FORUMS: list search recent posts

DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Walter Soyka
DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 4:46:42 pm

Interchange has arrived.

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/277/10973

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 7:24:49 pm

Brilliant news, can't wait to hear how well it works, then I'll be getting myself a copy of Resolve

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 7:40:47 pm

In the words of a wise man, "Now what, haters?" :-D


Return to posts index


Neil Goodman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 7:43:55 pm

lol, theres one program that works with it.. and you say "now what" ?

Neil Goodman: Editor of New Media Production - NBC/Universal


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 8:15:17 pm

[Neil Goodman] "ol, theres one program that works with it.. and you say "now what" ?
"


Yes but it's a very important program :)

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index

kim krause
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 10:44:36 pm

exactly...the fact that davinci is now supported in fcpx means that black magic sees the benefits of the new final cut way of working....would love to hear what the haters think of this...hahahahahahahah


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 8:35:35 pm

[Neil Goodman] "lol, theres one program that works with it.. and you say "now what" ?"

If there's one, won't there be more?

Now what, haters!?


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 16, 2011 at 12:21:56 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Now what, haters!?
"


Careful there Jeremy, or you're going to end up as the "Leave Britney Alone" guy of the FCP X forum.







Oh, and by the way, it is spelled H8tr.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 16, 2011 at 2:32:39 am

[Chris Harlan] "Careful there Jeremy, or you're going to end up as the "Leave Britney Alone" guy of the FCP X forum. "

Hmm.

Maybe I'm taking this the wrong way, but if you have something to say to me or about me, just say it. I'm a grown up.


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 16, 2011 at 2:53:39 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Hmm.

Maybe I'm taking this the wrong way, but if you have something to say to me or about me, just say it. I'm a grown up."



Oh, heavens, no. Just a joke. And I certainly meant no offense. Your well-reasoned arguments in support of X have been welcome conversation even where I disagree with you.

I'm assuming your "haters" line was meant somewhat in fun. Every time I hear some one use the word "haters" as a dismissive accusatory I think of this guy. Of course, after watching it he doesn't say haters at all, so I'm not sure why I have such a strong association. Still, I thought it was funny to watch it and substitute in my head FCP X whenever he says "Brittany."

Again, no offense meant; I was just riffing on your use of H8Rs.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 16, 2011 at 3:31:13 am

[Chris Harlan] "I'm assuming your "haters" line was meant somewhat in fun."

Absolutely. All in total fun, I thought I had mentioned that! Really, it's short for "haters gonna hate". (Which they will and they do.). ;)

It's now a meme:

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/haters-gonna-hate#.TppOnyp5mSM

Thanks, Chris.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Robert Brown
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 17, 2011 at 4:16:47 am

Is that really a guy?

Robert Brown
Editor/VFX/Colorist - FCP, Smoke, Quantel Pablo, After Effects, 3DS MAX, Premiere Pro

http://vimeo.com/user3987510/videos


Return to posts index


David Roth Weiss
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 8:35:48 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] " "Now what, haters?""

Randy Ubillos is a freaking genius. His accomplishments for Avid, Adobe, and BlackMagic since June 21st have been truly remarkable.

If he continues at this rate, by this time next year Mr. Ubillos will have succeeded in dishing out the entire ProApps division to Apple's competitors.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 8:37:31 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Randy Ubillos is freaking genius. His accomplishments for Avid, Adobe, and BlackMagic since June 21st have been truly remarkable. "

Indeed!

Now what, haters!?


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 9:16:26 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Now what, haters!?"

LOL! FCPX is AWESOME! *




* For everything but actual editing :p

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 9:23:19 pm

[David Lawrence] "LOL! FCPX is AWESOME! *
"


i knew you'd come round eventually :)

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 9:46:10 pm

[David Lawrence] "LOL! FCPX is AWESOME! *"

Especially if you own stock in Avid and Adobe.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 10:15:50 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Especially if you own stock in Avid and Adobe."

If stock price is how you choose an editing program, Apple sure wins today:

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-20120524-17/apple-shares-close-on-new-hig...

Although, what goes up....


Return to posts index


David Roth Weiss
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 10:44:10 pm

Apple never got round-tripping between FCP and Color completely right anyway.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 8:47:01 pm

I don't really consider myself a "hater" (although I imagine others might), but I'd suggest that BMD has now done more for FCPX's interoperability than Apple has.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 8:51:23 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I don't really consider myself a "hater" (although I imagine others might),"

I said that to the "Royal Haters", not you! :-)

[Walter Soyka] "but I'd suggest that BMD has now done more for FCPX's interoperability than Apple has."

Uh. Wasn't this the point? Apple gives the hooks, VideoCompany#1 takes it over from there?


Return to posts index


Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 9:04:34 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Uh. Wasn't this the point? Apple gives the hooks, VideoCompany#1 takes it over from there?"

If FCPX could output either EDL or FCP7's flavor of XML, it would have been interoperable at launch. Apple put the burden of interchange on the rest of the industry instead of assuming any themselves. It strikes me as a statement about their priorities.

But that doesn't change the fact that this is a big development in the ongoing saga. Tune in next week to see if Autodesk follows suit with Smoke...

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 9:16:46 pm

[Walter Soyka] "If FCPX could output either EDL or FCP7's flavor of XML, it would have been interoperable at launch. Apple put the burden of interchange on the rest of the industry instead of assuming any themselves. It strikes me as a statement about their priorities."

From another post, here's how I feel about 3rd parties, complete with repeat:

"Here is my thoughts on third party development.

I think this is really smart. The video business is becoming very fragmented. This can lead to specialization ("we only shoot, Red, man") or it can lead to generalization ("I have SD, 720p, 1080i, 23.98, 59.94, 29.97i, , 29.97p, 5k, 4k, Alexa, Beta, DV, Digibeta, 7000fps, MPEG4, MPEG2, AVI, wmv all going in one timeline. Help me"). Camera manufacturers are developing their asses off right now. There is some really healthy competition out there. Film, is truly dying. This means that every manufacturer is going to have their way of doing things. By creating a proprietary digital system, this means you need to support a proprietary method of handling that media. So, with all the variety out there, would you rather have a specialized system or a generalized system? What if you could create a specialized system depending on your needs? What if you could turn the specialized system in to a more general system ? This is how I see third party support working in FCPX. FCPX will provide the underlying language and method, then people would be able to hook in to this to interact and interchange. When Red's 28k sensor comes out, we won't have to wait for Apple/Avid/Adobe to develop a method, Red will have to support it in FCPX. They have the hooks, go to town. Support yourself.

Now apply this to OMF, AAF, XYZ, CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS and Discovery. If you need specialization, you purchase it and interact with that developer who will listen and respond to you directly. I do not see this as a bad thing. Apple broke their own stuff, (Qt/itunes Updates causing FCP craziness) so owning the whole system didn't prevent them for making mistakes. Things break sometimes. Apple has a pretty decent developer relationship going. They have leveraged that relationship to everyone's advantage. Why can't this happen with FCPX and why is it a bad idea? Sure it's a new idea, but is it a bad one? Look at Lightworks. Open source. Is that a bad idea?"

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Mark Morache
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 10:39:17 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Now apply this to OMF, AAF, XYZ, CBS, NBC, ABC, PBS"

Third party solutions to the rescue. Yes, for many things this makes sense, but when Adobe Premiere can open up FCP7 projects, and FCX can't, that's just wrong.

Not everyone needs OMF, or EDL, but everyone can benefit from the ability to open old projects.

Apple should own this one. Gee, can they afford to pay a team of coders to do the translation necessary to go between FCX and FCP7? I think so.

---------
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can't stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
http://fcpx.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 10:47:54 pm

[Mark Morache] "Yes, for many things this makes sense, but when Adobe Premiere can open up FCP7 projects, and FCX can't, that's just wrong."

It can open an XML variant of the project, not FCProjects. Big difference. CatDV can move FCP7 to FCPX today, with some caveats.

[Mark Morache] "Not everyone needs OMF, or EDL, but everyone can benefit from the ability to open old projects."

Agreed.

[Mark Morache] Apple should own this one. Gee, can they afford to pay a team of coders to do the translation necessary to go between FCX and FCP7? I think so."

I don't think it's about the money.


Return to posts index

Mark Morache
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 11:18:39 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "It can open an XML variant of the project, not FCProjects. Big difference. CatDV can move FCP7 to FCPX today, with some caveats."

I understand, and I don't expect everything to translate, however if FCX could open up as much of my FCP7 project as PP can, that would be wonderful.

[Jeremy Garchow] "I don't think it's about the money."

Of course not, but what besides desire keeps them from doing it? It could have saved a whole lot of pain for the editing community, and for their own image in that community. And I wouldn't be happy about spending as much or more as I'm spending for FCX, for the limited translation of CatDV.

I'm sure someone will develop a cost efficient limited translation between FCP7 and FCX. I expect that the third parties will give us some wonderful tools, but seriously, can't we agree that Apple should own this one?

If they sold me the new iPhone, and told me that I had to wait for third party developers to give me the ability to make calls to the people I used to call on my old phone, I'd start looking for another phone.

---------
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can't stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
http://fcpx.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 11:44:25 pm

[Mark Morache] "but seriously, can't we agree that Apple should own this one?"

Maybe, maybe not.

[Mark Morache] "If they sold me the new iPhone, and told me that I had to wait for third party developers to give me the ability to make calls to the people I used to call on my old phone, I'd start looking for another phone."

Uh. FCPX can edit video/audio/text can't it? The iPhone can make a phone call, can't it?

Does the iPhone come with Angry Birds? No. It's separate.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 12:06:08 am

Haters and everyone else-

And when I say haters, you know I say it with love, right?

Everyone else, HIGH FIVEEE!

What do you think about this? Check out the XML work done here with Resolve (second movie):

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/277/11024

FCPX sequence to DaVinci to FCP7 to DaVinci to FCPX.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Mark Morache
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 12:29:43 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Does the iPhone come with Angry Birds?"

No, it comes with Angry Editors.

And maybe my analogy wasn't the best, but if I couldn't bring in my old aps, or my old contact list, or calendar, it would be worse than annoying. If Adobe made a new Photoshop that couldn't open old psd files, there would be just as strong a revolt.

Personally, I'm keeping FCP7 around for as long as I can for those times I need to retool an old project. It would be nice to be able to use the new tools with the legacy work.

Is Apple unfairly taking bad heat for all of this? Are editors prematurely leaving Apple for Avid and Adobe? Can they afford to keep using FCS3 for the next several years until FCX gets back the missing tools?

FCX is working for me, but barely. I'm still hitting bugs, workarounds and slow-downs.

---------
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can't stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
http://fcpx.wordpress.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 1:10:04 am

[Mark Morache] "Is Apple unfairly taking bad heat for all of this? Are editors prematurely leaving Apple for Avid and Adobe? Can they afford to keep using FCS3 for the next several years until FCX gets back the missing tools?"

Definitely not unfair heat. It was certainly a conscious decision.

I have no idea if people are being premature or not. It's up to them.

A couple of years seems like a long time. Do you really think it will take two years for OMF Export when you can do it today with a bit of a kludge?

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 16, 2011 at 7:10:30 pm

Jeremy, sorry for the delay. I wanted to try to give your quality post a quality response.


[Jeremy Garchow] "So, with all the variety out there, would you rather have a specialized system or a generalized system? What if you could create a specialized system depending on your needs? What if you could turn the specialized system in to a more general system ? This is how I see third party support working in FCPX. FCPX will provide the underlying language and method, then people would be able to hook in to this to interact and interchange. When Red's 28k sensor comes out, we won't have to wait for Apple/Avid/Adobe to develop a method, Red will have to support it in FCPX. They have the hooks, go to town. Support yourself."

I agree that a generalized system that can be extended to accommodate specialized requirements is ideal. For example, one of the things I love best about After Effects is has long been completely agnostic to things like resolution, frame rate, bit depth, color space, import format, etc. I'll come back to AE in a minute.

I'm not suggesting that Apple should assume responsibility for absolutely everything, but I do think they've gone too far the other way, assuming responsibility for nothing in the way of interchange.

When Apple introduced XMEML with FCP4 in 2003, they didn't do away with the industry-standard EDL. However, XMEML offered significant advantages for interchange over straight EDL, so other developers in the industry began building solutions around it. This meant improved interchange with applications that chose to support FCP explicitly, but there was still the industry-standard EDL to fall back on. Apple played nicely with the industry, and the industry played nicely with Apple.

With FCPX, though, Apple has eschewed interchange standards entirely, and are asking the rest of the industry to do their homework for them. In other words, Apple is not playing nicely with the industry, but they are asking the industry to play nicely with them. Resolve may support FCPX, but FCPX doesn't support Resolve.

I have no problem with Apple introducing a new XML variant to better support the new features and data structures in FCPX -- how could you have progress without introducing new standards?

I do take issue with Apple dropping industry standards that they used to support in order to promulgate their new format. FCPXML is based on an entirely different data model than every other editorial-related app in the industry uses, and Apple has put the task of dealing with their design decisions into the lap of every other developer in the industry which wishes to allow their products to interchange with FCPX. Of course, they are well within their rights to do so, but to claim this is somehow good for developers and end users seems strange.

I think Walter Biscardi put it very well when he suggested that Apple is building walls, not bridges.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Apple has a pretty decent developer relationship going. They have leveraged that relationship to everyone's advantage."

I don't think this is true at all. Apple had a large third-party ecosystem because the the size of the FCP install base made it an important development target -- but that doesn't mean that Apple makes it easy to develop for FCP or FCPX.

I have discussed my thoughts on Apple's recent developer relations in my recent article [link] and in conversation with Oliver Peters [link], but I'll summarize: if Apple had good developer relations, third-party developers would have been better prepared for (or at least aware of) the huge changes in FCPX.

As far as the idea that Apple is building a platform that will be good for their developer "partners" and that they are intentionally leaving out functionality to allow room for third-party development, I call bollocks. If that were true, FCPX's XML and APIs would have been finalized well before launch and they would have had developers on board.

Graeme Nattress would have had something to say on June 21st beyond "When we know more, we'll tell you." (Incidentally, he has not told more, so either he still doesn't know more, or is not at liberty to say.) Baselight wouldn't have toiled away on a complicated plugin for a dead platform. AJA wouldn't have suggested using Desktop Display as a viable preview option with a Kona card.

Adobe pre-announced the move for After Effects from 32-bit to 64-bit. This architecture change required all plugins to be updated, and Adobe gave early access and assistance to developers so that their products could be ready for launch. Adobe understood the value of their huge third-party developer ecosystem. Red Giant was able to prepare for AE CS5; they were surprised by FCPX and a huge advantage was seemingly given to Noise Industries, who did have launch-day products.

AE is a nice example of a flexible and extensible system, and Adobe themselves add functionality through the plugin system. Open up your After Effects > Plugins folder and dig around. How does AE support JPEG images? Through a Format plugin. Easy-ease? A Keyframe plugin. OpenGL? An Extensions plugin. This is in addition to the more obvious Effects use of plugins.

Autodesk's Maya is an even more flexible and extensible system. It's practically as much a platform as it is an application, and studios all over the world customize it heavily to suit their unique needs and pipelines.

Apple has no history for allowing this kind of truly open development. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but sadly, I don't see anything in FCPX that suggests that this sort of extensibility is part of Apple's design.

