FORUMS: list search recent posts

NAB and FCP X

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Michael Sanders
NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 8:55:37 pm

NAB isn't far away - surely it's about time the rumours started?

Michael Sanders
London Based DP/Editor


Return to posts index

Al LeVine
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 8:59:41 pm

Maybe something great at the Super Meet. The agenda as of now is "super secret"...


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 9:02:53 pm

I heard a rumour that Apple won't be at NAB :)

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


Return to posts index


Al LeVine
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 9:05:04 pm

They were two years ago to introduce X!


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 9:07:59 pm

[Al LeVine] "They were two years ago to introduce X!"

Not AT the show though!

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


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 9:19:45 pm

Just for the fun of it, maybe Final Cut Pro X will give us tracks and the ability to work with tape and import Final Cut Pro 7 projects, and versions prior. Maybe, just maybe a send to Motion feature will be implemented as well. Just a guess, nothing more.

Oh, maybe they will announce the new Mac Pro, time will tell.


Return to posts index


Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 10:11:53 pm

[David Mathis] "Just for the fun of it, maybe Final Cut Pro X will give us tracks and the ability to work with tape and import Final Cut Pro 7 projects, and versions prior. Maybe, just maybe a send to Motion feature will be implemented as well. Just a guess, nothing more.

Tracks make no sense with the magnetic timeline. The audio elements need to be able to move for it to work, otherwise the track data would be useless. I think we'll ultimately get what we want, but it won't be in the way you think. I'm personally betting Roles will be expanded to fill the organizational tasks that tracks are for. So unless Apple abandons several ideas fundamental to FCPX (and I hope they don't), tracks aren't coming.

I'm also very dubious that Apple will integrate tape I/O at this stage.

Motion round-tripping. Yes, please.

[David Mathis] Oh, maybe they will announce the new Mac Pro, time will tell."

Apple have never announced new hardware at NAB. They'd make a bigger splash at WWDC in June.



Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 10:43:53 pm

[David Mathis] "maybe Final Cut Pro X will give us tracks "

God I hope not. Expanded organizational capabilities for Roles would be nice. The next version of X seems like it'll be pretty major. Or, they've given up. Everyone back to Avid and Pr! (gouges out eyeballs)

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 11:00:22 pm

[Charlie Austin] "[David Mathis] "maybe Final Cut Pro X will give us tracks "

God I hope not."


Amen brother.

The LAST thing we need is to turn the only real editing alternative in the marketplace into just another "same as everyone else" NLE.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index


Charlie Austin
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 11:06:39 pm

[Bill Davis] "The LAST thing we need is to turn the only real editing alternative in the marketplace into just another "same as everyone else" NLE."

Well, there are plenty of alternatives. And Apple really do need to come up with a way to visually organize the timeline better. You get used to things jumping around, but Roles really do need to stick together. Some sort of Logic integration will hopefully address concerns of folks who need to throw faders. ;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 11:17:44 pm

Yes clear organization is important and I think that should be done through Roles. I do hope Apple pays some attention to Roles in the near future. It's one of the key reasons why I see hope in the trackless timeline.



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 11:33:07 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Well, there are plenty of alternatives"

(counting on my fingers) Avid, Premier, Vegas, Lightworks, Autodesk (Flame/Smoke) X and what?)

What other NLE programs are out there in general use?

Pinacle still hanging on? Montage? Are there still hidden Toaster suites out there?

The "big A's" plus Sony is a pretty narrow space. But I could certainly ignorant of wider choices.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index


Erik Lindahl
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 2:48:07 am

Yes please, give us tracks back. I don't se why tracks and the magnetic stuff can't go-excist along with roles. Perhaps you don't have to call it "tracks" but "role lanes" or something similar like "lane grouping" is needed. Timelines very easily become a mess with the current setup since you have little or no control over your vertical layout.

I'd call it dynamic tracks or what not. Tracks 2.0.

And I'd love to see the event viewer become a real secondary viewer. It's a little crippled in it's current form.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 2:55:14 am

[Erik Lindahl] " something similar like "lane grouping" is needed. Timelines very easily become a mess with the current setup since you have little or no control over your vertical layout.

