FORUMS: list search recent posts

Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Robert Bracken
Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 1:54:41 pm

Since Apple makes almost all of their money from consumer products, it makes sense that FCP X is a consumer software. I still think it's fantastic. But I was thinking, no one knows if Apple is committed to the Pro hardware. We do know that Apple is committed to the consumer hardware, such as the Macbook Pro.

We should see the Macbook Pro with thunderbolt and no DVD drive by this summer. The FCPX App will fit perfectly with that.

Apple is a hardware company first. They make software to sell the hardware. Not matter what margins the Mac Pro make, it is important for Apple to sell as many as possible otherwise they're taking resources away from higher selling hardware.

So we shouldn't worry about the future of FCP X. That will stick around for a long time and have an even bigger user base. (Which I'm most excited about.) We should worry about the Mac Pro and should envision a future without it.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 1:58:37 pm

[Robert Bracken] "it makes sense that FCP X is a consumer software. "

I think some us us may disagree with you on that

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Daniel Frome
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 3:07:16 pm

Although I wouldn't be totally opposed to it... there would be something weird about buying an HP workstation to replace my mac pro... the edit software works the same... but the OS... /shrug


Return to posts index


Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 3:24:46 pm

[Robert Bracken] "So we shouldn't worry about the future of FCP X."


Robert,

I think you'll find the debate here is not about whether FCPX has a future or how big the user base will be and more about what kind of future that will be and what kind of users - ultimately, what kind of workflows FCPX is capable of handling, and for whom it was designed and to whom it appeals.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 3:29:58 pm

"Since Honda makes almost all of their money from consumer products, it makes since that William Rast - Curb/Big Machine is a consumer car."


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 4:14:01 pm

[Robert Bracken] "Apple is committed to the consumer hardware, such as the Macbook Pro. "

I guess you don't look at laptops all that much. I guess you consider the ability to add an AJA Io/XT or Pegasus RAID "consumer" hardware.



Return to posts index


Robert Bracken
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 4:20:13 pm

Thunderbolt will allow the connection speed to add 3rd party hardware. But, we'll see that with iMac and Mac Mini.

I'm really excited to see where FCPX will go. It will achieve great things. What will probably happen is the discontinuation of Professional hardware such as the Mac Pro.

We've already seen the discontinuation of Xserve. Mac Pro will face a similar fate.

Long live FCP X.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 4:48:28 pm

If one wants an all Mac workflow (and Apple loves ecosystems) there will be a MacPro replacement. There's a whole lot of different types of rendering in which multi core Xeons will help. Once someone has to search for a Windows solution it becomes much easier (more practical for some) to switch to a common OS for ease of infrastructure build out. Eventually I think clustering will rule (maybe by the time Thunderbolt goes completely optical) and other technologies can take advantage of it . . . if speeds can approach on board throughput. Keep in mind the world of codecs keeps getting more demanding on system resources and the demands for speed of delivery keeps escalating.



Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 6:22:02 pm

[Robert Bracken] "I'm really excited to see where FCPX will go. It will achieve great things."

I don't mean to nitpick Robert but this statement is in opposition to itself.

If, looking forward, you're excited to see where FCPX will go, you can't logically draw the conclusion that "it will achieve great things."

It could be an abysmal failure - Apple's had some real stinkers in the past.

It could achieve great things if Apple came out of the sanctuary and listened to professional editors regarding what makes it so lacking for so many.


Return to posts index


Richard Herd
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 7:48:51 pm

[Jim Giberti] "[Robert Bracken] "I'm really excited to see where FCPX will go. It will achieve great things."

I don't mean to nitpick Robert but this statement is in opposition to itself."


It's an ontological argument ;)


Return to posts index

Paul Jay
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 6:41:25 pm

You can do uncompressed HD + dual link hdsdi on an iMac + Macbook pro with Thunderbolt.

How is this consumer technology???

Im tired of the Apple isnt for Pro whining by professional whiners.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 6:49:07 pm

[Paul Jay] "Im tired of the Apple isnt for Pro whining by professional whiners."

As am I. If Apple isn't in a given niche, somehow all the other professional uses don't count . . . this is especially so when they're assuming Apple has made a decision that it hasn't. MacPros are still for sale in every Apple store I've visited in NYC and it's still available online. It needs an update badly but there's no EOL announcement and sales haven't ceased.



Return to posts index


Jim Giberti
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 6:50:55 pm

[Paul Jay] "Im tired of the Apple isnt for Pro whining by professional whiners."

Imagine how tired people are of people who call other people whiners.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 7:13:48 pm

[Paul Jay] "Im tired of the Apple isnt for Pro whining by professional whiners."

