FORUMS: list search recent posts

Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Gerry Fraiberg
Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 28, 2012 at 10:12:48 pm

From Final Cut Pro Insider:

Final Cut Pro trainer Rory Cantwell reviews the many improvements in Apple's Final Cut Pro X v.10.0.6. He writes, "Now in FCPX 10.0.6 I am glad to report almost all of [the] problems have now been addressed and sorted and the list of next generation professional functionality being added to the app each release, is making this editing solution one that should no longer be ignored by the professional market."

http://www.definitionmagazine.com/journal/2012/11/13/why-you-should-upgrade...



Return to posts index

Rich Rubasch
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 28, 2012 at 10:34:24 pm

Hmmm....still ignoring it....

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
Founder/President/Editor/Designer/Animator
http://www.tiltmedia.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 28, 2012 at 11:23:28 pm

its worth noting that soho training are making a metric tonne training FCP editors in Avid and PPro.

I know its an old harp - but there is not a UK job posted in 12 months for the software. you might begin to be curious about its chances.

this isn't 1999. no one is offering 100K seats. there are swathes of editing seats everywhere at negligible cost.

Apple's core appstore 299 just is not that significant. particularly given Oliver Peter's true cost math.

the fact that no one in the UK is touching FCPX with a barge pole, given apple's rapid development is significant.

I think it goes to a deeper issue regarding perception of apple as valid professional partner in the mid-term.

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


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 28, 2012 at 11:57:42 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "but there is not a UK job posted in 12 months for the software."

BBC - UK?
http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/44825



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 28, 2012 at 11:59:40 pm

mm. not really no, craig is marshalling a ship there, but the total job posting silence remains.

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 12:22:17 am

http://www.indeed.co.uk/viewjob?jk=e50ce4f435660f49&q=Final+Cut&tk=17d4o0bv...

Requirements:
Motion graphics SW packages such as: Adobe Premier, Apple Final Cut Pro X or equivalent


http://www.reed.co.uk/jobs/web-developer-digital-creative-video-specialist/...

In depth working knowledge of FINAL CUT PRO X

http://www.omni-jobs.co.uk/web-recruit-jobs/multimedia-and-video-associate-...

Reporting to the Marketing Development Co-ordinator, you will be tasked with shooting promotional videos for the relevant websites, as well as editing them using Final Cut Pro X.



Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 12:30:20 am

craig - please.

the first is "multimedia designer" in - leeds.

it lists PPro before FCPX for gods sake.

the second is very dodgy.

"though candidates without formal qualifications will be considered if their industry experience and portfolio is suitable
In depth working knowledge of FINAL CUT PRO X, APPLE MOTION, APPLE COMPRESSOR and the latest ADOBE CREATIVE SUITE (PHOTOSHOP, ILLUSTRATOR, INDESIGN"

to re-iterate, yet again: no reputable jobs of any description where the word editor is in the job title exist over the last 12 months for FCPX.

good archive haul tho.

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


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 12:35:17 am

Also still not using it. Not seeing much of anything of FCX here in LA. One shop I know using it uses it for their YouTube channel. Even LEVERAGE has switched away from it.

yes...yes they have.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 12:37:53 am

[Shane Ross] "Even LEVERAGE has switched away from it.

yes...yes they have.
"



seriously? is that done?

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


Return to posts index


Shane Ross
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 12:42:55 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "[Shane Ross] "Even LEVERAGE has switched away from it.

yes...yes they have.
"


seriously? is that done?"


I cannot say officially, but I know someone who works there.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 1:28:15 am

[Shane Ross] " Even LEVERAGE has switched away from it."

Oh No! FCP X, the little lever that could lift the world, has just snapped? What did they replace it with?


Return to posts index

Jari Innanen
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Jan 6, 2013 at 4:35:58 pm

[Shane Ross] "Also still not using it. Not seeing much of anything of FCX here in LA. One shop I know using it uses it for their YouTube channel. Even LEVERAGE has switched away from it.

yes...yes they have.
"


This must be old news then: http://www.postmagazine.com/Publications/Post-Magazine/2013/January-1-2013/...


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Jan 7, 2013 at 6:18:41 am

[Jari Innanen] "[Shane Ross] "Also still not using it. Not seeing much of anything of FCX here in LA. One shop I know using it uses it for their YouTube channel. Even LEVERAGE has switched away from it.

yes...yes they have.
"

This must be old news then: http://www.postmagazine.com/Publications/Post-Magazine/2013/January-1-2013/.....
"


Old news indeed. The show has been canceled and the last episode aired a couple of weeks ago. The article has no author and reads like a Marquis press release, which I assume it actually is.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 12:31:03 am

I have been telling editors (when they ask) for the past few months that X can be used if they wish to do grade, online & sound post with me. The caveat is they also buy the third party software that gets usable AAF sound out.

I see no reason to buy as not one single job from X has come to me whilst 30 odd broadcast docos and half a dozen short dramas have since X was released. 90% were FCP7 and a few AVID or Pr6 jobs.