I'd call it dynamic tracks or what not. Tracks 2.0.

And I'd love to see the event viewer become a real secondary viewer. It's a little crippled in it's current form."


I'm a big proponent of not having fixed tracks. I love not patching or worrying about collisions/accidental overwriting etc. But I think role grouping and hopefully color coding is needed. cutting a music clip at the bottom of the timeline and having half of it pop to the top because the space is open is kind of silly. Let's hope they're working on that.

And having the event viewer at least contain a scrubbable filmstrip or something would be nice.

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 5:57:46 am

I'm trying to imagine how a scrubbable filmstrip would do anything but slow things down.

Right now there's no clicking involved in putting material in the event viewer- just scrub over your Event clips. You'd have to double-click a clip to have it "stick" in the Event viewer, which takes us back to the FCP7 paradigm. There may be a compromise but I don't see it.



Return to posts index


Charlie Austin
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 6:40:37 am

[Marcus Moore] "I'm trying to imagine how a scrubbable filmstrip would do anything but slow things down.

Right now there's no clicking involved in putting material in the event viewer- just scrub over your Event clips. You'd have to double-click a clip to have it "stick" in the Event viewer, which takes us back to the FCP7 paradigm. There may be a compromise but I don't see it."


Yeah, that's true... But if you highlight an event clip anyway to skim it, perhaps you'd get a little skim strip at the bottom of the event viewer if you choose to use it. Personally I don't, but when I have it seemed like you should be able to skim it somehow. I dunno.

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Erik Lindahl
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 12:17:12 pm

Film-strips and / or mini-timelines under each view yes please. It's a far better visual feeback than the system now. Scrubbing has it's finness but it's not the answer for everything for sure (even terribad at times). This in conjuction with proper timecode read-outs would really be a boost. Also the event viewer being simply an event views renders it useless for operations such as grading and comparing scenes with-in an edit. Since the changes made to compound clips you can in teory get around this limitation by working with compounds as you edits / seqences / projects (what ever you want to call them) but that sort of renders the idéa projects out of the window (which I sort of thought they did in the first place but that's a different story all together).

I understand Apple and some "hooked" people like the new "floating" workflow but it does have it's issues and I don't see any issues mixing these new idéas with old very workable or sometimes features. Apple could also use the secondary viewer as a more flexible "secondary viewer" if they wish to. To a degree you go back to a viewer / canvas setup but it's such an important tool I don't see how they can't go back there to a degree while keeping to their new padagrim as well.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 2:11:47 pm

I agree with you completely on expanding the capabilities of the Event viewer. I guess the way that I edit, which is to do rough selections and then refine in the timeline [which is not how everyone works]- the passive scan and drop has been such a HUGE time-saver over FCP7 "double click clip, scrub, next clip, scrub" that having to double click (or command click) on a clip to bring it to the Event viewer seems archaic to me. I can see certain operations where getting finer skimming detail would be advantageous, but it would need to be a special operation.

Playing thru an export in QTX yesterday, it occurs to me that it would be great if they could incorporate a way where if you're hovering over part of an single thumbnail Event clip- it zero's in to a second or so of content to allow for making finer grain selections on that thumbnail.



Return to posts index

Erik Lindahl
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 2:20:06 pm

Speaking of thumbnails, the generated thumb-strip in FCPX has to get way better. It's really bad that they show the wrong thumb at a given point in time. It's more confusing than helpful to me IMO. I get that generating icons like they do have their issues but they for example don't show scene-breaks correctly even after you split a clip into two sections.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 8:12:34 pm

Honestly the largest "issues" come from those who just can't escape the very natural urge to view the new thing through the lens of the old thing.

It's like learning a new language by constantly asking "we say BOAT in English, what's the word in the new language. I totally get that. But in editing, if you do things that way, the very language you use can be the very problem because your starting point is A WAY of operating. And if the goal is to explore a NEW way of operating, then you're limiting your thinking.

Those of us who "liked" X from the start were often those of us who were most willing to revise our habits, NOT merely learn how to do the same things we did before X, within X.

