRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 9:54:50 am

The 'democratization' of technology has always been one of the cornerstones of this industry IMO...


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Robert BrownRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 2:48:18 pm

I think most people realize fcpx probably has some cool stuff and God knows what the story will be in 5 years but the turmoil is really just from the way Apple decided to do this. After years of buildup with huge events at NAB for example, where every year for a while they would announce more and more new features to make FCP compete with Avid, they finally ditched that game and almost everybody they managed to get on their side. Kind of like a kid taking his ball home so nobody else could play.

Maybe they do "revolutionize" the prosumer market. But I think the bread and butter pro market is slower to change as people aren't interested in a whole new way to edit as most of us are sick of learning new software. We just want everything to work and work well and also software that plays well with others.



Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Michael BelangerRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 3:10:04 pm

Let's get one thing straight.. FCP is a tool for editors just like any word processing program is to a writer. I don't even think the idiots at Microsoft would be so dumb as to release a new version that made all of your previously saved manuscripts UNOPENABLE. That is just plain stupid and of course it goes downhill from there. It is plain arrogance and ignorance on Apple's part. If they want to capture the Prosumer market then release the damn thing at CES not at the National Association of Broadcasters. Are they simply stupid or psychophrenic ... wanting to appeal to a mass audience but releasing to the pros at NAB. People give Apple way to much credit... They are a fat and bloated institution that acts like they are hip and modern but are the General Motors of the computer industry.. All the computer parts are made for Apple by the real heavy weights and Apple is essentially a design, marketing and assembly company. Now they can add top heavy and meandering to a descriptive list. They buy Shake and kill it... They buy Color and then kill it... They never seem to finish what they start. SO I have little hope that Apple will ever develop completely.
If I were a betting man I would say Apple will never gain back the pro market now or EVER... There is just too much ill will and bad blood between the pros and Apple now. AVID and Adobe will clean up.
As for the comments from the prosumer that wrote that Adobe AE was just a toy they really show their lack of knowledge because truly AE and most Adobe products were truly pro and had great features and performance .. Render times were long because of the hardware not the software. The quality of what was rendered was truly great.
ALL HAIL ADOBE AND AVID .. APPLE YOU ARE DEAD TO ME !!!


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+2

James CulbertsonRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 6:48:11 pm

> As for the comments from the prosumer that wrote that Adobe AE was just a toy <<<

Michael, The "prosumers" you reference were Flame artists and other equivalent FX pros. The same people who said After Effects would never be used for high end film or broadcast work.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Michael BelangerRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 7:10:39 pm

So by extension any PRO trashing FCP X is making the same mistake as the Flame Snobs??
I think it is fair to say that the only snobs are Apple trashing all of their paying broadcast clients who committed to an FCP workflow then are told hey you guys are old school.. we are cutting edge.. too cutting edge even for you guys...New lexicon does not make better product. If Apple wants to try and come up with a new process that makes things faster and better then I am all for it but it certainly doesn't seem that way so far. They do need a reality check for sure but I guess they can't see past their stock pile of cash...c'est la vie


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

James CulbertsonRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 9:00:21 pm

Michael, I wouldn't call them or anyone today a snob. It just appears that some folks are more open to change than others and can see the possibility in new ways of doing things. Doesn't make the old ways obsolete either... I'll be using FCP7 for awhile yet for projects I would imagine, even when I do begin to use FCPX.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Michael BelangerRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 9:11:43 pm

Please save me on the sanctimonious "change" concept. Most of us have gone from linear tape and switchers to the current software on multiple platforms and learned Nuendo to boot. I hardly think we are allergic to change. I guess you could say I am allergic to blindly following a path with no set course just because it has an Apple logo on it. I am allergic to double speak... releasing a product at a Broadcaster trade show and then summarily informing people that we are in a tapeless world and inputting or outputting is simply not in the cards for ANYONE.. All broadcasters use tape as do program producers .
Tape is still the cheapest and most robust bullet proof format out there. People use tape backup for their hard drives. I am allergic to a company that completely ditches its most noteworthy customers and does not keep them in the loop. New isn't always better. BETTER is better. Do I want to go back to film editing on a flatbed... nope but I certainly don't need a hammer without a handle that is for sure. Call me when you add the handle Apple.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


James CulbertsonRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 10:07:12 pm

Funny how much you sound like some of the AVID editors I knew when the original FCP came out.

They said the same things about change. And they were sure FCP was different, and were allergic to blindly following some new paradigm.