Well, I guess we're even, because I'm equally tired of your one-note hit-and-run braying.


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 7:56:36 pm

[Chris Harlan] " one-note hit-and-run braying."

I'm sure it was inadvertent Chris, but you just leaked the title of the new Michael Bolton release.


Return to posts index


TImothy Auld
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 8:06:07 pm

Now, that's funny.

Tim


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 8:29:50 pm

orson welles approves this comment.

http://www.zog.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/OrsonWellesClap.gif


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 19, 2012 at 9:12:05 pm

I just want to thank the Academy and Aindreas Gallagher without who's inspiration, none of this would be possible.


Return to posts index


Michael Gissing
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 8:24:20 am

Time for a sing along. Just substitute "whinger" for "ginger" in the chorus.







Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 9:01:47 am

[Michael Gissing] "Time for a sing along. Just substitute "whinger" for "ginger" in the chorus.
"


Minchin is a genius!

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 11:44:57 pm

[Steve Connor] "Minchin is a genius!"


indeed, brother


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 1:53:23 pm

[Paul Jay] "Im tired of the Apple isnt for Pro whining by professional whiners."

[Craig Seeman] "As am I. If Apple isn't in a given niche, somehow all the other professional uses don't count..."

I believe that Apple's recent behavior in the professional space has been poor [link], and I do fear that they have lost their commitment to professional markets. I think that for a while, Apple used to supply products built for professional use, but now they supply products that professionals can use -- and I think that's a subtle but important difference.

However, since you gentlemen maintain that Apple is actively building for professionals, please indulge me in a thought experiment:

If you didn't already have Apple hardware and FCP7, would you really be buying iMacs and FCPX for all your professional work today?

Would you say that Apple's March 2012 post-production offering has more or fewer significant gaps than Apple's March 2011 (or better yet, Apple's March 2010) post-production offering?

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: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 2:58:18 pm

[Walter Soyka] "If you didn't already have Apple hardware and FCP7, would you really be buying iMacs and FCPX for all your professional work today?"

I know people who are doing exactly that.
I don't know of "startup" facilities but I do know of individuals who are starting up businesses doing that. iMac, Thunderbolt, FCPX suits some businesses in a tight economy look for "ease of use" tools.

For my own work 10.0 would not be feasible, 10.0.3 is. Given that I had FCP7, the transition was a bit easier since I had a mature NLE to use. At this point I'm using 10.0.3 exclusively although I still curse at a few of its failings.

[Walter Soyka] "Would you say that Apple's March 2012 post-production offering has more or fewer significant gaps than Apple's March 2011 (or better yet, Apple's March 2010) post-production offering?"

Absolutely. I've never claimed that FCPX is feature competitive with FCP7 or PP5.5 (6 coming) or MC5.5 (now 6). I do believe that FCPX i maturing into a professional NLE and I suspect Apple will have a couple more major feature improved releases this year.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 3:54:17 pm

I can understand the argument of FCPX as strategic retreat, but I think there's a lot more to the discussion about Apple and professionals than just whining. Apple broke people's trust and created the doubt that you and Paul are complaining about people expressing. Apple will be held to a higher standard until they have regained people's trust or moved out of the market.



[Craig Seeman] "I know people who are doing exactly that. I don't know of "startup" facilities but I do know of individuals who are starting up businesses doing that. iMac, Thunderbolt, FCPX suits some businesses in a tight economy look for "ease of use" tools... I've never claimed that FCPX is feature competitive with FCP7 or PP5.5 (6 coming) or MC5.5 (now 6)."

I wasn't talking about new market entrants willing to trade feature set for low cost and ease of use. I was talking about an established professional like yourself...


[Craig Seeman] "For my own work 10.0 would not be feasible, 10.0.3 is. Given that I had FCP7, the transition was a bit easier since I had a mature NLE to use. At this point I'm using 10.0.3 exclusively although I still curse at a few of its failings."

... but you pretty much answered it there for me.

I'd like to step out of debate mode and back into learning mode for a bit.

I assume that your workflow is one that suits FCPX well. May I ask about it?

I haven't spent a lot of time on 10.0.3 myself, but I'm very nervous about trying it in production since it seems to have spooked several of the other vocal early adopters with grave performance or reliability issues. Have you seen any of these? Also, I know you said you're using FCPX exclusively now, but I'm curious how comfortable you would feel today without your FCP7 license to fall back on?

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: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 4:45:45 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I wasn't talking about new market entrants willing to trade feature set for low cost and ease of use. I was talking about an established professional like yourself..."

