FORUMS: list search recent posts

FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Eric Parker Andersen
FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 5:50:44 pm

I haven't checked in on this forum in awhile, not sure if it just for bashing FCPX/Apple, or if there are many positive posts as well. Here goes.

Although I'm sure the haters will say 'too little too late', I'm having a good experience with the improved broadcast monitoring in FCPX. Yup, that means I'm using it for professional purposes, both at my freelance studio at home, and at the production facility where I work. At home, I can finally show my work on my Sony XBR client monitor via my trusty Blackmagic DeckLink. At my day job, the same AJA i/o Express that let's me roll out commercial, segment and on-line edits from Avid, now let's me roll out the commercials, graphics and animations that I create in FCPX/Motion (via SDI to HDCAM usually). I've had luck using roles for separating audio stems and have had no problem cutting show segments that wind up in Avid driven on-lines. Some of these shows are delivered digitally, but most go out on HDCAM tape. So far, so good.

It's nice to have the monitor up for color grading/correcting, but I say again, the scopes in FCPX are so gorgeous and responsive that flying by instrument (something I always do since I have imperfect vision in one eye) was just fine for me.

During the first week of its' release, I was using FCPX for a paid professional edit for a major videogame publisher, even in the 'beta' shape that it was released in. I loved it instantly (well, 5 or 10 minutes of confusion), and I was so glad to wrap up my last FCP 7 project. No looking back. There were some birthing pains, and Apple needed to realize that FCP was not an iPod (nobody makes their living with an iPod), but I am grateful that they are looking forward, and the two dozen projects that I completed on FCPX have been a joy to create. And it is only getting better.

E. Parker Andersen - Seventhree Productions
Shooter, Cutter, 2D/3D Graphics and FX
http://www.73pro.com


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 6:12:27 pm

[Eric Parker Andersen] "Although I'm sure the haters will say 'too little too late', I'm having a good experience with the improved broadcast monitoring in FCPX. "

I've also recently been testing that, and the workflow with Resolve. Things seem pretty smooth.

The truth is, 99% of the argument against using FCP X for serious work has disappeared. The "it's not a pro app" narrative is running on fumes. Apple has diligently added broadcast monitoring, better audio export options, multicam, XML. Stability is much improved and performance (especially with long projects) is better. Third parties have filled in gaps like importing FCP 7 projects.

The chief argument against FCP X these days seems to be that people don't trust Apple because... why? Because Apple didn't hold the entire app off of the market until these features were done, despite the fact that the app was useful to much of FCP's existing user base (and a bunch of other people besides) even without them? I can't really make sense of it. People try to argue for jumping to Media Composer, despite the danger posed by Avid's awkward financial situation. They try to argue for jumping to Premiere, forgiving Adobe for all of its canceled apps -- of which there have been a fair number over the years, including the original Premiere.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Jules bowman
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 6:24:59 pm

Why are people who dislike fc10 considered haters. The use of such a dismissive and derogatory term is a bit arrogant.

Are those who think magnetic trackless timeline is wrong stupid people to you? Antiquated dinosaurs? Just wrong?

This moral high ground you seem to stand on is a tad tiresome. And insulting.

It's just as easy to say you a haters. Of those who don't follow your party line. Your beliefs. Who challenge your opinions.

why oh why are you such haters?


Return to posts index


Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 6:28:29 pm

[Jules bowman] "Are those who think magnetic trackless timeline is wrong stupid people to you? Antiquated dinosaurs? Just wrong?"

If they were saying "I don't like this", that would be one thing. Many of them are saying something more like "This is inherently broken and impossible to use for professional work, and furthermore demonstrates that Apple is abandoning professional users to go make shiny gadgets".

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Neil Patience
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:06:49 pm

[Chris Kenny] "demonstrates that Apple is abandoning professional users to go make shiny gadgets"."

I have to say in my experience I am doubtful if Apple have ever cared that much about professional users.

Back in about 2004/5 I was editing freelance for ITV in London who decided to build a large FCP set-up for editing promos and trailers. (all programme making there was and still is Avid)
As I was one of the few people there with any FCP experience they employed me as a fairly minor consultant to assist in the edit suite designs.
They installed a 150TB SAN with about 20 suites all running uncompressed SD (but HD capable) over a large fibre network which went through 13 floors of the building. 4 online finishing suites, 4 ingest stations. ArtBox, and Final Touch (as was). Graphics stations with AE etc.
We were told that at the time it was one of the largest if not the largest single FCP installation in Europe. ITV were and I think still are Europe's largest independent braodcaster.
So given that Europes largest broadcaster just installed just about Europes largest FCP you might imagine Apple would have been interested in it in some way shape or form.
The answer from them was, I was told, literally nothing. ITV contacted them about possible publicity, press etc etc but there was no interest from Apple at all.
It was quite a coup for them having this big installation right in the middle of an Avid using brodcaster but they never even blinked, let alone "cared"

I have a similar tale about a London facility that was among the first all FCP houses of any size to be built. - pretty much the same story.

Perhaps it was because they are just US centric but I am not sure how you could be a more "pro" user than that and get little or no help/interest from Apple directly at all.

best wishes
Neil
http://www.patience.tv


Return to posts index

Jules bowman
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:16:34 pm

I don't like it.

Magnetic trackless timeline is stupid. Renaming things is stupid. A project isn't an event. The world cup is an event. The queen's jubilee is an event. Your project is not an event. No manual save is insane. This is not an upgrade to fcp7 which is how it was sold. Marketing spin is insulting... It doesn't background render, stop saying it does. But more than anything EOLing the software I had invested 8 years of my life in after making me wait for the awesome upggrade which never came is the rudest a company has ever been to me and for that alone I always hold apple in contempt when it comes to anything other than their toys, which they do well.

I don't like it and I don't see it as professional software. Anyone who uses the argument that they make money from it so it is pro... That's a stupid argument. I could cut pieces and be paid for them on pinnacle studio 9. Why? Because I have a degree of aptitude for framing my shots when i shoot and narrative when I edit. If I do that for a job, is pinnacle studio 9 pro? In fact I could do it on iMovie. Is that pro now?

I don't hate fc10 as an independent entity. I do think it is stupid. When they finally hack tracks back into it and add a manual save I may even consider trying to again. But I do hate apple for dumping on my work life which is taxing enough as it is and pretending fc10' was an upgrade. In fact was THE upgrade to rule them all.

What I really dislike is the almost acolyte defence of it on here with incessant digs as those who mock fc10 in the context of it being an upgrade to fcp7 WHICH IS HOW IT WAS SOLD TO US and the impact it has had on our work lives. Which is what we had been made to wait for for 2 bloody years. Which is what kept us on expensive macs. Which made us pump more money into third party plugins, most of which are now going to be redundant soon.

Sure, my thousands of pounds are but a few lines of Charlie on a handful of hookers backsides at the Christmas party for apple, but for me they are a lot.

But hey, I'm in the wrong because I don't get where the puck is going to be. I'm scared of change. I'm a hater. I'm irrational. I should let it go. I'm holding it wrong. I just don't get it. I'm not willing to persevere. I don't work on leverage or some post house in Germany. I am just wrong.

Haterism doesn't materialise in a vacuum.


Return to posts index


Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 8:44:26 pm

[Jules bowman] "Magnetic trackless timeline is stupid. Renaming things is stupid. A project isn't an event. The world cup is an event. The queen's jubilee is an event. Your project is not an event. No manual save is insane. "

You're stating opinions as facts.

[Jules bowman] "This is not an upgrade to fcp7 which is how it was sold."