My initial concerns about collaborative workflow are largely gone but still the editors I know are almost universally staying away. So like the market Aindreas works in it has almost zero traction in my area.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 12:41:43 am

[Michael Gissing] "My initial concerns about collaborative workflow are largely gone but still the editors I know are almost universally staying away."

The damage was already done. Switching to FCX also means learning a whole new app....one that is completely different. Why not go back to Avid where you have a huge pool of editors that already know it? Or to Premiere which is so similar to FCP 7 that it is called FCP 8 by many?

Apple's rep is seriously damaged. Sure, a lot of new editors and professionals in many arenas will use this. Just not in my neck of the woods. I still haven't seen it anywhere in the wild...only at Apple stores and melrose Mac.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index


Michael Gissing
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 1:02:25 am

The issue of trust is more important than learning a new NLE from what most editors have told me. Many editors said they already used CS5.5 for Ae & photoshop so they just upgraded and switched to Pr6.

But the surprise to me is how many are staying put on FCP7. I think there is far too much hype here on embracing the new world order and pointing out why X is so superior without recognising that Legend is out there doing the bulk of the paid work in broadcast. So my clients are staying Apple and even buying new iMacs but locked into Legend for much longer than I expected.


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 1:28:57 am

Even if it does ever gain some traction i dont think it will be for years to come. Alot of editors/facilities i know are still on Media Composer 4 and FCP 6. If they havent felt the need to even upgrade there existing apps, why would they switch up there entire workflow and ecosystem to save a few bucks?, cause really, thats the only main benefit i can see to FCP X right now is that its cheap.

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


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 4:07:44 am

Given, I've adopted X where I can because I generally like it. I can easily see the argument that Premiere or Avid is just as good a choice. But the argument to stay with 7 is getting ridiculous at this stage. Time to move on to something that doesn't require so much transcoding and rendering whatever it is. 7 was old in the tooth way before X was released wasn't it? I remember a lot of complaining that it was time to give Avid or Premiere a serious look before we even got the sneak peek at X. It's time to move on from 7 to something isn't it? If people have lost faith in Apple, they should be ditching 7 in droves. It's more likely to get left behind or broken with the next minor OS update just around the corner anytime. I guess that eventually that will push some decisions to be made. When you can't run 7 alongside the latest version of PS or AE because of OS upgrade issues, it'll fall out of favor quickly.


Return to posts index


tony west
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 5:08:35 am

[Bret Williams] "When you can't run 7 alongside the latest version of PS or AE because of OS upgrade issues, it'll fall out of favor quickly."


I agree, I see a lot of old fcp and old mc at stations in my town and in a way I'm not really surprised at all.

People are comfortable with the programs and they are paying their bills and execs don't have a clue what's new out there and don't want to spend money if they don't have to.

At some point 7 won't work anymore and they will have to move. By then X will have improved even more.

That's when I want to see which way they go.
Shane brings up a good point about starting over and the learning curve, only X is a quicker learn then most things.


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 1:01:04 pm

[tony west] "People are comfortable with the programs and they are paying their bills and execs don't have a clue what's new out there and don't want to spend money if they don't have to."

Because X is not going to improve the output quality one iota, and even the speed increases are dubious, especially over Premiere CS6, which any production house that has Creative Cloud or Production Premium will already have.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 5:51:27 am

Brett, I generally agree with you. But I think if you are cutting something highly supported like ProResHQ, and in a highly structured environment, you're not really feeling the problems you are talking about. If you are going from HDcamSR to HQ and then back, the kind of rendering and transcoding you are talking about never really enters the picture.


Return to posts index


Colin Hensworth
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:53:11 am

I'm a stubborn legacy user who feels more comfortable when all media is transcoded to Prores. I'm so fast in 7 why would I mess that up? Transcode while I sleep. When 7 is gone soon, my natural reaction will be to edit on Premiere for the easy and safe transition, but at the same time use X for quick projects while it continues to grow. I think using both could be effective.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 9:00:57 am

[Colin Hensworth] "Transcode while I sleep"

With X you transcode while you work! (If you have a fast Mac!)

[Colin Hensworth] "my natural reaction will be to edit on Premiere for the easy and safe transition, but at the same time use X for quick projects while it continues to grow. I think using both could be effective."

Very sensible, I would imagine a lot of people may be thinking the same thing

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Lemur Hayop
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 10:50:27 am

The way things are going transcoding might not always be necessary, e.g., shooting ProRes in-camera to SSD.


Return to posts index

Michael Hendrix
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 12:36:14 pm

2013 will be the year of transition for my shop. We have waited long enough and no one within or freelance has embraced X. Avid would be a $25,000 software upgrade so that is probably out of the question because we are being asked to make no new purchases next year. We already have CS6 so Premiere it is. Have already tested and it works well and everyone feels confident that they could make the switch with few hiccups.

Just can't wait for them to flip the switch on FCP7 and play catch-up.



Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:31:36 pm

[Michael Hendrix] " 2013 will be the year of transition for my shop"

Michael,

I'm sure I'm not the only one who would want to hear about your experience - please consider posting something once you've managed to transition. (or in the middle of it!)

Franz.