Established professionals have other NLEs just like me. For me it's FCP7 of course. There may be a few Media100 or Edius Pros that are transitioning to FCPX. I've only seen anecdotal mentions of people moving.

[Walter Soyka] "I haven't spent a lot of time on 10.0.3 myself, but I'm very nervous about trying it in production since it seems to have spooked several of the other vocal early adopters with grave performance or reliability issues. Have you seen any of these?"

On 2008 MacPro, I'm not getting crashes but I do get beach balls. I get better behavior on my 2011 MacBook Pro but I'd prefer a desktop which is why the MacPro update is important to me. I suspect the code isn't the most efficient yet when it comes to managing processor and memory use. There's nothing fatal though. I've never lost a project.There's also some personal work habits that I'm changing as well. I actually thing that may be one of the bigger hurdles. FCPX requires different thinking.

[Walter Soyka] "I know you said you're using FCPX exclusively now, but I'm curious how comfortable you would feel today without your FCP7 license to fall back on?"

With 10.0.3 I think I'm a bit free of the need of a "safety net." Not that FCPX does everything better than FCP7, I still curse at FCPX under development and a few other things like pasting filters and attributes but it's faster in other ways so I don't feel I'm losing time comparatively and, depending on the project, FCPX is faster.

Certainly the type of work I do and my personal editorial style has significant influence. I've never liked lots of video tracks as an organizational tool so FCPX timeline is a major improvement for me in GUI. Since most of my work is self contained I don't need "audio tracks" but I do need organizational tools and FCPX roles helps (not there yet). The biggest FCPX "setback" for me is dual/multi mono tracks (coming from a camera). I can work around it for the time being given the other advantages. Most of my work is corporate and local cable so I'm not dealing with long form (but I have done in a past life on Avid Media Composer). From my own FCPX experience, I think the biggest problem with long form would be beach balling would probably be several magnitude order worse. For the kind of short form and, often, very short turnaround work, FCPX is good and getting better. That's where I think it'll grow in professional use first.



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 5:04:22 pm

[Craig Seeman] " I've never lost a project"

I knocked on my wooden desk.

Once film editors get a chance to really use it. They'll love it too. I mean folks got into this industry to cut stories and X does that very very well.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 4:11:17 pm

[Walter Soyka] "If you didn't already have Apple hardware and FCP7, would you really be buying iMacs and FCPX for all your professional work today?"

It depends. If I hoped to cut such gems as John Carter, I would need the professionally accepted software. Maybe I could recut Ishtar too.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 6:03:39 pm

[Richard Herd] "It depends. If I hoped to cut such gems as John Carter, I would need the professionally accepted software. Maybe I could recut Ishtar too."

You're right. You probably couldn't have cut John Carter on FCPX -- but you and six associates could have cut it on FCP7 [link].

Whatever you may think of the film, it took a lot to make. With its enormous effects shot count and multiple cooperating vendors, it had an incredibly complex workflow of which picture editorial was only a small part. With its budget, there must have been tremendous pressure to get it done and get it out the door, and it's hard to fault the post supervisor for wanting to use an established system with a good track record instead of beta-testing a new product that would offer few benefits for their workflow.

If FCPX has an issue of not being "professionally accepted," that issue is a symptom of its inability to work as well in complex workflows as competing products and its questionable reputation for performance and reliability.

When FCPX reaches that magical degree of "good enough" in the three key areas of performance, reliability, and workflow, it will become "professionally accepted" -- just as FCP was.

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

Richard Herd
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 6:14:27 pm

But the point is made. Tools are tools. That's not a metaphor. That's an example of a specific being a representation of the category.

Actually cutting a story though is pretty awesome in X.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 7:06:17 pm

[Richard Herd] "But the point is made. Tools are tools."

Oh, I certainly agree. But does simply having a tool in the NLE category answer the question of whether Apple is committed to professionals?

The challenge for FCPX is that it's such a different tool -- and currently has fewer ideal use cases -- than its predecessor.

You weren't all that limited a year or two ago with a Mac Pro and an FCP7 license. An iMac with FCPX is still a bit more restrictive, and if that's the best that Apple can offer today [link], I maintain there's more to the Apple/pro question than whining or wondering who moved our cheese.


[Richard Herd] "Actually cutting a story though is pretty awesome in X."

There's a lot of interesting new thinking about how to handle media and how to handle an edit in FCPX. I think that Apple spent a lot of time on editorial mechanics during FCPX development.

Now that the early design decisions are made, it'll be interesting (and telling) to see how development priorities shift.

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

Richard Herd
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 8:35:16 pm

[Walter Soyka] "But does simply having a tool in the NLE category answer the question of whether Apple is committed to professionals?"