It's possible that there really was no grand plan here.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 17, 2011 at 4:08:20 pm

Thanks so much, Walter. Excellent post.

[Walter Soyka] "When Apple introduced XMEML with FCP4 in 2003, they didn't do away with the industry-standard EDL. However, XMEML offered significant advantages for interchange over straight EDL, so other developers in the industry began building solutions around it. This meant improved interchange with applications that chose to support FCP explicitly, but there was still the industry-standard EDL to fall back on. Apple played nicely with the industry, and the industry played nicely with Apple."

But wasn't EDL in there to begin with? Wouldn't it be fair to say that in 2004 EDL was a more common language? Do you still use EDL today? Just curious as to how people might still use it. I am not saying it's invalid, I am just wondering. AS far as Apple playing nice with the industry, I guess I don't get it. Resolve can't export an EDL, so is DaVinci not playing nice either? You can get an XML, an FCPXML and and AAF out of it, though.

[Walter Soyka] "Resolve may support FCPX, but FCPX doesn't support Resolve."

Please explain. Does Avid support Resolve? Isn't this the idea of interchange languages in the first place?

[Walter Soyka] "I do take issue with Apple dropping industry standards that they used to support in order to promulgate their new format. FCPXML is based on an entirely different data model than every other editorial-related app in the industry uses, and Apple has put the task of dealing with their design decisions into the lap of every other developer in the industry which wishes to allow their products to interchange with FCPX. Of course, they are well within their rights to do so, but to claim this is somehow good for developers and end users seems strange."

Again, it goes back to a specialized or generalized system. Why should Apple have to write and support a part of the system when less than 1% of the users are going to use it? Don't you think that time is better served developing the application and underlying XML language? Take Red for example. They have taken it upon themselves to make a conform tool for their footage. RCX is pretty sweet. It accepts interchange languages, and spits out interchange languages, and also conforms your offline QTs back to the R3ds. It's the only program that can properly trim R3Ds that I know of. They understand that their users might need to do these sort if things, and they released this software for free. They are taking responsibility because they know that other people might not have to. It allows all NLEs to edit how they need to fit their workflow (MXF, AMA, Native, Qt proxies, whatever) and then bring that back to the conform tool called RedCineX and then either export or finish, or do what you need to do.

[Walter Soyka] "[Jeremy Garchow] "Apple has a pretty decent developer relationship going. They have leveraged that relationship to everyone's advantage."

I don't think this is true at all. Apple had a large third-party ecosystem because the the size of the FCP install base made it an important development target -- but that doesn't mean that Apple makes it easy to develop for FCP or FCPX."


Yes, I should have been more specific. I was using the App Store/iTunes App model, not necessarily video plugin/workflow developers.

Here's why I think Apple hasn't let in very many 3rd party developers to FCPX.

Very simply, the system wasn't ready.

As of now, AV Foundation is still a really new venture, and I'm not sure if it's quite complete. I am not a developer so I don't understand the limitations, but I know they are there, just ask a developer! :) It seems to get better with every Lion release. I think that Apple released a purposely hobbled FCPX because the underlying frame works aren't in place to let developers go to town, or at least let them go to town in a way that Apple is comfortable with. I know, it wasn't the smartest way to go about things, but I truly think they were waiting for OS features to be completed.

[Walter Soyka] "Adobe pre-announced the move for After Effects from 32-bit to 64-bit. This architecture change required all plugins to be updated, and Adobe gave early access and assistance to developers so that their products could be ready for launch. Adobe understood the value of their huge third-party developer ecosystem. Red Giant was able to prepare for AE CS5; they were surprised by FCPX and a huge advantage was seemingly given to Noise Industries, who did have launch-day products."

Yep, I get it. Apple's system wasn't ready for this level of involvement. For better or worse. I think they had to make some corporate type decisions, and what we are seeing is a result of those decisions.

And let's talk about AE for a minute. Yes, AE supports a lot of plugins, but you have to write a plugin, and then we have to buy that plugin, it is the perfect example of 3rd party support to make an application all that you need it to be. Without the relatively recent addition of PPro interchange, you can't get anything in to AE without third party help (XML, OMF, EDL, etc), and you still can't get anything out of except media exports (no data interchange). So while it does do a great job of somethings, it's not as open and extensible as even FCPX as a stand alone application. Does Adobe not play well with the industry either?

[Walter Soyka] "Apple has no history for allowing this kind of truly open development. I'm not saying it couldn't be done, but sadly, I don't see anything in FCPX that suggests that this sort of extensibility is part of Apple's design.

It's possible that there really was no grand plan here."


Is there really no history? What about fxplug? or fxscript before it? Or before that it was the AE script or whatever it's called?

I do think that it's not ready yet, but I do think it will be there. Apple doesn't talk about things until they are ready. So I think there's a plan as I don't think that Apple operates without one, it's just not ready to be enacted quite yet.

Thanks again, Walter, for keeping this going.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 17, 2011 at 9:19:14 pm

Jeremy, thanks as always for some excellent conversation. I'll one-up Bill Davis and buy you dinner next time I'm in Chicago instead of asking you to come all the way out to New York. I sincerely appreciate all your thoughtful responses and extreme patience in slogging through my lengthy replies.

[Jeremy Garchow] "But wasn't EDL in there to begin with? Wouldn't it be fair to say that in 2004 EDL was a more common language? Do you still use EDL today? Just curious as to how people might still use it. I am not saying it's invalid, I am just wondering."

I use Resolve, so before BMD added FCPXML support, my options for conforming FCP edits were EDL or XMEML. I generally preferred the richer XMEML for interchange, but EDL was the lowest common denominator for getting the edit out of the NLE and into a grading session.

Networks apparently require EDLs as a part of the deliverable (but that's Shane Ross's problem, not mine).

I call out EDL as the bare minimum standard for interchange. It's old, it's inflexible, it's naive, and it's woefully incomplete -- but it's still a good way to get the bones of an edit from one system to another. It's a lingua franca for editorial communication among apps.

Apple didn't include any interchange in FCPX at first, and when they added interchange with 10.0.1, they made it proprietary (though open). They ignored all the existing interchange standards (EDL, AAF, and now XMEML [which they themselves originated]).


[Jeremy Garchow] "AS far as Apple playing nice with the industry, I guess I don't get it. Resolve can't export an EDL, so is DaVinci not playing nice either? You can get an XML, an FCPXML and and AAF out of it, though."

What should Resolve export in an EDL? Without meaningful support for file-based media, there's nothing that Resolve ought to change from the EDL it imported. XMEML, FCPXML, and AAF all include broader media support, so there is meaningful changed data to get from Resolve there after a grading session.


[Walter Soyka] "Resolve may support FCPX, but FCPX doesn't support Resolve."

[Jeremy Garchow] "Please explain. Does Avid support Resolve? Isn't this the idea of interchange languages in the first place?"

I oversimplified, but if I continued my oversimplification, yes, I would say that Avid does support Resolve. Avid is capable of writing industry-standard interchange files, which Resolve is capable of reading. The key here is "industry standard." Since both applications understand the same standards, no one has to do anything special to get them to work together.

FCPXML may well become an industry standard, just as XMEML did -- but XMEML earned its place in the industry by providing richer, more meaningful interchange, not by being the one and only way to interchange with FCP.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Again, it goes back to a specialized or generalized system. Why should Apple have to write and support a part of the system when less than 1% of the users are going to use it?"

See, I think that supporting standard interchange would actually make FCPX better generalized, because it would automatically work with anything that also supported the same interchange standards.

Apple should write and support standard interchange because they claim FCPX was "built from the ground up for professional editors" and because professional editors often need to move editorial decisions from one application to another.

Good interchange actually lessens specific demands elsewhere in the NLE. For example, with good interchange with a grading app, the burden on FCPX's color tools is lowered. With good interchange with an audio app, the burden on FCPX's sweetening toolset is lowered.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Don't you think that time is better served developing the application and underlying XML language? "

I think time spent supporting standard interchange would qualify as "developing the application," and since it would allow FCPX to be used in more complex workflows, would be an excellent use of development time.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Yes, I should have been more specific. I was using the App Store/iTunes App model, not necessarily video plugin/workflow developers."

I'll jump off-topic here. As a user, I'd love to see an "app store" for plugins. The app store is very user-centric. I hate having to deal with a dozen different developers, stores, and update mechanisms.

That said, I can understand why a developer would want to maintain independent control of all these things.



[Jeremy Garchow] "Here's why I think Apple hasn't let in very many 3rd party developers to FCPX. Very simply, the system wasn't ready."

That's what I'm afraid of, and it scares me.

Truly flexible and extensible systems are more like platforms than applications. The first-party developer makes their own tools available to third-party developers (like how Adobe uses the plugin architecture themselves to extend AE).

Look at Amazon. They're an online retailer, but they don't consider the technology that drives their store a product -- they've built it as a platform, so now they can sell you everything from books to lawn chairs as well as vast buckets of redundant online storage and cloud computing power.

Back to our industry, the Cinema 4D environment is so flexible that Maxon actually used it to write the C4D installer application.

If Apple really intended for third parties to pick up their slack as some here have suggested, they should have worked on FCPX as a platform. They should have done the hard work upfront on the APIs so that they could be public, not private, and third-party developers could use them to integrate more tightly with the application.


[Jeremy Garchow] "As of now, AV Foundation is still a really new venture, and I'm not sure if it's quite complete."

AV Foundation is an integral part of media handling on iOS. It's still growing, but it's not brand new.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Yes, AE supports a lot of plugins, but you have to write a plugin, and then we have to buy that plugin, it is the perfect example of 3rd party support to make an application all that you need it to be."

Again, I'm not saying that FCPX should do everything itself. I believe that it should be as open as possible to allow as much third-party development around it as necessary.

I also believe that well-supported editorial interchange is an important part of this philosophy of openness. A good plugin architecture allows the application to be open to direct extension; good interchange allows the application to have a spot in a larger pipeline.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Without the relatively recent addition of PPro interchange, you can't get anything in to AE without third party help (XML, OMF, EDL, etc), and you still can't get anything out of except media exports (no data interchange). So while it does do a great job of somethings, it's not as open and extensible as even FCPX as a stand alone application. Does Adobe not play well with the industry either?"

This is a very interesting point. After Effects was never intended to be what it has become. The design philosophy behind most compositing apps (AE, Fusion, Shake, Nuke) is shot-based, so editorial information was never necessary.

I think it's a testament to AE's openness that users have found ways to make a layered, shot-based compositor into a poor man's finishing system -- which is certainly well outside its stated purpose or first-party toolset.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Is there really no history? What about fxplug? or fxscript before it? Or before that it was the AE script or whatever it's called?"

I didn't meant to suggest that Apple had no history of allowing plugins; rather, that they didn't build the sorts of large, flexible, extensible systems that would allow a third party to, say, add their own machine control to the application.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 12:35:04 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I call out EDL as the bare minimum standard for interchange. It's old, it's inflexible, it's naive, and it's woefully incomplete -- but it's still a good way to get the bones of an edit from one system to another. It's a lingua franca for editorial communication among apps."

Really great post, very well argued - as always you've got to the heart of the matter as I see it.

Here in Europe EDL is the only common language currently in use for digital intermediate - it's old-fashioned (and superceded) but everyone's sticking to it because it works. (XML makes the occasional appearance, e.g. with Smoke, but it's still far from common.)

No EDL is almost as much as a problem as no OMF - here the only real standard for audio post is ProTools, anything else is vanishingly rare.

I realize that for many users of FCPX these two interchange formats feel like an obsolete language that make so sense and have no use, but for a small but not insignificant minority they are a non-negotiable essential. Which is why Apple should have included them ...

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 4:42:47 pm

At some point when reading this great post, I am realizing that we are more similar than different in our disagreements. All of these discussions have been great and has really showed me that despite some details, we really all want the same thing, it's just we take different roads to get there. Thanks so much for keeping this going.

[Walter Soyka] "I use Resolve, so before BMD added FCPXML support, my options for conforming FCP edits were EDL or XMEML. I generally preferred the richer XMEML for interchange, but EDL was the lowest common denominator for getting the edit out of the NLE and into a grading session."

But it wasn't 100% necessary. Certainly a great option, and options are key, but an EDL to Resolve was not necessary. More on that later.

[Walter Soyka] "I call out EDL as the bare minimum standard for interchange. It's old, it's inflexible, it's naive, and it's woefully incomplete -- but it's still a good way to get the bones of an edit from one system to another. It's a lingua franca for editorial communication among apps.

Apple didn't include any interchange in FCPX at first, and when they added interchange with 10.0.1, they made it proprietary (though open). They ignored all the existing interchange standards (EDL, AAF, and now XMEML [which they themselves originated])."


Agreed, but it is for very very specific workflows. As has been mentioned, DI is one. That is one area where EDL is still used, and Red supports EDLs out of RCX and they are very important to them for film transfer. Broadcast deliverables is another that you mentioned, also extremely useful. I'll get to my point in a minute here.

[Walter Soyka] "What should Resolve export in an EDL? Without meaningful support for file-based media, there's nothing that Resolve ought to change from the EDL it imported. XMEML, FCPXML, and AAF all include broader media support, so there is meaningful changed data to get from Resolve there after a grading session."

Why should it not? It's a conform tool, ain't it? :) Is FCPXML not meaningful? Sorry, this is sort of meant as a joke.

[Walter Soyka] "I oversimplified, but if I continued my oversimplification, yes, I would say that Avid does support Resolve. Avid is capable of writing industry-standard interchange files, which Resolve is capable of reading. The key here is "industry standard." Since both applications understand the same standards, no one has to do anything special to get them to work together.

FCPXML may well become an industry standard, just as XMEML did -- but XMEML earned its place in the industry by providing richer, more meaningful interchange, not by being the one and only way to interchange with FCP."


XMEML simply won't work as well as it needs to FCPX. Since the whole structure has changed, the XML has had to change, too (you know have to describe an Event and a Project, just look at what happens when you import an FCPXML roundtrip from Resolve). They also "upgraded" a few things, as in true fractional frame rates. Finally. Yes, in order for other applications and workflows to work, they will have to adopt FCPXML.

[Walter Soyka] "See, I think that supporting standard interchange would actually make FCPX better generalized, because it would automatically work with anything that also supported the same interchange standards.

Apple should write and support standard interchange because they claim FCPX was "built from the ground up for professional editors" and because professional editors often need to move editorial decisions from one application to another.

Good interchange actually lessens specific demands elsewhere in the NLE. For example, with good interchange with a grading app, the burden on FCPX's color tools is lowered. With good interchange with an audio app, the burden on FCPX's sweetening toolset is lowered."


OK. So now we are back to FCPX as an application. Many many "complaints" from users (including me) was that FCP7's "finishing" tools weren't very good. Audio editing and filters were pretty crappy, I would use the 3way of offline/roughcuts, but that's about it. If going out to Color and DAW, I wouldn't worry about any of those things, I'd just edit, knowing we are heading for an external finish. Now, with FCPX, for the non external finish projects, which are happening more and more due to budget/time constraints, I now have tools that require zero round trip. This is a good thing. A very good thing. It makes my job much easier and I can go home to the family a bit earlier, and I can also "finish" while I edit. Of course, we will still do external finishes as well, so of course we will need interchange. I would rather Apple spend the time to get the tools operating much better in FCPX so I can save a little time, rather than work on an EDL exporter. I will gladly pay a third party for an EDL exporter. It's what they do, they will support it directly and if there's an issue, I can pick up the phone and talk to a human or get wicked fast response. This just won't happen with Apple. I personally don't need EDL, but I am saying for those that do. I do need interchange in the form of OMF and XML the elder for now, if and when applications I use decide FCPXML is OK, then I won't need XML the elder.