Return to posts index

Michael Hendrix
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Dec 1, 2012 at 1:57:33 pm

Franz, I have been testing the Adobe workflow for a few months not. We have 10 seats of FCP working on a shared system, Omneon(Harmonic). The second step was to get ever system up-to-date, ie, RAM, OS (we were still on Snow Leopard).

Keep in mind, we are a Fortune 50 company so working within the IT infrastructure is very painful, alot of security barriers, they have to touch and approve everything so we are always late on upgrades.

The problem came when our IT support was told Omneon was okay on Mountain Lion. We imaged all 10 systems and started having problems. Then we were told Omneon was not okay on ML and a update would be coming in Dec.

So, the transition has been slowed waiting for Omneon to provide a update. I am still bouncing between FCP and Premiere and it works great. Next step is system testing on the shared storage.



Return to posts index

Neil Patience
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 1:12:42 pm

Certainly in London Aindreas's observations totally match what I am seeing. I work largely in broadcast cutting light ent. comedy, sport and Avid totally dominates.
Not seen a single facility even giving X a try. Indeed Avid seems to be picking up where some have switched. But as others have noted FCP7 is still used.
A couple of examples, Air Post, part of Air Studios were all FCP 7, Color etc 18 months ago. Now, although they have retained a few FCP seats, they have switched largely to Avid.
ITV, which is one of Europe's largest broadcasters is all Avid for programme making, around 50 suites. However the promo department, ITV Creative, chose to go FCP 7 around 2005. They have something like 15 small cutting bays and 4 full broadcast spec suites. 4 ingest stations. I was there a couple of weeks ago and they are pretty much decided to go to Avid, which given how many they already have makes sense. They were considering PPro but given the existing infrastructure it seemed less likely a choice.
X certainly so far has yet to have any traction at all in my environment but I guess time will tell.

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


Return to posts index

Michael Sanders
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 2:13:37 pm

So does the fact that no one has jumped en masse means its rubbish?

No. How long did it take FCP legacy to get a decent foot hold in broadcast? Well about 3 or four years if not more.

There's also the fact its new .. people in our industry are cautious. Did people go and by Avid when it came out? No they didn't it took an age. Even when Avid could do Full broadcast, tape suites were still busy for a few years to come.

But you guys who are ignoring it - ignore at your peril. 10.0.6 is completely different to the original release - mmm sounds familiar.

But you will start to get asked if you can cut on it I'm sure. As the word spreads and people see it in action it will infect like a virus.

I've just finished shooting and editing a series of 6 x 30min round table discussion programmes for a european broadcaster. 4 x PDW800's with audio to a 788T. Most of the programme is the discussion, with small insert packages (think Newsnight). We cut each each one in just over half a day. The producer was over the moon and is now raving about FCP X.

We're making inroads and "it's another piece of software to learn" really isn't going to cut it for much longer I'm afraid.

Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor


Return to posts index

Trevor Asquerthian
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 2:33:37 pm

I think FCx has some interesting features. But I don't think I'll get a paying job on it in the next 18 months.

Smoke stands more of a chance, as does PPro.

I suspect my breakdown for the next 12 months (same market as Neil) will be:

Avid: 60% steady
IPEdit: 25% and growing
FCP7: 15% and shrinking
Tape: 0% sunk without trace
Smoke: 0% no sign of interest yet (would be a better fit than Avid for a promo department)
PPro: 0% no sign of interest yet (but Adobe are keen)
FCx: 0% no sign of interest yet



Return to posts index

Rafael Amador
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 3:04:39 pm

[Michael Sanders] "So does the fact that no one has jumped en masse means its rubbish?

No. How long did it take FCP legacy to get a decent foot hold in broadcast? Well about 3 or four years if not more. "

That's a very old argument.
You can't compare the early years of FCP with the early years of FPCX.

FCP was launched by an (at that time) small company in economics troubles called Apple and based on a platform with , at the time, uncertain future, and the market was in the hand of a powerful competence. Digital Video was on is early steps and Internet was not on the pockets of millions neither Apple in the mouth of billions. The expansion of FCP was basically from users to users.

FCP in the beginning was less operative than FCPX, but succeeded because convinced and because was a no-brainer to start to edit with. Even for people without any previous experience on video editing. You didn't need to wrap your mind around nothing, Anybody that had seen a piece of celluloid in his live would catch the "paradigma" at first sight.
The main difference between FCP and FCPX, is that Apple developed FCP with the editors in mind and has developed FCPX with Apple in mind.
rafael

http://www.nagavideo.com


Return to posts index

Mark Raudonis
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 4:26:29 pm

[Rafael Amador] "The main difference between FCP and FCPX, is that Apple developed FCP with the editors in mind and has developed FCPX with Apple in mind. "

Quote of the day!



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 5:52:39 pm

[Mark Raudonis] "[Rafael Amador] "The main difference between FCP and FCPX, is that Apple developed FCP with the editors in mind and has developed FCPX with Apple in mind. "

Quote of the day!

"


Indeed!