Apple was quite open about FCP X's differences and its lack of backwards compatibility.

[Jules bowman] "But more than anything EOLing the software I had invested 8 years of my life in after making me wait for the awesome upggrade which never came is the rudest a company has ever been to me"

It was obvious to careful observers for years that classic FCP was going scraped and entirely replaced. There were clear technical considerations that made this necessary. So could you be more specific about your objection here? Is it simply that you wish the replacement had been a little more similar to classic FCP?

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Jules bowman
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:17:45 pm

I'm stating opinions as opinions. I started the whole post with 'i dont like it'. That is my opinion. The subsequent bits, therefore, can pretty much be construed as my opinion too.

Though I understand how you could misinterpret that given you're projecting your own personality onto me.

I believe the Jobs quote was ' the next upgrade will be awesome'. I believe it was listed as an upgrade when released. Revisionism doesn't change fact.

As for your smug condescension at the end.... really? Go away.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:24:12 pm

[Chris Kenny] "It was obvious to careful observers for years that classic FCP was going scraped and entirely replaced. There were clear technical considerations that made this necessary. So could you be more specific about your objection here? Is it simply that you wish the replacement had been a little more similar to classic FCP?"

That's revisionist history. It was obvious that FCP was going to be upgraded to 64 bit, and that Quicktime was a problem in going forward. Everyone expected an upgrade similar to PPro and Avid, and no one expected the EOL of Legacy and the creation of an entirely new, totally incompatible program that shared nothing with Legacy other than it's name. If you were expecting otherwise before last March, direct me to the post.

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


Return to posts index


Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:59:16 pm

[Herb Sevush] "That's revisionist history. It was obvious that FCP was going to be upgraded to 64 bit, and that Quicktime was a problem in going forward. Everyone expected an upgrade similar to PPro and Avid, and no one expected the EOL of Legacy and the creation of an entirely new, totally incompatible program that shared nothing with Legacy other than it's name. If you were expecting otherwise before last March, direct me to the post."

I did in fact predict major changes arising from questioning standard assumptions about how editing worked, and a feature set that wasn't a strict superset of FCP 7's. And I predicted that some people would be incensed by this. See this blog post from May 2010.

In general, [Apple is] willing to do things that they know people will complain about loudly — but this gives them the flexibility to sometimes make exceptional products:

I suspect this is precisely where they’re headed with FCP. We’re going to get the OpenCL and Grand Central Dispatch goodness that everyone wants. But we’re not going to get an app with a strict superset of Final Cut Pro’s functionality. Instead, we’re going to get an app that Apple believes is better overall for the tasks video editors perform, even if some features are cut. And we might also get a significantly overhauled UI; something that results from a process of sitting down and questioning every assumption about how editing interfaces currently work.

In short, I think they’ll come up with something really interesting… that will probably cause a bunch of people to totally freak out about how Apple has ruined everything and make forceful public declarations about how they’re leaving the platform. Meanwhile, people actually willing to embrace the thing might discover it has a bit of that iPad ‘magic’.


--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 20, 2012 at 2:22:03 pm

[Chris Kenny] "I did in fact predict major changes arising from questioning standard assumptions about how editing worked, and a feature set that wasn't a strict superset of FCP 7's"

I stand corrected, you were very prescient on this matter. Not being one to read things like Apple Insider I was unaware that this was being discussed. I will stand by my statement that most editors were unaware of these possibilities. The main rumor I heard was Apple selling off FCP and getting out of ProAps. Now that seems like a consummation devoutly to be wished for.

Actually I find the Apple Insider posting you were blogging about interesting reading at this point in time.

http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/05/18/apple_scaling_final_cut_studi...

5/18/10

"Apple's Final Cut Studio suite of video post production apps is getting a significant makeover to better target the software to the mainstream of Apple's customer base rather than high end professionals.
According to a person with knowledge of Apple's internal Pro Apps plans, the company has shuffled around management within the Final Cut team in order to retarget its efforts to more closely match the needs of the majority of its customers. Apple's Mac customer base has steadily shifted from desktop models to notebooks, while also broadening out from a high end creative niche to a wider installed base that includes more prosumer and advanced home users."


I find AI's analyses more on target than yours. They brought the app to market to suit this new demographic and took almost a year to bring to market the other features desired by the less important "higher end" of the market. I don't know about you, but I prefer to be the desired demographic for the products I use. I'm not as interested in building my business around a product that treats me like "oh and here's something for you, when we get around to it."

[Chris Kenny] "In short, I think they’ll come up with something really interesting… that will probably cause a bunch of people to totally freak out about how Apple has ruined everything and make forceful public declarations about how they’re leaving the platform."

If you predicted that everyone would freak out, why do you get so amazed that everyone is freaking out?


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 20, 2012 at 3:42:30 pm

[Herb Sevush] "I find AI's analyses more on target than yours. They brought the app to market to suit this new demographic and took almost a year to bring to market the other features desired by the less important "higher end" of the market."

I considered the AI analysis implausible because I didn't believe Apple would abandon the high-end market. And they didn't. What I failed to account for was that Apple's pattern of shipping minimalistic initial releases provided a mechanism by which they could ship a more mainstream initial release despite not indenting to abandon the high-end.

[Herb Sevush] "They brought the app to market to suit this new demographic and took almost a year to bring to market the other features desired by the less important "higher end" of the market. I don't know about you, but I prefer to be the desired demographic for the products I use. I'm not as interested in building my business around a product that treats me like "oh and here's something for you, when we get around to it.""

I addressed this argument a couple of days ago. The argument you're making seems plausible at first glance, but it doesn't take into account some important market dynamics. There's a lot of overlap between what the high-end needs and what mid-range users need. Really, if you go down the list of every single feature in a modern NLE, the difference between an app that works for mid-range users and an app that additionally works for high-end users probably comes down to less than 5% of the features.

Now, consider that the amount of development effort a vendor can invest in an application isn't contingent on its per-unit cost, but on the total revenue that they derive from that application. You start to see my point, yes? A more mass-market application that brings in more total revenue can, and generally will, have more resources invested in its development. This makes the app better for all of its users, including its high-end users who are, after all, mostly using the same features the more mainstream users are.

We see this dynamic at work all the time. Consider the trouble that the iPhone is causing for RIM, for instance. The iPhone is primarily a consumer-targeted device to which Apple has added some enterprise features over the years, whereas RIM has focused the BlackBerry more closely on enterprise users. The iPhone's mass-market success has created a very strong ecosystem around it, and has allowed Apple to make massive investments in iOS, such that it has better user interface, better bundled apps, offers more capabilities to third-party developers, etc. Consequently now that the iPhone has some enterprise deployment features, it's suddenly a very strong product in that market despite that market not being Apple's primary focus.

Or consider, in our industry, that we all use hardware platforms and operating systems were originally created primarily for office productivity tasks and that today are used by hundreds of millions of people primarily for things like browsing Facebook. We're not using specialty hardware platforms and specialty operating systems built from the ground up for video editing. If you want a more specific example, consider that DaVinci has, over the last decade, gone from being and expensive turnkey system with custom hardware to being an application that runs quite nicely on gaming GPUs. Our market is too small to support the kind of R&D that the mass market can support, and consequently specialty products commonly lose out to more mainstream products in the long run. Nobody building graphics processing hardware solely for color grading systems could possibly afford to invest what NVIDIA invests in R&D.

Bringing this back around to our primary subject, I consider the fact that FCP X has mass-market appeal to be a significant strength vs. (say) Media Composer. It will result in Apple being able to invest more in the app, in the app having a stronger ecosystem around it, and in many entry-level users learning the app and some of them later taking it with them when they move upmarket.