Time will tell. Talk to you in a year.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Michael BelangerRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 10:45:15 pm

Oddly enough I was a proponent of FCP from FCP 1... because as an experienced editor it offered things AVID did not at a price AVID COULD not.. at least at that time. Strangely enough AVID was pretty smug at that time too.. much like Apple is today. But as you say.. give it a year and we'll see if THEY come around
Honestly you summarily dismiss people as being buffoons without such an inkling of fact. What I am stating is fact. Apple ditched their broadcast clients literally overnight with not a word of warning. People built whole infrastructures around this software and Apple just turned their back on them hinting they had the latest greatest new rock in the quarry... Whatever dude if you want to make 5 copies of a project every time you want to make a revision knock yourself out. KInda reminds me of a very young young "editor" who in order to distinguish his clips from other peoples would use an odd symbol before each clip name. Trying to reinvent something that already existed.. called the English language.
Now when Apple comes up with something called the iCar that runs on bullsh$%t they will likely have an infinite supply of fuel... mostly from their software development team !


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Ted LevyRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 5:11:45 pm

It's "Tangier"


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Mike MostRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 6:22:01 pm

>>I wonder what "pros" thought of the first AVID release?

We were pretty darned impressed.

In 1987 (I think....), I was one of a select group that was shown what was to become the Avid Media Composer in a suite at the original MGM Grand (now the Ballys) during NAB. Bill Warner had put together a system running on an Apollo minicomputer, using magneto-optical drives and a self invented video compression scheme, that he had designed multiple interfaces for. One was based on online editors, one was based on a film rewind bench metaphor, and there was one other that I can't quite recall. At the time, nonlinear editing systems had already arrived and were being used on network television shows (i worked for Lorimar at the time). Ediflex, Montage, Touchvision, Editdroid - all of these were based on having multiple copies of all your source material and multiple transports that would precue for a real time playback of your "virtual" edit. They worked amazingly well, but Bill saw that the future of computer based editing was, well, in the computer. In the demo, we saw postage stamp sized, highly pixellated images, but it was clear that the complete random access nature of what Bill was doing was the future. We came out of that demo and my boss at the time said we've just seen how we'll all be editing in 5 years. The only thing he was wrong about was the timetable, it was actually 3 years. By the next NAB, Avid on a Macintosh was born.

The difference between the introduction of the Avid and FCPX is that Avid didn't try to tell editors how to cut, and they didn't try to change the editing approach. They used new technology to get rid of all of the physical transport limitations, and provide some assistance in terms of organization (although they used the "bins" metaphor for a good reason.....). Apple is trying to tell editors that they know more about what they do, their thought process, their cutting room organization, and their working habits than the editors do. And that editors should just tell their producers and clients that they don't need tape or hard copy deliverables any more, because Apple says they don't. And that's why they're getting the reaction they're getting.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  
+2

Bret WilliamsRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 4:44:46 pm

Always had RS-422 built in. Even if you had a dv deck you could run a betacam through it as your capture card. Or use a targa which was as good as Avid's offerings. It also was much more advanced in otter ways. It had Rez independence, layered ps import, composite modes, real nesting/precomps, and ae plugin support. Right from the beginning it was no toy. It lacked some niceties like an audio mix tool or any sort of media management and super high end features like film cuts (which was an add on to composer anyway) but it played real nice with the post environment at the time. In fact, with everyone still on AVR77 systems cuz Avid screwed them with no suitable Meridien upgrade path, FCP had potentially better image quality when you consider it brought in DVCam natively via fw, and even Meriden had to recompress it both on capture and then again on layback to tape. It was no toy IMHO.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Jeremy GarchowRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 5:18:23 pm

I hear you Brett, but those were third party add ons, just like they will be in FCPx.

At the time, Cinewave was 5 grand if I remember correctly.

I think it is safe to say that HDSLRs are the new DV in the sheer scope of availability. You also have to take the overall growth of media outlets in to consideration. FCPx is just like FCP v1 in many ways just swap dv for h264 tapeless. Fcp1 had deck control built in because it had to, there was no tapeless. It still required non Apple devices and drivers if you needed rs422.

Once third party support is more available, capability will grow is how I feel about it. For now, we learn the interface, give feedback on how to improve it, and wait... or move on to a new system of that's ways best for the situation.


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  


Michael AranyshevRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 6:17:42 pm

[Bret Williams] "super high end features like film cuts (which was an add on to composer anyway)"

FilmLogic was available for Adobe Premiere before FCP was out but only when paired with FCP it really became a real alternative to Avid and Lightworks for film projects


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

Ian BaileyRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 2:44:18 pm

Initially I was positive about FCP X and could understand why Apple was moving in that direction. However, when so many useful and easy to use features from FCP, STP and Color have been lost, it's time to be polite but firm: http://www.apple.com/feedback/finalcutpro.html


Return to posts index
Reply   Like  

dennis KaneRe: Interesting take on Apple's view of "Pros"
by on Jul 3, 2011 at 3:26:29 pm

If your business is broadcast TV or high end film production, FCPX probably is not for you. You can stay with FCP 7 or move to Avid or Adobe and continue. These two groups are no longer the main drivers of video editing for Apple. I personally am not in TV or high end film production, although I too make a living editing. I am a "pro " also because my profession relies on editing. I find many of the dedicated applications like Color , Resolve and ProTools to be too complicated and not necessary. I am very happy with FCPX and I know I will be more pleased in the future as the program matures.


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]