I'm not sure what the words mean: "committed" and "professional."


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 8:49:30 pm

I'm pretty sure that "committed" would be defined by how long Apple intends to support this particular iteration of FCP (and I don't think there can be a lot of argument that they do not have a good track record in continuing to support their own proapps) and "professional" to me means what you become when the check clears.

Tim


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 9:25:57 pm

[TImothy Auld] "and "professional" to me means what you become when the check clears.
"


Perfect summary!

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 9:29:10 pm

Regardless of who manufactures the software, I get my support from the Cow.

Nicely said re:

[TImothy Auld] ""professional" to me means what you become when the check clears."


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 9:43:17 pm

[TImothy Auld] "they do not have a good track record in continuing to support their own proapps"

Basically they've discontinued all their external purchases (Logic may be the only exception at this point). They've continued to support what they've built in house such as Motion and Compressor.



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 9:45:38 pm

[Craig Seeman] "what they've built in house "

That's a big point, imo. "in house" I've never coded a video editing app, but I imagine it's pretty hard.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 9:55:07 pm

And screwed a lot of people in the process. I am not arguing that Apple is not doing what is in their best interest. I think they are. But I have been monetarily hurt by the decisions business decisions they have made. Do I think they are evil? No. Do I think they are doing what is in the best interest of their shareholders? Yes. Will I ever trust them to continue the support of anything they sell whether or not developed in house. I don't think so. But, like James Bond, I try never to say never.

Tim


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 10:19:53 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Do I think they are evil? No. Do I think they are doing what is in the best interest of their shareholders? Yes."

I find that argument morally questionable. There is always more money to be made in consumer markets. That doesn't mean a company coding software for CT scan devices buggers off tomorrow to build Angry Birds for the iPad because it is in the better interest of their shareholders while patients are grilled thanks to buggy software. Yes, bad analogy. Lovin it and not apologetic about it.
Apple bought into the market, lured people to their platform because of subsidised software that competitors couldn't offer at such cheap prices (and killed or almost killed a few smaller companies along the way) and then have lost interest. Were they ever really interested in it. Don't think so. It was a means to an end at the time. The Moor has done his work - the Moor may go.
Is that evil? No, just "big corporate". That doesn't mean I have to like it, be apologetic about it or throw more money at them in the future.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 10:33:18 pm

Like the law and justice who are at best distant cousins (this is not my line, I wish it were) Morality and corporate imperative are rarely intertwined.

"Farewell the tranquil mind; farewell content!" Othello

Tim


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 11:07:53 pm

Apple lured us in and then let us down? Sounds pretty sad doesn't it? We all made money over the years using Apple software and hardware (or at least I hope you did!) They handled one launch and an EOL badly and now they're an evil empire.

You're investment in Apple hardware and FCS3 still works, you can still charge for it, you can still do the same jobs with it, nothing has changed there. You also have a great choice in other NLE software to move to if you don't like the direction Apple has taken, and that software is now cheaper (considerably so in Avids case) and better as a result of Apples decision to enter the Pro NLE space in the first place.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 11:24:54 pm

Indeed. I never felt "lured" by Apple. I bought in in 1999 because because I thought it would work for me in a couple of years. And it did. Quite well. But the point is I bought it back then for the same reasons that I think Apple has with bringing out X: Self interest. I think they are making a huge mistake for the long run in the way they are behaving at present, but as wiser people have always tried to tell me, you should never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and it annoys the pig.

Tim


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 12:09:19 am

[Steve Connor] "They handled one launch and an EOL badly and now they're an evil empire."

One launch and EOL?
Let's see. Shake gone, FCP 7 gone, Color gone, DVDstudio Pro gone, XServe gone, FC Server gone.
As someone already pointed out, it all started years ago.
I don't care if they made it cheaper. Anyone who runs a business and complains about the cost of CS5 should reconsider his business model as he should be able to recoup in two month at the very latest.

I am not a one-man shop. The whole thing will cost me a good chunk of money. Yes, I made money with their products. I would have made the same without them... and it would have cost me less in the long run.

The "evil empire" thing has nothing to do with FCPX, that's just lack of interest on their end. Opressive app store and itunes store policy plus other things is more like it but that's a different story.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 7:48:39 am

[Frank Gothmann] "I am not a one-man shop. The whole thing will cost me a good chunk of money. Yes, I made money with their products. I would have made the same without them... and it would have cost me less in the long run. "

How so?

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 1:19:45 pm

[Steve Connor] "How so?"