The more you fight X and try to shoehorn it into your traditional habitst, the more i think you'll will struggle. the evidence of that are the folks who pop up looking for X to add "comfort" features so they don't have to rethink processes. Dual windows, patching, color correction that works "more like Devinci" - all pleas to make X more like the comfortable past.

But the odd thing is, on the far side of the learning curve, many of those things are far less important to me than they used to be. I'm no longer making the same types of programs I used to. I'm making smaller, tighter, (hopefully) more impactful videos. I'm making them more often. I'm also doing radio spots, business presentations, TV Spots, incorporating stills and motion graphics more. And I'm distributing most of that directly to clients out of FCP-X as exports in the form of video or audio web exports..

Other competing software solutions do all of these things as well. But X approaches the workflow and the process plumbing differently, and I think in a more modern way.

It still feels fresh and fast to me. Concentrating on doing the most critical parts of modern content creation really, really efficiently and well.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 8:50:55 pm

I can't stress how much I agree with you Bill.
I can come up with a score more analogies but it seems some people simply want FCPX to be FCP8.
Personally I want a trackless NLE. I'd prefer a different way of organizing things than tracks.
Those who like tracks have many choices. For me, I only have one and I don't want to lose that to tracks.

Those of use who liked FCPX from the earliest days so a potentially viable approach to editing even at a time when it was bereft of important features.

In my school days there were subjects that were often infused with words in languages other than English for example. Psychology and Sociology I remember often used German expressions for some concepts. Sometimes another language is better at explaining things than an awkward translation.

Some might not like X because it's missing features. Some might not like X because they don't like the language of the "new paradigm." I do want the new and improved features to be in the new language though.

Hmm, one might say that one must Grok FCPX ;)



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 9:25:53 pm

[Craig Seeman] "some people simply want FCPX to be FCP8."

Yes.

[Craig Seeman] "Those who like tracks have many choices. "

But for my workflow,none as good as FCP7, let alone FCP8. As much as I would like otherwise I'm still stuck here in orphan land for at least another year. I care about your choices just about as much as you care about mine.

[Craig Seeman] "Hmm, one might say that one must Grok FCPX"

Heinlein would be pleased.

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 10:16:41 pm

[Herb Sevush] "But for my workflow,none as good as FCP7, let alone FCP8. As much as I would like otherwise I'm still stuck here in orphan land for at least another year. I care about your choices just about as much as you care about mine."

In that regard the race may be between Adobe Premiere Pro and Editshare Lightworks (I don't think Avid has the R&D resources). I know that feels like a "hurry up and wait" approach but that's even the case with us FCPX users. They're all missing key features that FCP7 had. It's closing in on two years since the official EOL of FCP7 and consider that it's been closer to 4 years since FCP7 hit the market. That's the reason, I think, why so many aren't moving yet. For what it's worth I think it'll be a while before any one NLE really covers all the bases as well as FCP7 did... even though some NLEs always did some things much better than FCP ever did.



Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 1:49:41 am

I hope the FCPX dev team can put it's best foot forward this year and show how they're going to solve some of the few remaining key issues. I think, like Herb, a lot of FCP7 users are still holding on to the existing platform.

In that respect, Apple has it's own "WindowsXP" problem. Convincing people to move off the old system and onto the new. Undoubtably, some will choose to go to a different platform when they finally leave FCP7. But I think this is the key year when FCPX will make it's case for the hanger's on.

A new MacPro and another substantive update would, I think, go a long way towards calming peoples fears.



Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 11:20:58 am

[Craig Seeman] "the race may be between Adobe Premiere Pro and Editshare Lightworks"

Really?


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 4:15:08 pm

Yes



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 4:20:34 pm

I fear I share Dennis' incredulity at such a statement.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 5:06:30 pm

Is it the disbelief in Lightworks?
Just my gut but I think "They rebelled. They evolved. And they have a plan" much like the Cylons.
It'll take time but I think they are looking at challenging Avid.

I think there's some interesting marketing pieces they're throwing together.
In addition to Editshare there's
http://www.lwks.com
and
http://www.redsharknews.com

It may take a year or more before things come together and like any plan it may not work but I see pieces getting put into place.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 5:23:41 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Is it the disbelief in Lightworks?"

