Article: The Future of Editing

	NAB Expo The Future of Editing Thousands of members of Creative COW were at the 2011 NAB Show, and we are pleased to bring you some of their reports. In this entry, Walter Biscardi looks at the future of editing, FCP X, AVID, Adobe and what's on the table now for tomorrow. Feature   04/27/2011 Author: walter biscardi

Thank u for this detailed article Walter

During these past 2 days we have read all kind of comments and comparisons and assumptions and filling in the blanks!some say fcp X is an Imovie pro,other say it has a Smoke look others say it's a Sony Vegas imitation,etc...some say Apple abandoned the pros,others are sad cuz it's too cheap,some others are just too lazy to learn and wants a "faster horse"...

As I see it ,Apple people got exactly what They intended from the demo!they made a huge buzz about their new product,editing forums are crowded with comments about the new flashy features,and they got the marketing ball rolling!... I wonder why none of this happens when adobe or avid has new product!that's what apple people does,that's what they excell at!

I frankly don't see what's wrong if apple is able to deliver a brand new product that appeals to prosumers and still be able to fulfill Pros expectation!who said pro stuff should be ugly and complicated or else it's labeled as consumer application!as long as fcp is up to the job I don't care if it looks like "windows movie maker"

After all ,we are gonna wait until June , download the new X , we will love it ,and a year later we will be nagging why the magnetic timeline only works only on audio and not on video as well!

I got to see a better vimeo clip of the demo today and I think I Get It. Personally, I under-utilized the second window in my personal editing style, I tend to throw everything down into the timeline to work on, and the demo looked like the way I work now, kinda. I also found echoes of my user experience with Discreet Edit 6, which was pleasant. It looks like a modal interface where everything you don't immediately need for a particular task stays hidden, the same way the icons in the apple desktop dock appear and disappear at will.

One thing FCP has always got right is, there is more than one, sometimes more than three ways to do any particular thing you need to do. One of them is bound to be the way you like to do it. It is currently about as friendly to keyboard-centric users as it is to mouse-pushers, and anything in-between like me, and that's good. I can't imagine Apple threw out that concept for x. And careful listening to the spiel will confirm that you'll have all the keyboard shortcuts you want, that there can be a second monitor, and a few other things people are already wailing about.

The stakes of this show were astronomically high, so, you are the Apple demonstrator: you are not going to demonstrate any aspect that is not yet 100 percent bulletproof. This thing is still a work in progress. The parts that work, that I've seen so far, I know are going to help my particular needs quite a bit. And for that price I'm willing to take a flyer on it. They didn't address all my questions and needs that night either. But they proved that they haven't been making vaporware the last two years. This is significant, whatever it is. It may be a double, but it's for sure they are still in the game at this point. Now we have to find out what inning.

I've seen a 2 part video on fcp.co,it was pretty decent
http://fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/333-fcp-x-presentation-the-bootleg-experie...

I don't wanna spoil any remarks, but in Motion you can actually build your own double/triple- window interface and save and manage it.

So I don't know what's the problem if final cut X has the same approach,

Actually it would have been quite strange if the Supermeet had opened with the news that final cut X can export cmx 3400 edls AND has a multiformat magnetic time lime. And then another marketing guy pledging they would always support Grass Valley edl's as well.
wouldn't make much sense, wouldn't it ?


René A. Hazekamp

portfolio http://www.renehazekamp.com

[walter biscardi] "As for the multiformat timeline, they told us it supports it but never actually showed that one which was surprising for me."

One of the screen shots from the presentation showed h.264 and prores clips mixed in.

I guess you mean you didn't actually see it playing that content.

"I don't wanna spoil any remarks, but in Motion you can actually build your own double/triple- window interface and save and manage it."

Wow, you're right! You just rip the tabs off the pane. I can't believe I didn't notice that. Ugh, I feel like a dummy

Rob Grauert, Jr.
http://www.robgrauert.com
command-r.tumblr.com

Great thread so far. I read Walter's article on his blog first and now here again. My feelings reading this and other Pro responses have to do with the open vs. closed mindset of "Mature" Pro Editors.