[Walter Soyka] "[Jeremy Garchow] "Here's why I think Apple hasn't let in very many 3rd party developers to FCPX. Very simply, the system wasn't ready."

That's what I'm afraid of, and it scares me.

Truly flexible and extensible systems are more like platforms than applications. The first-party developer makes their own tools available to third-party developers (like how Adobe uses the plugin architecture themselves to extend AE)."


I hear you. But do you really think it's not going to happen? Yes, it's unfortunate it wasn't ready all at the same time, but does that mean we will never see it?

[Walter Soyka] "This is a very interesting point. After Effects was never intended to be what it has become. The design philosophy behind most compositing apps (AE, Fusion, Shake, Nuke) is shot-based, so editorial information was never necessary."

Never is a strong word, I think it wasn't there because no one thought it necessary to figure it out (although I'm not saying it wouldn't be tough). There have been many times I have wanted to send my sequence to AE from FCP7, do the work, have it render and then return in a sequence, just like Color does with tc/reel info still in place, just linked to new media. I can now do this with PPro, but it is a recent addition, and is proprietary to an Adobe workflow, sure it might not fit a feature film workflow, but I don't edit features.

[Walter Soyka] "[Jeremy Garchow] "Is there really no history? What about fxplug? or fxscript before it? Or before that it was the AE script or whatever it's called?"

I didn't meant to suggest that Apple had no history of allowing plugins; rather, that they didn't build the sorts of large, flexible, extensible systems that would allow a third party to, say, add their own machine control to the application."


A ha.

Now this, this very idea, is exactly where I am heading. As of right now, I would love this to be the model for FCPX. It doesn't have a capture control window, that will now come from a capture card company. If you use Smoke, Avid, FCPX, PPro and an AJA card, you will be potentially able to use that same capture app across all the different applications. This, to me, is flexibility. You have mentioned platforms, this is how I see FCPX, a new platform from which to jump off. Hopefully the hooks that are in FCPX are big enough and strong enough to support whatever workflow you choose, and yes, part of that specialized workflow might have to come from someone who is dedicated to writing it as it's in their best interest to keep it functioning. Apple sure isn't, and I am Ok with that too. Shore up the things that need to be shorn, like FCPXML, and make it as open as it possibly can so people can glom on to whatever they need out of it. The market fragmentation is not going to stop, it is only going to get worse. If third parties are allowed to participate (which once the OS/Application/Frameworks are ready, I am sure Apple will open the doors) the FCPX application is a step in a direction of tying to serve as many possible outlets as possible, which is a monster of a task. I think in order to play nice with everyone, you have to delegate certain tasks to certain people, instead of trying to manage absolutely everything yourself. In my opinion, writing in EDL support at the application level is not a very good delegation of time for Apple. I do not think that they are skirting responsibility, I do not think that they don't know what they are doing, I do think they tend to show you what's obsolete before it's obsolete, not that EDL is entirely obsolete.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 6:31:06 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "All of these discussions have been great and has really showed me that despite some details, we really all want the same thing, it's just we take different roads to get there."

True!

I'll state upfront here that I am not opposed to FCPXML, and that I understand that a new interchange format is necessary to take advantage of FCPX's new features and data models.

My issue is this: FCPXML can be translated relatively easily one-way to older interchange formats like EDL and XMEML. If Apple had included this feature, FCPX could have fit into to many workflows at launch. Without it, FCPX had to BE the workflow.

I think my earlier comparison with XMEML was apt in this regard. EDL standards already existed, and Apple continued to support EDL input and output when they introduced XMEML.

XMEML was far richer than EDL and allowed much deeper integration with FCP. It took a little while, but eventually XMEML took root in the market for interchange with other apps, including Color, Resolve, the Boris translation utilities, earlier (and later) versions of FCP, Smoke, FCSvr, CatDV, and probably hundreds of proprietary workflow tools. EDL support was still there for those who needed it, but XMEML offered more functionality for those who chose to use it.

Then with FCPX, Apple decided to go it alone. They ignored industry standards and hit the reset button on interchange.

I think that getting an edit into or out of the NLE is an absolutely fundamental function. Imagine Word Processor X, an application that couldn't open, print, or save documents unless you retyped them in WPX. Should the WPX developers leave it up to third parties to add basic I/O to the application?

The fact that Apple didn't think interchange was important enough to develop for launch (or possibly ever, in the case of legacy import) suggests to me that "built from the ground up for professional editors" is just a catchy tagline.

Without interchange, you have to do absolutely everything within the app, or else you just can't use it.



[Walter Soyka] "What should Resolve export in an EDL? Without meaningful support for file-based media, there's nothing that Resolve ought to change from the EDL it imported. XMEML, FCPXML, and AAF all include broader media support, so there is meaningful changed data to get from Resolve there after a grading session."

[Jeremy Garchow] "Why should it not? It's a conform tool, ain't it? :) Is FCPXML not meaningful? Sorry, this is sort of meant as a joke."

Hey, I included FCPXML in my "meaningful" section!

I fail to see what relevant contribution Resolve could make to an EDL. Nothing you do in Resolve should change the edit decision list. Shouldn't all the outgoing source reels and timecodes be the same as the incoming ones? Changing anything there would destroy subsequent ability to re-conform.

On the other hand, XMEML, FCPXML, and AAF should be changed by Resolve so that they can point to the new media files that Resolve creates.



[Jeremy Garchow] "XMEML simply won't work as well as it needs to FCPX. Since the whole structure has changed, the XML has had to change, too (you know have to describe an Event and a Project, just look at what happens when you import an FCPXML roundtrip from Resolve). They also "upgraded" a few things, as in true fractional frame rates. Finally. Yes, in order for other applications and workflows to work, they will have to adopt FCPXML."

In order for other applications and workflows to roundtrip with FCPX, they have to adopt FCPXML, because Apple unilaterally changed the editorial data model with FCPX and offer no mechanism for importing legacy edits.

Any workflow where FCPX provides the creative cut and some other application finishes could have been accomplished with EDL/XMEML; the extra FCPX-only data that FCPXML carries could be discarded, since the other apps can't use it meaningfully anyway.



[Walter Soyka] "This is a very interesting point. After Effects was never intended to be what it has become. The design philosophy behind most compositing apps (AE, Fusion, Shake, Nuke) is shot-based, so editorial information was never necessary."

[Jeremy Garchow] "Never is a strong word, I think it wasn't there because no one thought it necessary to figure it out (although I'm not saying it wouldn't be tough). There have been many times I have wanted to send my sequence to AE from FCP7, do the work, have it render and then return in a sequence, just like Color does with tc/reel info still in place, just linked to new media. I can now do this with PPro, but it is a recent addition, and is proprietary to an Adobe workflow, sure it might not fit a feature film workflow, but I don't edit features."

Fair. How about "After Effects was not originally intended to become a finishing tool. It was designed as a shot-oriented, layer-based compositor that has organically accumulated a class-leading motion graphics toolset."

Some things that are important in a finishing system are important in a shot-oriented compositor, too. You need immense control and quality. You need masking and tracking.

Some things that are important in a finishing system are just not important in a shot-oriented system, though, and that shows in AE's design. No real-time, no editorial tools to speak of, no conform tools.

Could you cut in AE? Yes. Could you build a complicated composite or mograph piece in FCP7? Yes. Both are possible, but neither plays to the strengths of each application.

Stu Maschwitz and the DV Rebel philosophy have encouraged users to push AE into grading and finishing with AE, even though AE lacks the toolsets necessary to do either of these tasks efficiently.

To bring this back to FCP, I'd argue that conform is not a necessary tool for a compositor, but it sure is for an NLE.



[Jeremy Garchow] " I would love this to be the model for FCPX. It doesn't have a capture control window, that will now come from a capture card company. If you use Smoke, Avid, FCPX, PPro and an AJA card, you will be potentially able to use that same capture app across all the different applications. This, to me, is flexibility."

I think we're talking about different things here.

It sounds like you're suggesting a separate third-party application that would handle all machine control and give you files that you can take to any application. That's already possible today.

I'm suggesting that if FCPX were built like a platform instead of an app -- if it were written more like a 3D app than a standard NLE -- the capture card company could add a capture control window to FCPX. Deep integration like that could offer some really interesting benefits.


[Jeremy Garchow] "The market fragmentation is not going to stop, it is only going to get worse."

But Apple is the one fragmenting the market here! Everyone else seems to value interchange -- and Apple used to, as well.


[Jeremy Garchow] "I think in order to play nice with everyone, you have to delegate certain tasks to certain people, instead of trying to manage absolutely everything yourself. In my opinion, writing in EDL support at the application level is not a very good delegation of time for Apple. I do not think that they are skirting responsibility, I do not think that they don't know what they are doing, I do think they tend to show you what's obsolete before it's obsolete, not that EDL is entirely obsolete."

I think Apple should directly support openness in FCPX, both in data and plugin architectures. The more open FCPX is and the more different workflows you can plug it into, the more opportunities exist for developers around it.

It doesn't take tremendous effort to play nice with everyone. That's what standards are for. If Apple chooses not to follow them, they will build a very beautiful walled garden.

BMD had FCPXML interchange shipped less than one month after the FCPXML spec was published, and Resolve uses a standard timeline. Surely Apple, with all their resources, could have easily implemented EDL/XMEML output for the sake of interchange if they thought it was important. The fact that they didn't makes me worry about their priorities.

Apple's "we write our own standards" play with FCPXML-only interchange reflects what Apple thinks post should be, and that isn't lining up with post reality for me just yet.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 7:46:25 pm

[Walter Soyka] "My issue is this: FCPXML can be translated relatively easily one-way to older interchange formats like EDL and XMEML. If Apple had included this feature, FCPX could have fit into to many workflows at launch. Without it, FCPX had to BE the workflow."

I go back to my statement, the system wasn't ready. It was released in the 10.0 state because everything was not quite in place. Apple knew exactly what they were doing. I believe that they knew this interface was going to be a stretch for some long time FCP users, they also knew there was going to be some bugs, they knew there was going to be some backlash, so instead of releasing it to an overwhelming majority of users who were going to bang on it harder than has been done in their "beta testing" FCPX would have been even more of a complete joke that some people think it currently is as it would have been full of half working "features".

Let's say they did release it, just like they did 10.0, except it had EDL and FCPXML from day1. Since they didn't want to let the cat out of the bag early and give access to 3rd parties, not only would they have to chase down the crashing and display bugs, but then they'd have to chase EDL and FCPXML bugs on a system that isn't even complete. They are finished before they even got started. The calculated roll out of features is just that, calculated. They are rolling this out "slowly" and I'm sure they are collecting data and taking notes, as the whole damn thing is not done! How can they begin to write in industry standard support if their own standards that they are hoping to get adopted (fcpxml, av foundation) aren't quite complete?

Every other NLE/Color system is way more mature than FCPX, some of them by decades. For now it is sort of an island, and in my opinion was done on purpose, but who really knows that's just conjecture on my part.

[Walter Soyka] "I fail to see what relevant contribution Resolve could make to an EDL. Nothing you do in Resolve should change the edit decision list. Shouldn't all the outgoing source reels and timecodes be the same as the incoming ones? Changing anything there would destroy subsequent ability to re-conform.

On the other hand, XMEML, FCPXML, and AAF should be changed by Resolve so that they can point to the new media files that Resolve creates. "


Wouldn't you want an EDL that connected to the new Resolve renders? Why go back to an NLE when it's not needed? That's all.

[Walter Soyka] "Fair. How about "After Effects was not originally intended to become a finishing tool. It was designed as a shot-oriented, layer-based compositor that has organically accumulated a class-leading motion graphics toolset."

Some things that are important in a finishing system are important in a shot-oriented compositor, too. You need immense control and quality. You need masking and tracking.

Some things that are important in a finishing system are just not important in a shot-oriented system, though, and that shows in AE's design. No real-time, no editorial tools to speak of, no conform tools.

Could you cut in AE? Yes. Could you build a complicated composite or mograph piece in FCP7? Yes. Both are possible, but neither plays to the strengths of each application.

Stu Maschwitz and the DV Rebel philosophy have encouraged users to push AE into grading and finishing with AE, even though AE lacks the toolsets necessary to do either of these tasks efficiently.

To bring this back to FCP, I'd argue that conform is not a necessary tool for a compositor, but it sure is for an NLE."


So now that AE can be used for these things, that means it should remain the same and not get this interchange capability added? So, it's grown or morphed into something that it didn't start out to be. This is good!

And weren't you the one saying that AE is THE example of an open and extensible system, when really, you must play by it's rules and figure out the way to get in and out of it, and then mange that media, or buy third party plugins and use a proprietary linking system that's owned by Adobe? At least FCPX now has FCPXML which we have already seen is talking to "industry standard" applications, and more will come. Shit, FCPX was already talking to AE, even without FCPXML which says something about both programs.

[Walter Soyka] "I think we're talking about different things here.

It sounds like you're suggesting a separate third-party application that would handle all machine control and give you files that you can take to any application. That's already possible today.

I'm suggesting that if FCPX were built like a platform instead of an app -- if it were written more like a 3D app than a standard NLE -- the capture card company could add a capture control window to FCPX. Deep integration like that could offer some really interesting benefits.
"


I think are talking about the same thing, different roads. :)

OK, so an AJA capture utility opens an application instead of a window in X, but what if it hooks directly in to X (or Avid or PPro, or Smoke)? What's the difference? If the media is sent directly to FCPX in the background (which I think has been hinted at) what is the difference of opening a window or an app if it functions exactly the same? I used a separate app to aggregate all of my P2 data and I had the choice to either send it online (native MXF files) or offline (for batch log and transfer) and it allowed way more interface control than the log and transfer window does. It was all third party, and worked with FCP7 perfectly (via XML). I didn't miss log and transfer at all, as a matter of fact, I loathed it and wanted every other media format to work just like I worked with P2 in P2Flow. I have seen the other side of true third party support and the attention and detail that is put in to something when they want it to work and work right. There was no way I was waiting for Apple to change the log and capture window, or the log and transfer window, or allow native MXF support. I went out and found other ways to do it and kept everything I liked about FCP7 working, but I didn't need Apple's help and I didn't need to wait for very many features in order for it to work because Apple's "platform" worked. I did need to wait for native AVC-Intra decode before I could use P2 Flow with AVC-I material.

I do not think that Apple needs to write in support for everything.

They do need to provide the basis of their own interchange language.

[Walter Soyka] "I think Apple should directly support openness in FCPX, both in data and plugin architectures. The more open FCPX is and the more different workflows you can plug it into, the more opportunities exist for developers around it.

It doesn't take tremendous effort to play nice with everyone. That's what standards are for. If Apple chooses not to follow them, they will build a very beautiful walled garden.

BMD had FCPXML interchange shipped less than one month after the FCPXML spec was published, and Resolve uses a standard timeline. Surely Apple, with all their resources, could have easily implemented EDL/XMEML output for the sake of interchange if they thought it was important. The fact that they didn't makes me worry about their priorities.

Apple's "we write our own standards" play with FCPXML-only interchange reflects what Apple thinks post should be, and that isn't lining up with post reality for me just yet."