Return to posts index

Michael Aranyshev
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:41:33 pm

I've been waiting for someone saying it for long time. Original FCP was a success because it made sense, not because it was cheap.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 4:24:14 pm

I think smoke is overkill for a promo department. Premiere combined with a fully tooled up After Effects with all the trapcode stuff and magic bullet is probably a better, cheaper fix. you get a broader price competitive skills pool to draw from too.

Actually trying to say train staff internally on smoke to a proficient level is no small dice. Smoke is a beast. And as freelancers, good smoke guys can charge a pretty penny.

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 6:07:54 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I think smoke is overkill for a promo department. Premiere combined with a fully tooled up After Effects with all the trapcode stuff and magic bullet is probably a better, cheaper fix. you get a broader price competitive skills pool to draw from too.
"


Undoubtedly. Especially when you can more easily add print and Internet departments into the support mix. For years, I've had numerous Creative Directors, most of whom are or were AE folk, ask me "Why not Premiere?" There used to be a lot of valid answers. Now there aren't. Over the last year "Why not Premiere?" has become a pretty good question.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 30, 2012 at 10:04:50 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I think smoke is overkill for a promo department. Premiere combined with a fully tooled up After Effects with all the trapcode stuff and magic bullet is probably a better, cheaper fix. you get a broader price competitive skills pool to draw from too. Actually trying to say train staff internally on smoke to a proficient level is no small dice. Smoke is a beast."

I've been banging away on the Smoke prereleases, and you're right -- Smoke is a beast. The timeline is familiar enough, but the compositing/effects side is really not something that one can pick up in a couple of days. Nonetheless, I'm really enjoying working with it. Discreet were a bunch of UI geniuses, and I think Autodesk are on the right track in revising the workflow for timeline centricity.

However, I must also say there's a lot of stuff that's very easy to do quickly with Ae and a nice set of plugins that would be very hard to do with Smoke and nothing else (if not impossible). I'm finding that Smoke is a really intriguing tool for my work, but it won't replace Ae.

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

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 4:17:11 pm

[Michael Sanders] "But you will start to get asked if you can cut on it I'm sure. As the word spreads and people see it in action it will infect like a virus."

no, frankly. Its dead in the water even with all the changes. thats the point. people are making decisions and overhauling work process for the medium term, decisions are being made that will be executed 2013 - X isn't not getting an iota of a look in, its not infecting anything. The industry is visibly moving on.

the idea that they will suddenly start liking it, or remember it, in a few years - or more pertinently, place their trust in apple in a few years, is not a goer either.

It's toast as far as i can tell.

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 5:19:41 pm

You will see FCPX in new facilities, not established facilities. People growing up with it who are starting their own businesses. It will take time for those facilities to grow up.

The irony in seeing all these Avid posts is that this is such a small part of the entire professional market. Avid has been loosing money for years and Avid is NOT an NLE company. I'd love to see how many of the Avid posters are buying new or upgrading Isis. That's a better measure of Avid. Avid will either go under, be sold, do something major to change their business model. Some of the above scenarios will be very painful to some.

That the bulk of the facilities are holding on to FCP6,7 is telling. Neither Avid nor Adobe is yet a compelling economic proposition.



Return to posts index

Michael Hendrix
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 5:50:31 pm

"That the bulk of the facilities are holding on to FCP6,7 is telling. Neither Avid nor Adobe is yet a compelling economic proposition."

Avid, not really, but have to disagree with Adobe not being a economic proposition. It is one key reason we are switching, doesn't cost us a dime, we already have it.

Also, Adobe's cloud pricing was timed perfectly, $50 a month for basically everything Adobe, great deal.

I think the reality behind people hanging on to 7 is that nothing is forcing change, it still works and people are making money with it, milking it for every last dime. That's more of a testament to how strong of a hold FCP HAD on the market not where the future lies.

When the OS no longer will run the legacy software, people will start to get nervous. When the latest "look" hits and the plugins are not available for FCP, people will start thinking.

My prediction, one way or another, 2013 will be the year of the transition.



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 6:18:37 pm

[Michael Hendrix] "I think the reality behind people hanging on to 7 is that nothing is forcing change,"

Outside of the cost of software there are costs in training time and workflow changes. Adobe is priced well but I suspect a lot of facilities don't see a major cost benefit in a changeover. It may even be there but apparently they're not convinced of it. It certainly makes much more sense for many companies to move to Adobe over Avid but, apparently, it makes even more sense (including economic sense) to not move at all.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 5:57:15 pm

[Craig Seeman] "That the bulk of the facilities are holding on to FCP6,7 is telling. Neither Avid nor Adobe is yet a compelling economic proposition.
"


That's not what I'm seeing. People are just taking their time to change. Nearly everybody I talk to, though, has an idea of where they are going by now. They are just doing it on their own calendar.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 6:24:34 pm

[Chris Harlan] "They are just doing it on their own calendar."

We'll have to see how 2013 progresses. "Calendar" has real factors like financial both short and long term. Sales have a way of changing over time until the purchase is made. Basically, in both my past work with facilities and developers, only the tangible really counts because a large portion of "advance intentions" do really shift between road map and actualization.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:11:55 pm

[Craig Seeman] "[Chris Harlan] "They are just doing it on their own calendar."