[Herb Sevush] "If you predicted that everyone would freak out, why do you get so amazed that everyone is freaking out?"

I'm not amazed, just annoyed.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 20, 2012 at 4:25:48 pm

[Chris Kenny] " I didn't believe Apple would abandon the high-end market. "

I feel abandoned. My MacPro tower recently died. For the moment I'm getting by with a loaner. I would like to stay with OSX, at least for the near future, but they don't seem to be making anything for me to do that with, neither software nor hardware. When and if I see a solution that works for me I will stop feeling abandoned. Your 80% assurances don't count.

[Chris Kenny] "Our market is too small to support the kind of R&D that the mass market can support"

I do understand mass market economies of scale. As I have written in other threads I believe that the era of high-end video riding on the coattails of mass market computers is coming to an end. My guess is that many of us will be working on Linux boxes in the next few years and paying a lot more to do that. I don't believe Apple is interested in arresting that trend or serving that market.

[Chris Kenny] "I'm not amazed, just annoyed."

OK

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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 21, 2012 at 1:49:06 pm

[Herb Sevush] "I do understand mass market economies of scale. As I have written in other threads I believe that the era of high-end video riding on the coattails of mass market computers is coming to an end. My guess is that many of us will be working on Linux boxes in the next few years and paying a lot more to do that. I don't believe Apple is interested in arresting that trend or serving that market."

I guess I get the logic here -- mainstream computing is moving to a more appliance-like model (iPad, Metro, etc.) and you don't think pro video editing is compatible with that model? Not sure I agree.

First off, I think traditional personal computers are going to take a pretty long time to exit the stage -- even if 80% of consumer computing happens on phones, tablets and maybe ARM desktops in five years, there will likely still be a viable market for high-powered traditional desktops and laptops. It's not just pro video customers -- it's gaming enthusiasts, engineers, scientists, developers, etc. And there's the whole server market, which also largely shares the same hardware platforms. It's enough of a customer base to keep prices reasonable, I think.

Secondly, I'm not sure appliance-like computing is inherently incompatible with what we do, the hardware it occurs on becomes more powerful and developers and platform vendors figure out how to handle problems like sharing data between apps better within the new model. I doubt many people looked at the Mac in 1984 and saw a system of relevance to professional video editing -- today's iPad is already much closer to being useful to our market, and we're already seeing video editing tools there. Nothing that could substitute for a desktop NLE yet, but it's early days.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 21, 2012 at 2:55:22 pm

[Chris Kenny] "even if 80% of consumer computing happens on phones, tablets and maybe ARM desktops in five years, there will likely still be a viable market for high-powered traditional desktops and laptops. It's not just pro video customers -- it's gaming enthusiasts, engineers, scientists, developers, etc. And there's the whole server market, which also largely shares the same hardware platforms. It's enough of a customer base to keep prices reasonable, I think."

That would be nice, but first of all I'd say 95-5 instead of your 80-20. The computers on most people's desks are a waste - most people need a web browser, email, word processor and for a much smaller group a spreadsheet. You don't need a desktop for this any longer.

You can go into any corporate office and wipe out 95% of the desktops and replace them with Pads and tablets. All of the markets you named will be in the same boat as high end video. It would be nice if prices were not effected, by I'm guessing otherwise. The other issue is operating systems. As both Apple and Microsoft go full bore after the tablet market I expect these high end niche players to be left behind. Again, that might just be my negative outlook on things, but "hope for the best, expect the worst" works for me.

[Chris Kenny] "Secondly, I'm not sure appliance-like computing is inherently incompatible with what we do"

I need a keyboard, I need multiple large monitors, I need access to large fast storage. This is the antithesis of the cloud world of pads and tablets where mobility reins. I'm sure it will be possible to edit on tablets, but will it be optimal?

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


Return to posts index


Mitch Ives
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 20, 2012 at 10:38:09 pm

[Chris Kenny] "You're stating opinions as facts."

Hmmm. seems like a little bit of the pot calling the kettle black?

I don't hate FCPX. What I hate are the fanboys who refuse to admit there are/were any shortcomings.

To Apple's eternal embarrassment, you still can't keyframe the damn color correction filter! You don't need a study to know that this is one of the most basic things in a serious app. It's been asked for since the first release. If Apple was listening to anybody it would be here by now, wouldn't it?

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 22, 2012 at 4:43:54 pm

[Jules bowman] "I don't like it.

Magnetic trackless timeline is stupid. Renaming things is stupid. A project isn't an event. No manual save is insane. This is not an upgrade to fcp7 which is how it was sold.


First of all they never sold it as an upgrade. They sold as "the new paradigm". NEW!

Second: tracks are not smart, so trackless is not stupid. Trackless and magnetic are helpful. For some projects/workflows. To me actually in most situations.

I agree with the naming. A project is a project, not an event and a timeline is a timeline, not a project. That is annoying, but I can live with it and it is the same in Aperture, so I had it before.

The manual save is VERY helpful and a truly professional feature. I used the NLE FAST before (which was later turned into Avid Liquid) and it is still used by many broadcasters worldwide (those who are stuck in SD and satellite phone-links). It didn´t have manual save. One of my companies branches does Digital Signage and we use Harris´ Infocaster. Very professional tool. Has no manual save.

You don´t like it. Fine. But that does´t mean the program is stupid. It only has a different feature set, that apparently does´t appeal to you.



Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 6:29:23 pm

[Chris Kenny] "The chief argument against FCP X these days seems to be that people don't trust Apple because... why? Because Apple didn't hold the entire app off of the market until these features were done, despite the fact that the app was useful to much of FCP's existing user base"

In delicate terms, that is the opposite of being true. They don't trust Apple for a variety of reasons, the least of which is their completely disingenuous performance at NAB, rolling out a product they NEVER said was meant for imovie and facebook support with "upmarketing" to "come". The reason you don't get it, is, basically during their rollout, you had almost near contempt for people that were rightly justified at being PO'd at the EOLing a product they based their workflows, jobs and built their houses around...with NO warning...

You know this, yet you don't get why... "They" don't trust Apple, yet you don't get why...it's because you think the end of history coincided with their last update...said with all due respect.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 6:39:52 pm

[Jamie Franklin] "In delicate terms, that is the opposite of being true. They don't trust Apple for a variety of reasons, the least of which is their completely disingenuous performance at NAB, rolling out a product they NEVER said was meant for imovie and facebook support with "upmarketing" to "come"."

That would be an interesting point if that were a remotely valid description of the initial release of FCP X. But it's not. That construction is born out of the notion that the video editing market is divided into broadcast TV, feature films, and YouTube hobbyists, and if a product isn't suitable for the first two groups it must be targeted at the last. This is simply wrong -- the actual world of paid professional video editing is far larger than broadcast TV content and feature film production, and FCP X, even in its initial incarnation, had a feature set suitable for a sizable fraction of the market. (You might argue it was a little too buggy for it to be a great idea for people to adopt it immediately, but that's a common failing in 1.0 releases and says nothing about Apple's motivations.)

[Jamie Franklin] "you had almost near contempt for people that were rightly justified at the EOLing a product they based their workflows, jobs and built their houses around...with NO warning..."