Because retraining people costs time and money. There are mistakes, things need to settle in, new workflows need to be tested and established. Entirely new software needs to be purchased, new plug-ins or hardware if plug-ins aren't available etc.
We have 80TB of shared storage, tuned to work perfect with FCP7. In order to work fine with other NLES things need to be changed and reconfigured. That's not a problem technically, but those 80TB need to go somewhere to do that. Preferably while still being usable. Otherwise it's a shutdown for several days. And even after that, since are not moving to Windows from one day to the next, the challenge is to make it work with several NLEs and platforms. And which software will it be? It's time consuming to really evaluate things to the core. The FCP ecosystem grew with us as we grew and as the market grew. It has to be replaced with something that provides full functionality from day one while still maintaining compatibility with the Macs that are still in use bascially BECAUSE FCP7 still works and the Macs still work. If we had gone with Avid or Edius (or Premiere) from day one none of these considerations would be necessary now.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 1:32:43 pm

[Frank Gothmann] "Because retraining people costs time and money. There are mistakes, things need to settle in, new workflows need to be tested and established. Entirely new software needs to be purchased, new plug-ins or hardware if plug-ins aren't available etc.
We have 80TB of shared storage, tuned to work perfect with FCP7. In order to work fine with other NLES things need to be changed and reconfigured. That's not a problem technically, but those 80TB need to go somewhere to do that. Preferably while still being usable. Otherwise it's a shutdown for several days. And even after that, since are not moving to Windows from one day to the next, the challenge is to make it work with several NLEs and platforms. And which software will it be? It's time consuming to really evaluate things to the core. The FCP ecosystem grew with us as we grew and as the market grew. It has to be replaced with something that provides full functionality from day one while still maintaining compatibility with the Macs that are still in use bascially BECAUSE FCP7 still works and the Macs still work. If we had gone with Avid or Edius (or Premiere) from day one none of these considerations would be necessary now."


Fair points, although if you had gone with Avid at the time, your costs would have been much higher up front, it's only a relatively recent development that Avid is now a reasonable price.

I like FCPX a lot, but if I was in your position it wouldn't be in the running at the moment. As we keep saying a roadmap or at least a statement of future intent for FCPX would be very helpful for larger facilities like yours. As much as I like Apple Products, I think it's ridiculous that they haven't done this.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 4:10:55 pm

[Steve Connor] "I like FCPX a lot, but if I was in your position it wouldn't be in the running at the moment. As we keep saying a roadmap or at least a statement of future intent for FCPX would be very helpful for larger facilities like yours. As much as I like Apple Products, I think it's ridiculous that they haven't done this."

I agree with you. If X had been there in addition to 7... no problem with me. Also, a big problem is that Apple's dominance and pricing policy kept certain apps away from the Mac completely. With Apple pulling the plug, there is currently no professional DVD authoring application on the Mac available anymore (Encore doesn't cut it). Unlike NLEs where there is a choice, DVDStudio Pro was the only viable choice on the Mac.
There never was and there never will be a pro Blu-ray authoring app, no high-end AVC encoding and zero MVC encoding on the Mac. Optical dics are big, big business for us so Apple signaling the want to see it dead and dropping support is not what we need.


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 1:00:50 am

[TImothy Auld] "Will I ever trust them to continue the support of anything they sell whether or not developed in house. I don't think so. But, like James Bond, I try never to say never.
"


This is the crappy situation that I really didn't want or need to be put in and I think it's a malaise that Apple has induced within the international creative community.

Ironic huh?
Apple?

I'm a big loyalty guy and a big communication guy.

I don't think it's asking too much of people I've spent hundreds of thousands of dollars with to communicate their loyalty to me.

You can't tell me they're not aware of the instability and concern they've spread for the last couple of years, with endless EOL'ing and not a single outreach to the community regarding our future together.

We have a very different view of responsibility, Apple and me, and I'm pretty sure my approach is better.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 1:09:48 am

Jim, I think we started out on this forum at loggerheads (I'm sure at least partially because I am a stubborn SOB) but I agree with every word in your post. I really cannot imagine what they are thinking.

Tim


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 1:26:18 am

[TImothy Auld] "Jim, I think we started out on this forum at loggerheads (I'm sure at least partially because I am a stubborn SOB) but I agree with every word in your post. I really cannot imagine what they are thinking.
"


I don't recall that Timothy, you seem like a perfectly reasonable man to me. But if we did, then I'm sure it was mostly your fault.

See how responsible I am.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 1:29:50 am

I am sure it was totally my fault and I beg your pardon. If only our friends in Cupertino would do the same for us.

Tim


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 12:13:43 am

[TImothy Auld] "and "professional" to me means what you become when the check clears."

And one of those clapping Orson Welles from me too.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 9:05:42 pm

[Richard Herd] "I'm not sure what the words mean: "committed" and "professional.""