I'm not saying that there aren't interesting things about Lightworks. I'm just saying that Adobe and EditShare are in such different places that implying that there is enough parity between them to have them in "a race" is fanciful.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 6:03:58 pm

Both are targeting Avid's market in some fashion.

All these companies have different business models and very different product lines. Avid is a target though and I think Adobe wants to be the NLE and Editshare wants to be the hardware solution and is using their NLE as a marketing tool.



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 4:33:28 pm

No, I'm afraid not Craig. That is an un-buyable statement.

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 5:09:36 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "No, I'm afraid not Craig. That is an un-buyable statement."

I can see where Craig is coming from.

If you assume that Avid is going under financially and will not have the money to invest in R&D, then what other editing system out there is designed specifically for the feature film market - Lightworks. Given they are owned by Editshare, a company providing networking and storage solutions, they might seem the most logical successor to the Avid mantle. Craig included Adobe in this for obvious reasons but PPro does not have a hardware division nor is it as focused purely on the actual timeline cutting side of things. You could see the future as PPro takes much of the FCP market and Lightworks takes Avid's more niche market.

Not saying it's going to happen, but I can see the logic, if you presume Avid is going to fail.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 5:41:41 pm

[Herb Sevush] "If you assume that Avid is going under financially and will not have the money to invest in R&D, then what other editing system out there is designed specifically for the feature film market - Lightworks. Given they are owned by Editshare, a company providing networking and storage solutions, they might seem the most logical successor to the Avid mantle. Craig included Adobe in this for obvious reasons but PPro does not have a hardware division nor is it as focused purely on the actual timeline cutting side of things. You could see the future as PPro takes much of the FCP market and Lightworks takes Avid's more niche market.

Not saying it's going to happen, but I can see the logic, if you presume Avid is going to fail."


Now you're going to panic Aindreas even more - yet another NLE he might have to learn

Steve Connor

There's nothing we can't argue about on the FCPX COW Forum


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 5:48:17 pm

Thanks Herb. You got what I was alluding to.

Looking at the marketing going in to Lightworks and developing their own news outlet with RedSharkNews shows signs of long range a messaging/marketing campaign.

They are, at least in part, targeting Avid. They're using a business/marketing model that Avid probably can't approach or compete with. They have a competing storage system and an NLE which might be considered on the opposite end of the pricing structure... and has had a "Hollywood" past.

It may take them some time to "get there" and they may not succeed but you can see where they may be headed... and it's yet another blow to Avid.

The longer Avid stagnates the more time competitors have to gear up, each with very different business strategies.

Unlike Avid, Editshare may not really care which NLE you choose. They are a hardware company. In their case their NLE is just a facility. What the NLE does give them is a marketing tool. And that's how they're using it.

It's ironic but I could have seen what Editshare is doing as something Avid could have done as a change in their business model but this is what happens when Avid can't reconcile selling MC/Symphony and Isis for example, as a clear business model. I don't mean to say Editshare wins and Avid loses ultimately but Editshare is trying and Avid is stagnant.

Avid is in a perpetual preservation mode and in the long term that doesn't lead to growth or even survival especially when you consider their loses have been ongoing since 2006 and it's now 2013.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 6:01:59 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Looking at the marketing going in to Lightworks and developing their own news outlet with RedSharkNews shows signs of long range a messaging/marketing campaign."

I never heard of Editshare until I started investigating the new Lightworks, so in that sense they are getting something for their investment. I've also become a regular reader of Redshark News, many of the OT threads I've started lately come from their articles.

I still don't believe in the imminent decline of Avid, but I do see the direction Editshare is heading and I agree it's very interesting. Nice to have a player in the business whose name doesn't start with an A.

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 6:29:04 pm

Herb, have you looked at their Lightworks page?
http://www.lwks.com

It was fairly popular in Hollywood for a bit. Maybe not as big as Avid but there are not new by any means.

Obviously they're aware that they faded and are working on that. Editshare acquired them in 2009. Now that there's the beginnings of "Avid insecurity" they're working on bringing back Lightworks, not as an NLE for sale but as a marketing tool... in the way Avid never used MC for Isis.