Pulling Final Cut Studio was clearly an error, but it was never literally unavailable, and Apple put it back on sale when people expressed their concerns. I'm not sure how Apple making a mistake and correcting it in response to feedback justifies long-term distrust.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 6:55:15 pm

[Chris Kenny] "Pulling Final Cut Studio was clearly an error, but it was never literally unavailable, and Apple put it back on sale when people expressed their concerns. I'm not sure how Apple making a mistake and correcting it in response to feedback justifies long-term distrust."
FCP was literally unavailable through retail channels (I'm sure people were still selling it on craigslist and eBay) until Apple decided weeks (months?) later to start selling it via their 800 number on a limited basis. Maybe other people had a different experience but it was gone from Apple's site, gone from Apple's stores and gone from the the handful of 3rd party Apple retailers I called in my area.

But that's all water under the bridge now.

Why can't everyone just agree that painting with broad strokes (whether that broad stroke is to call people that don't like FCPX dinosaurs or to call people that do like FCPX un-pro) is a major hindrance to having a rational discussion and just stop doing it?


-Andrew

2.9 GHz 8-core (4,1), FCP 7.0.3, 10.6.6
Blackmagic Multibridge Eclipse (7.9.5)



Return to posts index

Jason Jenkins
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:00:39 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Why can't everyone just agree that painting with broad strokes (whether that broad stroke is to call people that don't like FCPX dinosaurs or to call people that do like FCPX un-pro) is a major hindrance to having a rational discussion and just stop doing it?"

Yeah. And how about that broadcast monitoring?!

Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production... with style!

Check out my Mormon.org profile.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:08:30 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Why can't everyone just agree that painting with broad strokes (whether that broad stroke is to call people that don't like FCPX dinosaurs or to call people that do like FCPX un-pro) is a major hindrance to having a rational discussion and just stop doing it?

"


Well said

Steve Connor
"FCPX Professional"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 6:57:47 pm

And round and round we go...

They EOL'd software without warning...putting back OLD software because people were rightly upset doesn't excuse Apples moves here and regain "trust". Promoting their software - "we aren't leaving the PROS behind" while doing just that doesn't excuse Apples moves here...1.0 release after 10 years, doesn't excuse Apples moves here. Redesigning how we edit isn't a new paradigm, it's redesigning how we edit, and not embracing it doesn't make us haters, or irrational as you are insinuating...

This argument is exactly the same as a year ago. Continued belittling of those that are not embracing this software as irrational luddites and haters because we say meanie things against Apple...

Honestly, the ones who haven't really moved on here are the Apple fanatics...only now you are getting worse because there have been "updates"....


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:47:15 pm

[Jamie Franklin] "Honestly, the ones who haven't really moved on here are the Apple fanatics...only now you are getting worse because there have been "updates"...."

Based on some of the other posts on this thread it's not just the Apple "fanatics" who haven't moved on

Steve Connor
"FCPX Professional"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 8:03:55 pm

[Steve Connor] " Based on some of the other posts on this thread it's not just the Apple "fanatics" who haven't moved on"

The I know you are but what am I approach. A barn burning classic! This is getting old. When someone takes an exception to being called a "hater" or broad stroke insinuations of being irrational for distrusting Apple (for no apparent reason to the fanatics), the responses it appears you are referring to, how exactly have they not "moved on"...this is a discussion forum, not a psychology session.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 8:23:14 pm

[Jamie Franklin] "The I know you are but what am I approach. A barn burning classic! This is getting old. When someone takes an exception to being called a "hater" or broad stroke insinuations of being irrational for distrusting Apple (for no apparent reason to the fanatics), the responses it appears you are referring to, how exactly have they not "moved on"...this is a discussion forum, not a psychology session.
"


You accused some of the FCPX "fans" of not moving on, I just suggested that those still posting rants on here may not have moved on as well, not really psychology as such.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Professional"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 8:51:36 pm

[Steve Connor] "You accused some of the FCPX "fans" of not moving on, I just suggested that those still posting rants on here may not have moved on as well, not really psychology as such."

Accused? They aren't...I made a statement of fact. Saying there is no reason for the "they" people to distrust Apple, blather on in a VERY dishonest attempt to make the "they" people sound irrational, is by it's very definition, not moving on from the ludicrous, belittling, smug statements being hurled at people all last summer...and if by not moving on by me, no, I won't sit here and read these insinuations without taking exception to them...

Edit to add: If people are still ranting about this software..so? it is still in flux...it's not as if this program just came and went...


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 8:58:59 pm

[Jamie Franklin] "They EOL'd software without warning...putting back OLD software because people were rightly upset doesn't excuse Apples moves here and regain "trust"."

Wait, so your objection is that they didn't continue developing the classic FCP codebase?

[Jamie Franklin] "Redesigning how we edit isn't a new paradigm, it's redesigning how we edit, and not embracing it doesn't make us haters, or irrational as you are insinuating..."

I haven't actually said (or insinuated) any such thing.

[Jamie Franklin] "This argument is exactly the same as a year ago. "

Yeah, which is kind of bizarre given that many of the arguments advanced against FCP X then are no longer relevant. It now has (either internally or as part of its ecosystem) the basic feature set required to be usable for things like broadcast TV and feature film editing. The fact that Apple essentially went right down the list adding these things should alleviate concerns that Apple intended to abandon markets that required them. Yet somehow the anti-FCP X narrative seems to have changed not at all.

[Jamie Franklin] "Honestly, the ones who haven't really moved on here are the Apple fanatics...only now you are getting worse because there have been "updates"...."

Err... we're "worse" because we now have a stronger argument?

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:19:29 pm

Sigh. More of the same dismissal...

You said you couldn't make sense of why people distrusted Apple using logic you simply invented...which makes this ironic. You basically put this delusion on people while deluding yourself.

Your responses are pretty repugnant. Which is why I have always taken exception with you. For every great point you make, you come out with this smug-a-thon reply...you know better, which is frustrating. Just look at your first response here...

[Chris Kenny] " Wait, so your objection is that they didn't continue developing the classic FCP codebase?"

Honestly, that's how you are twisting the argument? you can do so much better...by listening


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:02:45 pm

[Jamie Franklin] "You said you couldn't make sense of why people distrusted Apple using logic you simply invented..."

What logic are you saying I invented? That people distrusted Apple because Apple shipped the initial version of FCP X without certain high-end features, and people read this as an indication that Apple wasn't interested in the pro market? I didn't invent that. It was a very widely advanced argument. There are to this day people saying that even now that Apple has added most of the relevant features, they still distrust Apple's commitment to the pro market because they weren't prioritized highly enough to make it into the initial release.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:06:11 pm

White noise


Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 6:57:53 pm

There are some legitimate reason's to be heaved at the mighty Apple. If you don't understand that, it doesn't mean everyone is a "hater", it just means you don't understand it. That's all.







Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index

Eric Parker Andersen
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:14:59 pm

I actually agree with much of what has been said here regarding Apple, even if it comes across as sour grapes. That is why in my original post I said Apple needed to learn some things, after the launch of X (its' not an iPod!!!). I would go so far as to say the launch was disastrous. Rather than freak out, I took a breath, rolled up my sleeves and learned a fantastic new app. I spent $400 on a new edit suite, and within 4 weeks I had made 30x that cost by using it. Am I a fanboy? Hell yeah. Because Apple is forward thinking, and egalitarian.

FCPX was pro out of the gate, but just not usable for every pro. Now, with the broadcast monitoring close to perfect, I would argue it is. Long format or short, broadcast or YouTube, it is a pretty brilliant software considering how young it is.

E. Parker Andersen - Seventhree Productions
Shooter, Cutter, 2D/3D Graphics and FX
http://www.73pro.com


Return to posts index

Eric Parker Andersen
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:29:02 pm

Dang. Sorry everyone, I got sidetracked into discussing the launch again. It's addicting. Actually I'm glad Apple/FinalCut is cutting-edge and controversial again. I miss those days when I was a rebel for thinking I could use FCP from home for quality video work.