I'm not convinced that Apple really knows, either.

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

Richard Herd
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 9:18:20 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I'm not convinced that Apple really knows, either"

What it is they lack as a convincing force: Pathos, ethos, logos?

Or is demonstration the convincing force?

If you consider the past, discounting the last 12 months is disingenuous given the past decade. We have seen editing become a fashion industry!


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 9:34:14 pm

[Richard Herd] "What it is they lack as a convincing force: Pathos, ethos, logos? Or is demonstration the convincing force?"

My initial reply was pretty flippant. I was going for funny, but it came out a bit snarky.

Let me have a think on defining "commitment" and "professional." Maybe I can do better than the Justice Potter "I know it when I see it" vibe I've been riding.


[Richard Herd] "If you consider the past, discounting the last 12 months is disingenuous given the past decade. We have seen editing become a fashion industry!"

Here, I disagree. First off, I think that the time period in question is longer than 12 months. I think it's about four years -- see the my article FCPX and the Domino Effect [link] for the details behind my thinking (or the timeline graphic within for the short version).

Secondly, it's possible that the entire history of FCP1-7 was the aberration, where Apple was selling a product they bought from someone else to hang on to a core constituency that they were in real danger of losing. FCP wasn't really consistent with Apple's philosophy on product development, as Tim Wilson eloquently described in his article Steve Jobs - A Personal Calendar Entry [link] -- but FCPX is.

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

Richard Herd
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 3:23:09 pm

That was an interesting read, both parts. So what did you decide? Are you focusing on you business as a niche position or are you broadening your services?


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 12:23:34 am

[Walter Soyka] "If you didn't already have Apple hardware and FCP7, would you really be buying iMacs and FCPX for all your professional work today?
"



Let me answer this way.

Just shot a multi-cam reality show with my stedi-cam for a local station.

5 camera set-up

3 XD, one ex1 with the stedi and a gopro

Can't jam TC with the ex1 or gopro

So.....................eic steps in with a strobe flash to match.

They use 7 and that's how they get it done in post.

Now, what's the problem? It's a 13 hour day. we shot all day. Think about how many flashes we had to have.

How much space on the cards we used because we didn't want to stop down and reflash every second.

With the stedi there were sections that I din't shoot but then had to jump back in. In and out but not stop down. Keep running on a blank wall when I would have stopped. OK now plow through all that extra useless crap producer. waste time.

They are very good at what they do, and it will be a good looking show when they get done.

But with X..............none of that.

I would sync all that stuff with sound.

Done.

OK, now show me why I should go back to the strobe.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 12:53:30 am

[tony west] "But with X..............none of that. I would sync all that stuff with sound. Done. OK, now show me why I should go back to the strobe."

I agree with you that there are workflows where FCPX offers unique advantages over FCP7 et al, but I think that this example is a bit of a straw man. If sound is available, you shouldn't go back to the strobe, ever. If you're using FCP7, you should use PluralEyes in this workflow. Even if you're using FCPX, you should consider PluralEyes.

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

tony west
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 1:47:21 am

[Walter Soyka] "If sound is available, you shouldn't go back to the strobe, ever. "

Why not?

Remember we were shooting on cards so when you stop that makes another clip.

When they would do a take that would start a new clip. They wanted to sync all the clips not just the first ones.





[Walter Soyka] "PluralEyes"

If I have X why do I need PluraEyes. I thought X just copied what PluralEyes does.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 3:04:37 am

[tony west] "They wanted to sync all the clips not just the first ones."

That's ok. PluralEyes can deal with multiple clips.

The latest version even works with FCPX's multicam.


[tony west] "If I have X why do I need PluraEyes. I thought X just copied what PluralEyes does."

PluralEyes is both faster and more reliable [link].

Next time you have a suitable project, try the demo. I'd be curious to hear your opinion.

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

tony west
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 3:42:30 am

[Walter Soyka] "PluralEyes is both faster and more reliable [link]."

I don't see how it can be faster. You have to go into a separate program vs just staying in X

That link seems to be gone.

It looks like they want 149.00 for PluralEyes

Don't know if I want to spend that if X is working the way it is now for me.

I can see using this program with 7 but not with X

Even if you used it with 7 you would be using a 32 bit 7 vs a 64 X which is syncing it just fine for me.

Have you used it with X Walter?


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 2:18:20 pm

We're pretty far off-topic now, aren't we? But since we're talking about Apple's sync and PluralEyes, I'll take a moment to offer another opinion.