I totally agree that Apple SHOULD be open, but sometimes they are not and never really have been. You have to do things their recommended way.

I think the interchange will come, they have a few more things to shore up first. They are basically telling us, it's not ready for primetime without telling us in those exact words. Perhaps they should have said, "Everything just changed in post, but in the future someday. Maybe". There's no question this has been a marketing "disaster" or foul-up or whatever you want to call it.

It is pretty clear to me that Apple has thought about FCPX pretty hard, and they are still thinking about it. It's not done, or else they would have released it. The whole picture is not in view, and some can't wait for that picture to come clear. I get that.

I am looking forward to Lightworks, I hope it can fly, let's see what an open source model can really do.

Sink or swim time.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 8:04:38 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] " I believe that they knew this interface was going to be a stretch for some long time FCP users, they also knew there was going to be some bugs, they knew there was going to be some backlash, so instead of releasing it to an overwhelming majority of users who were going to bang on it harder than has been done in their "beta testing" FCPX would have been even more of a complete joke that some people think it currently is as it would have been full of half working "features"."

Here's what worries me most about this - this is the Wikipedia entry for iMovie ...

iMovie '08 (Version 7.0) was released in August 2007 as a part of the iLife '08 suite. iMovie '08 was a complete redesign and rewrite of iMovie.


August 2007 (release of iMovie 08, prototype of FCPX) to June 2011 (release of FCPX) is almost four years - count them! Four years is a very long time in technology terms these days and getting longer with each passing year.

So here's my question and no doubt it'sa very naive one. How come it has taken so long to get FCPX into shape given that it's effectively been over four years in development?

And if it's going to keep moving at this glacial pace what does that bode for the future, where its competitors are clearly now moving much, much faster? Adobe is now seriously cracking the whip and their ability to turn out breath-taking new image manipulation concepts is truly staggering. Does Apple really have it in them to keep up with this pace?

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 8:30:48 pm

Oh boy. Here we go with iMovie. This is a faulty analogy as iMovie is not FCPX, but perhaps they used it as a testing ground of some of the ideas, and certainly borrowed some of the overarching ideas of the interface.

Smart Collections are like Smart Playlist in iTunes which was released in what, 2002?

So why has it taken so long for FCPX to be developed since obviously smart collections and smart playlists are so interrelated!!!!!!???????

I have no idea what Adobe's going to do. It's obvious they are serious, as any serious company does when they get serious, they start seriously buying up things, just look at Apple. They also now have star power if you want the ADR preview video that has been going around today. Star power seems to matter to some people in choosing an NLE.

I'm not discounting Adobe, they have a good thing going. I already use AE a lot and own PPro, I'm just not going to move there quite yet.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 8:35:43 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Oh boy. Here we go with iMovie. This is a faulty analogy as iMovie is not FCPX"

Sorry, but isn't it a pretty well-established fact that iMovie was the seed product for FCPX? Are you saying there isn't a continuous line of development from iMovie 08 to FCPX? What have I missed?

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 9:11:28 pm

Because they share some of the same terms doesn't mean they are the same program or even share the code, which means that FCP does not equal iMovie form the very foundation of it, even though they may look the same. Apple wants them to operate similarly to fit in to their systems and anyone that's upgrading can learn the new system quickly, just like FCExpress to FCP7. The Creative Suite has made a lot of interface unifications as well.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 9:31:41 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Because they share some of the same terms doesn't mean they are the same program or even share the code, which means that FCP does not equal iMovie form the very foundation of it, even though they may look the same."

That old favourite of these forums, William of Occam, he say: entea non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem or in the plain language of the Angles beatified by Augustine: entities should not be multiplied if not absolutely necessary.

But of course this somehow doesn't apply to the iMovie/FCPX conundrum, where of course we are talking about two completely different things.

Let us not talk about the superficial similarities of the entire interface which are well known but utterly irrelevant.

Let's not discuss why FCPX shares the exactly the same idiosyncratic and not altogether perfect project management window as iMovie.

Let's not talk about how the Transitions, Generators, Music and Effects, Titles, etc. browsers are identical in design and operation.

Let's not talk about how the FCPX Event library with its underlying metadata management system was so oddly but coincidentally prefigured in iMovie.

Let's above all not draw attention to the fact that the magnetic timeline with its default rippling behaviour (!), its connected clips (!), its apparently identical Replace modes (!), its Precision Editor (!) and so on and so on, all seemed to have appeared in iMovie long before we knew anything about FCPX.

Let's not remind ourselves that the very same designer unjustly vilified for his creation of FCPX was earlier unjustly vilified for his creation of iMovie 08 - naturally he would have remembered nothing of what he'd done earlier with iMovie (apparently in another dimension of space and time) when quite by chance he came to work on FCPX.

None of this is relevant, because old William of O. is just plain wrong in this case.

We are talking about two entities which only appear to be the same by the merest coincidence and did in fact, miraculously, arise entirely spontaneously and independently during the same timeframe in exactly the same spot on the planet.

It is of course much more likely that Apple just happened to design FCPX along the exact same lines as iMovie without having remembered that they'd done it all before, than that FCPX, heaven forfend, is in any way descended from iMovie.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 11:00:21 am

[Simon Ubsdell] "That old favourite of these forums, William of Occam, he say: entea non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem or in the plain language of the Angles beatified by Augustine: entities should not be multiplied if not absolutely necessary.

But of course this somehow doesn't apply to the iMovie/FCPX conundrum, where of course we are talking about two completely different things.

Let us not talk about the superficial similarities of the entire interface which are well known but utterly irrelevant.

Let's not discuss why FCPX shares the exactly the same idiosyncratic and not altogether perfect project management window as iMovie.

Let's not talk about how the Transitions, Generators, Music and Effects, Titles, etc. browsers are identical in design and operation.

Let's not talk about how the FCPX Event library with its underlying metadata management system was so oddly but coincidentally prefigured in iMovie.

Let's above all not draw attention to the fact that the magnetic timeline with its default rippling behaviour (!), its connected clips (!), its apparently identical Replace modes (!), its Precision Editor (!) and so on and so on, all seemed to have appeared in iMovie long before we knew anything about FCPX.

Let's not remind ourselves that the very same designer unjustly vilified for his creation of FCPX was earlier unjustly vilified for his creation of iMovie 08 - naturally he would have remembered nothing of what he'd done earlier with iMovie (apparently in another dimension of space and time) when quite by chance he came to work on FCPX.

None of this is relevant, because old William of O. is just plain wrong in this case.

We are talking about two entities which only appear to be the same by the merest coincidence and did in fact, miraculously, arise entirely spontaneously and independently during the same timeframe in exactly the same spot on the planet.

It is of course much more likely that Apple just happened to design FCPX along the exact same lines as iMovie without having remembered that they'd done it all before, than that FCPX, heaven forfend, is in any way descended from iMovie.
"


So you're saying you DO think it's related to iMovie :)

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 12:11:48 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "It is of course much more likely that Apple just happened to design FCPX along the exact same lines as iMovie without having remembered that they'd done it all before, than that FCPX, heaven forfend, is in any way descended from iMovie."

And if it is? So what?


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 3:17:00 pm

Given that Randy Ubilos wanted to give the new program that replaced iMovie, a different name, First Cut. Perhaps he thought even then that he was building a framework which could be superficially easy but sustain a very advanced feature set. Sadly, by not giving the product a new name then, it made an association that would be a bit more difficult for PR to handle.

I think the seriously mistaken reasoning is that iMovie 2nd generation is consumer and, therefore, FCPX is based on a consumer app. Whereas iMovie (First Cut) was simply a foundation in which in its simplest form could be used broadly while it could be"built out" into the advanced form FCPX.

While many argued (rightly) about import and export from FCPX, that iMovie import (First Cut import) is really a way for clients to give you rough cuts and selects that can be edited rather than hand typing in time codes.

That some use FCPX's iMovie (First Cut) lineage as means to denigrate FCPX is, IMHO, flawed reasoning.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 3:25:00 pm

[Craig Seeman] "That some use FCPX's iMovie (First Cut) lineage as means to denigrate FCPX is, IMHO, flawed reasoning."

I agree with this -- but I don't think that's what Simon was doing at all.

He was pointing out that to the extent that FCPX and iMovie share concepts, interfaces, and data structures, FCPX has effectively been in development for more than 4 years.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 3:30:35 pm

[Walter Soyka] "He was pointing out that to the extent that FCPX and iMovie share concepts, interfaces, and data structures, FCPX has effectively been in development for more than 4 years."

Yes, iMovie was the skeletal origin of FCPX. I'd add that I think this was done with forethought for a more advanced app. I think, over time, the reasoning behind some of the elements will make more sense and serve better purpose than they do know.

Tangentially a better lineage might be iMovie (First Cut) Quicktime based Desktop, iMovie iPad AV Foundation based, FCPX AV Foundation based Desktop.



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 3:47:58 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I agree with this -- but I don't think that's what Simon was doing at all.

He was pointing out that to the extent that FCPX and iMovie share concepts, interfaces, and data structures, FCPX has effectively been in development for more than 4 years."


Thanks, Walter - that's exactly what I was trying to convey. I had to go the long way around to try and make the point ... !

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 7:02:51 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "And if it is? So what?"

As Walter kindly pointed out on my behalf, my point was to try and establish that the development cycle for FCPX has seemingly already been a fairly lengthy one ...

And this being so, the pace of that development seems less than encouraging.

I am an enthusiastic fan (yes, I can be a fan too!) of the relatively new 3D application called Modo. It's made by what appears to be a pretty tiny company that just happen to be passionate about what they do - and who incidentally are making a genuinely outstanding and beautifully designed product. (I have no financial or other interest in the product or the company.)

With their relatively limited resources they manage to turn out major updates pretty much once a year and the latest version (Modo 501) released last Xmas is currently on its fifth Service Pack - yup, that's right SP5!

With the greatest respect to the technology and design behind FCPX, I find it hard to believe that it is as complex a product to develop as a professional level 3D package (I speak from total ignorance, of course).

My point, which I have finally arrived at by a circuitous route, is that I don't see Apple working at this sort of rate of development with this product. Conversely, I do see a company like Adobe pushing the barriers of what is possible in ways that are truly breath-taking ... for example with innovations like this:







Granted FCPX is new and controversial but is it really as technologically ground-breaking as the ideas that regularly come out of Adobe?

OK, so FCPX is going to move on and we may well not have seen the half of it yet - but is it really moving fast enough in today's world?

Heck, I don't know - just posing the question ...

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 7:57:21 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "As Walter kindly pointed out on my behalf, my point was to try and establish that the development cycle for FCPX has seemingly already been a fairly lengthy one ..."

But MY point is that even though they look the same, they aren't. Sure they might have the same look and feel, but they aren't the same application or code base.

Imagine building a full size working model out of painted balsa wood, then having to remake it in steel, even though the product has the same veneer (paint), they are totally different. It takes a while to go from working model to production.

[Simon Ubsdell] "I am an enthusiastic fan (yes, I can be a fan too!) of the relatively new 3D application called Modo. It's made by what appears to be a pretty tiny company that just happen to be passionate about what they do - and who incidentally are making a genuinely outstanding and beautifully designed product. (I have no financial or other interest in the product or the company.)

With their relatively limited resources they manage to turn out major updates pretty much once a year and the latest version (Modo 501) released last Xmas is currently on its fifth Service Pack - yup, that's right SP5!"


That's what this guy is saying: http://digitalcomposting.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/x-vs-pro/

You want your tools to come from people who's life depends on your buying their software. It's a blessing and a curse, really.

In 3 months, FCPX had two releases, the launch, then .1 with a .2 or whatever they are going to call it, in another 6 months or less.

FCP 7.0.2 came out in March of 2010, 7.0.3 in September 2010.

[Simon Ubsdell] "My point, which I have finally arrived at by a circuitous route, is that I don't see Apple working at this sort of rate of development with this product. Conversely, I do see a company like Adobe pushing the barriers of what is possible in ways that are truly breath-taking ... for example with innovations like this:"

I'm not being snide, but if Adobe is impressing you with their demos, then what are you still doing here?

Adobe has made a conscious effort to live out loud. Apple has never done that. There is no right or wrong way, just different. Just because Apple doesn't talk doesn't mean they aren't developing, just because Adobe shows previews doesn't mean that it's going to work like the cool demos. Two companies, two plans, two styles. Let's not forget, Adobe is a huge publicly traded company as well.

[Simon Ubsdell] "OK, so FCPX is going to move on and we may well not have seen the half of it yet - but is it really moving fast enough in today's world?"

I leave you with this:







Jeremy


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 8:10:32 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I'm not being snide, but if Adobe is impressing you with their demos, then what are you still doing here?"

Because I'm interested in all of this stuff - the good, the bad, the success stories, the disappointments, the questionable, the arguable, and more than anything else, without partisanship, the genuinely great ideas, whoever happens to come up with them.

But I'll shut up now and retrieve my outdoor attire ...

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 8:11:36 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "But I'll shut up now and retrieve my outdoor attire ..."

Don't shut up, please keep it going.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 8:11:15 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "But MY point is that even though they look the same, they aren't. Sure they might have the same look and feel, but they aren't the same application or code base. "

That's a pretty definitive statement. They're clearly not the same application, but how do you know they're not sharing the same code base? Just curious.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 19, 2011 at 8:12:12 pm

[David Lawrence] "They're clearly not the same application, but how do you know they're not sharing the same code base? Just curious."

I read it on the internet? :-D

How do you know they are?


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 12:07:30 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "[David Lawrence] "They're clearly not the same application, but how do you know they're not sharing the same code base? Just curious."

I read it on the internet? :-D

How do you know they are?"


Well, I don't know for sure... but you either believe that they wrote everything from scratch and all the similarities to iMovie are purely coincidental...

or there's this! :)



_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 4:33:44 am

I have to admit, I had to look this up as the reference escaped me.

.
.
.
.
.

If you're still reading this after I said that, the ever truthful Wikipedia has this to say: "The principle is often inaccurately summarized as "the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one." This summary is misleading, as in practice the principle is actually focused on shifting the burden of proof in discussions.[1] That is, the razor is a principle that suggests we should tend towards simpler theories until we can trade some simplicity for increased explanatory power. Contrary to the popular summary, the simplest available theory is sometimes a less accurate explanation."

Wouldn't it be simpler to say iMovie is FCPX?

PPro and AE have similar visual attributes. Same code? Or same paint?


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 5:36:34 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Wouldn't it be simpler to say iMovie is FCPX?"

Sure, but that would have been demonstrably untrue. FCPX does a lot more than iMovie.


[Jeremy Garchow] "PPro and AE have similar visual attributes. Same code? Or same paint?"

Isn't the point here that iMovie and FCPX don't just have similar visual attributes, though? They share the magnetic timeline user experience (if not the code), and most likely the same or very similar data structure (given the fact that FCPX imports iMovie projects and not legacy FCP projects).

Also, I think the similarity between AE and PrP is only skin-deep; beyond their different purposes and philosophies, they have different underlying data models and different underlying image processing systems. Further, I've found that a bunch of the PrP UI widgets don't work exactly the same as the AE widgets they resemble (and I've submitted a stack of feature requests about reconciling these differences).

AE and PrP resemble each other in the same way that FCPX and Aperture resemble each other; they're apps from the same developer that share UI guidelines. iMovie and FCPX share design and actual functionality.

