FORUMS: list search recent posts

Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Craig Seeman
Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 25, 2012 at 9:18:16 pm

Final Cut Pro X features: catching up and superseding
http://alex4d.wordpress.com/2012/06/25/fcpx-past-and-future/

Interesting read on some interesting thinking from an interesting plugin creator (amongst other things).



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 25, 2012 at 11:27:19 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Final Cut Pro X features: catching up and superseding
http://alex4d.wordpress.com/2012/06/25/fcpx-past-and-future/

Interesting read on some interesting thinking from an interesting plugin creator (amongst other things).
"



Interesting! (Seriously.)


Return to posts index

Viktor Kamenický
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 12:27:09 am

hmm... interesting reading!

"You never want to get to get a call from the editing room"
Art Adams


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 12:38:15 am

Alex4d has some great pontifications. I always enjoy reading them, especially when they get kinda "far fetched" as that's when it gets interesting.

His idea of multiple skimmers (with a keyboard modifier) is pretty awesome.

At some point, these dreams need to become a bit of a reality, at least somewhat.

I am beginning to trick myself that I am not an editing professional because I actually like a lot of FCPX. For shame.

I also want flying cars, or at least the more plausible intermediary of me not driving a car, but rather being driven in it while Holographic Alfred Hitchcock navigates the route and narrates "The World Without Us". I will then get to enjoy the irony. Or perhaps I'll ride on top of it Teenwolf style. I don't know. Either way, Alfred's driving while I'm just along for the ride.


Return to posts index

Andrew Richards
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 1:16:44 pm

I really hope Alex is right about the shared Events/Projects databases. That has been the endgame I've been pulling for all along. I was a big fan of Final Cut Server, though I was sometimes disappointed in its limitations in actual use. While as admin I could do really cool things with it, the users felt it was more of a burden than a tool.

My pie-in-the-sky dream was for Apple to better integrate FCP and FCSvr, where FCSvr essentially replaced the Browser window (or rather become a tab). FCP would become a direct client of FCSvr's database, eliminating the troublesome Java GUI and making it a work-saver instead of a work-maker for the editors.

FCPX already has a database-driven local asset manager, the Event Browser. Now all they need to do is put a database server behind it (like it's that easy, right?). The database underpinning FCSvr was PostgreSQL, which Apple recently adopted as the bundled database for OS X in Lion. In OS X through 10.6 they shipped MySQL. Probably just a coincidence.

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 2:18:43 pm

Andrew,


From what I've seen of the software and read here in the forums, it just strikes me that "workflow" was entirely an afterthought to FCPX design: renders kept with the project file which is designed to be kept on the boot drive. Really? At what point in the design process was that idea analyzed and arrived at as the ideal solution? Using the finder to organize projects?

A better database and workflow model is certainly needed (as per your post) but right now that prize is up for grabs and it doesn't seem to me that Apple has any particular advantage built into its software, nor any particular drive in that direction.

Also this is pretty funny (from the linked post):

"Secondary storylines could be modified by assistant editors while they are repositioned in the primary storyline."

Solutions looking for problems ...


Franz.


Return to posts index


Marcus Moore
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 2:37:54 pm

I'm not sure where you got the impression that the Project/Render files are designed to be kept on the boot drive. That's only true insofar as FCP7 defaulted the scratch disk to the Documents folder on the MacHD.



Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 2:53:22 pm

Marcus,

There was a discussion on issues with network media - I think it may have even been Jeremy? Search is failing me. Solution was to keep things on the boot drive, including renders.

Someone else may remember more detail.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 3:05:56 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "There was a discussion on issues with network media - I think it may have even been Jeremy? Search is failing me. Solution was to keep things on the boot drive, including renders."

I think it was Oliver as he was having problems with his Volume based SAN.

The way that SAN works, it'd be nice to be able to keep the Project/Event databases on the boot drive, an all media (renders included) on the external drive/SAN. This is how I currently work with fcp7, project and media in separate drives. FCPX allows for this with everything except render files at the moment.


Return to posts index


Andrew Richards
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 3:43:34 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "There was a discussion on issues with network media - I think it may have even been Jeremy? Search is failing me. Solution was to keep things on the boot drive, including renders."

It was Oliver and storing the Events and Projects on a FibreJet SAN. The solution was local storage as opposed to that particular SAN, and local storage does not have to be the boot volume.

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 2:46:41 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "A better database and workflow model is certainly needed (as per your post) but right now that prize is up for grabs and it doesn't seem to me that Apple has any particular advantage built into its software, nor any particular drive in that direction."

While I agree that it'd be nice to be able to separate render files from database location, I think the rest of your analysis is misinformed.

It certainly does not look or operate in a familiar way, and it is true there needs to be more functionality built in to the software, there are many advantages to the FCPX media management process, especially of you have a central storage system and multiple users.

It takes much more than a cursory glance to realize this, and yes, as it stands right now, it takes a bit of imagination, but there's also quite a bit of power built in already.

I think the separate event and project method is actually going to be quite nice, but it does take getting used to.

Perhaps having another person work on a separate part of your timeline is of zero use to you. That's fine. For some of us, it will be of use, and if it's presented in a logical and "better" way it will be a step forward. It might not "solve" a problem, but it will certainly enhance the workflow and allow easier collaboration and creativity.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 2:51:14 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "... yes, as it stands right now, it takes a bit of imagination, ..."

Jeremy,

This does seem to be the forum that discusses imaginary software the most.

Franz.


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 2:58:12 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "This does seem to be the forum that discusses imaginary software the most.
"


Sometimes, it appears using one's imagination is certainly frowned upon in this forum.

Have you tried to share a Project with multiple users on a SAN with FCPX? How'd it go? What about an Event?

How about media? Have you shared that yet?

How about archiving a Project or Event, and then restoring it?

Tried it? Have you emailed a Project to someone who has duplicate media? How'd it work out? How was the reconnection process?

Have you tried any of these with other software beyond fcs3? How'd it go?


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 3:16:43 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "... it appears using one's imagination is certainly frowned upon in this forum."

You think so? I would say it is broadly encouraged, sometimes to a fault (ie. 10 million users is certainly imaginative, ...).

As for the rest I am not currently experimenting with X, and some of those questions don't relate to my workflows. I'm on 7 still and will be into the new year.

I take it you have good experiences with those examples?