I was actually curious to hear others' take on the Broadcast monitoring. I wanted to hear of any potential problems since I've been starting to use it in earnest for actual delivery on HDCAM tape.

Glad to see there is still so much passion out there. My core belief is that it is about the art, not the canvas, and I love using Avid and Adobe products as well (and I look forward to learning Smoke better).

E. Parker Andersen - Seventhree Productions
Shooter, Cutter, 2D/3D Graphics and FX
http://www.73pro.com


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:35:28 pm

[Eric Parker Andersen] "My core belief is that it is about the art, not the canvas"

That is exactly why the argument will live on. I believe it's about the canvas. The "art" is only within my control to a certain degree, but what little control I do have, I feel the most creative on the most flexible canvas around...that being FC-PRO-7


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:45:24 pm

The art is what ultimately matters but the paint, the brushes and the canvas etc., all play a part in the creation of the art.



Back on topic...

Reliable b-cast monitoring was one of the big things I was waiting for X to get back before I'd even contemplate giving it a serious look. Glad to hear that that seems to be one more thing I can check off my list.



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:45:45 pm

[Eric Parker Andersen] "Dang. Sorry everyone, I got sidetracked into discussing the launch again. It's addicting. Actually I'm glad Apple/FinalCut is cutting-edge and controversial again. I miss those days when I was a rebel for thinking I could use FCP from home for quality video work.

I was actually curious to hear others' take on the Broadcast monitoring. I wanted to hear of any potential problems since I've been starting to use it in earnest for actual delivery on HDCAM tape.
"


I'm afraid the word "haters" tends to bring out the same old arguments again. Nerves are still raw even a year on.

Still glad to hear that the Broadcast monitoring is working well for you

Steve Connor
"FCPX Professional"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:07:04 pm

[Eric Parker Andersen] "I was actually curious to hear others' take on the Broadcast monitoring. I wanted to hear of any potential problems since I've been starting to use it in earnest for actual delivery on HDCAM tape."

Apple does warn that the audio sync is currently only accurate to the frame level with the broadcast output, not the sample level. Between that and FCP X's lack of deck control, I think I'd be tempted to keep exporting and using an external app (e.g. Blackmagic's Media Express) for laying down to tape.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:49:54 pm

It's true, the term 'haters' could set off a full scale east coast vs west coast hip hop situation!

I haven't posted on here for a couple years but I've been trying to figure out why every time I tell a colleague I really like X the same scowl and shaking of heads immediately follows. The conversation really can't continue without both parties having an open mind.

It puts everything at a disadvantage. I know in my case I had to learn FCP after knowing Avid, eventually I liked it better but it was tough! Less hoops to jump through, which is why I have grown to like X so much. It took three days of several hours and repeating tutorials in order to start to even do anything in it. I had to put in the work to learn it in order to make up my own mind. It really is a rethinking of everything that had become habit.

I was doing the finishing on a feature when X dropped and no update to FCP7. Initially I was pretty miffed, 32bit really sucks when you are on a 12 core mac pro monster using a quarter of it's abilities. I fired up FCPX tried it out for an hour, said #%@* this and put it away until I had a personal project. FCP7 did and still does what it always did. But the more and more I used FCPX without the pressure of a deadline, the more I grew to like it. No more transcoding to prores, bins already made on ingest, no more making sure I have my tracks laid out for protools, I could go on, but I have to say it's a pretty great leap forward from FCP7 since it's been updated.

As for last summer, the feature was sold and now I'm generating 1080p 5.1 deliverables to go to HDCAMSR using roles, it's been much easier. Had the FCPX/Resolve workflow been around when it was being finished, it would have been much less work.

Avid and CS# have their place, I think whatever tools an individual artist works best with is great. I just hope that rather than referring to people in the discussion as haters or fanboys we can ask ourselves if we have given it an honest try before dismissing something completely.

p.s. my intensity pro card on my home setup on X is working better than it does in 7. I feel like it's almost ready for primetime.


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 8:31:34 pm

[Darren Roark] " I just hope that rather than referring to people in the discussion as haters or fanboys"

This isn't a balanced argument. No one is calling people who are enjoying this software and finding success with it a "fanboy"...the "fanatics" are those dismissing people and their opinions, calling them haters or irrational for justifiable complaints, generalizations and frankly, talking smack and making "stuff" up...THAT is a "fanatic"...


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 8:35:24 pm

[Chris Kenny] "Pulling Final Cut Studio was clearly an error, but it was never literally unavailable, and Apple put it back on sale when people expressed their concerns. I'm not sure how Apple making a mistake and correcting it in response to feedback justifies long-term distrust."

Wrong! It is unavailable Chris. Apple put it back on the market for a very brief time, and for enterprise customers only, and even those could only purchase it direct from Apple for $1000, even if the customer qualified for $295 update.

FCS3 has since been completely removed from the market by Apple, and, without any official announcement. That has been in force for many months now.

So, it's not correct to say the company corrected their mistake. In fact, one could easily argue that Apple used subterfuge to make it appear in the press as though they were correcting the mistake. It's wonder you and many others fell for it.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:17:01 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Wrong! It is unavailable Chris. Apple put it back on the market for a very brief time, and for enterprise customers only, and even those could only purchase it direct from Apple for $1000, even if the customer qualified for $295 update. "

It was available for months. Enterprise customers were the ones for whom this was supposedly a huge problem. The number of people who actually waited until after FCP X was announced and then suddenly decided they might want FCP 7 upgrade licenses is probably miniscule. You appear to be making the argument that it wasn't sufficient for Apple to have given people a window of some additional months to buy copies of an EOL'd product, but that they have some obligation to keep it on sale indefinitely. This seems somewhat unreasonable.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:25:45 pm

[Chris Kenny] "You appear to be making the argument that it wasn't sufficient for Apple to have given people a window of some additional months to buy copies of an EOL'd product, but that they have some obligation to keep it on sale indefinitely. This seems somewhat unreasonable."

You're damned straight it wasn't sufficient. It was never spelled-out sufficiently for the public, and the "limited" time frame was never published definitively. As a reseller, I hear about the confusion daily and deal with the repercussions constantly. At NAB, the confusion and distrust was pervasive, and for you to think otherwise is reality distortion.

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

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 20, 2012 at 10:01:37 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "At NAB, the confusion and distrust was pervasive, and for you to think otherwise is reality distortion.
"


Oh, David, please.

This is just simply inaccurate at a very fundamental level.

The only "pervasive" subject I took note of on the show floor was how many of the traditional players are adopting social media strategies in addition to their traditional sales efforts. (Better late than never, guys!)

That was a theme for at least 30% of the booths of companies like Harris Broadcast (larger booth presence than anyone except perhaps Sony) that form the core of the actual broadcast industry. Facebook, Twitter and YouTube icons were prominent in many booths where traditional players are staking out turf in the new social media world.

Even in the small subset of "digital video editing" - which in itself is about 10% of what NAB is all about - anyone without an agenda would easily put the Blackmagic announcement, the Smoke announcement, and even the Go Pro offerings WAY ahead of FCP-X as a topic of conversation.

So when Mr. Weiss uses the term "pervasive" it's just not accurate at all.

Sorry, David, but you're stuck in a small echo chamber. And it's leading you astray. Perhaps at the Media Motion Ball - the discussion was closer to "pervasive" - but not anywhere else.