Read Lightworks history. It mentions a little of EditShare's business strategy with it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lightworks



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 6:43:48 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Herb, have you looked at their Lightworks page?"

Craig I've been aware of Lightworks since they first came out. In those days they came out with a multicam model that was called Heavyworks. They were aimed squarely at the feature market with a special console that emulated a Steinbecks control surface. they never made a big inroad in NY and I never got a chance to play with one.

As for the Eduitshare / Lightworks page I've been a lurker there since the very first announcement. Even though it is not truly "open source" I am very interested in any company that bases their approach around user input and feedback.

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 7:11:35 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Even though it is not truly "open source" I am very interested in any company that bases their approach around user input and feedback."

Yet they give it away for free. Of course nothing is ever truly free when coming from a for profit business.
In addition to the hardware it may be they're working on some high priced specialized utilities that might once again appeal to the feature film market. Obviously that part (utilities) is highly speculative but it's clear (to me) there's a business motive involved and given EditShare's product and Lightworks history one might at least guess what one of those markets is.



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 8:35:29 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Avid is in a perpetual preservation mode and in the long term that doesn't lead to growth or even survival especially when you consider their loses have been ongoing since 2006 and it's now 2013."

its an interesting prognostication on the Red shark rising again, but - as much as steve sees me as a man hell bent on throttling X for dark reasons,

you are... quite keen, yes.. yes actually quite quite keen indeed on foreseeing a very, very, very dim future for Avid mate.
this is bell you have rung quite a few times over the last two years Mr. Seeman.

tell the truth now - they pranged your car one time right? :)

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 9:18:44 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "tell the truth now - they pranged your car one time right? :)"

Not just my car. They took a great NLE and slammed it head on into a brick wall and stalled it dead.
The wheels still spin but they can't steer the thing worth a damn.

I used it for more than a decade. Event trained people on it. Then away from it for more than a decade and it looks frozen in time. Looks like they added some new tail fins and shined up the headlights is all. OK maybe they rebuilt the engine but the frame is as old and battered as time itself and they can't bare to replace the dial on the radio or replace the 8 track.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 9:28:46 pm

[Craig Seeman] " replace the 8 track.
"


Yes, it would be nice if they could replace the 8 track, er 24 mono track limitation.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 10:07:04 pm

[Craig Seeman] "but the frame is as old and battered as time itself and they can't bear to replace the dial on the radio or replace the 8 track."

thats nicely put - and God you really do get that feeling. they are in a lover's swan dive with their twenty year customers.

change a button and there's war.

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 9:03:05 pm

[Bill Davis] "Honestly the largest "issues" come from those who just can't escape the very natural urge to view the new thing through the lens of the old thing."

I agree that people need to approach new tools with virgin minds. My advice to someone learning a new NLE has always been to pretend that you've never used an NLE before. If you come at it with the attitude of, "Well in XYZ I always did it like this. Why doesn't ABC do it like that too?" then you are sunk. I don't see FCPX being any different in that regard other than that it was introduced with a lot of bagage (which we are all aware of so I won't rehash it here).

Many people that aren't keen on FCPX may have started out editing on film or tape-to-tape editing before moving on to (and most likely bouncing between) various NLE's such as Media Composer, Media 100, Discreet Edit, Premiere, FCP Legend, Liquid, etc., so I'm skeptical that the largest issue is that old dogs can't learn new tricks. Contributing factor? Of course, but there other things at play here as well.




Return to posts index

Mike Matzdorff
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 19, 2013 at 4:56:16 pm

this is exactly how I feel.

I was VERY resistant at first, now -- a year later, I see the wisdom. it's young software but a hugely powerful tool.



Return to posts index

Matt Trubac
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 5:47:15 pm

Put your music in a secondary storyline. It keeps it in one lane and eliminates multiple connection points for your music "track." Is there a downside to this that I'm not realizing?


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 2:20:39 pm

Exactly, we need organization, but not "tracks" as other NLEs have them. Track information is just another form of metadata. What we need is for Role info to be represented in the timeline. Tracks are a means to an end, and not an end unto themselves.