Franz.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 4:11:50 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "You think so? I would say it is broadly encouraged,"

Except when someone like Alex4d comes up with some good ideas that are based on what he actually sees inside the app and backed up by a bit of Apple development history, and someone like you says something like, "Hogwash, Apple's database motives are an afterthought. How do I know? I just know. I've never tried to do anything with media management in FCPX, I just know it's an afterthought."

Sorry man, but I'm calling it like I see it and sorry to be personal.

Perhaps we have different ideas of "broadly encouraged".

[Franz Bieberkopf] "I take it you have good experiences with those examples?"

Yes, I do have decent experiences. I would like a bit more control and some more options (like a trim media option, or metadata sync, or getting metadata in/out via XML) but for the most part, I find it to be pretty decent for an "out of the box" media management system without a bolt on asset manager. Sharing one Project or Event (instead of duplicating) would bring it to the next level. It would also have the potential to make things more complicated. If I use my imagination, those complications could be mitigated by some really cool features (like a big check box to turn off the other person's metadata, or a big checkbox to turn it back on). If I am thinking about it, so is someone else who's much more capable than I am.


Return to posts index


Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 4:51:35 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "... and someone like you says something like, "Hogwash, Apple's database motives are an afterthought. How do I know? I just know. I've never tried to do anything with media management in FCPX, I just know it's an afterthought.""

Jeremy,

You've used quotation marks there.

I don't think they mean what you think they mean.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 4:52:59 pm

think of them as air quotes


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 5:35:21 pm

Jeremy,

There is a long history of air quotes and scare quotes (uses breakdown below). None of them are the kind of caricatured arch summary that you used - though I suppose you meant something along the lines of snark?

Franz.


http://micusp.elicorpora.info/micusp-kibbitzers/1-scare-quotes-in-micusp-so...


So-called: to distance oneself from more common uses of the word(s) without necessarily indicating criticism:
[…] the students need to rely on other things outside of “experts” or textbooks […] (EDU.G0.01.1)
Sneer/Snarky: to critique common uses of the word(s), often using sarcasm:
Weitzman’s firm takes the “nice” way out, starving them for as long as they’ll take it (ECO.G0.04.2)

Style: to signal off-register language or the use of fixed “general English” expressions:
[…] colloquially this term has become synonymous with the idea of a “take home message” that the author of a text is attempting to impart on the reader (ENG.G0.02.1)

Term: to mark off a disciplinary or cultural term without direct citation:
[…] the result of refining the concept of “Assembly-line” […] (IOE.G1.05.2)

Coinage: to coin or invent a term for one’s own use:
In addition, I incorporate a measure of “other debt” as debt with non-regular payments, such as debts to an individual or to an employer. (ECO.G2.03.1)

Mixed/uncertain
: to avoid having to force s-quotes into one-category or another, and also to categorize instances of misuse and otherwise uncategorizable usages:
The Forest Service attempted to “bullet proof” its NEPA documents […] (NRE.G2.05.1).


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 5:54:51 pm

I took Jeremy's use of quotation marks as a means to delineate the dialog of a fictional, hypothetical you, delivering a brief monologue that distilled and lampooned his notion of your point of view. This is not to say that I agree with Jeremy's characterization of either the situation or the hypothetical you--quit frankly, I've forgotten what that was--but I think his use of quotation marks was both in bounds and effective. Is this as off-topic as I can possibly get?


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 6:05:22 pm

This was my take as well, though I would have characterized it more precisely as a monolog of a fictional, hypothetical Franz (whom we might call Faux Franz, for clarity) on the topic of fictional, hypothetical software. And I might add that Faux Franz seems a bit arch himself, and that fictional, hypothetical software seems fantastic. On the other hand, I do like how Faux Franz focuses on Apple's database motives - a topic which has not seen enough discussion here (and which achieves the rare feat of using "database" as an adjective, unless "database motives" is actually a compound subject).

But Jeremy's response seemed to indicate a much more sophisticated meta-commentary which I haven't grasped.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 6:23:47 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "and which achieves the rare feat of using "database" as an adjective, unless "database motives" is actually a compound subject"

All I have to say about this is that I think that Database Motives will be the title of a either 1) a pithy 2018 off-Broadway RomCom (that will be hideously adapted to File the very next year), or 2) a blurry, washed-out attempt at a Tony Scott knockoff that will debut on iTunes sometime around 2019. Of course there is also option 3, but I'm not certain that porn actually has titles anymore.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 6:29:40 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Database Motives ... hideously adapted to File the very next year."

I think we can stop there.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 6:57:47 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Of course there is also option 3, but I'm not certain that porn actually has titles anymore."

At first glance, I read "titles" as something totally different. I will let you use your imagination.

Those are real quotes, not air quotes.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:01:43 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "[Chris Harlan] "Of course there is also option 3, but I'm not certain that porn actually has titles anymore."

At first glance, I read "titles" as something totally different. I will let you use your imagination.

Those are real quotes, not air quotes.
"


Oh, it definitely still has those.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:04:13 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Is this as off-topic as I can possibly get?"

Actually, unless you use an analogy and simultaneously invoke Hitler - no.


; )

"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: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 6:55:42 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "Jeremy,

There is a long history of air quotes and scare quotes (uses breakdown below). None of them are the kind of caricatured arch summary that you used - though I suppose you meant something along the lines of snark?

Franz."


If I only had the prefect analogy to explain why I used quotes. The quote itself was an analogy.

To make it easy for you, I was paraphrasing. If I could go back and edit the old post, I'd use a single quotation. So here it is again for preservation:


"[Franz Bieberkopf] "You think so? I would say it is broadly encouraged,"

[Jeremy Snarko]
Except when someone like Alex4d comes up with some good ideas that are based on what he actually sees inside the app and backed up by a bit of Apple development history, and someone like you says something like, 'Hogwash, Apple's database motives are an afterthought. How do I know? I just know. I've never tried to do anything with media management in FCPX, I just know it's an afterthought.'"


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 5:28:48 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "It certainly does not look or operate in a familiar way, and it is true there needs to be more functionality built in to the software, there are many advantages to the FCPX media management process, especially of you have a central storage system and multiple users. I think the separate event and project method is actually going to be quite nice, but it does take getting used to."

I want to re-iterate that every NLE on the planet is fundamentally a database, but I agree that FCPX seems to have the most short- and medium-term potential in large part due to its architecture.