In the discussions I engaged at on the show floor - with dozens of fellow production professionals it hardly came up.

In fact in the meeting with the other guys from THIS board like Walter, Moody and (jeez, I'm spacing on the other name. how rude of me, sorry) we talked for 3 full hours about our careers and industry trends and I don't believe X or any other software consumed more than maybe 20 minutes aggregate of the total.

And nobody said a cross word about anyone else the entire time. (How refreshing do you think THAT was!)

That's the difference "face to face" makes. Something I'm trying to bring to my writing here.

X is solid enough now so that no matter how people try to "spin" the past year or cling to and attempt to defend their prior positions - the truth is well represented out there.

It's a great product that works really well for a market niche. Just like every other software editing package out there.

Everyone has to face the reality - no matter how annoying it may be - that there is no longer a monolithic single software solution that works well for everyone.

Legacy became sorta close to that by accident. Largely because during it's time - most editors needed a similar tool.

Now they don't.

The market has shifted. The industry has shifted. NAB proved that. Some traditional processes remain but are re-aligning. Others are being replaced. Go Pro has more people talking than Ikigami.

Like it or not, that's the way it is.

(Actually I had a studio shoot right before I left for Vegas and that's what the client showed up to shoot with. ONE Go Pro Hero 1. All they needed was a quick backlit shot of a guy stepping up on a podium and raising their arms in victory for an opening. It's going to the opening sequence of an iMag piece in a large convention. So getting a silhouette knock out image hardly needs a Red. So the camera fit the gig.)

Life moves on. Pick a direction. Adapt to your new reality - however that plays out - or fall behind.

I now wish we could do this forum in person occasionally. THAT would knock down the angst and ire significantly.

You can't trash a person face to face very easily. You have to do so behind a keyboard if you want to keep feeling "safe." And that's really too bad.

FWIW.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 20, 2012 at 10:47:27 pm

[Bill Davis] "In fact in the meeting with the other guys from THIS board like Walter, Moody and (jeez,"

I was hoping that there would be a picture. I really want a picture of the debate meetup. Especially of jeez. ;)

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 7:50:40 pm

[Chris Kenny] "The chief argument against FCP X these days seems to be that people don't trust Apple"

That's just one of a number of reasons.

Until the most recent release, 1.0.4 I believe, it was incredibly buggy and many of those on this forum who really love the design simply couldn't use it for paying work. By all accounts the latest release is a lot better, but that been what - 2 whole weeks out of the last year. Version 1 it might be, but why would a working editor want to base his paycheck on that kind of performance.

Next, the magnetic timeline is not to everyone's liking, to say it mildly. For many it is the answer to a question that they weren't asking. FCPX has a distinct design style and for many editors it runs counter to the way they work. Since Apple chose to re-invent the wheel, it's not surprising that those who simply wanted a better wheel are not enthusiastic.

Finally there is Apple itself. Yes, many editors no longer trust Apple. I guess they're all delusional, it must be something in the water they don't drink. Or maybe it's just the silence, the lack of communication. The unavoidable comparison between Adobe and Apple, and even between the "new" Avid and Apple, as far as communicating a vision for the product over the next few years contributes as much as anything to the distrust of Apple.

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


Return to posts index

Eric Parker Andersen
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 8:29:55 pm

Just a quick thought for those that wrestle with the magnetic timeline in FCPX. Just lay down a big gap clip, and edit everything else as a connected storyline. Bam, almost a classic NLE timeline, almost. Just a thought although I know the reservations run deep, and for some good reasons.

Trust Apple? I don't trust any company. I've bought gear/software across the spectrum that is no longer supported. Having worked with Adobe and Avid and Sony, JVC, Panasonic (etc, etc, etc) over the years I never found any of those companies to be particularly useful when an issue comes up (esp. the 'old' Avid; talk about favoring their big clients over the little guy). How did I get around the issues? Not by talking to Adobe tech support, that's for sure. I figured it out by looking to user communities such as this. AT the least we can AGAIN thank Apple for bringing the price point of an NLE down. Heck, I grabbed MC just 'cuz it was lowered to a grand. Now Smoke for $3500? Thanks Apple, you heartless money-grubbing company. ;)

Sorry to those who didn't like the term 'hater'. It was not directed at you, the FCP user who felt burned and abandoned, took a clear headed look at the X, and decided you don't like the new direction. Fair enough. 'Haters' are those that enjoy hating for its own sake, the ones who declare that FCPX 'sucks', is 'stupid' and isn't 'pro'. Not true, it clearly works for lots of us in the biz.

Including the Broadcast Monitoring...

E. Parker Andersen - Seventhree Productions
Shooter, Cutter, 2D/3D Graphics and FX
http://www.73pro.com


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:01:36 pm

I think the biggest reason at this point in the game, for not adapting to X, is because no one is aking for it. I work at an all avid place, with 2 smokes and some FCP 7 setups for the web. Not one person here has any inclination to try it.

I also pick up alot of part time free lance work. Mostly shorts and music videos with the occasional corporate job. Not one person or add ive seen asked for FCPX.. Or adobe premiere for that matter. Its all Avid and FCP7..

so my question is why learn something that youll never use in a workplace? I mean ,sure, if it you like it and you use it at home for personal stuff, but as far as getting a job, its not gonna help to th ave that experience.

With that said, ive dbbled with it, and followthe news, because if it one day does become a viable option, then ill be ready to go but i dont see that happening for years and years.

Not to mention i just love editng on Avid. Being in the cut for hours and realizing you havent touched a mouse other than to load a clip, is simply liberating.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:36:30 pm

[Neil Goodman] "Not one person here has any inclination to try it. "

Do any of those people own the systems that they are using in the "all avid place"?

What if someone came in and said, "today, you are using FCPX" would they use it or leave?

[Neil Goodman] "I also pick up alot of part time free lance work. Mostly shorts and music videos with the occasional corporate job. Not one person or add ive seen asked for FCPX.. Or adobe premiere for that matter. Its all Avid and FCP7.. "

Is that editors that haven't asked for it, or clients? Who owns the gear there?

Just curious.

If I needed to go to place that had certain tools in order to get paid, I probably wouldn't ask for much either. Since I have a choice in which tools I use, it makes my relationship to the tools I use much more personal as it's my decision.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:33:31 pm

Nope, all the systems are NBC/Uni’s..HP’s and Nitirs'.and of course, the editors would want to keep our jobs, but our post supervisor has openly stated FCPX isnt on her radar as of yet. It would be hard to convince anyone to ditch the ISIS’ and ecosytem we have here for some completely new piece of software, especially one that isnt adopted widely.

As far as the freelance goes, Its mostly the clients saying i want this cut on this or that, and i use my own gear at home mostly although occasionally a few of my clients have me work outa there offices. At home im basically setu p to use any software someone might ask for, even FCPx so its not really an issue there but Premiere CS is on every computer i’ve ever worked on, except our bays here at work, and still no ones asked me to cut on it.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 11:14:58 pm

[Neil Goodman] "Nope, all the systems are NBC/Uni’s..HP’s and Nitirs'.and of course, the editors would want to keep our jobs, but our post supervisor has openly stated FCPX isnt on her radar as of yet. It would be hard to convince anyone to ditch the ISIS’ and ecosytem we have here for some completely new piece of software, especially one that isnt adopted widely. "

Well, that's a hard system to replace and that particular setup is Avid's strength. Even setting up an fcs3 system to replace that would take a lot of retooling so you'd have to have really excellent reasons to make that move.

[Neil Goodman] "As far as the freelance goes, Its mostly the clients saying i want this cut on this or that, and i use my own gear at home mostly although occasionally a few of my clients have me work outa there offices."