The parallel I keep coming back to is Events. The static organizational model from other NLEs are Bins. You make a bin, you put something in a bin. FCPX's keywording goes at the same problem from a completely different direction- it's unquestionably a more fluid solution, but with the same result.

Once Apple leverages the Role data for clips in the timeline, it will "look" very familiar, but the underpinnings will be [like Events] very different.



Return to posts index

Joseph Owens
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 5:03:14 pm

[Marcus Moore] "Exactly, we need organization, but not "tracks" as other NLEs have them. Track information is just another form of metadata. What we need is for Role info to be represented in the timeline."

This is outmoded thinking. Who needs the timeline? This obsession with structure, order of things and hierarchies and stuff is so last-century. The real problem with FCX is that it is not revolutionary enough. It dropped too much of what people were comfortable with and offered something which wasn't actually different enough to warrant changing a whole way of life.

The winner of the edit sweepstakes will be the one who can get rid of the whole timeline/tracks paradigm. Everything should take place in the browser, which is your storyboard-in-waiting. Maybe it (the browser) should be the whole edit, everything optional, nothing written in stone, no gaps, no broken process links.

Edit in the bin.

jPo

"I always pass on free advice -- its never of any use to me" Oscar Wilde.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 6:19:02 pm

You're being facetious, of course, but I think my analogy between Keywords-Events, and Roles-Timeline is completely apt.

If you have a piece of audio that you've tagged with the Role "SFX", wouldn't it be great to know that when you drop that into your timeline, it's automatically deposited into the right "track" or Lane as I think they're referred to in X. That SFX Lane isn't restricted to just one "track" of audio, but is as deep as the number of overlapping elements it contains. All those individual elements are connected to specific visual moments, but are free to move (stack or unstack) depending on what you're doing with the picture edit.

You're joke about eliminating timelines implies you think that Tracks as they exist are essential. And I'm proposing they're not. A way to visually organize audio elements IS essential. That's two completely different things.



Return to posts index

Joseph Owens
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 9:41:41 pm

[Marcus Moore] "You're being facetious, of course,"

Not really. If tracks aren't essential, why would the timeline be important? The only reason for its continued existence in FCX is that most editors can't keep the whole project in their heads, and it would be a giant conceptual step forward if only those old tired methods weren't so entrenched. It would be just as easy to make the order and connections in the browser (which becomes increasingly irrelevant as construction of the timeline-model progresses) and Play-Stop-Jog in a viewer would still work the way it usually does... I mean who cares how long the project is, you can see what is connected to what in/out in the new browser so all of that other stuff is just superfluous -- it is what it is. Apple told us that, and that stacking tracks no longer makes sense, or that any of that has priority -- and in fact the complaining is legion about having to "drill down" to see lower selections.
Think of the timeline as it currently exists as simply a larger graphical "Audition" and you will see that we really don't even need it anymore. The 'audition' as a hidden, semi-nested sequence is actually a hint at what is to come.

You may think this is 'cracked', but its visionary, the way most people think of the future before they're ready for it. Right Bill?

jPo

"I always pass on free advice -- its never of any use to me" Oscar Wilde.


Return to posts index

Joseph Owens
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 9:50:08 pm

[Marcus Moore] "You're being facetious,"

Bleh, I tripped the bad word filter in another post so it might not make it into this thread, but facetious? Not really.

How do you think we got by in the good old days of editing tape-to-tape, which I started doing in 1976, no Timecode. There was no timeline then, and its an invention of this NLE-editing model. I'd say its a crutch. Get rid of it. There is no reason why we can't edit in the media browser. Its an AVID ability, but under-developed.

jPo

"I always pass on free advice -- its never of any use to me" Oscar Wilde.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 9, 2013 at 1:51:17 am

You're still mocking me, I know it...

I'm fortunate to come along early enough that I got to taste every major editing shift in last 30 years. Film, A/B roll, then several flavours of digital.

Maybe that's why I'm so pliable to change. With your background you've obviously seen enough change to know that they're always a better solution. Maybe all Apple's decisions in FCPX won't work out and in some areas they will eventually have to back-peddle, but where Roles are concerned, I think they are on the right track towards something that doesn't have to be as micromanaged when you don't want to, but the control necessary to do so when it's called for.