This is not necessarily a bad thing. But as Simon points out, it does mean that Apple developers have been thinking about magnetic timelines for quite a while -- meaning they would have had plenty of time to think about interchange with the rest of the industry if they had cared to.

Fortunately for us, Autodesk, BMD, Foolcut, and Philip Hodgetts are thinking about interchange for them.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 5:53:38 am

[Walter Soyka] "Isn't the point here that iMovie and FCPX don't just have similar visual attributes, though? They share the magnetic timeline user experience (if not the code), and most likely the same or very similar data structure (given the fact that FCPX imports iMovie projects and not legacy FCP projects)."

Can't iMovie export XML? That should pretty much end the conversation, right? They are NOT the same.

Yes, they share ideologies, but they are not structured the same under the hood.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 6:21:15 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Can't iMovie export XML? That should pretty much end the conversation, right? They are NOT the same. Yes, they share ideologies, but they are not structured the same under the hood."

Not necessarily.

I've been arguing for some time that the FCPX to FCP7 one-way translation is relatively easy to do (you can translate the relative timing of clips to absolute time, discarding their relationships), but that the FCP7 to FCPX translation is substantially harder (since you can't infer the relationships between clips from just their positions in absolute time).

I'd suggest that one of the following two claims is true:
  • If iMovie's data structure is the same as or very similar to FCPX's, then Apple implemented the FCPX to FCP7 translation for iMovie, but chose not to implement it in FCPX.
  • If iMovie's data structure is not the same as FCPX's, but is very similar to FCP7's, then Apple solved the much harder FCP7 to FCPX problem, and only chose to implement it in FCPX via iMovie, not FCP classic.


Personally, I'd wager that iMovie uses a parent/child structure like FCPX, which makes its import into FCPX and its export to XMEML straightforward. I'd imagine they included XMEML support in iMovie because FCP7 still existed at the time, and I suspect they dropped it from FCPX floppy-disk-style because they EOL'ed FCP7.

I didn't know that iMovie did XMEML until you pointed it out. This actually makes me more frustrated and confused about Apple's thinking on interchange. iMovie can interchange with both FCPX and FCP7, but FCP7 and FCPX can't interchange with each other?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 7:03:11 am

[Walter Soyka] "I suspect they dropped it from FCPX floppy-disk-style"

This made me laugh.



[Walter Soyka] "iMovie can interchange with both FCPX and FCP7, but FCP7 and FCPX can't interchange with each other"

*shrug*. I dunno. Probably a conspiracy.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 10:26:10 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Can't iMovie export XML? That should pretty much end the conversation, right? They are NOT the same."

I think if you looked at bit closer at XML export from iMovie you'd see how very limited it is (just read the export dialogue when you try it to see what gets left out, and it's pretty much everything except the basic cuts). I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that Apple left this out of FCPX because it looks a bit lame ;-)

I reckon it's stretching your argument pretty thin to try and suggest that the absence of iMovie's XML export from FCPX is any kind of proof of their fundamental "unconnectedness"!

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 5:46:36 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Wouldn't it be simpler to say iMovie is FCPX?

PPro and AE have similar visual attributes. Same code? Or same paint?"


I was starting to write but I see Walter already answered so see his post above.

I know the truth hurts but if Apple were honest, they would have named their new NLE iMovie Pro, because that's really, truly what it is. I mean, did they really think their most discerning, technically sophisticated users wouldn't notice?

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 5:57:25 am

[David Lawrence] "I know the truth hurts but if Apple were honest, they would have named their new NLE iMovie Pro, because that's really, truly what it is. I mean, did they really think their most discerning, technically sophisticated users wouldn't notice?"

I could say the same thing, but change few words:

I know the truth hurts but if Apple were honest, they would have not named their new NLE iMovie Pro, because that's really, truly what it's not. I mean, did they really think their most discerning, technically sophisticated users wouldn't notice?


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 6:16:10 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "I could say the same thing, but change few words:

I know the truth hurts but if Apple were honest, they would have not named their new NLE iMovie Pro, because that's really, truly what it's not. I mean, did they really think their most discerning, technically sophisticated users wouldn't notice?"


Why do you think it's not? Just curious. I mean look at all the empirical evidence.

Data structure - Events/projects, skimming, no source monitor, range selection, project = sequence, no tracks, ripple only, magnetic timeline behavior, collision avoidance, the precision editor, themes, the freaking Ken Burns effect! etc, etc, etc...

You're saying all of that was developed independently in a complete vacuum by the same lead developer. All new code all from scratch?

I don't think so.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 6:56:48 am

[David Lawrence] "[Jeremy Garchow] "I could say the same thing, but change few words:

I know the truth hurts but if Apple were honest, they would have not named their new NLE iMovie Pro, because that's really, truly what it's not. I mean, did they really think their most discerning, technically sophisticated users wouldn't notice?"

Why do you think it's not? Just curious. I mean look at all the empirical evidence.

Data structure - Events/projects, skimming, no source monitor, range selection, project = sequence, no tracks, ripple only, magnetic timeline behavior, collision avoidance, the precision editor, themes, the freaking Ken Burns effect! etc, etc, etc...

You're saying all of that was developed independently in a complete vacuum by the same lead developer. All new code all from scratch?

I don't think so.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
"


Not in a vacuum. Definitely not. I'm not a total doofus! I see the similarities visually, but that's all we can see.

I do think they are bringing parity to the system just like fce and fcp. My colleague's 12 years old kid was editing on iMovie, she brought home fcpx, and went right to work.

The things you mention might operate the same and look the same, but can you get iMovie to Resolve for instance?

Can Philip Hodgetts get iMovie to fcp7?

Are there 64 bit logic effects in iMovie?

I do think it was new code, yes.

And as I mentioned before, so what if it was iMovie pro? If it can do all I need including support my capture hardware, should I be ashamed or something? And if they'd wanted iMovie Pro, wouldn't they have just called it iMovie pro? As people seem to be bringing up a lot lately, Apple doesn't care about the ProApps money, so why is it even $299? Couldn't they sell many more copies @ 49.99? I'm just not buying the hype that fcpx = iMovie. It just doesn't add up to me, call me an optimist.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 9:48:56 am

[Jeremy Garchow] " I see the similarities visually, but that's all we can see."

Honestly, Jeremy, this is a bit disingenuous, isn't it? You really believe that the only similarities are "visual"???

I do wonder (and I hope you won't think me rude for asking the question) whether you've actually looked at iMovie to see how non-trivial the similarities are and how deeply they relate to function as opposed to mere cosmetics as you seem to be trying to imply.

Let's just talk about the magnetic timeline - this is a very radical, never-before-seen departure for an NLE, as I don't think I need to point out! The fact that it already existed in iMovie in fundamentally the same form - there are really very few significant differences (and if you can see any please point them out) - surely has to suggest that the heavy-lifting on this concept was done during the development of iMovie.*

And if the code had to be rewritten from the ground up, this happens all the time and is not really that big a deal. To take the example I've cited elsewhere, Luxology, the makers of Modo, managed to turn around the both the PC and Mac 64-bit versions of the app (in about a year) without breaking stride on the ongoing development of what is unarguably a considerably more complex application than FCPX. The rewriting of the code did not do anything to change the app fundamentally (or even superficially) - which is not to say it wasn't also improved and enhanced at the same time. (And of course, we've seen this happen with many apps that have made the major code-rewriting transition to 64-bit - I just like this example because it shows what a small company without the massive resources of an Apple or an Adobe can achieve without appearing to break sweat.)

The fact remains that the design of FCPX - if not the code - had clearly all been worked out during the development of iMovie. To dispute this seems to me to be to fly in the face of unbelievably clear evidence. (And I think to see the real picture here it is important to look closely at what we can observe rather than draw inferences from how FCPX and/or iMovie may or may not interface with each other and the rest of the world - which will almost certainly be decisions arbitrarily arrived at by Apple rather than unambiguous pointers to the development of either app.)

* To be specific about what the two timelines have in common:

a) Rippling timeline, including the magnetic behaviour that means overlapping clips slide out of each other's way - this really is massive and unprecedented, but clearly a design idea created in all its complexity for iMovie before we ever got to see it in FCPX;

b) Connected Clips (a huge concept that ia very radical but is entirely identical across the two apps);

c) Replace Mode (this is idiosyncratically not the same as Replace mode in any other NLE, but is the same in both iMovie and FCPX);

d) Audio and Video linked by default and placed in primary storyline but can be "Detached";

e) idiosyncratic audio waveform display shared by both apps;

f) adjusting audio levels affects height of waveform (feature not seen anywhere else but shared between the two apps), also the waveform will display audio clipping (identically) when the level is raised too high;

g) handles on audio clips for interactively creating fades;

h) the Precision Editor (this is a big one, again it's quite an unusual tool but the functionality is virtually identical between the two apps is is the name!);

i) the Range Selector (this is the default selection behaviour in iMovie which doesn't the In/Out selection option, but the operation of the range selector is clearly functionally identical between the two apps).

I'm sure there are things I've missed - the similarities are so many and so deep-rooted it's hard to remember them all. (That said, there are one or two things about the iMovie implentation of these ideas that I prefer - I was really hoping to see iMovie's in-context menus in FCPX as I think these are a really elegant time-saver and oddly a much more "modern" approach than the old-fashioned Inspector model reverted to in FCPX. But this is one of the few genuine differences, apart from Secondary Storylines, which I think look to be a relatively recent and inadequately assimilated solution to one of the limitations of iMovie.)

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 5:11:24 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Honestly, Jeremy, this is a bit disingenuous, isn't it? You really believe that the only similarities are "visual"???

I do wonder (and I hope you won't think me rude for asking the question) whether you've actually looked at iMovie to see how non-trivial the similarities are and how deeply they relate to function as opposed to mere cosmetics as you seem to be trying to imply."


I haven't played with iMovie much, no and it's not a rude question. My point about AE and PPro having similar interfaces still stands. They have tabs, the organizing is similar, but yet they are completely different apps. Those tabs also stretch across photoshop and illustrator (and the whole Creative Suite).

As I have said before, they share ideologies, but this does not mean that the programs themselves are structured form the same code which is to say that while the method of FCPX stems from iMovie, it does not mean the FCPX the application has been in full development for the same time as iMovie. That is all. I will maintain it's not iMovie Pro, even if the programs behave similarly. And really, I don't care. Call it iMovie Pro. If iMovie Pro plugs in to an AJA card, then sweet for me.

If it is written from different code, you have to still make sure that code works, it's not just copy/paste, add a secondary storyline feature. Do you have experience with working with software developers at all? Not that I am an expert, but I am just wondering if you know how hard it really is and how long something this complex takes. If FCPX and iMovie were the same, why isn't FCPXML done? It takes a long time to go from concept to production. iMovie was/is the concept.

I hope you know, I am not denying what seems to be similar interfaces and methods, but that link that was sent by Steve Conor seems to point out some really major differences between the apps, including the timelines. They don't even look similar, I just took you at your word.

And the long list of things you mention, is that what really separates a Pro Application from a consumer one? Audio adjustment? Waveforms? A range? These things do not a Pro application make.

And so what, test it on a million consumers before letting me take a shot at it. Siri is now in the hands of at least 4 million people. Think of the data gathering that will make Siri better, and maybe adaptable for something else that will make my professional life better. I am OK with all of that.

And I like most of the magnetic timeline so I'm weird.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 5:16:17 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "And I like most of the magnetic timeline so I'm weird."

I'm weird too Jeremy

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 7:09:15 pm

I'll join the weird club as well.

BTW as much as I think some portion of the post industry is "weird" averse, in my travails both online and in person there's a good number of people who are interested in FCPX and it's new UI and can foresee using it assuming some things develop further.



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 7:24:50 pm

[Craig Seeman] "I'll join the weird club as well."

Hey, you know what - I'm weird and I like it too.

Does that mean I can't also be critical of some of it? Or does that mean I'm not allowed into the club? ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 7:46:20 pm

I think your interest in it is self evidenced in the nifty fx filters you've worked on.

I'm also critical of it. Don't get me going on dual track mono!

I think key to the weird club, me thinks, is that, although the trackless magnetic timeline still has room for major improvement, it's worth improving rather than abandoning.



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 7:52:32 pm

[Craig Seeman] "
I think key to the weird club, me thinks, is that, although the trackless magnetic timeline still has room for major improvement, it's worth improving rather than abandoning."


On that basis, sign me up please ;-)

I'll take a year's membership - but I might not renew ...

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 5:28:23 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I haven't played with iMovie much, no and it's not a rude question. My point about AE and PPro having similar interfaces still stands."

I'm afraid we're not going to get very much further with this conversation if you still think the similarities are of that order. The comparison doesn't really hold up at all. Please do go and have a proper look at iMovie and tell me if you still think the same way.

[Jeremy Garchow] "I hope you know, I am not denying what seems to be similar interfaces and methods, but that link that was sent by Steve Conor seems to point out some really major differences between the apps, including the timelines. They don't even look similar, I just took you at your word."

You've lost me here - I think Steve Connor's link pretty much nails the fact that they are fundamentally the same, but then I would think that ;-)

However my point is absolutely nothing to do with whether or not they "look" the same as this is a completely trivial point of comparison and I wouldn't object to you scoffing at it if it were the only piece of evidence.

The evidence is all in the details of the functionality - where the similarities are extreme to the point where it just doesn't make sense to try and separate them.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 5:35:54 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "I'm afraid we're not going to get very much further with this conversation if you still think the similarities are of that order. The comparison doesn't really hold up at all. Please do go and have a proper look at iMovie and tell me if you still think the same way."

Perfect. Then again, as is becoming a trend, we will agree to disagree. Why would I play with iMovie when I can play with the exact same thing in FCPX? I cant even bring in P2 to iMovie. :)


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 10:49:26 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "And as I mentioned before, so what if it was iMovie pro? ... should I be ashamed or something?"

This is not the point I was making. I actually think iMovie is a great product and just like FCPX it's really good fun, and very fast, to edit in.

[Jeremy Garchow] " I'm just not buying the hype that fcpx = iMovie. It just doesn't add up to me"

Odd use of the word "hype" in this case - I'm not sure that adherents of this view are marketing anything. Personally, I'd just like to know the truth of the matter as I think it has interesting ramifications for our understanding of where we are with FCPX and how it came into being in the form that it has - which seem to me to be pretty important questions.

But I'd genuinely like to hear a more detailed argument from you as to why it "doesn't add up" - I don't think a discussion of what interchange routes are possible (or rather available, which is not at all the same thing) really gets to the root of the issue.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 11:02:32 am

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/imovie-to-finalcutpro/

Apple doesn't mind you thinking they are related, but it's strange how they aren't pushing iMovie as a selects tool for clients anywhere in their marketing. It's a great concept that seems to have been overlooked.

Personally I don't care if they are related at a code level, it would seem to be a waste of resources if they weren't. It also doesn't make me think any less of FCPX if it is.

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 11:43:42 am

[Steve Connor] "http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/imovie-to-finalcutpro/

Apple doesn't mind you thinking they are related"


Interesting reading - everything about their language there seems to be telling you that FCPX is iMovie's big brother. Though no doubt there will be sceptics who'll tell you that's just a marketing gimmick to get iMovie users to make the step up!

[Steve Connor] "Personally I don't care if they are related at a code level, it would seem to be a waste of resources if they weren't."

I'd agree about the "waste of resources" point.