So your choice is taken out of all of this, which is a different situation than those that can choose (captain obvious, I know). I'm not saying that fcpx is the right choice for everyone. It isn't, just as an Isis system isn't for everyone. If someone is telling me what system to use, guess what system I will use and like it?

At our place, I'm the only one who has even experimented with anything but fcs3, but it's my recommendation on the next move. Whatever I decide (with the appropriate conversations, of course) is what we will do. And it will be me who will have to help, support, design, and in some ways "train" for the next system, as well as make equipment recs and consider existing hardware integration in to all of it. It's not going to be fcp8.

Broadcast monitoring is very welcome, but it hasn't tipped the scales. Cs6 is going to be a strong contender, especially with Adobe dipping their toes in openCL, greatly improving broadcast monitoring, so they have my attention. We also use AE.

I can tell you Microsoft is near the bottom of our list, but that's my decision for now.

There's an incredible amount to consider. When moving to fcp3, it was rather easy, and a different era. Most shooters I worked with at the time were slowly moving to DV. Then fcp 4.5 and dvcpro hd.

My point is, the considerations are up to me, our clients don't dictate what we edit on. So if X works for us, or cs6, or whatever, what does that have to do with a wide adoption or who's asking for it?


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:04:29 pm

[Eric Parker Andersen] "Just a quick thought for those that wrestle with the magnetic timeline in FCPX. Just lay down a big gap clip, and edit everything else as a connected storyline. Bam, almost a classic NLE timeline, almost."

But in every other NLE on the market I don't have to do that, I can just edit to my hearts content. What's in it for me. Speed? Not compared to Edius, or PPro. Roles? I prefer tracks. Organization? Many prefer Avid.

I have never had a problem dealing with track collisions, before the X release I didn't know there was a name for this behavior. I don't need to be protected from something I don't have a problem with. I'm not saying it doesn't work for some, I am saying that as far as editing workflow goes, the prize doesn't seem worth the price, at least not for me.

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


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:05:21 pm

[Eric Parker Andersen] " 'Haters' are those that enjoy hating for its own sake, the ones who declare that FCPX 'sucks', is 'stupid' and isn't 'pro'. Not true, it clearly works for lots of us in the biz."

A characterization not nearly directed at said posters as it is to those that have legitimate gripes for a litany of reasons spelled out continuously. I don't see people griping for griping sake. But I do see people inventing revisionist prose projecting a delusional fantasy against those that have vented various frustrations at Apple, it's new product and disingenuous rollout. As if hey, none of that happened! You just don't "get it!" It's all sunshine and lollipops, and here is a smug condescending reason why they don't get it.... /facepalm


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:14:40 pm

[Eric Parker Andersen] "Just a quick thought for those that wrestle with the magnetic timeline in FCPX. Just lay down a big gap clip, and edit everything else as a connected storyline. Bam, almost a classic NLE timeline, almost. "

I know what you're saying Eric, but of course you lose the full trimming tools and other plusses by eliminating the Primary, but you're right - and that's one of the approaches I've tried when I wanted more linear control.

But this thread has already gone from Broadcast monitoring (which got me interested) to general psych 101. But I'd love to talk more in another thread. After finishing our latest short this week in X, I've almost come round to the approach - but virtual tracks and (please) a quick evolution of the compound clip concept) and I could be convinced it's a solid direction...and the promised audio mixing.


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:12:44 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Until the most recent release, 1.0.4 I believe, it was incredibly buggy and many of those on this forum who really love the design simply couldn't use it for paying work. By all accounts the latest release is a lot better, but that been what - 2 whole weeks out of the last year. Version 1 it might be, but why would a working editor want to base his paycheck on that kind of performance."

This accounts for people not running out and using FCP X for serious projects from day one, certainly. I myself was in here a year ago pointing out that it didn't really matter much if Apple took a bit of extra time to add higher-end features because this was a fairly conservative industry and people likely weren't going to switch over very quickly regardless.

Had people just been saying "Hey, it's an initial release and it's kind of buggy, I'll give them a chance to ship the 2.0[1] first", I would have had no objection. But they weren't saying that. They were (and are) drawing wide-ranging conclusions about Apple's plans for the product and the market based on a distorted understand of who the product was targeted at, and advocating and predicting wholesale migration to other NLEs, often while glossing over the issues those other products had.

FCP X was useless to my company as shipped 12 months ago. I stated this openly. I explained exactly why. I clearly wouldn't have objected to others making similar statements.

[1] Which, given that Apple appears to be adopting the OS X version scheme, will probably actually be labeled 10.1.

[Herb Sevush] "Next, the magnetic timeline is not to everyone's liking, to say it mildly. For many it is the answer to a question that they weren't asking. FCPX has a distinct design style and for many editors it runs counter to the way they work. Since Apple chose to re-invent the wheel, it's not surprising that those who simply wanted a better wheel are not enthusiastic."

And this would also be fine if people were saying "I don't like it" or even "I don't like it because of X, Y and Z". But many were saying "This makes narrative storytelling impossible and demonstrates that Apple is clueless about video editing" or other similarly hyperbolic things.

[Herb Sevush] "Finally there is Apple itself. Yes, many editors no longer trust Apple. I guess they're all delusional, it must be something in the water they don't drink. Or maybe it's just the silence, the lack of communication. The unavoidable comparison between Adobe and Apple, and even between the "new" Avid and Apple, as far as communicating a vision for the product over the next few years contributes as much as anything to the distrust of Apple."

Apple has never been a very communicative company. It's unclear to me why this suddenly seems to have started bothering some people a lot more lately.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:19:29 pm

[Chris Kenny] "Apple has never been a very communicative company. It's unclear to me why this suddenly seems to have started bothering some people a lot more lately."

Could it be because they stranded the vast majority of their reported 2-million users without any warning, without a "true" replacement, and without a solution for opening their previous years of projects?

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

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 9:54:08 pm

aye.

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


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:15:32 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Could it be because they stranded the vast majority of their reported 2-million users without any warning, without a "true" replacement, and without a solution for opening their previous years of projects?"

I don't buy the "stranded" rhetoric. Had FCP 7 broken with the next system update and never been fixed or something, that would be Apple stranding its users. But FCP 7 continued to work -- it still works just fine to this day on Lion. We still use it regularly, because our clients still regularly bring us projects edited in it. It doesn't feel like we had something before the FCP X release that we suddenly lost after it.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:41:32 pm

[Chris Kenny] "I don't buy the "stranded" rhetoric."

Then you're out of touch with the other human beings in your chosen field. I deal with stranded users daily who have no idea where to go because their MacPros are old, there's no replacement, and they still have no idea where to turn.

[Chris Kenny] "It doesn't feel like we had something before the FCP X release that we suddenly lost after it."

So, because others don't feel the same way as you they're thoughts, feelings, and aspirations are invalid? Get out of that dark room sometime Chris and talk to other pros, it's obvious you've been in isolation far too much.

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

Chris Kenny
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 11:09:19 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Then you're out of touch with the other human beings in your chosen field. I deal with stranded users daily who have no idea where to go because their MacPros are old, there's no replacement, and they still have no idea where to turn."

Err... I thought we were talking about FCP here. As of right now, there's nothing about the current Mac Pro's extended product cycle that can't be explained by the a lack of new Xeons from Intel. Intel recently announced some, and as was noted in the other thread, HP seems to think they'll be able to ship a product with them in late May. If there's still no new Mac Pro by, say, mid-June, that would start to become suggestive, but as of right now the alleged cancelation of the Mac Pro is a matter of speculation and rumor. And even the rumors I've seen were non-commital, to the effect that Apple was considering canceling it, not that it was actually being canceled.