We'll have to see how 2013 progresses. "Calendar" has real factors like financial both short and long term. Sales have a way of changing over time until the purchase is made. Basically, in both my past work with facilities and developers, only the tangible really counts because a large portion of "advance intentions" do really shift between road map and actualization.

"


Sure. I agree with all of that. I'm just disputing the assertion that facilities aren't finding either MC or Pr compelling. These facilities have been going through the same worldwide recession that everyone else has. What's not compelling is spending a lot of money when it doesn't have to be spent. It makes perfect sense that people aren't buying en masse.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:00:00 pm

[Chris Harlan] "I'm just disputing the assertion that facilities aren't finding either MC or Pr compelling. These facilities have been going through the same worldwide recession that everyone else has. What's not compelling is spending a lot of money when it doesn't have to be spent. It makes perfect sense that people aren't buying en masse."

Compelling, to me, are not features divorced from economics. There's not great motive to spend and that's the point. This also means an impact on Adobe and Avid ... and this is really really bad for Avid. For Adobe it buys them more time to make the economics compelling. Actually this too for Apple although they have an entirely different business model.

One would have to see a real cost benefit gain to move to another NLE. In this economic climate it's harder. The cost benefit gains of moving to either Avid or Adobe are not compelling (and not to Apple either for that matter).



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:08:44 pm

[Craig Seeman] "[Chris Harlan] "I'm just disputing the assertion that facilities aren't finding either MC or Pr compelling. These facilities have been going through the same worldwide recession that everyone else has. What's not compelling is spending a lot of money when it doesn't have to be spent. It makes perfect sense that people aren't buying en masse."

Compelling, to me, are not features divorced from economics. There's not great motive to spend and that's the point. This also means an impact on Adobe and Avid ... and this is really really bad for Avid. For Adobe it buys them more time to make the economics compelling. Actually this too for Apple although they have an entirely different business model.

One would have to see a real cost benefit gain to move to another NLE. In this economic climate it's harder. The cost benefit gains of moving to either Avid or Adobe are not compelling (and not to Apple either for that matter).
"


I'm sorry, Craig, if I misunderstood you. I took your earlier post when you said that it was "telling" that many facilities weren't upgrading to either Pr or MC to mean that they had judged MC or Pr not to be compelling NLE platforms and might instead be waiting for X to evolve. That is the notion I'm arguing against.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 9:47:27 pm

[Chris Harlan] "I'm sorry, Craig, if I misunderstood you. I took your earlier post when you said that it was "telling" that many facilities weren't upgrading to either Pr or MC to mean that they had judged MC or Pr not to be compelling NLE platforms and might instead be waiting for X to evolve."

I dont' think they're waiting for X to evolve instead at all. They're waiting for whatever can hit that much tougher cost benefit trigger (tougher due to economics). Personally, baring change, I think Avid is least likely to get that baring a major change. It certainly could be Adobe. It might be Apple. Apple has a lot to do in a very short time on many fronts (not impossible for them but we just don't know). Adobe is showing efforts in collaborative workflow for example with Adobe Anywhere for example.



Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 6:17:01 pm

[Craig Seeman] "You will see FCPX in new facilities, not established facilities. People growing up with it who are starting their own businesses. It will take time for those facilities to grow up.

The irony in seeing all these Avid posts is that this is such a small part of the entire professional market. Avid has been loosing money for years and Avid is NOT an NLE company. I'd love to see how many of the Avid posters are buying new or upgrading Isis. That's a better measure of Avid. Avid will either go under, be sold, do something major to change their business model. Some of the above scenarios will be very painful to some.

That the bulk of the facilities are holding on to FCP6,7 is telling. Neither Avid nor Adobe is yet a compelling economic proposition.
"


Avid is a huge market out here, and while you may not be seeing any moves in your area, all the facilities i know who were Avid are staying Avid, and all the fcp 7 facilities are either staying put for now, or moveing to Avid. Thats what im seeing in LA, and one could argue, thats a very big market, that makes up a big chunk of the professional world.

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 6:35:43 pm

[Neil Goodman] "Avid is a huge market out here, and while you may not be seeing any moves in your area, all the facilities i know who were Avid are staying Avid, and all the fcp 7 facilities are either staying put for now, or moveing to Avid. Thats what im seeing in LA, and one could argue, thats a very big market, that makes up a big chunk of the professional world."

If they're not buying Isis then Avid is not gaining much financially and eventually and inevitably there will be serious consequences. Avid's market is decidedly not huge at all. The Broadcast and higher end feature film market is very small. Avid revenue shows it. That much of that very small market itself doesn't upgrade their infrastructure as Avid improves product, is another serious hit on Avid financially. That Avid can't sustain itself, let alone grow, with just its current pro market is unfortunately very real. They're going to have to change their business model. It doesn't necessarily mean "non pro" but it does mean major changes in either product pricing, products offered relative to R&D or a means to compel upgrades especially in hardware.



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:16:25 pm

[Neil Goodman] "and one could argue, thats a very big market, that makes up a big chunk of the professional world."