With all autosave all the time, FCPX may be more transactionally-oriented than other NLEs (which may be more state-oriented). If this is true, that's a huge step toward multi-user collaborative workflows.

The separation between events and projects makes this much more meaningful, even if projects must be atomic and locked (though the parent-child structure suggests that even projects could be meaningfully subdivided for simultaneous access).

I thought this separation was dumb early on, but as Jeremy and Bill Davis have been pointing out, it offers a lot of new possibilities.

I don't mind speculating on what FCPX might become -- crystal ball gazing has become a hobby in the last year -- but Franz has a point that we speculate more about FCPX than other NLEs. For example, Adobe actually demoed a concept for collaborative editing at NAB [link] with relatively little fanfare, but here we are talking about how a product that has not shown collaborative editing must surely be headed in that direction because its underpinnings may or may not allow it.

As the last round of Mac Pro updates has shown, we should be careful about assuming our speculation will become fact.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 6:48:33 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I don't mind speculating on what FCPX might become -- crystal ball gazing has become a hobby in the last year -- but Franz has a point that we speculate more about FCPX than other NLEs. For example, Adobe actually demoed a concept for collaborative editing at NAB [link] with relatively little fanfare, but here we are talking about how a product that has not shown collaborative editing must surely be headed in that direction because its underpinnings may or may not allow it."

Well, there's a demo, and there's what's actually in the application right now.

Adobe is very serious about all of this, and I am sure something like it will come out of those efforts. The description given by Kevin sounds like a real life cloud editing solution, and it is no coincidence Creative Cloud was launched this year.

Today, Pr needs help in sharing projects and media reconnect, FCPX doesn't need as much help as it's already in there to some degree. While it might not be cloud editing, it could be. With a few tweaks, the media could live in the cloud, the Event/Project (or maybe just Project) is local. The links are all there already. It's not hard to see how this might happen because it is already happening in FCPX minus the cloud based server which is obviously a huge part of the equation, but the general infrastructure is there none-the-less. There is also a pretty kick ass Proxy creation system in case you need to *take the edit with you, and all it takes to link back to full res is a pref change. But maybe all of this is an after thought?

I hear what you're saying, and the non-relase of a new MacPro does not make me doubt Apple anymore than it did by actually refreshing the older MacPro model and keeping it on sale. The silence of that action speaks volumes, although I am sure that is another unpopular opinion of Apple as it relates to FCPX. So be it. I'll roll the dice for now as I am running top of the line FCS3 hardware. 32bit has it's merits. :) As I mentioned in my first response, at some point these dreams need to become somewhat of a reality.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:12:32 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Well, there's a demo, and there's what's actually in the application right now."

Jeremy, I saw the demo. They were running an internal build of Premiere Pro, live on stage at NAB. To my mind, that makes the proposed feature closer to reality with Premiere than FCPX, where it has not yet been seen in a running application, but only hinted could be possible based on the architecture.



[Jeremy Garchow] "The links are all there already. It's not hard to see how this might happen because it is already happening in FCPX minus the cloud based server which is obviously a huge part of the equation, but the general infrastructure is there none-the-less."

They are totally different approaches, and Apple does not have the infrastructure in place to do what Adobe was doing in that demo. The local machine was a Premiere thin client, and the remote machine was the server actually responsible for all the media storage and realtime rendering and streaming.

Apple's in-place infrastructure could allow you to work on your local copy of the media; Adobe's doesn't require you to have the media at all. You've mentioned you're going to be mobile; with Adobe's collaborative concept, someone could ingest media for you at the office and you could start cutting it right away, with no need to even download proxies.

All this is orthogonal to my original point, though, which was that I think a publicly demoed concept is better evidence of a company's current development efforts than architectural hooks.


[Jeremy Garchow] "But maybe all of this [FCPX awesomeness] is an after thought?"

I've used brackets to editorialize and summarize. I'll appeal to Chris Harlan, forum line judge, if it's in-bounds or not. :)

I don't think the beautiful engineering in FCPX is an afterthought. I think that the FCPX architecture is its best weapon going forward.

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

Bill Davis
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:38:58 pm

[Walter Soyka] " I'll appeal to Chris Harlan, forum line judge, if it's in-bounds or not. :)
"


Chris.

Run out and buy shin guards immediately.

(this appears to be a surprisingly dangerous job considering the Wimbeldon just past)

"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

Andrew Richards
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:43:06 pm

[Walter Soyka] "The local machine was a Premiere thin client, and the remote machine was the server actually responsible for all the media storage and realtime rendering and streaming."

Avid has something like this in the works too, don't they?

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:53:11 pm

[Andrew Richards] "Avid has something like this in the works too, don't they?"

Yes -- Avid Interplay Sphere [link].

It might even be shipping, but nobody here really seems to pay much attention at all to Avid.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:44:48 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Jeremy, I saw the demo. They were running an internal build of Premiere Pro, live on stage at NAB. To my mind, that makes the proposed feature closer to reality with Premiere than FCPX, where it has not yet been seen in a running application, but only hinted could be possible based on the architecture."

I don't know. We can go back and forth on this. FCPX has the real world capability, but not the server. It appears that Adobe solution has the server but not the real world capability. Who has the cart and who has the horse? I don't know.

Here's the quote: "The server basically showed up in PP's media browser. The presenter simply dragged some clips from the server into a new Project. The clips didn't transfer, they are simply pointers to the actual media which reside on the PP server that he logged into. "

So with FCPX, if the Event is local, the only thing downloaded would be the small alias files. This type of function already exists in FCPX, but does not exist in Pr.

With a little more programming, the Event can remain on the server, and the Project is local. Once you're done with it, it uploads that file to the server for all to see and share.

So while I know that it's not there yet, I think that as it stands, right now, today, if I open an FCPX project and if I open a Pr project, I can see more potential in the FCPX side of things, especially when you consider I could create and download ProRes Proxy files right in the application for "off internet" editing. This can't be done with Pr at all, right now, today.

And staying on topic of the original Alex4d post, Apple already does have a bit of a server infrastructure with iCloud. It's not hard to see how this might transpire with a bit of effort. The only problem remains (for both companies) is how you get a metric crapton of camera original footage up to the cloud reliably and correctly. Maybe you don't, maybe it's all proxy footage. Again, advantage FCPX (today).


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 8:06:22 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Maybe you don't, maybe it's all proxy footage. Again, advantage FCPX (today)."