[David Roth Weiss] "So, because others don't feel the same way as you they're thoughts, feelings, and aspirations are invalid? Get out of that dark room sometime Chris and talk to other pros, it's obvious you've been in isolation far too much."

Meh. I'm not just sitting here doing unsupervised grading all day. I do supervised grading, workflow consulting, and end up in business-type meetings on a regular basis (as a consequence of owning a chunk of the company). I talk to a fair number of people, and they often pick my brain at length about industry developments once they figure out how nerdy I am about this stuff. I've had a couple of people over the last year express skepticism about what Apple is up to with FCP X, but nobody has ever given me the standard line from this forum about how Apple isn't to be trusted and it therefore makes sense to migrate to Avid or Premiere (in fact I can't recall Premiere ever being mentioned). We are, as I noted, seeing FCP 7 and Avid projects in the same ratios we were seeing a year ago (and nothing else, for all that Premiere gets talked up in Internet forums). I was on a workflow conference call just yesterday discussing whether the project would be edited in FCP or Avid, and absolutely none of the anti-Apple talking points I see repeated ad nauseum here was even hinted at.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 20, 2012 at 6:13:42 pm

It's too early for premiere - maybe FCPX too really, but its definitely far too early to judge the level of impact PPro 6 is going to have - I think there is going to be a pretty significant shift to PPro: I mean it looks fit for purpose, almost everyone already has it to upgrade to 6 from, the trimming tools are now better than I know how to use, there's proper application level card output support, and there are a couple usps like warp stabilser..

I personally find it really easy to imagine myself editing in 6, and I reckon a ton of corporate commercial (at least moodfilm, case study stuff) could go largely to premiere.

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


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:38:39 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Could it be because they stranded the vast majority of their reported 2-million users without any warning, without a "true" replacement, and without a solution for opening their previous years of projects?"

While I've really grown to enjoy much of the program, I recognize that it's because our workflow and acquisition format allowed for me to work with it and to continue to work through it.

For so many of my industry colleagues (and Apple clients) that has simply not been the case because they were, in fact, excluded from the program by default.

That was shortsighted and close minded on Apple's part. It could have been done much differently.


Return to posts index

Jamie Franklin
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:48:22 pm

And there was still a lot to be desired in 7. It's not as if the RED workflow improved in the last year. Or Color had its horrendous bugs and limitations ironed out. "Stranded" has several connotations. Abandoned to me is more apt. Yes, it's still there, and working, but what we were waiting for didn't materialize...and they pulled support. To dismiss that, among the many other let downs on this "upgrade", as negligible or insignificant by some is quite a callus thing. Especially when the argument is being made that "upmarketing" was their game plan from the beginning....ahuh


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 11:14:49 pm

[Jim Giberti] "For so many of my industry colleagues (and Apple clients) that has simply not been the case because they were, in fact, excluded from the program by default.

That was shortsighted and close minded on Apple's part. It could have been done much differently."


Precisely! Unlike some of our other debaters here, you exhibit true empathy and understanding Jim, and that's a beautiful thing. Some of the others simply refuse to acknowledge anyone's else's feelings, which clearly run deep for many users.


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 11:29:07 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Precisely! Unlike some of our other debaters here, you exhibit true empathy and understanding Jim, and that's a beautiful thing. Some of the others simply refuse to acknowledge anyone's else's feelings, which clearly run deep for many users."

I have my moments David.
I was just thinking of you, as a Vermontophile...just finished a short piece on the region.


Return to posts index

Michael Hadley
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:39:58 pm

Wow. This is the most "passion" I've seen on the cow in a long time. But: Apple totally screwed the launch of X AND scared the bejeesus out of every FCP 7 editor who had learned and invested in master the tool of their business. One of the worst bungles the company has ever made.

That said, while not a perfect fit for every pro/working editor, I have found that X suits my needs and, perhaps most importantly, it makes editing Faster and more Fun. More enjoyable. And gives me more time to focus on the cut.

It still is immature in a lot of ways and need to improve. But I think it has a lot to recommend it, if you are willing to put away your 7 skill set and muscle memory and try something new.

Two more things: I've had issues with X and have had no problem getting a tech person to talk with me. Four times. No service contract, nothing. Just called them up. Very short wait. That suggests to me they want to support their customers 'cause they are literally offering free support.

Also: being that Apple is huge and hugely profitable, they have the resources to stay in this line of business for the long term. Their cagey approach to PR leaves one wanting more, but their public actions indicate their commitment. But the screwed up launch still leaves many people leery. Which is perfectly understandable.


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 10:46:25 pm

[Michael Hadley] "Two more things: I've had issues with X and have had no problem getting a tech person to talk with me. Four times. No service contract, nothing. Just called them up. Very short wait. That suggests to me they want to support their customers 'cause they are literally offering free support."

Well that must have changed after our last debacle with FCPX corruption Michael. I had to explain to them that I was not going to pay them $100 to help them trouble shoot their buggy program. We had a very lengthy conversation - far too much of it spent on why I wouldn't pay to talk about it and why they would benefit from me helping them work out some serious problems.

Perhaps they've realized that benefit now, and their responsibility in debugging their beta software.


Return to posts index

Frank Gothmann
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 19, 2012 at 11:17:43 pm

What pisses people of is simply the whole package - the app itself, the attitude, the silence, the pending demise of the tower.
It's childsplay.
Seriously, listen to all the interviews conducted during NAB. You constantly hear the phrases, "switching, distrust in Apple, people being angry with Apple, fear of loosing the tower, reassurance from Adobe, Avid, Autodesk".
It's a very clear message, screaming in your face.
Any company with a little bit of respect for their customers would want to address such things - in the open. NAB would have been a perfect opportunity to do that. Show up, show comitment, talk. And don't give me the "Apple doesn't do tradeshows anymore" spiel.
If they don't, that message is also clear so people start pointing the middle finger back.

It's the usual bull all over again with them hiding somewhere in a hotel suite and briefing a few privileged vips that have Apple's blessing to spread the word.
I see Spectre's Blofeld stroking his white cat, appearing on a monitor while the mignons are listening.
It's a bloody NLE, not a secret weapons program.
People are making back flips because broadcast monitoring sort of works now. Wow, amazing.
And then I look at a Mac Mini cramped inside a rackmount server enclosure with "the favorite feature being the mechanical arm on the right hand site of the unit which transferred the on/off button movement to the back of the Mac Mini" - all for the bargain price of over 2.000 dollar.

Can't have any of this nonsense anymore.



------
"You also agree that you will not use these products for... the development, design, manufacture or production of nuclear, missiles, or chemical or biological weapons."
iTunes End User Licence Agreement


Return to posts index

Michael Hadley
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 20, 2012 at 12:33:24 am

In truth, I was a bit surprised. But yeah, I just called 'em up. They sent emails to follow up. I uploaded files to them. I was kind of amazed, really.

But I would imagine the FCP X team at Apple has had their butt kicked and (hopefully) management has told them to make it right. Now.

The tech support is one indication. The fast/good updates is another. The sneak peaks/roadmap to celebrities like Larry J. Those are good things.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX Broadcast Monitoring in action
on Apr 20, 2012 at 1:53:37 pm

[Chris Kenny] "Apple has never been a very communicative company. It's unclear to me why this suddenly seems to have started bothering some people a lot more lately."

That's just silly.

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


Return to posts index

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