Not even close

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:31:06 pm

[Neil Goodman] "Avid is a huge market out here, and while you may not be seeing any moves in your area, all the facilities i know who were Avid are staying Avid, and all the fcp 7 facilities are either staying put for now, or moveing to Avid. Thats what im seeing in LA, and one could argue, thats a very big market, that makes up a big chunk of the professional world.
"


A few quibbles from the same pond. I can't say their name, but I know of a particular cable network who is shifting their whole promo department from Avid to Premiere. I also know of a medium-sized promo house, that specializes in games, that's moving from 7 to Premiere. I'm also feeling pressure from some of the Creative Directors I work with to go Premiere on their projects. That said, I agree that Avid is, by far, our local big fish. Which is good, because it is terrific editing software, and now, finally, ubiquitous. I don't think its whale status is in any danger here at all in the Southland. Premiere, though, is finally here too.


Return to posts index

Michael Hendrix
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Dec 1, 2012 at 2:10:43 pm

I believe NASCAR has switched to Premiere for the most part. I wonder how many people have been enticed by the Adobe Anywhere demos. When I saw it, my jaw dropped.

We are contracting out at least 50% of our editing. I would love to open up our base outside of the region to get more diversity and talent but loading up hard drives, shipping, relinking projects is tough. And a big problem is security for that content. Our training stuff is incredibly proprietary so letting it walk out the door is troublesome.



Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:36:59 pm

[Craig Seeman] "That the bulk of the facilities are holding on to FCP6,7 is telling. Neither Avid nor Adobe is yet a compelling economic proposition."

Craig,

As one who is still using 7 for the forseeable future, I'd amend your comment:

Apple, Avid, Adobe have no compelling propositions on any level.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Colin Hensworth
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:46:42 pm

I can honestly say I would be far more likely to adopt X if there were a more normalish timeline. Some sort of hybrid between X and Pr.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:10:21 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "Apple, Avid, Adobe have no compelling propositions on any level."

Believe it or not, I agree with you.

This year will be very interesting for Apple with a MacPro replacement, OS 10.9, ongoing changes in FCPX. It can be major steps forward or self built hurdles.

The slow movement buys Adobe more time to iron out and improve things.

I can't say much about Avid other than the clock is ticking and if they're just banking on FCP7 movement to their quarter it's going to be another failed business model.

I do wonder how EditShare looks for those companies seeking an alternative to Unity Isis.



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:17:14 pm

[Craig Seeman] "I do wonder how EditShare looks for those companies seeking an alternative to Unity Isis."

There are plenty of viable shared storage solutions at all levels that are good alternatives to both Isis and Xsan. And they work with FCP7, PPro or MC. So in the hypothetical scenario that someone like Blackmagic bought the editor and DAW software IP from Avid, the user base would be just fine.

What's more interesting, is whether the eventual Mac version of Lightworks (late 2013 or 2014?) would ultimately have significant traction.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 5:32:26 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Its dead in the water even with all the changes. thats the point"

That's not the point. That's your point (and a few others).

My point is on the tip of my head. Amortization schedules of capital purchases and the Return on Capital Employed will rule the day. Those returns also account for HR outlays (like training). It's risky from a return on capital point of view to purchase 50 suites of X for places already operating either Avid or Premiere. Really, what the hell was Apple thinking?

So far there's a couple of answers:
1. Revolution
2. Abandonment


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 6:14:56 pm

[Richard Herd] "what the hell was Apple thinking? "

Attrition. It would be extremely rare for a facility to have the economic conditions to move an entire facility to FCPX. Someone familiar with FCPX and starting a new facility would be a different story.

Most of the examples we're seeing here of FCPX in professional use, involves and editor with some knowledge and a single seat. Those are beachheads. People with FCPX experience on their own systems will create their own jobs because a facility won't use it unless there's already a trusted editor on staff making that decision.



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 6:34:59 pm

[Craig Seeman] "[Richard Herd] "what the hell was Apple thinking? "

Attrition. It would be extremely rare for a facility to have the economic conditions to move an entire facility to FCPX. Someone familiar with FCPX and starting a new facility would be a different story.

Most of the examples we're seeing here of FCPX in professional use, involves and editor with some knowledge and a single seat. Those are beachheads. People with FCPX experience on their own systems will create their own jobs because a facility won't use it unless there's already a trusted editor on staff making that decision."


Extremely rare? I think that's a generous overstatement !

1. Revolution
2. Abandonment
3. Attrition
4. Beachheads <--a decent business name, IMO.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:51:42 pm

Yes, even though I'm a fan of FCPX and think it's a great NLE, I too would be very cautious about moving an entire facility to it at this point. Right now I think it's OK for the intrepid editor in a facility to start working in a single seat but FCPX still has to improve collaborative workflow. I do hope Apple tackles this within the year.



Return to posts index

Keith Koby
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Dec 2, 2012 at 3:53:26 am

There's a base for a killer sharing app there in fcpx. The adobe sharing thing isn't real yet and will be expensive because it's going to require expensive servers to crunch footage into proprietary streaming formats to get it done. I highly doubt apple will role over and play dead.

