FORUMS: list search recent posts

Crickets chirping in this forum now

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Andy Field
Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 2:12:00 pm







Turns our Adobe WAS the "or not"


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 2:21:02 pm

Andy,

Lightworks for Mac is due out later this year.

There are other options.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 2:34:13 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "Lightworks for Mac is due out later this year. There are other options."

Do you realize that all the good stuff in Lightworks is still only available with subscription [link]?

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


Return to posts index


Richard Cardonna
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 2:45:04 pm

Yes $60. bucks a year but no activation the app is yours in the sense that you can still use it as I understand


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 3:05:42 pm

[Richard Cardonna] "Yes $60. bucks a year but no activation the app is yours in the sense that you can still use it as I understand"

Yeah, it'll open as long as you're using only DNxHD (Which is a one-time $70 fee), or DVCAM / DVCPRO 25/DVCPRO 50/DVCPRO / MPEG 422 SD/HD. Everything else requires that subscription.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 3:10:53 pm

Gary,

While I wouldn't ignore the subscription issue, you could, for example, pay for DNxHD and develop a workflow where everything was transcoded to that.

One of the core issues here is control as has been emphasized in posts below.

Franz.


Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 3:13:28 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "
While I wouldn't ignore the subscription issue, you could, for example, pay for DNxHD and develop a workflow where everything was transcoded to that."


Have dealt with that in FCP Legacy for so long, that it in no way entices me.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 6:44:51 pm

[Gary Huff] "... that it in no way entices me."

Gary,

The issue was whether the Adobe model and the Lightworks model are the same. There are differences.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 7:43:01 pm

There is talk of a Lightworks Lifetime Membership - say $999 one-time fee gets you upgrades etc. for life.

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 7:51:56 pm

[Lance Bachelder] "There is talk of a Lightworks Lifetime Membership - say $999 one-time fee gets you upgrades etc. for life."

That might be super enticing to people.


Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 8:00:25 pm

What's super enticing to me is the software itself - after seeing the demo at NAB on PC and limited Mac demo there are features that make total sense that don't exist in ANY other NLE without using plug-ins, fx or 3rd party adds. There is a learning curve for sure but it looks worth it in the end. It really looks great for what I do and I plan on giving it a go with my PC on a paying gig real soon.

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 8:21:26 pm

[Lance Bachelder] "What's super enticing to me is the software itself - after seeing the demo at NAB on PC and limited Mac demo there are features that make total sense that don't exist in ANY other NLE without using plug-ins, fx or 3rd party adds."

All of that, and it already has a proven track record for feature work... so there isn't a question mark about it's ability to fit into a professional workflow. I've been playing around with it for about a year now, and it feels pretty damn solid. Definitely a must have IMO. Even if you don't use it lot, please support the cause! Competition in this space is sorely needed, and good, low cost options are a must.

Shawn



Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 8:23:47 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Even if you don't use it lot, please support the cause! Competition in this space is sorely needed, and good, low cost options are a must."

I completely agree.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 8:25:11 pm

[Lance Bachelder] "What's super enticing to me is the software itself - after seeing the demo at NAB on PC and limited Mac demo there are features that make total sense that don't exist in ANY other NLE without using plug-ins, fx or 3rd party adds. "

Hey Lance -- can you describe these features a little bit? I'm pretty keen to give Lightworks a go, but I haven't spent the time to get familiar with it yet.

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

Lance Bachelder
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 10, 2013 at 3:42:11 pm

I still don't have my head wrapped around it yet but the whole "rooms" thing is pretty cool - interface customization is more flexible than other NLE's including having a space for each type of workflow exactly like you want whether picture editing, sound editing, etc.

Setting up a room for each sequence in a project and opening any of them any time - i.e you're working on sequence 10 of a 50 sequence feature film and someone wants to see version 6 of sequence whatever - just pop open that room. Say you ask your assistant to cut in some b-roll or sound fx in a sequence - you can have that room open on your desktop and watch the assistant work while working on your own sequence - great for training an apprentice Editor. One thing I've found is it's best to have matching monitors in a dual set-up - I have a 30" Dell and 24" Dreamcolor and it's not great for desktop customization with Lightworks - dual 27" would be ideal.