I too "don't care" one way or the other - it doesn't affect my opinion of FCPX in any way for better or worse and I don't think it should.

But the reason I think this is an important question (odd that it's never really been discussed at anything other than an emotional level) is what it may or may not tell us about how long FCPX has been in gestation and how it may or may not have mutated out of iMovie, and indeed why. At what point did someone decide that FCP8 was not going to happen and was that before or after the decision to upgrade iMovie (if that's what it was)?

OK, so it's all speculation - but I think it's interesting speculation.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Paul Dickin
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 1:39:06 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] " At what point did someone decide..."

Hi
Apple (= Steve Jobs) had a big 'not-for-turning>turning' moment in early 2007.
Jan 9th 2007. At the iPhone announcement he said:
" ‘You don’t want your phone to be an open platform,’ meaning that anyone can write applications for it and potentially gum up the provider’s network, says Jobs."

May 30th 2007. This was being reported:
Steve Jobs: This is a very important trade-off between security and openness. We want both. We've got good ideas, and sometime later this year, we can open it up to third-party apps... "

That was a big U-turn moment. Apple Inc going for exponential iOS development rather than as a subset of OS X...

As big a U-turn as Bill Gates' "Internet Tidal Wave" memo in May 1995, when he binned his proprietary view of world networking (MSN) and embraced the web.

Ubilos showed off iMovie 8 later that year. I guess Ubilos had sole charge of 'video edit/asset-stripping the Pro Apps' strategy from that turning point.



Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 22, 2011 at 1:02:56 am

[Simon Ubsdell] "I'd just like to know the truth of the matter as I think it has interesting ramifications for our understanding of where we are with FCPX and how it came into being in the form that it has - which seem to me to be pretty important questions."

I think this is the key point of the comparison.

The industry was told for about two years that Apple's Pro Apps team was developing a brand new, completely modern version of FCP. That's a very different development path than building on a consumer-class application (iMovie) and extending it to have professional features. If that's what really happened, it would explain a lot.

My hunch is that there was a fork in FCPX development that coincides with the FCP team layoffs. AppleInsider nailed it in May 2010..

We know at one point, FCPX had sequences and tracks. And then something changed. I'd love to know the story of what happened. My guess is that a management decision was made to merge Pro Apps with Consumer app development to create more unified product lines.

[Jeremy Garchow] "Perfect. Then again, as is becoming a trend, we will agree to disagree. Why would I play with iMovie when I can play with the exact same thing in FCPX? I cant even bring in P2 to iMovie. :)"

iMovie on the Mac is a bag of hurt I wouldn't wish on anyone. But you should check out iMovie on the iPad because it's actually very good for what it is. I wouldn't do a commercial job on it but for just having fun, it's great.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 21, 2011 at 10:35:02 am

[David Lawrence] "or there's this! :)"

Loving your photo of William of Occam! I confess I'd never quite pictured him that angry ;-)

Actually I was referencing him because, despite the slightly erroneous way in which he is usually invoked (complexity of theories), I thought his reference to entea (entities) was very apposite in this case.

Don't postulate separate entities unless necessity demands it.

In this case it seems clear to me that iMovie and FCPX are the same entity, and there is no compelling "necessity" for multiplying entities by postulating that they are fundamentally different.

The onus would be on those who disagree to demonstrate conclusively that they are fundamentally different - at least according to our friend William. And seeing how scary he can be, who would want to take issue with him?!

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 8:30:24 pm

Thanks again for another quality riposte in this dialog.

[Jeremy Garchow] "I go back to my statement, the system wasn't ready. It was released in the 10.0 state because everything was not quite in place."

If FCPX were being built in such a way that was truly developer-friendly, then APIs and XML would have been ready before launch. I agree with you that it was not quite ready, but I'm worried that you're underestimating how not ready it was.

Let me use a bad construction analogy. The user sees the finished house, but the developers work with the framing underneath.

The fact that the product is out but developer support is not suggests to me that they are are actually re-framing the house underneath the finished skin -- or that developer support is not a priority. Either one is bad.


[Jeremy Garchow] "Wouldn't you want an EDL that connected to the new Resolve renders? Why go back to an NLE when it's not needed? That's all."

EDLs aren't file based; they're reel/timecode based, so there's no need or way to connect them to the new renders. Instead, you can re-conform from the original EDL with the new render files (replacing the original media files) -- if your NLE supports such old-fashioned interchange notions as EDL and conform.



[Jeremy Garchow] "So now that AE can be used for these things, that means it should remain the same and not get this interchange capability added? So, it's grown or morphed into something that it didn't start out to be. This is good!

And weren't you the one saying that AE is THE example of an open and extensible system, when really, you must play by it's rules and figure out the way to get in and out of it, and then mange that media, or buy third party plugins and use a proprietary linking system that's owned by Adobe? At least FCPX now has FCPXML which we have already seen is talking to "industry standard" applications, and more will come. Shit, FCPX was already talking to AE, even without FCPXML which says something about both programs."


I don't want to argue against expanding capabilities, but this one seems like a stretch. You are suggesting essentially wrapping the entire functionality of Premiere Pro into After Effects, without losing any of what makes AE great.

AE isn't an NLE. It's not a real finishing system. It doesn't have the necessary editorial toolset, because it's not designed to be an editorial tool. The fact that it can be used so far outside of what it was designed to do shows how flexible it is, but you want to bend it more?

Another bad analogy: If an NLE like FCP is a hammer, a compositor like AE is a screwdriver. They are built differently, and built for different purposes.

That said, I actually did drive a nail with a screwdriver a couple days ago. I was on a ladder, and I had the screwdriver in my hand, so I gave up the appropriateness of a hammer for the convenience of not having to climb back down and up again.

If you want to borrow my screwdriver to pound nails, be my guest -- but please don't re-engineer it to drive nails better. I actually use it to drive screws, and rather like the way it works.

If anything, I'd argue that embedding AE in PrP would be a more natural fit: AE is built for shots, and PrP is built for sequences of shots.

Separate note: I would love to see Adobe take on Autodesk Smoke and Avid DS in the finishing market. They've got all the technology, spread out over a couple different applications. I'd love to see them take all those components and integrate them well. Dynamic link is interesting and can be powerful, but using it with AE and PrP shows the difference between a shot orientation and a sequence orientation pretty quickly.


[Jeremy Garchow] "I am looking forward to Lightworks, I hope it can fly, let's see what an open source model can really do."

Agreed. Should be interesting!

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 9:02:46 pm

[Walter Soyka] "If FCPX were being built in such a way that was truly developer-friendly, then APIs and XML would have been ready before launch. I agree with you that it was not quite ready, but I'm worried that you're underestimating how not ready it was.

Let me use a bad construction analogy. The user sees the finished house, but the developers work with the framing underneath.

The fact that the product is out but developer support is not suggests to me that they are are actually re-framing the house underneath the finished skin -- or that developer support is not a priority. Either one is bad."


Yeah, it all sucks. It's not how I would've picked it. But here we are.

[Walter Soyka] "EDLs aren't file based; they're reel/timecode based, so there's no need or way to connect them to the new renders. Instead, you can re-conform from the original EDL with the new render files (replacing the original media files) -- if your NLE supports such old-fashioned interchange notions as EDL and conform."

Yep.

[Walter Soyka] "I don't want to argue against expanding capabilities, but this one seems like a stretch. You are suggesting essentially wrapping the entire functionality of Premiere Pro into After Effects, without losing any of what makes AE great."

Mmmm, maybe? Why not? We have the technology. I have always wished AE was an NLE, it's just not. I have always said that Motion should be wrapped right in FCP. Soundtrack Pro, too. Soundtrack Pro came close, but not all the way there. I am decently happy with the new audio controls, though. Parts of Motion are now in FCPX, I think it should just be the whole thing.

[Walter Soyka] "The fact that it can be used so far outside of what it was designed to do shows how flexible it is, but you want to bend it more?"

Hell yeah. If it makes my life easier, bend. That way I don't have to bend as hard. Make the software work for me, not vice versa. Things, people, needs, technologies, ideas, they all change. These aren't philips head screws and nails, as the Philips head screw is still a Philips head screw, a nail is still a nail. Yesterdays image creation processes are not todays image creation processes. I am not going to stick in the past of video applications, there are new requirements today, and I think the tools should reflect that, fragmentation and all. Just like an EDL, it was a tool of it's time, and perhaps it's time has come.

[Walter Soyka] "Separate note: I would love to see Adobe take on Autodesk Smoke and Avid DS in the finishing market. They've got all the technology, spread out over a couple different applications. I'd love to see them take all those components and integrate them well. Dynamic link is interesting and can be powerful, but using it with AE and PrP shows the difference between a shot orientation and a sequence orientation pretty quickly."

They seem to be heading in that direction, let's see what happens.

On another side note, check this out:



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 9:07:50 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "On another side note, check this out:
"


Wow. That is amazing.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 9:21:24 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I go back to my statement, the system wasn't ready. It was released in the 10.0 state because everything was not quite in place. Apple knew exactly what they were doing. I believe that they knew this interface was going to be a stretch for some long time FCP users, they also knew there was going to be some bugs, they knew there was going to be some backlash, so instead of releasing it to an overwhelming majority of users who were going to bang on it harder than has been done in their "beta testing" FCPX would have been even more of a complete joke that some people think it currently is as it would have been full of half working "features". "

[Jeremy Garchow] "It is pretty clear to me that Apple has thought about FCPX pretty hard, and they are still thinking about it. It's not done, or else they would have released it. The whole picture is not in view, and some can't wait for that picture to come clear. I get that."

On the other hand, what if there's a much easier explanation?

What if they simply blew it?

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 9:28:09 pm

[David Lawrence] "On the other hand, what if there's a much easier explanation? What if they simply blew it?"

Occam's Razor!

What now, fanboys? (he says in jest!)

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 9:34:40 pm

[David Lawrence] "What if they simply blew it?"

Yeah. There is definitely that possibility.

If they blew it, then FCP in my professional life, will end:







Jeremy


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 10:45:34 pm

[David Lawrence] "On the other hand, what if there's a much easier explanation?

What if they simply blew it?
"


OR--and I bet you have NOT considered this--it is a multidimensional program that sits across the local multiverse and is only partially visible in our world, until Dec. 2012, when the doors between universes open and we have an ice cream party. At that point, you will be able to multicam across time and the boundary between alternate realities.

I think, using Ockham's Razor, this has to be it.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 10:47:40 pm

[Chris Harlan] "OR--and I bet you have NOT considered this--it is a multidimensional program that sits across the local multiverse and is only partially visible in our world, until Dec. 2012, when the doors between universes open and we have an ice cream party. At that point, you will be able to multicam across time and the boundary between alternate realities."

You can explain this mathematically using string theory.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

nothin' attached to nothin'


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 10:58:01 pm

Or this. From Digital Rebellion feed:

http://t.co/vDHd298r


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 11:00:03 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Or this. From Digital Rebellion feed:

http://t.co/vDHd298r"


Mindblowing! Hoverboards here we come

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 11:02:14 pm

[Chris Harlan] "OR--and I bet you have NOT considered this--it is a multidimensional program that sits across the local multiverse and is only partially visible in our world, until Dec. 2012, when the doors between universes open and we have an ice cream party. At that point, you will be able to multicam across time and the boundary between alternate realities. "

Does this mean Fringe is actually a reality show?

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Mark Bein
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 9:34:42 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Apple put the burden of interchange on the rest of the industry "

That's almost what XML is all about!
It's not a file format - it's an eXstensible Markup Language.
A readable, well documented description of a fcpx project.
It cannot have the same flavor as fcp7.

XML makes it very easy to import/export for the rest of the industry.
That's why it didn't take long.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 9:47:36 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "VideoCompany#1 takes it over from there?"

No, Video Company#1 dropped the ball and went off to play with the opposition, don't you remember?

Still, good for BMD - great news!

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 9:59:13 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "No, Video Company#1 dropped the ball and went off to play with the opposition, don't you remember? "

I do have vague recollections of Adobe and Avid dropping the Mac platform altogether, yes.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 10:04:50 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I do have vague recollections of Adobe and Avid dropping the Mac platform altogether, yes."

The difference is that the Automatic Duck fiasco is what we Brits refer to as an "own goal" ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 10:13:38 pm

First of all, it's Friday, lighten up everyone.

[Simon Ubsdell] "The difference is that the Automatic Duck fiasco is what we Brits refer to as an "own goal" ;-)"

FCPX gets round trip interchange to a highly useful external program without any third party support, and everyone's still cranky:



Jeremy


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 8:52:29 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I don't really consider myself a "hater" (although I imagine others might), but I'd suggest that BMD has now done more for FCPX's interoperability than Apple has."

I guess turn around is fair play, given that Apple has singlehandedly turned just about every Color facility into a DaVinci facility.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

kim krause
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 10:56:19 pm

apple handed black magic their stake in color correction in exchange for davinci support in fcpx....this was determined long ago and that's why the latest update for resolve took a few extra weeks.....now apple doesn't have to spend money on development of a product that another company is already offering. and davinci will become the defacto standard for grading as almost anyone with fcpx downloads the lite version of davinci resolve. i am still gonna miss the simplicity of color and the transparent interaction between editing and grading but black magic is doing everything right and i am looking forward to putting my eggs in their basket as soon as the last few wrinkles have been ironed out. and now i can still do work for all those clients that walked away from apple because davinci will work with avid and premiere. thanks to apple i have just increased my potential client base by a factor of 3.....hows that for a positive spin?


Return to posts index

Sohrab Sandhu
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 8:57:25 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "In the words of a wise man, "Now what, haters?" :-D"

Sorry, But I have MOVED ON


Sohrab

FCS 3, AJA Kona Lhi & Adobe PPro



"The creative person wants to be a know-it-all. He wants to know about all kinds of things: ancient history, nineteenth-century mathematics, current manufacturing techniques, flower arranging, and hog futures. Because he never knows when these ideas might come together to form a new idea. It may happen six minutes later or six months, or six years down the road. But he has faith that it will happen." -- Carl Ally


Return to posts index

Nikola Stefanovic
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 14, 2011 at 9:56:21 pm

Apple leave desktop color grading segment in good hands. If windows version can render out prores, then we have winner.

Nikola Stefanovic
http://www.vimeo.com/nikolastefanovic/reel


Return to posts index

Clint Wardlow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 12:07:04 am

While this is really great news, Resolve ain't exactly cheap. With all the plugins and other programs (future and present) that will be needed to restore FCPX to the functionality of legacy FCP, I have a feeling the price tag is going to far exceed the price Final Cut Studio. Da Vinchi Resolve alone costs more than what I paid for my copy FCS3 (and actually even more than the 1/2 price deal I got on Adobe Production Suite).

This may not be a big deal far large production houses with deep pockets, but for an independent operator guy like myself (who went to a lot of trouble learning the complex, definitely non-user friendly Color), I have a sinking feeling the modular FCPX model is going to be very expensive indeed.

I hope this isn't true -- but it looks that way to me.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 12:10:38 am

[Clint Wardlow] "Resolve ain't exactly cheap."

Funny, they have a free version. I don't think they will pay you for it though, so I think free is about as cheap as it's going to get.

[Clint Wardlow] "This may not be a big deal far large production houses with deep pockets, but for an independent operator guy like myself (who went to a lot of trouble learning the complex, definitely non-user friendly Color), I have a sinking feeling the modular FCPX model is going to be very expensive indeed."