I have to admit as someone who's currently working a lot with both full rez files (commercials) and Proxy files (my muiti-cam music video stuff) I often simply forget which mode i'm in.

Which speaks to the fact that however they did the proxy functions in X, it's not like the old days when you could see a proxy file's pixels a mile away.

Maybe if you commonly edit on some starship bridge array with oodles of screen real estate the proxy deal could be a problem? But on my 30" cinema display, Proxy editing is indistinguishable from ProRes editing - at least visually.

YMMV.

"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

Walter Soyka
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 8:10:43 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I don't know. We can go back and forth on this. FCPX has the real world capability, but not the server. It appears that Adobe solution has the server but not the real world capability. Who has the cart and who has the horse? I don't know."

Fair, but...


[Jeremy Garchow] "With a little more programming..."

Apple needs a little more programming, and Adobe just needs a little more shipping. :)

I am not guaranteeing that Adobe will beat Apple to market with this. All I'm saying is we have concrete evidence that Adobe has done work on collaborative editing, while we only have the architectural possibility that Apple's foundation may someday support collaborative editing.

I'm with you that all the ingredients seem to be there. I'm not 100% convinced that Apple will have the will to go collaborative, as I'd see that as a huge reversal of focus-on-the-individual trend that so many here have noted, but it would certainly be useful and it certainly could happen.


[Jeremy Garchow] " Apple already does have a bit of a server infrastructure with iCloud. It's not hard to see how this might transpire with a bit of effort. The only problem remains (for both companies) is how you get a metric crapton of camera original footage up to the cloud reliably and correctly. Maybe you don't, maybe it's all proxy footage. Again, advantage FCPX (today)."

Not necessarily. Adobe's concept was network-based, but that's not the same as cloud-based. There is nothing today in Creative Cloud for purchasing computer time; it's possible that the Premiere server could just run in your own office -- maybe even on your own desktop.

And really, as Andrew pointed out, Avid is further out on this than both Adobe and Apple with Interplay Sphere, scheduled to ship Q3 this year.

For the sake of completeness, Quantel has QTube which I think is in the market today.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 8:19:46 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Not necessarily. Adobe's concept was network-based, but that's not the same as cloud-based."

I see. I thought in Kevin's article it said the other editor was in Seattle.

I guess then it could be your own "private cloud" if one owns the server storage, but then you'd have to worry about the network running out of your studio. I don't know. Seems harder than a (Creative) Cloud based service.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 8:31:40 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I see. I thought in Kevin's article it said the other editor was in Seattle."

He was. The server was in San Jose, one client was in Seattle, and the other client was on the show floor at NAB.


[Jeremy Garchow] "I guess then it could be your own "private cloud" if one owns the server storage, but then you'd have to worry about the network running out of your studio. I don't know. Seems harder than a (Creative) Cloud based service."

Yup. I have no idea whether this ran over a VPN or if the protocol itself is somehow secured to allow this.

Either way, unless they have some Skype-like magic, some assembly may be required.

That said, I run a VPN out of my office so I can securely connect to my workstations and render garden from anywhere in the world. It works, and it's secure. It may take some networking expertise to set up, but I'd gladly do this or pay to have it done for private cloud editorial.

But we have veered off-topic, and to bring this back, with SAN support already included, the opportunities for local collaboration in FCPX could be immediate.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 2:32:50 am

[Walter Soyka] "I'm with you that all the ingredients seem to be there. I'm not 100% convinced that Apple will have the will to go collaborative, as I'd see that as a huge reversal of focus-on-the-individual trend that so many here have noted, but it would certainly be useful and it certainly could happen."

More on this. Let's bring it back to hardware/software.

I'm not 100% convinced of anything in the NLE space, but I think that fcp and now FCPX is partially created to sell hardware, just as any NLE company develops new features, applications, and workflows to sell more upgrade copies (or now Adobe's subscription service which has benefits, Lightroom showed up for "free" today).

Collaboration, true collaboration (within the same space, and not the cloud) requires software and hardware, and depending on the requirements, it can be big hardware, or not terribly big hardware. Depending on what is managing your SAN (or not) it takes some work, set up, and know how.

XSan client software is built in to every single Lion install. Running an Xsan network requires a metadata master which is a computer that is connected to fast storage. Conceivably with thunderbolt (sorry Franz), this cost will come down, and the metadata master can be a mac mini connected to a raid or two that can get 500+ MB/sec each. You then need a way to "serve" the data which could be fibre/10 GigE/1 GigE.

I'm not saying this is easy or ultra cheap, but it is certainly more affordable than ever, and it will sell more Macs if the collaboration is built right in to the entire system, especially if you don't need to buy a MacPro just to manage data calls.

If you ever have a chance to see someone with a SAN that's running fcpx and is using San Locations, you will see with those tools that are already working very well in the application today (since 10.0.1 or whenever San Locations showed up). With X's "in the app" methods of moving Events and Projects in the app and then a simple rearrange with San Locations with absolutely zero reconnect time and media management across multiple machines is a plus. With San Locations, you don't even need to quit fcpx to load new Projects and Events.

I'm not saying this as an Apple fanboy, I am saying this as someone who is genuinely interested in the capability that is already there. From what I can gather Autodesk uses similar ideas in their system (not currently in Smoke prerelease) so perhaps Apple "stole" it.

It is also very apparent that development time was spent here as the Event/Project structure is totally and completely suited for this workflow, yet how many people have and use a SAN let alone XSan? Why would Apple devote this much time to it? They don't advertise it and no one talks about it, yet it's one of the great functions of fcpx? You don't even need XML in this case to move media, all organization, and timelines really easily and quickly all from within the application. Motion Templates are more tricky, but Spherico helps with that: http://www.spherico.de/filmtools/MTT/index.html


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 4:42:50 pm

[Walter Soyka] "[Jeremy Garchow] "But maybe all of this [FCPX awesomeness] is an after thought?"

I've used brackets to editorialize and summarize. I'll appeal to Chris Harlan, forum line judge, if it's in-bounds or not. :)
"


Oh heck, you use one tennis metaphor and you're done for.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:30:51 pm

[Walter Soyka] "\ -- but Franz has a point that we speculate more about FCPX than other NLEs. For example, Adobe actually demoed a concept for collaborative editing at NAB [link] with relatively little fanfare, but here we are talking about how a product that has not shown collaborative editing must surely be headed in that direction because its underpinnings may or may not allow it."