Other features like adding window burns for myriad of useful things like date, shot, timecode and even letterbox in a render are simple checkboxes - no filters/fx to add and adjust - just check the item you want and where on the picture you want it and it will be in your render.

Still a LOT to learn on my side - it's not an NLE you can just pop open and figure out - you gotta watch the tutorials and read the manual or you'll miss how powerful it really is. Almost everything from adding a dissolve to color timing to titles is different than any other NLE but it all starts to make sense the more I play with it.

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index


Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 2:46:32 pm

Walter,

I'm ambivalent about software as subscription - still working out what I think about it.

But I assume you're addressing those who are negative about subscription.

On that point, it's worth noting that Lightworks is an open source project - if someone knows more about how "open" it is, I'd be interested.

But in terms of the subscription issue, I think it's a price sensitive issue. If CC were available at 10.00 a month, I think the negative feedback would be a lot less. While price doesn't address issues that David Lawrence is raising, I think a lot of the negative feedback we're witnessing is because CC represents a price increase, long term, for most people.

Most education institutions, for example, would probably accept a 60.00 / year fee for software.

It's also important to note that a lapses subscription with lightworks won't prevent you from opening your project down the line (though it may disable crucial functions for some use cases).

Franz.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 2:56:37 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "I'm ambivalent about software as subscription - still working out what I think about it. But I assume you're addressing those who are negative about subscription."

I'm all for supporting Lightworks.

I'm just pointing out that Lightworks is (today, at least) working on the same model that Adobe is to those with a philosophical aversion to renting their tools.


[Franz Bieberkopf] "On that point, it's worth noting that Lightworks is an open source project - if someone knows more about how "open" it is, I'd be interested."

Opening the source is planned, but has not happened yet.

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

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 2:59:30 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I'm just pointing out that Lightworks is (today, at least) working on the same model that Adobe is to those with a philosophical aversion to renting their tools."

Walter,

I think there's a significant difference in that Ligthtworks offers a free base installation. That's not the same model.

Also, over 10 years (assuming current prices), Lightworks would cost 600.00, CC would cost at 6000.00. There's an order of magnitude of difference.

Franz.


Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 3:03:49 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "I think there's a significant difference in that Ligthtworks offers a free base installation. That's not the same model."

Well, except what are you going to do with that base installation? Open an old project? Hope it's not using ProRes, AVCHD, H.264, XDCam, XF codec, AVC-Intra, REDCODE, DPX, or HDV...because that footage requires a subscription license for decoding.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 3:13:10 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "I think there's a significant difference in that Ligthtworks offers a free base installation. That's not the same model."

Totally valid point -- but the free edition is really limited.

It comes without AAF import/export, full QuickTime export, ProRes decode, AVC-Intra decode/encode, XDCAM decode/encode, R3D decode, H.264/AVCHD decode/encode, MPEG-4 export, titling, or hardware I/O.

A base installation that can't even read your media won't go very far in the real world. Wouldn't a user going off subscription with Lightworks have basically the same problem of inaccessible project files as going off subscription on CC?

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 3:32:48 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Totally valid point -- but the free edition is really limited."

Imagine being able to open a PP, AE, PS project from a client (or an old project) to inspect in a "free" version and then determine what additional work, if any, need be done. Then one could make the rental decision for the month and bill the client. Simply avoiding the complete lock out might put people at ease.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 3:52:28 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Imagine being able to open a PP, AE, PS project from a client (or an old project) to inspect in a "free" version and then determine what additional work, if any, need be done. Then one could make the rental decision for the month and bill the client. Simply avoiding the complete lock out might put people at ease."

I filed a FR earlier this week which included basically this suggestion (among others) as ways to avoid lock-out.

I do understand the concern about being able to re-visit project files in the future. My personal view is that the best solution lies in improving open interchange formats, so that at least the major subset of the data becomes application-independent.