Well, with "DaVinci Free", you can go to Color via XML. How's that for some irony?


Return to posts index

Clint Wardlow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 12:47:18 am

Actually I was unaware of Resolve Lite. I'll download it and give it a test run. Hopefully it will contain enough power for my meager needs. The restriction to only two nodes in the comp window is a bit of a drawback, however if it offers good curve grading (what I mostly use, having first mastered curves in photoshop) I will be a happy camper. If nothing else, thanks for pointing me to it, even if it only somewhat assuages my fears that the modular FCPX design isn't going to be cheap. Will Resolve Lite support FCPXML?


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 12:52:02 am

[Clint Wardlow] "Will Resolve Lite support FCPXML?"

That's the first thing that came to my mind when a friend just mentioned this to me.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 12:55:02 am

[Clint Wardlow] " Will Resolve Lite support FCPXML?"

The new 8.1 will. Yep!

It does have curves as well. Too bad it doesn't work with AJA cards.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 3:45:40 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Too bad it doesn't work with AJA cards."

Or properly support dual monitor layouts or resolutions below 1920x1080. Or refrain from writing SQL crap all over your hard drive. I know Color is dead, but playing with Resolve reminds you of how good Color was and would have been if Apple had actually put any effort behind it. Oh well...

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

kim krause
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 8:16:24 am

i have to agree with you...when it comes to ease of use and just pure and simple logic color is still the winner. i have been playing with resolve and its nice to see it copying so many of the features that color has always had. however i still think its way to complicated just to open a project and actually get going. you have to set the media directory ( why can't you just select it when you open a new project) and you have to tell it where to render and what to render as. color was so simple...pro res in-pro res out...every project links back to the original fcp job...bloody simple. i really hope davinci bets it together in this regard because the actually grading tools aren't bad at all...even though i would make some of the windows either sizable or moveable so you could have a more logical workspace.....that tiny 2 way controller down in the lower left hand of the screen is a joke. it's one of the main tools i use and it should be more prominent...and some short cuts to the frame store and easier tracking would be nice.....not complaining, just comparing!


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 4:52:14 pm

[Oliver Peters] " I know Color is dead, but playing with Resolve reminds you of how good Color was and would have been if Apple had actually put any effort behind it. Oh well..."

You're gonna make me cry Oliver...

Wah!!! Wah!!!

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:59:31 pm

I thought Apple did put effort in to Color. I don't know if you ever payed with Final Touch, but holy crap was that thing stuck together with duct tape. Apple at least stabilized it.

And now I can use Resolve to get to Color from FCPX for free. Love it!

Look guys. I know I get excited and silly about this stuff. It's OK, I don't mind change, I know that development takes time as does stability.

There are so many choices right now, it's a good thing. All my hardware can talk to my software. I wouldn't have to buy anything else if I wanted to stop using FCP7 today.

That won't last forever, eventually money will be spent, and that's ok too. I need to charge money in order to keep a roof over my head and my dog fed as well (although, I'm not sure if there's enough food in the world for him).

I do know that no system is perfect, and it will never be perfect. To me, FCPX represents a step forward, to some it represents the opposite. Lightworks represents a look ahead as well. When you build something, you start with a foundation and frame of some sort. That's where fcpx is in my mind. I'm cool with that, in a short time, it's already proven you can get in and out of a trackless world. Sweet, let's see where it goes.


Return to posts index

Glen Hurd
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 4:48:00 am

Very excited for you Jeremy.

Just a couple of questions.

1. Why are those who disagree with FCP X as a viable product called "haters" when those who support it as excitedly as you do aren't called "the interminably undaunted?" Hater rolls off the tongue though, doesn't it. Heh. I love the word "hater." It represents someone who is so . . . hard to control.

2. Why are you excited by Resolve's 'round-tripping' with XML? The whole point has been to get a product that supports basic broadcast workflows. These involve support for accurate picture monitoring and for the ability to send video and audio out for other specialists. Just getting one of those features doesn't mean the bird is ready to fly. I guess it is exciting to get some progress though.

For most of us "haters", audio is still considered something of great importance. Too bad its completely stripped out of the XML project file when going into Resolve. And once it's stripped, I don't see how it gets put back in.

Perhaps I'm missing something. I've searched the manual. I've searched the update notes. Sadly, it seems to be missing. I'm sure there's a work around brewing though. It wouldn't be FCP X if it wasn't. Roles anyone?

Or are silent movies part of the new paradigm? Just kidding, Jeremy - you know I love to tweak.

Ah, well. Logic X is going to solve this, right? Lets hope Apple maintains control of at least one critical feature.
"Bang up job so far, Agent Kujan."

Geesh, I sound so "hater" -ish. I guess I "hate" waiting for basic functionality while watching what looks from the distance like a fire-dance.

In other news, Resolve is kicking ass with Media Composer 6 beta - lots of excitement there. And they're supporting more features, too, including PTZR (pan, zoom, tilt, rotate.) I'm sure they'll eventually get around to supporting more features with FCP (once the din dies down - unless there's not much demand for it, of course.)
And Resolve will be available on cheaper hardware that supports cards with more CUDA cores!
Yes, this little 3rd party developer is really opening the door back to Windows.

Gotta love these 3rd party developers. No loyalty - just going where the market is.

See? We're not all "hate". ;)


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 1:10:44 pm

[Glen Hurd] "1. Why are those who disagree with FCP X as a viable product called "haters" when those who support it as excitedly as you do aren't called "the interminably undaunted?""

The irony is that most of us who aren't happy with FCP X are complaining in context to FCP 7 - NOT other NLEs. If you took the improved performance of FCP X and some of the asthetic changes and revamped FCP 7 with these features - the result would blow the doors off of FCP X in its current and probably future form.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 4:08:19 pm

[Glen Hurd] "Very excited for you Jeremy."

Thanks, Glen. How nice of you to be excited for once.

[Glen Hurd] "1. Why are those who disagree with FCP X as a viable product called "haters" when those who support it as excitedly as you do aren't called "the interminably undaunted?" Hater rolls off the tongue though, doesn't it. Heh. I love the word "hater." It represents someone who is so . . . hard to control."

I thought the people who like FCPX are called dumbed down newbie skateboarders that don't know what a sequence is?

[Glen Hurd] "2. Why are you excited by Resolve's 'round-tripping' with XML? The whole point has been to get a product that supports basic broadcast workflows. These involve support for accurate picture monitoring and for the ability to send video and audio out for other specialists. Just getting one of those features doesn't mean the bird is ready to fly. I guess it is exciting to get some progress though."

Hell no it's not ready, but it's proof of concept. If this works, others will too. It means I stick around for a bit and see what happens. I have said over and over again, I simply can't use FCPX for paying work yet, but I'd like to.

[Glen Hurd] "For most of us "haters", audio is still considered something of great importance. Too bad its completely stripped out of the XML project file when going into Resolve. And once it's stripped, I don't see how it gets put back in. "

Color would do weird things to audio too. I'd never use the audio from a Color round trip. I'd simply copy and paste the audio from another sequence, or add the final mix from audio post. If you can't figure out how to get audio back in to a piece, that could be a problem for you.

Also, since FCPX has a really nice stem export, you could do that as well, but whatever no one cares except the interminably undaunted.

[Glen Hurd] "Geesh, I sound so "hater" -ish. I guess I "hate" waiting for basic functionality while watching what looks from the distance like a fire-dance."

Patience is a virtue.

[Glen Hurd] "In other news, Resolve is kicking ass with Media Composer 6 beta - lots of excitement there. And they're supporting more features, too, including PTZR (pan, zoom, tilt, rotate.)"

I hope it's everything you want and more. You are so right, I guess it is exciting to see progress.

And good luck with Windows. Seriously, you're going to need it.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 4:17:51 pm

[Glen Hurd] "Very excited for you Jeremy."

Thanks, Glen. How nice of you to be excited for once.

[Glen Hurd] "1. Why are those who disagree with FCP X as a viable product called "haters" when those who support it as excitedly as you do aren't called "the interminably undaunted?" Hater rolls off the tongue though, doesn't it. Heh. I love the word "hater." It represents someone who is so . . . hard to control."

I thought the people who like FCPX are called dumbed down newbie skateboarders that don't know what a sequence is?

[Glen Hurd] "2. Why are you excited by Resolve's 'round-tripping' with XML? The whole point has been to get a product that supports basic broadcast workflows. These involve support for accurate picture monitoring and for the ability to send video and audio out for other specialists. Just getting one of those features doesn't mean the bird is ready to fly. I guess it is exciting to get some progress though."

Hell no it's not ready, but it's proof of concept. If this works, others will too. It means I stick around for a bit and see what happens. I have said over and over again, I simply can't use FCPX for paying work yet, but I'd like to start. Maybe after the next update.

[Glen Hurd] "For most of us "haters", audio is still considered something of great importance. Too bad its completely stripped out of the XML project file when going into Resolve. And once it's stripped, I don't see how it gets put back in. "

Color would do weird things to audio too. I'd never use the audio from a Color round trip. I'd simply copy and paste the audio from another sequence, or add the final mix from audio post. If you can't figure out how to get audio back in to a piece, that could be a problem for you.

Also, since FCPX has a really nice stem export, you could do that as well, but whatever no one cares except the interminably undaunted.

[Glen Hurd] "Geesh, I sound so "hater" -ish. I guess I "hate" waiting for basic functionality while watching what looks from the distance like a fire-dance."

Patience is a virtue.

[Glen Hurd] "In other news, Resolve is kicking ass with Media Composer 6 beta - lots of excitement there. And they're supporting more features, too, including PTZR (pan, zoom, tilt, rotate.)"

I hope it's everything you want and more. You are so right, I guess it is exciting to see progress.

And good luck with Windows. Seriously, you might need a little bit of it.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 4:30:13 pm

"And good luck with Windows. Seriously, you might need a little bit of it."

Is that your motivation for all these posts Jeremy, scared of taking a walk on the wild side; need to nest in the arms of mother apple's protective embrace?

Well I've been there and it's not so bad, in fact there's no real difference one way or the other. So go ahead, take a chance, you might even find something you like.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 4:57:23 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Well I've been there and it's not so bad, in fact there's no real difference one way or the other. So go ahead, take a chance, you might even find something you like."

Actually, Herb, on the contrary. Our windows server runs our NTFS based SAN which talk to all of our macs via metaSAN. It does a really good job of serving data, and that about all I need it to do.

It is that bad, all the "Terminal" commands are different, things are hidden in weird places. I know I would get used to it, but no thanks. We have to use windows for certain tasks and it's like pulling teeth.

I do like the MacOS, flame me for not being pro enough, I don't care. I am not throwing the baby out with the bath water.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:02:56 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "It is that bad, all the "Terminal" commands are different, things are hidden in weird places. I know I would get used to it, but no thanks. "

Hmmm, that statement reminds me of something... ;)

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:30:37 pm

Touché !

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 6:45:48 pm

[David Lawrence] "Hmmm, that statement reminds me of something... ;)"

Fair enough. I see where you're going.

What you don't see is me doing is going on a Windows debate forum and asking windows users why "ls" is called "dir" at the windows command prompt knowing full well they represent the same function.

Different languages. Same result.

I cant do what I need to do in windows without learning a different language to complete the same task.
So I can choose to learn the framework, or quit using windows, but Microsoft isn't going to change command line to Unix.

If a saw a compelling reason to fully switch to windows, I'd do it. I just don't see a reason. With FCPX I see reasons to stick around, even if a sequence is a project and a bin is a keyword collection. I guess I'll be fluent in a couple of NLE terms by the end of it. Good for me.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 6:55:11 pm

"What you don't see is me doing is going on a Windows debate forum and asking windows users why "ls" is called "dir" at the windows command prompt knowing full well they represent the same function."

If you woke up one day and Apple decided to EOL Mac OSX in favor of Windows, my guess is you'd have a lot more to say about the subject of "ls" vs "dir".

ON the other hand, using Windows as a platform for a NLE is a lot less daunting then you make it. You don't need to open the command line prompt to open PPro on a windows box. You just have to hold your hat on to keep it from being blown away by the unfamiliar speed.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 7:10:33 pm

[Herb Sevush] "If you woke up one day and Apple decided to EOL Mac OSX in favor of Windows, my guess is you'd have a lot more to say about the subject of "ls" vs "dir"."

We are now delving in to the hypothetical, but things do change. I would have a choice to make and it looks like there are some really decent options out there, lucky for me. I have to feed my dog somehow. Lamenting on what could have been doesn't seem to stop his belly from burning.

[Herb Sevush] "ON the other hand, using Windows as a platform for a NLE is a lot less daunting then you make it. You don't need to open the command line prompt to open PPro on a windows box. You just have to hold your hat on to keep it from being blown away by the unfamiliar speed."

Your choice. Right now, it's not going to be my choice. I'm comfortable with that. I do have and use Windows on both the server and parallels across three machines, one of those is bootcamped, but it's on my co-workers machine. It's not where I want to go at this point, I've checked it out and made a decision. I'm not complaining to Microsoft, it just not where I want to be at this point, and they could probably care less. My choice.

Oh, and sometimes I do need to use the command prompt, but that's my workflow. Maybe not yours. We also have a Linux machine with our LTO system. We are basically running every modern OS in our tiny little shop. I think we are open to possibilities and different methods of working.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 8:09:57 pm

"ON the other hand, using Windows as a platform for a NLE is a lot less daunting then you make it. You don't need to open the command line prompt to open PPro on a windows box."

This reminds me of something a friend of mine used to say (he writes 3D software tools)... "If you're spending more time in your OS than in your applications, there's probably something wrong with your workflow". :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 8:46:16 pm

And I spend more time doing windows OS stuff more than all of our macs combined, which part of my educated decision to stick with MacOS. There's nothing wrong with my "workflow" it's all necessary stuff as we ask a decent amount of our network.

I have to, there's no other way. The system runs fine.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 9:47:37 pm

"And I spend more time doing windows OS stuff more than all of our macs combined, which part of my educated decision to stick with MacOS. There's nothing wrong with my "workflow" it's all necessary stuff as we ask a decent amount of our network."

What I was responding to was Herb's statement "..using Windows as a platform for a NLE is a lot less daunting then you make it." In that context, I believe my friend's thoughts are right on. IMO, most creative professionals have moved on from these silly platform debates... admittedly there are devotees of every OS, but I think most of us care more about tools, techniques and workflows. If you want to approach the discussion from an IT standpoint, then I suppose there are arguments to be made... but it seems like those things might be better discussed with other IT professionals.

Thanks,

Shawn



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 10:05:09 pm

And I was commenting on your comment.

[Shawn Miller] " If you want to approach the discussion from an IT standpoint, then I suppose there are arguments to be made... but it seems like those things might be better discussed with other IT professionals.
"


When I say network, I don't mean connecting to the Internet, I mean our shared storage network which is a mixture of fibre and Ethernet that has Macs, Windows, and a Linux box attached to it, all for video reasons.

It is because of this, I might need to know a little about each one, and each point of failure. This is all to make sure we can edit video, not watch Internet tv.

It is relevant and germain to this conversation.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 10:38:40 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "germain"

Of course that would be germane.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 10:59:34 pm

I would criticize you for this, if I was any good at spelling. :-)



Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 10:58:32 pm

"When I say network, I don't mean connecting to the Internet, I mean our shared storage network which is a mixture of fibre and Ethernet that has Macs, Windows, and a Linux box attached to it, all for video reasons."