Like it or not, what everyone snap-characteized as the "debacle" of the X launch, may have been nothing more or less than the most painfully "necessary" of evils.

We're here talking about X a year later, because the ideas it represents prove over and over and over again to be worth debating.

And NOT because Apple created them. Because they didn't. This databasification of the world is everywhere. It's Google, it's smart phones, it's the cloud, and it's some "mechanic" plugging a bigger computer into a smaller computer in your car and reading out the database of how it's operated over the past month.

X is an expression of grafting content management, content assembly (and I'd increasingly argue, nascent content distribution) into a single modern tool.

It does these things amazingly well for some classes of users - and not as well for others - but it does them in a coordinated fashion with a lot of obvious thought to how to make the entire creative/content management flow more accessible and more useful to more users.

We all got lost (and in varying degrees, pissed) based on "how" it worked - and the real questions still being sorted out revolve around "why" it works the way it does.

Speculation is our only tool.

And I, for one, feel honored to be able to here to actively participate in this discussion. It stretches my thinking. And that's good for me.

Period.

"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

Walter Soyka
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 8:24:27 pm

[Bill Davis] "Speculation is our only tool."

I love speculation -- especially if developers are reading these boards, trolling for feature requests.

I just think that speculation should come after released products, feature commitments [link], and concept demos, in that order.

We risk great disappointment when we look at Apple's assets and base assumptions on the direction they will choose to take with them. Apple likes to surprise.

Further, I think that speculating only about FCPX's future while tacitly assuming static competition is myopic and gives no credit to other NLE developers.

Premiere Pro's hardware-assisted, dynamic linking NLE with a Prelude front end, Media Encoder backend and honey-badger timeline practically came out of nowhere to catch FCP Legend users' eyes.

Smoke 2013 didn't just tweak the UI in the new release, they actually rethought the classic Smoke editing and effects workflow, hiding the Edit Desk and making the timeline the central point for effects interaction, adding new features, and lowering the price point enough to be accessible to individuals.

Even stodgy old Avid, though keeping the feel of the interface, has gone 64-bit, added linked media support, and allowed tactile mouse interaction in recent years -- and, as Andrew has reminded me, led in cloud editorial.

None of the 4 As are stopping, and every one of them has a thing or two to learn from the other three.

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

Bill Davis
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 10:04:15 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Further, I think that speculating only about FCPX's future while tacitly assuming static competition is myopic and gives no credit to other NLE developers."

To a point, Walter. The thing is the moment most users make their decisions about tool adoption, they turn away from "assessment" and move on to mastery. They may keep an eye on the others, but the only real decision is if the new tool continues to meet their needs.

X slammed new emphasis into this market. It's not that other programs didn't do this stuff - they did. X just re-ordered the priorities and forced many of us who saw our NLE as exclusively "an editing app" and forced us to broaden our thinking about that.

It edits just fine. Not perfectly for every single editor - particularly if they've developed habits they won't or can't adapt - but it edits just fine. So the real places of interest aren't necessarily in the timeline anymore - they're around it, IMO.

Everyone has been in one NLE or another when the competition has announced something zippy and enticing. But it's rarely worth jumping ship to chase any single feature regardless of how compelling it might be - if for no other reason than most of the other NLE programs sooner or later typically add the same capabilities.

The fun of this discussion is that it's exploring those "other things" like media management, and connectivity.

This is the fresh territory - to my eyes - we're all having to explore.

And while PrPro and AVID are certainly spending time, resources and effort to explore the same territory - they are also, from what I can see, trying to maintain backwards compatibility with their classic approaches - something Apple was willing to risk.

That's the message AVID and Premier have kept sending out in the transition. "Come over here - we're more like what you had before. You'll be more comfortable."

And for that to be a successful long-term strategy - they'll have to find a way to continue to make their users feel simultaneously "comfortable" and also secure that they're not missing something else by not heading as rapidly into the new territory that Apple was willing to redesign their vehicle to get to.

I can see your point. Maybe Apples' competition are heading there just as rapidly, via a path I can't see. But it puzzles me how they can do that easily if they keep believing that "job 1" is taking care of existing customers who are driving traditional sedans and can only use the superhighways they're used to traveling on.

That's certainly the fast way to travel. But if "on road" is the main value you peruse, then you can only end up where the road builders decide you want to go.

Fun to speculate.

"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

Walter Soyka
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 1:14:32 pm

[Bill Davis] "To a point, Walter. The thing is the moment most users make their decisions about tool adoption, they turn away from "assessment" and move on to mastery. They may keep an eye on the others, but the only real decision is if the new tool continues to meet their needs."

Yes -- but a lot of the dialogue here is still about whether to adopt FCPX or not, even a year after its arrival.



[Bill Davis] "That's the message AVID and Premier have kept sending out in the transition. "Come over here - we're more like what you had before. You'll be more comfortable.""

Some users are saying that, but neither Avid nor Adobe really are.

Avid markets themselves as the industry standard [link]: "Media Composer is the top choice for professional film and video editing in the industry."

Adobe markets performance and broad integrated tool set [link], "Adobe® Premiere® Pro CS6 software combines incredible performance with a sleek, revamped user interface and a host of fantastic new creative features... Ready to switch to the ultimate toolset for video pros?"

Neither want to be considered FCP8, because both embody a different philosophy about post production than FCP did.



[Bill Davis] "And for that to be a successful long-term strategy - they'll have to find a way to continue to make their users feel simultaneously "comfortable" and also secure that they're not missing something else by not heading as rapidly into the new territory that Apple was willing to redesign their vehicle to get to. I can see your point. Maybe Apples' competition are heading there just as rapidly, via a path I can't see. But it puzzles me how they can do that easily if they keep believing that "job 1" is taking care of existing customers who are driving traditional sedans and can only use the superhighways they're used to traveling on. That's certainly the fast way to travel. But if "on road" is the main value you peruse, then you can only end up where the road builders decide you want to go."

All NLEs were sedans, but Apple scrapped theirs and made a Jeep (or a rocketship), so now they can go wherever they want and everyone else is stuck on the road?

I see this as a variation on the "Only Apple innovates" argument that I'm pushing back against.

Some believe creativity can only occur when all constraints are lifted. Others (and I fall into this category) believe that constraints focus creativity. I think that all four As have a lot of room for advancement within their respective philosophies and sets of constraints.