I understand why Apple wanted to include a sync feature like this in FCPX -- it's particularly useful for dual-system audio with DSLR video, which I'd identify as one of Apple's big anticipated uses for FCPX.

However, I think the fact that they spent time developing this feature says a lot about their approach to both their third-party developer partners and their customers' needs.

Apple spent time and effort developing a syncing solution when they could have either paid Singular Software to do it, bought PluralEyes from Singular Software, or given Singular Software early access to FCPX so they could have developed against it had a launch release ready. Instead, they chose to develop their own version of the technology. They fundamentally threatened a partner's business, and they signaled to other developers that they were willing to duplicate third-party efforts and bundle it in the app.

Further, assuming limited developer time and resources and given the availability of a partner with good sync technology already in place, why did Apple prioritize first-party development of this particular feature for launch release? Why wouldn't they prioritize other things that were important to their users and that actually had to come from first-party development, like XML or broadcast monitoring?


[tony west] "That link seems to be gone."

Sorry, I wasn't pointing to the video -- I was pointing to the whole thread, which I'd encourage you to read. Jeremy G. and Craig S. both talk about how much faster and more reliable PluralEyes is than FCPX's built-in sync. Given their extensive experience with FCPX, that carried a lot of weight with me.

PluralEyes pops up in just about every conversation about FCPX's Synchronize Clips feature that I've seen.


[tony west] "I can see using this program with 7 but not with X... Have you used it with X Walter?"

I used it with FCP7 quite a bit. I haven't used it with X.


[tony west] "It looks like they want 149.00 for PluralEyes. Don't know if I want to spend that if X is working the way it is now for me."

Maybe it's worth it for you, maybe it's not. I don't know what your needs are, but you do. That's why I suggested you try the demo on your next hairy sync project and see if it works better.

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

tony west
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 8:41:11 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Maybe it's worth it for you, maybe it's not. I don't know what your needs are, but you do. That's why I suggested you try the demo on your next hairy sync project and see if it works better."


Thanks Walter, I don't want you to think I didn't appreciate your tip. I went and looked at a demo for the PE and thanks for suggesting.

You made some interesting points about the way Apple treated this company and how they kind of got the short stick.

That line seemed to turn kind of on the subject of ethics. If we go there I got a list of stuff starting with
the way workers are treated in China before I get to this,

But I hear you.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 12:55:41 am

But would that really work with X. Have you finished a five camera, diverse codec project with it? And I'm not even asking about VO, music, SFX. Have you done something of that nature on X? Longer than 5 or so minutes? I am not asking this to show anyone up. I recently looked at X for a project, did some tests and - even with the reliability issues aside - it was not up to the task. Have you finished and delivered to broadcast specs a project of a complex nature and a length of 22 minutes or so with X?

Tim


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 2:04:12 am

[TImothy Auld] "But would that really work with X"

What would stop it from working?

when I first saw X one the features that drew me to it was that one.

I tried a test with some clips and it worked fine. I had no problem, and this was the first version.



[TImothy Auld] "Have you finished and delivered to broadcast specs a project of a complex nature and a length of 22 minutes or so with X?"

I'm working on a documentary right now and it's going to be a lot longer than 22 minutes.
I have not had any problems so far doing anything I have wanted to do.

I hear people taking about how buggy it is after the last update but mine still seems to be working the same.
I am still working on snow leopard because I don't like those grey folders in Lion.

I was just wondering if that had anything to do with it. I think most people have move to Lion.

What OS are you using?

One thing I don't have is patients, if it starts acting up I will be ticked like others and maybe start to look around.

So far so good.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 12:47:50 pm

I'm still on snow leopard and I can't move at the moment. Thanks for the information.

Tim


Return to posts index

Glenn Grant
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 23, 2012 at 6:13:49 pm

Hi Tony,

I love the work flow you just described, I only wish it actually worked. I have been playing around with X on a few small projects and it is great. Fast edits and great for sorting media.

So I decided to give X a try with a three camera shoot of a live event with mixed formats. The Multicam worked pretty good, but I still had to go in and adjust a few shots. The further into the project I got, the more beach balls and the slower the system got. Try adding subtitles to a one hour multi cam project and the lag time is crazy. In the end, I just exported what I could, and finished it in FCP7

The sad thing is there are a lot of things to like about X and for some projects, it is the right tool to use. When I am working with 7 I find myself wishing certain things were more like X. In my experience, the workflow you described would end up in a train wreck with X.

I do have hope for X with one or two more updates.

Hey, I just figured out how to get ride of my Legacy Name!


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 2:29:11 pm

[Paul Jay] "Im tired of the Apple isnt for Pro whining by professional whiners."

The important question is, why do you really care what others think about FCPX?