I think you're describing what most of us (probably) think of as IT functions and responsibilities. What I'm getting at (and I think this may have been Herb's point as well), is that OS choice is much less of an issue for folks with more narrowly defined jobs/roles (editor, motion graphics artist, VFX artist, etc.). If I'm spending more time working in Windows (for example) than After Effects or Premiere, then yes, there is something wrong with my workflow. I think this is probably true for anyone doing creative work in post-production.

Thanks,

Shawn



Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 17, 2011 at 10:53:04 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Fair enough. I see where you're going.

What you don't see is me doing is going on a Windows debate forum and asking windows users why "ls" is called "dir" at the windows command prompt knowing full well they represent the same function.

Different languages. Same result.

I cant do what I need to do in windows without learning a different language to complete the same task.
So I can choose to learn the framework, or quit using windows, but Microsoft isn't going to change command line to Unix.

If a saw a compelling reason to fully switch to windows, I'd do it. I just don't see a reason. With FCPX I see reasons to stick around, even if a sequence is a project and a bin is a keyword collection. I guess I'll be fluent in a couple of NLE terms by the end of it. Good for me."


Right, but again, it's all the same point, isn't it? If this were the "iMovie Pro" forum, none of us would be here -- there'd be nothing to debate.

But the EOL of FCS and the fact that Apple chose to name this new app "Final Cut Pro" inevitably means an entire industry that relies on FCS is now forced to compare the two and figure out what to do.

You may choose to use Windows or not, but FCS users have no choice. Moving forward over the next couple years, we either adopt a radical new UI or switch to something else. I guess a third possibility is that Apple reverses course and brings back an industry standard timeline option, but I think that's unlikely.

I still enjoy learning as much as possible about the new beast and hope I can make it useful for something. I especially appreciate your detailed examples. Great stuff, Jeremy!

Ironically, I also think your response to Windows is the perfect metaphor for what so many of us "haters" ;) have been struggling with since June 21. Understandable, yes?

I guess I'll wind up being fluent in a couple new NLEs as well. Just not the one I was expecting for the last couple years.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 18, 2011 at 5:10:30 pm

[David Lawrence] "But the EOL of FCS and the fact that Apple chose to name this new app "Final Cut Pro" inevitably means an entire industry that relies on FCS is now forced to compare the two and figure out what to do.

You may choose to use Windows or not, but FCS users have no choice. Moving forward over the next couple years, we either adopt a radical new UI or switch to something else. I guess a third possibility is that Apple reverses course and brings back an industry standard timeline option, but I think that's unlikely."


I still have a choice, and I'm an FCS user. FCS still works and is still on the market, although it's been pegged to be put out to pasture. I have at last two other software packages that I can edit on my same exact hardware without changing a thing, actually three, PPro, M100 and Avid, oh and Smoke if I needed it, so four.

PPro, Avid and FCP7 have very similar methods, though of course not exactly the same. I don't think it would take long. Of course there'd be some bumps, but them's the breaks. Life is tough, truly. I am glad their are viable options. Ten years of technology is a decent run in this lifetime.

[David Lawrence] "Ironically, I also think your response to Windows is the perfect metaphor for what so many of us "haters" ;) have been struggling with since June 21. Understandable, yes?"

Oh, heck yes. As I have said over and over again, Apple is asking a whole lot from us.

It's really the first time in a very long time that I can remember, that Apple is asking a lot when it comes to interface. It keeps coming up how much people have to think before using this interface, usually Apple's interfaces tend to do the opposite. They are intuitive, so easy they almost disappear, and of course they aren't perfect all the time. This is an interesting new venture and I certainly don't think it's as dumbed down as people make it out to be.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 9:11:34 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] I do like the MacOS, flame me for not being pro enough, I don't care. I am not throwing the baby out with the bath water.

I like MacOS too, but statements like these:

And good luck with Windows. Seriously, you might need a little bit of it.

are just ignorant. This isn't the 90s, you know.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 9:42:32 pm

[Gary Huff] "are just ignorant. This isn't the 90s, you know."

Ignorant. That's a first.

I hope you read the rest of the thread and where I come for when it comes to windows.

Ignorance is not what I base my decisions on.

Have a wonderful day.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 16, 2011 at 2:09:14 am

I did read that post from you. And it doesn't change the point that your comment about needing luck if you switch over to a Windows-based workflow is ignorant.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 16, 2011 at 2:32:19 am

[Gary Huff] "I did read that post from you. And it doesn't change the point that your comment about needing luck if you switch over to a Windows-based workflow is ignorant"


You will need it. And a lot of planning. I stand by my comment.


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 16, 2011 at 4:42:06 am

Well, stand by it with some examples then.

If I can get a sequence into FCPX via this route, then how will not having my bins organized be any more of a deal-breaker than not being able to get the sequence into FCPX in the first place?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 17, 2011 at 3:24:26 pm

[Gary Huff] "Well, stand by it with some examples then.

If I can get a sequence into FCPX via this route, then how will not having my bins organized be any more of a deal-breaker than not being able to get the sequence into FCPX in the first place?"


Gary-

I was simply pointing out the difference.

The text on the movie says you can send an FCP7 project to FCPX using Resolve. It's not true and I wanted to point out the difference.

You can send timelines around, but not entire projects. For instance, if I started a project in FCP7 and then wanted to move that entire project to FCPX for further editing using Resolve as a translator, I can't do it. Make sense?

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 17, 2011 at 8:14:51 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] You will need it. And a lot of planning. I stand by my comment.

I have been doing video production on a Windows desktop for a long time, and have only recently gotten a Mac. Use both, and I don't need luck and lots of planning when I go back to the Windows box.

So, in my experience, your comment is flat out incorrect.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 17, 2011 at 8:19:52 pm

[Gary Huff] "So, in my experience, your comment is flat out incorrect."

And if you have been working on only Macs, and recently switch to Windows, be prepared for some pain. That's all I'm saying Gary. I've done it, I've needed to do it. Windows is not as easy to run as a Mac in my experience, period. But of course I am a total ignorant idiot, and I am totally fine with that. Can we be done with this now? Thanks.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 17, 2011 at 8:39:05 pm

Gary -

I think the difference is we both started on Windows and then migrated to Macs. Apparently the reverse approach instills a bit of fear and loathing.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:20:27 am

Jeremy, if FCPX eventually delivered breakfast in bed they'd complain it was over easy and not sunny side up.



Return to posts index

Greg Andonian
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 6:29:42 am

Wait- Resolve now supports FCPXML? Even the FREE version?? Those funny cat videos on Vimeo are going to look AMAZING!!!!


(sorry, couldn't resist that one...)

______________________________________________
"THAT'S our fail-safe point. Up until here, we still have enough track to stop the locomotive before it plunges into the ravine... But after this windmill it's the future or bust."


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 4:27:45 pm

[Greg Andonian] "Wait- Resolve now supports FCPXML? Even the FREE version?? Those funny cat videos on Vimeo are going to look AMAZING!!!!"

And those videos will monatize services and those that show mastery of color grading and editing will be getting the jobs.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 3:49:35 pm

"they'd complain it was over easy and not sunny side up."

When I say over-easy it means you flip the dammed eggs, how hard is that to understand. And what's this, no bacon, you don't serve bacon anymore, not even a little sausage, nothing - what kind of half-assed breakfast is this? Even Micky Ds gives you a sausage. And can't you even translate a pancake properly for god's sake - I wanted blueberry syrup, not strawberry. I'm leaving, this hotel ain't shit no more, ever since the owner died the whole place has gone to shit, only interested in the economy tourist, no real service for the experienced traveler.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 4:36:47 pm

The third party condiment makers will make a fortune with a broad market who need to add side orders to their breakfast. Assuming Apple matures the SDK/APIs wide support is going to move FCPX up the breakfast ladder. Just as the original was FCP for the rest of us, FCPX may repeat that formula.

Granted "pros" may not like the limited menu selection at the moment but it seems Apple is opening the doors to the accouterments. Resolve is actually an excellent example with both a free version, a $995 version and control surfaces costing thousands of dollars. FCPXML is an important door to the kitchen.

I actually think this is why Automatic Duck may have moved to another kitchen. There's going to be a lot of price competition in a market in which they were once exclusive.

As utilities such as CatDV and Resolve add FCPXML support and more developers on the way Duck probably needed to hook into a company (Adobe) that needs versatile import export experience.

FCPX may be the breakfast of champions (Sorry I couldn't help that one).



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 4:46:54 pm

"The third party condiment makers will make a fortune with a broad market who need to add side orders to their breakfast."

Problem is the tourists don't use the fancy condiments, they're happy with the Youtube presets. Terrible release, bad marketing and strange packaging has scared many of the experienced travelers away. Time will tell if there's enough of them left to sell the fancy condiments to.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:04:32 pm

[Herb Sevush] " Terrible release, bad marketing and strange packaging has scared many of the experienced travelers away. Time will tell if there's enough of them left to sell the fancy condiments to."

New travelers will climb the ladder. Granted FCP brand has probably lost a chunk of upper market share but there's enough people who are experienced working with it for the third parties to feed it. Once enough features are added I think it'll begin to creep back up.

Key is that the condiment makers are ready and willing. I really think Apple's API is going to be the make/break more than anything. Apple needs to be working with Boris, RedGiant, GenArts amongst others.

Also the biggest change is that Avid, Premiere Pro, FCP legacy, all had a lot of GUI in common. FCPX is a new flavor and some people just don't like the taste and all the features in the world won't matter to them. The question is whether new people coming up, without GUI bias, will take to it.

There's a mistaken assumption (apparently) that FCPX is universally panned except for a small minority. I actually think the divide, when looking at the entire market, not just broadcast and feature narrative, is a bit more evenly divided. Add in the newbies who like it and there's a good basis for a growing new food flavor. Imagine if I told you I'd open lots of restaurants serving raw fish and it would become popular. Maybe it's not McDonald's hamburgers but Sushi sells well and it's not perceived as "fast food junk" even though it doesn't even need to be cooked.



Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:15:14 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Imagine if I told you I'd open lots of restaurants serving raw fish and it would become popular. Maybe it's not McDonald's hamburgers but Sushi sells well and it's not perceived as "fast food junk" even though it doesn't even need to be cooked."

Can I have my sushi without the magnetic wasabi please?

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:20:56 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Can I have my sushi without the magnetic wasabi please?"

Actually it's the seaweed wrap. You can remove it or the rice will fall all over the place. Wasabi is a condiment, the seaweed is fundamental to the design though. Sure with a burger you can remove the bun but with sushi the seaweed holds it together. You can't make sushi be a burger. People who try are going to get the rice all over the place and then blame the sushi for not being burgerlike.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:29:12 pm

"You can't make sushi be a burger. People who try are going to get the rice all over the place and then blame the sushi for not being burgerlike."

But all I ever wanted was a better burger, and when the guy at the drive in window gives me this crazy raw fish i start to complain that there's no meat in it he tells me the fish is better for me and they don't serve meat no more, it's so yesterday.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:55:36 pm

[Herb Sevush] "But all I ever wanted was a better burger, and when the guy at the drive in window gives me this crazy raw fish i start to complain that there's no meat in it he tells me the fish is better for me and they don't serve meat no more, it's so yesterday."

I'm sympathetic with that. Apple closed the burger joint and opened a sushi bar. You had McDonalds, BurgerKing, Wendy's, each have similarities and now Apple closes their's down and sells sushi. That they've decided to sell sushi is a given and they're not going back to burgers. Now they have to make sushi a worthwhile meal. Some say fish is a healthier meal.

Ultimately we now have a very different food on the market. Some will never like it. Some believe it will be a food staple. Apple has a challenge before them. Apple has to help the ketchup makers make wasabi. That's why I say the condiments are key. They have to make it tasty. It may be the difference between good sushi and a slab of raw fish.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 6:06:18 pm

I happen to like this analogy a lot.

The reason I get so cranky is that the Apple-Burger store was in my building, all I had to do was head down stairs and lunch is ready. Now I have to decide between walking a few blocks away to see if the Wendy's or BK burger is up to snuff, or I have to learn to like fish.

It also explains my annoyance with the folks who say I'm not being adventurous by sticking with burgers when I think they're too scared to walk across the street.

But I figure it's all good just so I can get a cold one at the end of the day. What - now I have to drink Pellagrino ???

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 6:12:41 pm

[Herb Sevush] "But I figure it's all good just so I can get a cold one at the end of the day. What - now I have to drink Pellagrino ???
"


Just don't go near the Kool Aid Herb.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 6:31:21 pm

[Herb Sevush] "or I have to learn to like fish. "

And fish isn't inherently better either. Fish can be pretty foul (fowl?) if not done right. So they have this fancy storefront, looks a bit different for this neighborhood. Enough so some walk in and maybe try it for lunch. You as for soy sauce, wasabi, a glass of saki and they tell you they don't have those yet. They espouse the health virtues of fish but maybe the seaweed isn't even quite holding the sushi together yet. Is it that fish is inherently bad or maybe the opened the restaurant a little too soon and their burger joint is gone.

I don't think sushi is inherently bad but they need to get their seaweed wrapping technique down and the condiments have to happen.

We have some who say "I want a burger and I don't like this sushi" so they start looking at the other burger joints.

We have others who say this sushi idea good be good but you have to get the wrapping right and you gotta get the condiment makers over here.

We'll have to see if Apple can make it palatable so that's it's not simply unique but tasty to us foodies. That's their challenge.



Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:36:08 pm

[Craig Seeman] "You can't make sushi be a burger. People who try are going to get the rice all over the place and then blame the sushi for not being burgerlike."

I picked up a mess of sushi, took it home and cooked it. Funny, but it tastes just like fish to me.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 5:58:32 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "I picked up a mess of sushi, took it home and cooked it. Funny, but it tastes just like fish to me."

Off to Long John Silver's for you. That's not sushi. We're a sushi bar now. You can get burgers and fish and chips at the other places. We're going to make sushi a healthy staple . . . even if you personally don't like it.



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 16, 2011 at 9:27:41 pm

After a lengthy set of extremely funny sushi analogies which I've enjoyed immensely, I've spent some time roundtripping from FCPX to Resolve today and it works extremely well.

For us small band of FCPX users this is BIG, for me it takes some of the sting of not having a broadcast monitor out, because Resolve does, so I now have it when I really need it.

(Sorry couldn't think of any fish related humour to make this point!)

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index

Rafael Amador
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 17, 2011 at 5:03:29 pm

[Steve Connor] "After a lengthy set of extremely funny sushi analogies which I've enjoyed immensely, I've spent some time roundtripping from FCPX to Resolve today and it works extremely well. "
Steve,
Could you please post a shot of the of the project you've been roundtrippin?
I'm curious of how complexity of the projects can be interchanged.
Rafael

http://www.nagavideo.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 17, 2011 at 5:09:05 pm

I've only done simple projects so far, having a few issues with compound clips. I have a more layered project to try tomorrow!

"My Name is Steve and I'm an FCPX user"


Return to posts index

Jacob Kerns
Re: DaVinci Resolve 8.1 -- now with FCPXML roundtrip support
on Oct 15, 2011 at 9:55:45 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "In the words of a wise man, "Now what, haters?" :-D"

Still have to background transcode this was the biggest turnoff for me.

NIADA
Technical Director


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]