Apple was clear that this was a sneak peek. Larry Jordan did a fine job reiterating this in his coverage so far. Surely, Apple will HAVE TO address all the backwards compatibility and interoperability concerns Pro Editors have with FCP X.

When you step back and look at the big picture here, you see can see the thinking involved with this product at the demo stage: they are trying to simplify and clean up how to edit. There is a bit of a paradigm shift with all the reliance on metadata, and the single viewer, and the "trackless" magnetic timeline, which poses massive concerns for those that know how to "get around" and are comfortable with what they already know.

But no one -- NO ONE ON THIS FORUM ANYWAY -- has experience learning this version and using it and getting the best out of it yet. All the hoopla about "will it support X or Y because we have invested in hardware or need a solution for whatever..." is immediate, but misses the point of the demo: to show Pro Editors a new / better way to edit with a shift in habits. This will take some getting used to. And surely all the concern is rightfully part of all the money and time spent investing in previous gear and habits.

But change is not always easy. It's almost like listening to those Avid Editors which never wanted to try FCP. Or try telling a die hard AE guy that his composite is easer with a node-based solution, like Nuke.

So what if the software looks pretty and clean and "iMovie-ish?" At the end of the day, if Editor A can use FCP X more fluidly with a shorter learning curve and get more power out of it than Editor B can form his older editing software, then who cares what it looks like? And if you are upset about how cheap it is and that it narrows the gap between Pro and Consumer, well, you're right. The argument about the artist using the tool to create and that access does not equate to good work still stands.

Everything seems very speculative to me and without using this tool no one knows if it works or doesn't.

Even if Apple forces everyone using FCP X to abandon current gear -- WHICH I DOUBT THEY WILL DO -- to use this system, it might be for the better in the long run. Backwards support sure seems to hinder other platforms and systems. I mean, look at Microsoft Windows for example :)

Ultimately, I'm sure FCP7 and all of FCS3 will be used transitionally as people learn how to use FCP X. And all this much ado about nothing will be an afterthought.

Or not.

"My feelings reading this and other Pro responses have to do with the open vs. closed mindset of "Mature" Pro Editors."

Are you implying that anyone that has a different/skeptical opinion on this is closed minded and immature?
How close-minded is it to automatically assume the new=better?
How closed minded is it to gush on and on about how great a product is that has only been shown in a limited demo?
History is on the side of the skeptic.
The list of things designers and engineers thought were 'better', 'innovative', or the ever trendy 'paradigm shift' that turned out to be total failures is a lot bigger, than the list of successes.
There is no doubt that failure paves the road to success, and it is the way to advance, but it is not automatic. This is something you will learn as you 'mature'.

"...but misses the point of the demo: to show Pro Editors a new / better way to edit with a shift in habits."

This is completely subjective. At best.
I don't recall asking Apple to show me a better way to edit. I've been editing slightly longer than Apple has been in business, and I know what works best for me.
In fact I don't remember anyone else asking that either. If you can find a post in the FCP forum since the release of 6.0 where the person was looking for "a better way to edit" in this context, I 'd like to see it. There are however, a lot of posts asking for improvements to the software and advertised features to actually work.

"But change is not always easy. It's almost like listening to those Avid Editors which never wanted to try FCP. Or try telling a die hard AE guy that his composite is easer(sic) with a node-based solution, like Nuke."

Change, for the sake of change is unproductive. Unless you're an interior decorator. For change to make sense in a business (that is what editing is) several things have to happen. It has to produce a clear and definable improvement. It has to make financial sense. It has to cause no unwanted consequences, or side effects.
So far, none of these questions can be answered. So those who are currently resistant to change, are probably right.