Speculation about FCPX's glorious future is used as an argument for FCPX, and it's often coupled with the twin assumptions that the competition is standing by flat-footed, and that by shedding its legacy constraints, Apple and only Apple are well-prepared for the future.

Let's look back at the original article. The first half is about how Apple had to catch up. The second half, using iOS as a template, is about possibile "superseding features" we could see in FCPX -- the ones that "competitors will find very hard to compete with."

Let's look at those features:
  • An internal store for FCPX effects, clip content, tutorials and online communities, eventually leading to third-party FCPX UIs for specialized uses and industries
  • Multi-user editorial collaboration


The FCPX in-app store is going to lead to new UIs for specialized uses? Apple doesn't let the user even rearrange panels in the interface; are they really going to let developers take it over? And Apple is the only firm that can create a store? Was Mr. Gollner aware that Adobe, perhaps too far ahead of their time, actually had a stock photography store integrated in Creative Suites 2 and 3, starting seven years ago?

Was the Adobe collaborative editing concept demo at NAB a moon-landing fake? Should someone tap Avid on the shoulder and let them know that the Unity collaborative editing systems they've been selling for 13 years don't really exist?

The claim that "Adobe, Avid and Autodesk aren’t in a position where they can completely change their core editing technology and metaphor" is somewhat bizarre, since -- just like Apple -- Adobe, Avid and Autodesk have all just seen massive change: Adobe with a Premiere Pro rewrite to go 64-bit and create the Mercury Engine; Avid with a 64-bit rewrite of MC; Autodesk with a platform port and philosophy/UI overhaul.

FCPX is unique, and FCPX has enormous potential -- but that is not the same as saying that FCPX is unique in that it has enormous potential.

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

Oliver Peters
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 2:02:18 pm

[Walter Soyka] "[Bill Davis] "That's the message AVID and Premier have kept sending out in the transition. "Come over here - we're more like what you had before. You'll be more comfortable.""

Some users are saying that, but neither Avid nor Adobe really are. "


For the most part Avid users have typically been happy with the product and never saw any reason to change. Some moved to FCP because they were forced by market or client demands and ended up liking the experience. Others were curious and also liked the change. Thus the success of legacy among those pro users, together with a rather malleable framework to build workflows around. There's also a large chunk of Avid-turned-FCP users who have never liked FCP and are more than happy to see the marketplace change a bit back to Avid.

The real battle is for the hearts and minds of the next wave of pro editors. Avid is trying to cover all bases, while Adobe is trying to give users some of the FCP workflow experience. This may ultimately be the right approach or it could be a strategy that runs out of road in a few years. That's the gamble Apple has made, with the plan of building a product intended to hit its stride in a few years, rather than today. There are many things Avid can do today, which FCP X can't touch. But are those necessary any longer? Like Stereo3D or film negative cut lists? Clearly not enough to warrant building those directly into X.

This means many users are re-evaluating what an NLE *should* be and what can we *give up* in order to have something better later.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 3:52:55 pm

[Oliver Peters] "For the most part Avid users have typically been happy with the product and never saw any reason to change. "

I don't know. There was a period of time around the later days of MC 2.8 when the frustration with the lack of development seemed fairly palpable. Not everyone felt that way, of course, but I'd say there was a fair amount of discontent.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 4:01:39 pm

[Chris Harlan] "There was a period of time around the later days of MC 2.8 when the frustration with the lack of development seemed fairly palpable."

That has more to do with how Avid was pricing and marketing Adrenaline hardware than with the software itself. More an issue of FCP+Kona versus MC+Adrenaline, I think.

OTOH, if you talk to broadcast news editors or film editors, they probably could care less. Plus, lots of folks were still on 2.8 even after Avid was long past that in version numbers.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 4:27:00 pm

[Oliver Peters] "That has more to do with how Avid was pricing and marketing Adrenaline hardware than with the software itself. More an issue of FCP+Kona versus MC+Adrenaline, I think.

OTOH, if you talk to broadcast news editors or film editors, they probably could care less. Plus, lots of folks were still on 2.8 even after Avid was long past that in version numbers.
"


That's undoubtedly true, but in the promo world, at least, there was visible frustration about MC's inflexibility. In that sphere, FCP 5.1, 6, & 7 ran circles around MC. Something as simple as easy panning and scanning of HD in an SD delivery, back when most of the TV world was still 4:3, made FCP a no-brainer over the center-cut only world of media composer.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 4:04:05 pm

[Walter Soyka] "FCPX is unique, and FCPX has enormous potential -- but that is not the same as saying that FCPX is unique in that it has enormous potential.
"


Now that line just dances!


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 6:10:35 pm

[Bill Davis] "And for that to be a successful long-term strategy - they'll have to find a way to continue to make their users feel simultaneously "comfortable" and also secure that they're not missing something else by not heading as rapidly into the new territory that Apple was willing to redesign their vehicle to get to.

I can see your point. Maybe Apples' competition are heading there just as rapidly, via a path I can't see. But it puzzles me how they can do that easily if they keep believing that "job 1" is taking care of existing customers who are driving traditional sedans and can only use the superhighways they're used to traveling on.

That's certainly the fast way to travel. But if "on road" is the main value you peruse, then you can only end up where the road builders decide you want to go."


I think you are setting up false dichotomy where the only way to change and innovate is to blow the whole thing up which just isn't true. The past 5 years or so Avid and Adobe have been making huge strides into new workflows (including file based and the cloud) but it just doesn't get as much fanfare as what Apple does.

To me all the NLE makers are creating automobiles (to keep going w/the tired and flawed analogy we all love to hate). The basics are all there (wheels, engine, drive train, breaks, etc.,) but the differences have mainly been in types of tech used (gas vs diesel vs electric, rotary vs in-line 6, etc.,), features and performance. I think the biggest thing that FCPX did, that the others didn't, is taking a very new approach to the UI. While all the other cars have a steering wheel, clutch, break, & gas pedals (left to right), a gear shift under your right hand, etc.,. where as FCPX's car uses something radically different... like voice controls and an iPad (or whatever).

My point is, if you keep everything that's new about FCPX but put a more traditional GUI on it and everybody would love it. I think the single most controversial thing w/FCPX-car isn't the new, high performance tires or powerful electric, direct-drive engine it's that when you sent down in the driver's seat theres no steering wheel, pedals or gear shift. The new control scheme is different, it works... but is it necessarily better?




Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 29, 2012 at 3:10:57 am

[Andrew Kimery] "The new control scheme is different, it works... but is it necessarily better?"

I'm pretty sure a lot of pilots felt exactly that way when the moved away from flaps run by cables and created modern planes that are largely "fly by wire" systems.

Somehow the airline industry survived.

And germain to our discussion, Apple's competitors are also clearly hard at work doing their own revisions to move away from their versions of the traditional "cable to flaps" system.

So that kinda says to me that the trend is solid, even if you don't prefer one particular implementation over another.

"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

Bill Davis
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 28, 2012 at 4:36:57 am

[Walter Soyka] "FCPX is unique, and FCPX has enormous potential -- but that is not the same as saying that FCPX is unique in that it has enormous potential.
"


As always, Walter, I find your thinking fascinating. And there's a lot of your analysis that I might agree with.

But I'm not actually saying that FCP-X is unique because of it's "potential."

I'm saying it's unique in that the dev team was willing to take larger risks in it's revision - not just because it has some arbitrary measure of more potential - but rather because the team shifted the target for the entire program away from many of the skills that made traditional NLEs a historical success: movie-era A/B roll conventions and studio style collaborative workflows, etc. - and re-focused it on the needs of todays content creators.

I think those started with individual empowerment - internal search agility - and export designed to ease i"publish to the web" needs. But I suspect the underpinnings in the program as it works right now show us a lot about how it will continue to evolve.

Love or hate the now exhausted metaphor, but the puck has moved dramatically.

The only question left is which program is best moving toward where that will be.

Im still betting that X has the fundamental stuff "righter" than it's competitors.

Since I'm in tired metaphore-land.

I actually find X good, fast and cheap.

It's very hard to argue with the last two with anyone who actually uses it professionally - it is certainly cheaper and I'll stand up and swear to anyone that it's been a wholeLOT faster for me that the program it replaced. So everything rests on the "good" thing.

And for my work, it's not just good - it's absolutely great.

So I'm happy - even if others aren't.

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

Andrew Richards
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 3:41:16 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "From what I've seen of the software and read here in the forums, it just strikes me that "workflow" was entirely an afterthought to FCPX design: renders kept with the project file which is designed to be kept on the boot drive. Really? At what point in the design process was that idea analyzed and arrived at as the ideal solution? Using the finder to organize projects?"

Was anyone complaining about this with FCP Legend? It was the same story there- everything defaulted to the user's Documents folder, including all scratch disks. They have to default it that way, the boot volume is the only one they can always assume exists. It has always been up to the user to provide and assign alternate storage. I do wish FCPX let you assign Render storage separately from Project storage though.

[Franz Bieberkopf] "A better database and workflow model is certainly needed (as per your post) but right now that prize is up for grabs and it doesn't seem to me that Apple has any particular advantage built into its software, nor any particular drive in that direction."

Unless they release a much deeper API than XML, Apple is the only one who can do it the way I described it. I too question their interest in doing such a thing, except perhaps if they want to push the limits of CoreData and use FCPX as a bellwether. I suspect they are already using it to push AVFoundation and OpenCL on OS X, so it isn't impossible that they'd take a stab at a new sort of Final Cut Server made up of shared Events and Projects databases.

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 6:03:41 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] ""Secondary storylines could be modified by assistant editors while they are repositioned in the primary storyline."

Solutions looking for problems ..."


Hardly.

With fast connections - this could easily enable collaborative work between teams regardless of any individual's physical location.

Pretty much what I see increasingly happening as I work more and more with ad hoc teams spread over wider physical spaces.

I'd LOVE to be able to have the audio editor able (via password permission) to link into a projects audio tracks to improve them. Same with a graphic designer for my titles.

The dying old idea that the only way to edit is to put a butt in a seat in an office surrounded by more butts and work hard to make the office building landlord wealthier? That's what's changing faster than anything else, IMO.

"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

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 6:11:54 pm

[Bill Davis] "I'd LOVE to be able to have the audio editor able (via password permission) to link into a projects audio tracks to improve them."

Bill,

This is a bit of a holy grail (ie long sought after ideal) for my own workflows, though to be useful it would need to be open enough to allow connecting somehow with other software (ie Protools).

I react to the fetishization of things like work by assistants in a secondary group (sorry, "storyline") rather than a more useful idea of timelines that can be worked on by more than one person in more than one way.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 4:12:46 pm

[Andrew Richards] "Probably just a coincidence."

Yeah. Total coinkydink.


Return to posts index

Andrew Richards
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 4:17:57 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Yeah. Total coinkydink."

It really does probably have a lot more to do with Oracle's acquisition of MySQL in 2009 than anything related to MAM product plans (if any even exist).

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 4:29:58 pm

[Andrew Richards] "It really does probably have a lot more to do with Oracle's acquisition of MySQL in 2009 than anything related to MAM product plans (if any even exist)."

A great headline in that article, by the way.

I am not sure if there's separate MAM plans in the works for FCPX, I'm not sure if that would be a worthwhile venture for Apple.

WHile it might be coincidence and was done out of necessity, it is still interesting that they both are based on the same platform rather than having a more custom designed interface.

I do think that the current FCPX is a great start at a true sharing interface, but I know nothing.


Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 4:41:05 pm

As far as MAM's go....

Keep wondering where this will end up?

http://www.squarebox.co.uk/fcpxml.html

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

Oliver Peters
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 6:32:40 pm

As an FYI, on my project and media status, we have settled on the Events and Projects being on an internal 4TB 2-drive RAID and all media is linked on the SAN volume. Renders are local to this internal RAID, which is fast enough for rendered ProResHQ files. I tend to render as little as possible. When it's time to back things up, the session folder with all the media and elements is copied from the SAN volume to a removal drive. On that drive, I also create two folders for "Place in Events" and "Place in Projects". These are where I copy my session Events and Projects folders. Before I do that, I will have dumped all render files. Seems to be working well, so far.

On the SAN performance issue, I have been in touch with Command Soft's tech support and they are investigating the network traffic issues we discussed in another thread. The network should be plenty fast to have E&P folders live in the SAN volume, but for some reason the system isn't happy when you do that. Maybe in the future.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 6:59:35 pm

[Oliver Peters] "The network should be plenty fast to have E&P folders live in the SAN volume, but for some reason the system isn't happy when you do that. Maybe in the future."