Consider that the weaker your own argument may be, the more important it is to put down others with an opposing point of view.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 20, 2012 at 5:24:13 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "[Paul Jay] "Im tired of the Apple isnt for Pro whining by professional whiners."

The important question is, why do you really care what others think about FCPX?

Consider that the weaker your own argument may be, the more important it is to put down others with an opposing point of view."


Now, see--I wish I'd been clever, like that, instead of just whining about braying.


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 1:31:01 am

[Chris Harlan] "Now, see--I wish I'd been clever, like that, instead of just whining about braying.
"


I wish you had to Chris, then I wouldn't have had to clean up the coffee I sprayed on my screen.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 2:13:14 pm

[Jim Giberti] "I wish you had to Chris, then I wouldn't have had to clean up the coffee I sprayed on my screen.
"


Someday I'm going to make a movie for playback at NAB that will simply be every editor I know spewing coffee.

David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.com
http://www.ProMax.com
Sales | Integration | Support


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Paul Jay
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 5:28:43 pm

A lot of complaining about a personal opinion.
No replies on my main question.

Is Thunderbolt consumer or pro technology?
Does a consumer needs 600 MBs storage + HD SDI in/out?

Is Apple producing consumer technology?


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 5:43:38 pm

[Paul Jay] "A lot of complaining about a personal opinion. No replies on my main question. Is Thunderbolt consumer or pro technology? Does a consumer needs 600 MBs storage + HD SDI in/out? Is Apple producing consumer technology?"

I doubt that Apple thinks of Thunderbolt as consumer or professional. It's just a pipe.

Saying that a consumer doesn't need that kind of bandwidth is like saying that 640KB of RAM ought to be enough for anybody. It sounds fine today, but you're likely to look pretty shortsighted in just a couple of years.

Is Apple producing consumer technology? Undoubtedly. I'd ask different questions. Is Apple producing professional technology, or technology that professionals can use? Does the distinction matter?

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

Chris Harlan
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 6:22:57 pm

[Paul Jay] "A lot of complaining about a personal opinion."

Well, since your "personal opinion" was about us, you shouldn't be so shocked.

[Paul Jay] "No replies on my main question."

I'm guessing that that is because most people took it as I did, which is as a rhetorical question which was meant as a statement and therefore did not require an answer.

[Paul Jay] "Is Thunderbolt consumer or pro technology?"

Neither/Both. Its agnostic. It is simply an extension of the PCI bus. It can be used as an advanced docking station for a Mac Air, or for video editing i/o. It's like asking if a $400 no-name tower is consumer or pro because it has USB3 or, better, PCI slots.

[Paul Jay] "Does a consumer needs 600 MBs storage + HD SDI in/out?
"


I'm guessing you meant something other than than "600 MBs storage," since 1 TB is becoming the minimum standard size for most Hard drives. As to the "HD SDI in/out"--I don't understand the relevance of the question. No, consumers don't need that. But, you could put the same sort of i/o into the $400 no-name machine, because it has PCI slots. In the case of ThunderBolt, you can add that HD SDI for a minimum of $1000. In the cheep-o PC, you can put it in for something like $600.


[Paul Jay] "Is Apple producing consumer technology?
"


Yes. People use it at work, too.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 6:28:33 pm

As far as the peripheral makers go, only devices I'd consider "pro" are coming out for Thunderbolt such as Video I/O and high speed storage which would be needed in fast file access. There's currently not much motive for most consumer to use Thunderbolt (although that may change at some point).



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 21, 2012 at 6:59:09 pm

[Craig Seeman] "As far as the peripheral makers go, only devices I'd consider "pro" are coming out for Thunderbolt such as Video I/O and high speed storage which would be needed in fast file access. There's currently not much motive for most consumer to use Thunderbolt (although that may change at some point).
"



How about Apple's own monitor that is both Hub and monitor? Belkin's announced hub? Sonnet's PC card adapter? Seagate's GoFlex adapter, Western Digital's Thunderbolt MyBook drive, LaCie's eSata adapter?

Very acceptable versions of the Pro devices you refer to are also available in either USB3 or PC Card. Does that make USB3 a pro only option?

Frankly, I would have been far happier if Apple had embraced eSATA and USB3. I could have been using them for years now, instead of just finally getting into TBolt because there are finally ALMOST enough devices to justify it.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Thoughts on why FCP X is here to stay and the Mac Pro isn't.
on Mar 22, 2012 at 1:08:42 pm

All Mac Pros on the UK Apple store are still showing 3 day delivery, on the US store they are still in stock though. Probably nothing but I live in hope!

Steve Connor
"FCPX Professional"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]