We actually are finding it just as easy to share with X as it was with 7, if not more easy to share. We can prep graphic layouts with compound clips in an event and export that as an xml. We can do the same for base versions of spots cleaned up and ready for multiple editors to use for different purposes. Just as easy as fcp7 but better because of roles and metadata. We think organization is better than 7 because we have the media shared in a central location outside of the trappings of the legacy FCP Documents folder.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Dec 2, 2012 at 3:31:37 am

3. Abandon Revolution


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 6:00:27 pm

[Michael Sanders] "But you will start to get asked if you can cut on it I'm sure. As the word spreads and people see it in action it will infect like a virus."

There are some pretty serious antibodies out there.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:07:32 pm

I find all this praise for X a bit ironic as I sit here trying to render/export a single 30 spot at least a dozen times in different ways to get around corrupt renders. And then eventually have it work correctly - and from there on out for the session - for absolutely no discernible reason. So you'll have to excuse me if I think all this talk about performance and speed is a bit of a joke. Until the app is less buggy and more bulletproof, you won't see wholesale adoption at any established facility. Experimentation only.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:21:56 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I find all this praise for X a bit ironic as I sit here trying to render/export a single 30 spot at least a dozen times in different ways to get around corrupt renders."

Export an image sequence, then review it and save out any individual corrupt frames?

Signed,
The Image Sequence Guy

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: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 7:51:09 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Export an image sequence, then review it and save out any individual corrupt frames?"

Why? Just to examine or fix?

It's the same issue I posted in another thread. An image that should be a PIP becomes full screen and semi-transparent and inverted for 1 frame. Random and at different points on successive attempts. Usually partially through a transition. Mostly PR4x4 media with filters and manipulation. 5+ layers thick. Not fixable because there is movement. So I had to keep trying until I got a clean export. Unfortunately with a client in the room; but fortunate, too, in that this client knows he can come back later and have a corrected product. So no worries (for him).

FWIW - I have seen this issue on other projects on another machine, so it's not limited to this one circumstance. The only commonality is that both machines are Mac Pros and have ATI 5870 cards. May or may not matter.

In the end, it doesn't matter how fast an NLE is, if you can't get the end product out of the box. ;-(

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:04:28 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Export an image sequence, then review it and save out any individual corrupt frames?"

[Oliver Peters] "Why? Just to examine or fix?"

As a workaround and attempt to reduce the amount of trial and error in getting a clean output. Rather than constantly re-rendering, hoping for clean output, send out some output you can expect will be dirty, then just try to re-render only glitches.

Once you've gotten those clean, stitch the whole img seq back into a movie file with Compressor.

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: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:11:58 pm

[Walter Soyka] "As a workaround and attempt to reduce the amount of trial and error in getting a clean output."

No, I get it. At this point the picture is locked, but I'm waiting for the mix to come back. I was exporting a video mixdown to put it back on the top layer. My fallback was to do a few mixdown exports and stitch them together, since the corruption was at different points. In the end, I got a pass that was completely clean.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:17:14 pm

[Oliver Peters] "In the end, it doesn't matter how fast an NLE is, if you can't get the end product out of the box. ;-("

Problems like this are not just limited to FCPX of course, every NLE I've ever used has bit me on the a** like this many times, I had a major problem with a PPro CS5 project last year that would not export a master file at all and I can't count the times that I had export issues with FCP over the years.

Considering it's all new code and it's version 1.06 I think it's remarkably stable.

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:20:30 pm

[Steve Connor] "Problems like this are not just limited to FCPX of course, every NLE"

While I agree and it's easy to say that, the reality for me is that I've recently run a couple of large jobs through FCP 7 and MC. The comparative stability versus X is quite significant. After working with X for months, I am no longer comfortable using it on anything that is deadline-critical.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:27:56 pm

[Oliver Peters] "While I agree and it's easy to say that, the reality for me is that I've recently run a couple of large jobs through FCP 7 and MC. The comparative stability versus X is quite significant. After working with X for months, I am no longer comfortable using it on anything that is deadline-critical."

Fair point, as I said it's version 1.06, would you really expect it to be as stable as FCP7 and MC?

For me it's fine, especially after the last couple of versions but I'm sure there's issues with it that I've yet to meet

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 8:58:23 pm

[Steve Connor] "Fair point, as I said it's version 1.06, would you really expect it to be as stable as FCP7 and MC? "

I would expect it to be much more stable than it is right now. From what I've experienced, the pre-10.0.6 bugs are still there and 10.0.6 introduced new ones.

It's a decade later than the original FCP and software development and Q&A techniques have advanced just as the product itself has. The whole point of rewriting the code was to make a better product that was ultimately easier to improve upon. I'm not sure we are seeing the reality of that.

By comparison, MC6 was a move to 64-bit and in theory the two should be on similar footing. They aren't. But maybe the A-list engineers inside Apple were pulled off to fix maps!