Do you have a separate metadata network from other network traffic?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:06:12 pm

"Do you have a separate metadata network from other network traffic?"

The workstations are connected only via the Fibre Channel network to media. There is also a metadata network via Ethernet. The chassis has its own built-in controller (I presume running on Linux). In addition to the 4 MacPro edit workstations, there's also an Xserve to run FC Server. It is the 5th station on the system.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:09:12 pm

[Oliver Peters] "The workstations are connected only via the Fibre Channel network to media. "

Got ya.

Do they offer a File based option or would you need to add more software?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 26, 2012 at 7:39:03 pm

"Do they offer a File based option or would you need to add more software?"

Don't know. System was spec'ed and installed by a reseller and that's how they packaged it. I guess if you poke through Command Soft's web site, it would say.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 4:19:20 am

"we speculate more about FCPX than other NLEs"

Yes we do - because - if you read Walter Biscardi's blogs - FCP Legacy was about as good as it gets with NLE's -- an endless sea of affordable plugs in - - ease of editing - played well with others - There's a reason it became one of the best selling, most used NLE's.

Yes it got long in the tooth -- and needed a face lift. But a year after FCP X - it's still not the tool many of us need - and we'd sure like it to be without tossing a decades worth of experience, muscle memory and marketable skills.

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 6:00:07 am

[Andy Field] "Yes we do - because - if you read Walter Biscardi's blogs - FCP Legacy was about as good as it gets with NLE's -- an endless sea of affordable plugs in - - ease of editing - played well with others - There's a reason it became one of the best selling, most used NLE's.

Yes it got long in the tooth -- and needed a face lift. But a year after FCP X - it's still not the tool many of us need - and we'd sure like it to be without tossing a decades worth of experience, muscle memory and marketable skills."


I certainly respect Walter's view - but I don't always agree with it. He does one kind of work. I do another. His experience are no more directly relevant to me than mine are to him.

Legacy was a great tool and I relied on it from April of 1999 to one year ago. Well over a decade of development, success and comfort. But I never made a movie or an episodic television program during that time.

Instead I wrote, shot, directed and produced more than 300 corporate videos. Legacy was flexible enough to meet my needs and Walters.

But my needs are NOT the same as his anymore. My industry has moved on.

A decade ago, my typical clients commissioned 30-75 minute programs. The average length requested by my clients today is usually 3 to 5 minutes and seldom more than 10.

Thats just the way it is.

Other than in-flight entertainment, nobody wants to watch 45 minute videos on their iPad - they want ten 4.5 minute standalone videos instead. And they want them sourced on the web or via their corporate server and searchable.

X is a much superior tool for producing the kind of content I actually need today.

Simple as that.

"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

Dennis Radeke
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 10:25:17 am

Interesting article for sure and like some said, discussing imaginary software or what could be is a powerful vehicle for making it a reality.

For the article, I will only comment and say that I don't think anything the author listed there as something that Apple can do that the competition can't do as well.

Dennis - Adobe


Return to posts index

Alex Gollner
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 1:07:30 pm

That's great news. If Apple do go in this direction we need the people at Adobe, Avid and Autodesk to keep them on their toes by following them (or leading the way)..

Despite the fact that Apple hardly acknowledge their competitors, X might go down in history as the time when competitors forced their hand. But Apple's perversity sent the post world into confusion.

___________________________________________________
Alexandre Gollner,
Editor, Zone 2-North West, London

alex4d on twitter, facebook, .wordpress.com & .com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 5:09:57 pm

[Dennis Radeke] "For the article, I will only comment and say that I don't think anything the author listed there as something that Apple can do that the competition can't do as well.

Dennis - Adobe
"


I presume this is totally true, Dennis.

This is just a place where we air our opinions.

I try to post opinions based, not on what I've read about or heard about, but rather on what I've personally tried and seen to be true.

I have what I'd consider "qualifying experience" on two pieces of software - FCP Legacy and FCP X.

I have no experience on your fine software. I know many others feel strongly that it's a great tool, and have done so for years.

Others will have to judge whether what I've experienced over the past year - the continuing transformation of my work from larger project to smaller, from tape and disk delivery to exclusively file based, and the elevation of search and export to equal weight as a productivity tools compared to my prior focus nearly exclusively on timeline operations - is as relevant to them as those factors are to me.

And they'll also have to determine if your companies approach - which many appear to feel gives people much of the historical conventions of Legacy software, but with modern additions - or whether Apple's approach to totally strip away the old in favor of a compete new approach - suits them best.

X verses Legacy is all I'm qualified to post about since those are the only two applications where I have the "seat time" to back up my contentions.

And people here will judge independently whether or not the kind of work I do is more like - or more unlike - what they do day to day.

I wish you and Adobe continued success.

Simple as that.

"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

Andy Field
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 2:36:24 pm

[Bill Davis] "The average length requested by my clients today is usually 3 to 5 minutes and seldom more than 10."

Bill - glad it's working for you - but for us - it doesn't matter if it's a 30 second commercial or 30 minute program - FCP 7 still provides the ease and flexibility we need. Just the audio mixing and automatic keyframing that's missing in X is enough to keep us away.

AVID is fine - takes some relearning - but feels clunky and and dusty ..and the Texas two step with AMA (which is spotty at best) seems like a step backwards from the "throw everything and the kitchen sink" at Premiere 6 Timeline and it just works.

Adobe Premiere is promising - fast - and if they can encourage the vast universe of FCP7 plug in providers to do the same with Premiere - can be the FCP 8 we'd hoped for --

A few issues that Adobe's incredibly responsive support team are working on will go a long way to making that transition attractive to many legacy editors

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
on Jun 27, 2012 at 3:49:45 pm

[Andy Field] "AVID is fine - takes some relearning - but feels clunky and and dusty ..and the Texas two step with AMA (which is spotty at best) seems like a step backwards from the "throw everything and the kitchen sink" at Premiere 6 Timeline and it just works."

Think of AMA as a slightly better Log & Transfer. That was the design and intent. Not as a drag & drop, direct editing method.

Unfortunately the Premiere approach breaks down pretty quickly when you have to send a sequence that's a mixed bag of native codecs elsewhere. Hence the reason the Send to SG function renders intermediate DPX files first. The approach also means that your export - when you are under a time crunch - can be inordinately long.

It's a question of when you choose to pay the render tax.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

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