That's my story and I'm sticking too it. It's all going to be spelled out in a giant blog post I'll finish if I can ever get a day free.

Amazing how busy I am, seeing as I'm an FCPX editor!



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 2:51:27 pm

[Bill Davis] "But I could certainly ignorant of wider choices."

Edius, from Grass Valley (you might have heard of them) has fairly good penetration in the broadcast news markets.

Media 100 still exists, Boris now owns them.

oh, and I hear FCP7 is still out there as well.

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


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 10:14:57 pm

True. They were last at NAB in 2007. Their last two appearances [FCS2 in 2008 and FCPX in 2011] were both at the Supermeet.



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 10:42:28 pm

I hear rumor of a "secret meeting" as Apple has done previously. I don't doubt it's a meeting with journalists an decision makers for some key bit of news. Of course we don't know which key(s) though.



Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 6, 2013 at 10:20:01 pm

It's really tough to figure what's going to happen. Things have been relatively quiet on the FCPX front since October when 10.0.6 was released.

I was actually half expecting a second maintenance 10.0.8 release in the last few weeks to fix the plug-in bugs. If they did, I could have seen a demo presentation at the Supermeet next month, with 10.0.9 or 10.1 release in June. But we're so close to NAB now, I think we might be headed for another feature release.

This is going to be the first year I've ever made it to NAB, so I'm selfishly hoping they do put in an appearance.



Return to posts index

Keith Koby
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 4:04:50 am

They are "there", and they do meet with people.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 5:52:11 am

Oh, I know they're there every year.

Last year they released 10.0.4 just before NAB [which was mostly maintenance with a few minor feature tweaks] and then held their "one on one's" the warmup weekend.

I'm definitely hoping for some proper announcements though. We'll be due a major update by early April.



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 8, 2013 at 8:31:47 pm

Not only that, but back about 4 years ago (the 2nd year the Supermeet was at the Rio (next door to the exotic dancer convention!) Apple even had a table where Brian Meany and a few others from the dev team were interviewing editors and soliciting feedback. I know that those on-camera interviews got watched. So Apple has been listening for a long time about what various classes of editors want.
FWIW.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 12:08:46 am

[Michael Sanders] "NAB isn't far away - surely it's about time the rumours started?
"


I'm actually surprised by how far I've moved into the "who cares" corner. I'm not being flippant about what you wrote, or other people's excitement. I truly AM surprised at how burnt out I am over speculating what Apple may or may not do in the near future. I guess I've begun to feel that constantly having these conversations is like putting on a sock puppet show for the sales department.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 3:34:04 am

I am a bit 'who cares' too Chris. I have my new PC screamer running da Vinci and CS6. I have just put an AVID cut feature film through a quick grade and bluray for investors & crew screening. Apart from my learning curve I was able to work faster on the grade and most of the quirks were just me learning new software.

At this stage the usual "what will Apple do this NAB" stuff is water off this little ducks back. A little distance does make the rumour milling seem like wish fulfilment rather than anything informed or important.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 3:57:13 am

[Michael Gissing] "A little distance does make the rumour milling seem like wish fulfilment rather than anything informed or important.
"


Yup.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 6:01:31 am

People are going to talk about things their invested in. I'm honestly fascinated watching this software evolve- so speculation is only natural.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 6:54:41 am

[Marcus Moore] "People are going to talk about things their invested in. I'm honestly fascinated watching this software evolve- so speculation is only natural."

Believe me, I'm quite invested in Apple products. I'm still very interested in watching X evolve as software, as well as what's going on with accompanying hardware. I still very interested in what people think should be there or what should not. I enjoy people's different theories and ideas and projections. Speculating about what Apple is or is not going to do at a show in three weeks--not so much. But that's me.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: NAB and FCP X
on Mar 7, 2013 at 2:26:56 pm

You choose your own level of involvement in speculation, I suppose. A lot of people get burnt out of Apple's products before they're released because they generate so much discussion, online and in the press. This is in no way Apple's fault and there's really nothing they could do about it outside of going the "pre-announce" route, which it's almost entirely unlikely.



Return to posts index

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