You know what is worse than "listening to those Avid Editors which never wanted to try FCP"? It's listening to pretentious know-it-all's trying to push their hobby/brand/music/religion on others that didn't ask for it.
I'm sure the Avid guys are tired of unsolicited opinions from FCP fanboys.
So "try telling a die hard AE guy that his composite is easer(sic) with a node-based solution," is a good example of that.
Nodes are great. DVDSP and Color are a couple of good examples of where they work well, but I prefer the viewer/canvas/timeline for editing. If you like node better, bully for you. Your love of nodes doesn't make you a better than anyone else.
And if the AE guy doesn't see things your way, so what? Unless you're getting paid as a consultant I'm guessing the AE guy doesn't really care what you think. He is happy with what he has. It also doesn't make him a Luddite. Maybe he is just immune to 'group think'.

"So what if the software looks pretty and clean and "iMovie-ish?" At the end of the day, if Editor A can use FCP X more fluidly with a shorter learning curve and get more power out of it than Editor B can form his older editing software, then who cares what it looks like?"

This is an interesting reversal of attitude to reinforce your point. So on one hand you're ragging on the Avid and AE guys for liking what they have, and not caring about what others think about it. And then when people are doing the same thing and harshing on the iMovie like UI of X, you revert to the Avid and AE guys attitude of if it works for me what do you care?
This reminds me of another typical double standard seen on these forums. How about all those that make cracks about us 'mature', 'old timers' not liking change, to make some group think point, and then evoking Murch's in the next breath to make some other point.

"Everything seems very speculative to me and without using this tool no one knows if it works or doesn't."

This is the only thing in your post that I didn't find insulting or condescending, and can agree with.

"Even if Apple forces everyone using FCP X to abandon current gear -- WHICH I DOUBT THEY WILL DO..."

Yeah, Apple would never do that, or abandon a group of loyal users...

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com

I have a system, it has stuff in it, and stuff hooked to it. I have a camera, it can record stuff. I read the manuals, and know how to use this stuff and lots of other stuff too.
You should be suitably impressed...

[Shawn Larkin] "Thanks for the reply Scott. I'm glad someone had something to say to me regarding that post.

For the record:

I use Avid, Premiere Pro, AE, FCP, Motion and any other tool I need in a given situation or environment. I'm not really a "fanboy" of what Apple makes. I just like well designed solutions that make things easier.

Basically, I look at things from "does it work or not" perspective. Apple is in a unique position to survey the NLE landscape from 10 years of experience and feedback and to create what they think answers a lot of problems with editing.

I "got" this from watching the demo. The way you navigate the timeline and media and, well, edit seemed like a paradigm shift to me and if felt like these smart architects were really trying to re-think editing from the basics on forward. This, of course, is my opinion. But it felt very "new" to me. And I've been making my living at this for over 10 years -- started on Media 100, then Avid, then FCP, then PP, blah, blah, blah...

Hence, no one knows if this is going to work or not. Not yet.

And yet there is a very closed mind to this before actually testing it for an extended period of time.

So it goes..."

Fair enough.
I was using you're post as a springboard to comment on several similar type posts along this theme. And while quoting you, I was speaking in a more general sense, which is not clear in my post. I should have said that up front.

"And yet there is a very closed mind to this before actually testing it for an extended period of time."

I can justify this, and it is not about having an open or closed mind.
So if you have been around for a while, you know how much work goes into a proper upgrade. Factor in the install and the learning time, the cost, the risk to system stability, and the unknown of will my current devices/drivers/plugins/projects work with the new version and for some of us, there has to be compelling reasons to try something new. As a one seat shop, I have no interest in risking my system just to be an unpaid Apple R&D guy, or learning new software just for the sake of. If I'm not seeing any benefits to myself, that outweighs any of the potential downsides, I would rather spend that time/money shooting and editing. And with Lightworks for Mac coming out this fall, if I really want to try something new, I can do that for free.
There may be folks out there that see real upsides to the new version, or just love to tweak on new stuff as much as they like to edit. Great. Have at it, and take one for the team.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com

I have a system, it has stuff in it, and stuff hooked to it. I have a camera, it can record stuff. I read the manuals, and know how to use this stuff and lots of other stuff too.
You should be suitably impressed...

I needed recently to make a purchase. I bought a $500 windows 7 laptop and downloaded lightworks.