[Steve Connor] "For me it's fine, especially after the last couple of versions but I'm sure there's issues with it that I've yet to meet"

I fully acknowledge that maybe what I'm doing with X are things that break it. After all, most of what gets talked about here are fairly simple from the standpoint of editing design. 1 or 2 layers of video. A few channels of audio. Some filters, some transforms, some color correction. That's all within the FCP X sweet spot.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 9:02:53 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I would expect it to be much more stable than it is right now. From what I've experienced, the pre-10.0.6 bugs are still there and 10.0.6 introduced new ones."

I'm not seeing this and the support forums don't seem to be plagued with reports of poor stability and lots of bugs, perhaps you should try a clean install



[Oliver Peters] "By comparison, MC6 was a move to 64-bit and in theory the two should be on similar footing. They aren't. But maybe the A-list engineers inside Apple were pulled off to fix maps!
"


Well there were a lot of posts about stability with MC6 so it's not that far off

[Oliver Peters] "After all, most of what gets talked about here are fairly simple from the standpoint of editing design. 1 or 2 layers of video. A few channels of audio. Some filters, some transforms, some color correction. That's all within the FCP X sweet spot.
"


I've certainly pushed it harder than that!

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 9:08:37 pm

[Steve Connor] "I'm not seeing this and the support forums don't seem to be plagued with reports of poor stability and lots of bugs, perhaps you should try a clean install"

By bugs, I'm talking about things like the skimming issues, where occasionally it just gets hung up. I noticed today that it also will no longer do a video-only share export of a file. Might just be this one project. I see the other things on multiple machines, so I doubt it's a clean install thing.

Then again, maybe I have lost all tolerance for these sort of things ;-)

[Steve Connor] "Well there were a lot of posts about stability with MC6 so it's not that far off"

Not really the case with 6.5 - at least not in my experience on several machines.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 9:11:40 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Then again, maybe I have lost all tolerance for these sort of things ;-)"

Having a project go bad when a deadline looms will do that to you!


[Oliver Peters] "Not really the case with 6.5 - at least not in my experience on several machines.
"


I've heard that 6.5 is much better, hopefully FCPX will be more stable for some people when it gets to version .5 as well

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 29, 2012 at 10:45:21 pm

[Steve Connor] "hopefully FCPX will be more stable for some people when it gets to version .5 as well"

Actually it is. The X or "10" is product branding, like OS X. So, 10.0.0 was the same as a 1.0 product version. Therefore, 10.0.6 is the same as if this was called version 1.6.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

David Powell
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 30, 2012 at 1:03:54 am

Wow so I'm not crazy! I've lost so many hours this week trying to get an hour long sequence out without corruption. Problem is each time out randomly shows up on a different place with or without filters. If this is common, I don't see how anyone is delivering projects on time. And this is 10.06 with no compound clips.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 30, 2012 at 1:13:38 am

[David Powell] "Wow so I'm not crazy! I've lost so many hours this week... "

You and me both, man. Seems like the others on the list are just a tad luckier.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Keith Koby
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 30, 2012 at 10:14:25 pm

Thanks for posting. I don't agree with everything the author wrote there, but I do think the app is ready for use.

We are currently switching workflows over to fcpx - promo and other longer form workflows. Staff who have been exposed to the app and are using it are happy with it and adapted without losing much of a beat. They were reading the manual and listening to me talk about it over the last few months and looking at it at work and at home - so getting familiar helps - but the transition hasn't been nearly as bad as you'd think.

We are sharing media and finding 10.0.6 stable. There are a few little issues that we are sorting through, but they do not effect the final output files. The editing process has been much faster than 7 and the export to audio is slick with the xtopro app.

If you are a freelance editor in our goto talent pool and you want to continue to work with us in the future, take some time and learn the app. The rate is the same.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 30, 2012 at 10:31:07 pm

[Keith Koby] "f you are a freelance editor in our goto talent pool and you want to continue to work with us in the future, take some time and learn the app. The rate is the same.
"


Keith, pardon me for being unfamiliar with you, but you are making this statement for iNDEMAND NETWORKS? I take it this is for internal promo work? I'm on the west coast some I'm not directly familiar with you. What's the size of your operation? How many X seats are you talking about?


Return to posts index

Keith Koby
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Nov 30, 2012 at 11:27:04 pm

Hey Chris!

I wouldn't expect you to know me or the brand of the company I work for because we are not consumer facing for the most part, but we are a good sized facility (post-wise) producing a lot of content.

We have 30 odd edit seats and we are moving many of them to X. I can't give exact numbers until after the new year, but yes we are adopting x.

Keith


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Dec 2, 2012 at 3:53:12 am

[Keith Koby] "We have 30 odd edit seats and we are moving many of them to X. I can't give exact numbers until after the new year, but yes we are adopting x.
"


Rabble rousers!


Return to posts index

Keith Koby
Re: Why The Pro Market Should Take FCP X Seriously - HD Magazine article
on Dec 2, 2012 at 3:58:04 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Rabble rousers!"

Insurgents!

Keith Koby
Sr. Director Post-Production Engineering
iNDEMAND NETWORKS
Howard TV!/Movies On Demand/iNDEMAND Pay-Per-View/iNDEMAND 3D


Return to posts index

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