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 4:15:31 pm

[Walter Soyka] "My personal view is that the best solution lies in improving open interchange formats, so that at least the major subset of the data becomes application-independent."

I like that, too. Maybe its from years of being forced to move between programs, but the notion of community standards beyond any individual company is an important one to me. For me, one of the more troubling aspects of the FCP X release was the way that Apple, after investing so much time and energy in developing XML as an interchange format, chose to just walk away from the structure by redefining it, willy-nilly, to suit its own immediate needs. So, yes; I am all for strong interchange formats.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 4:12:05 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "But in terms of the subscription issue, I think it's a price sensitive issue. "

It's not about the money, but it's about the money.


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 5:06:04 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "
It's not about the money, but it's about the money."


It is, but I think in this way: eventually, if you're paying so much to not actually own anything, is that a good ROI?

I don't think anyone argues with $29.99 at all...and then they seem to be okay with the bump to $49.99.

But what if that yearly subscription rate turns into $69.99? $99.99?

What if the CC turns into what used to be the cost of purchasing the full version of Creative Suite every single year, and on top of that takes money away from R&D and shrinks its development workforce.

Would that be a good ROI? I'd say that'd be a firm "no!" from most people...but then what do you do?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 5:24:39 pm

[Gary Huff] "It is, but I think in this way: eventually, if you're paying so much to not actually own anything, is that a good ROI?"

I do not buy software to resell it later for a profit.

I buy software to use to make money, so, as long as I am making enough money to support myself and my family, yes, it's good ROI.

[Gary Huff] "But what if that yearly subscription rate turns into $69.99? $99.99?

What if the CC turns into what used to be the cost of purchasing the full version of Creative Suite every single year, and on top of that takes money away from R&D and shrinks its development workforce.

Would that be a good ROI? I'd say that'd be a firm "no!" from most people...but then what do you do?"


If I find that it's not worth it, I switch to something else.

This is what I don't understand. Adobe does not have that much power. They cannot simply raise prices to a point where it's too expensive that a working independent can afford, and if they do, they don't need working independent's business.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 3:30:17 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Do you realize that all the good stuff in Lightworks is still only available with subscription [link]?"

But the free version continues to work. You can convert to supported codecs in the free version externally. The cost is most likely due to licensing around the codecs, you're not actually licensing the software itself.

In one's fantasy one might be OK if Adobe did something similar. Allowing for a scenario where one might still be able to open a project to inspect it or even export an XML. The reality is that Adobe doesn't seem to have any business reason to do that.



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 4:16:46 pm

[Craig Seeman] "In one's fantasy one might be OK if Adobe did something similar. Allowing for a scenario where one might still be able to open a project to inspect it or even export an XML. The reality is that Adobe doesn't seem to have any business reason to do that."

It also seems like a really messy coding problem.

I think, but don't know for sure, that the Cloud will probably help Adobe wrangle the absolute mass of coding that happens at the company, especially on a given time frame for each application.

Why does InDesgin need to be ready for NAB 2012 for example?

Can't the Creative Cloud truly help Adobe make better products and get them out of arbitrary time frames that have nothing to do with how long it take to create better products?


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 9, 2013 at 5:02:53 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Can't the Creative Cloud truly help Adobe make better products and get them out of arbitrary time frames that have nothing to do with how long it take to create better products?"

If that's what it is, but people are cynical for a reason, and that reason is called "history of humankind."


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 10, 2013 at 3:04:47 am

[Walter Soyka] "Do you realize that all the good stuff in Lightworks is still only available with subscription [link]?"

The good stuff are third party licenses that Lightworks passes on to you, it's not profit. Depending on future workflows the price might come down or disappear. While it is a subscription cost, it is really not similar to the Adobe situation at all. I cannot imagine any circumstances where Adobe would make the CC free.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 10, 2013 at 3:13:39 am

[Herb Sevush] "The good stuff are third party licenses that Lightworks passes on to you, it's not profit. Depending on future workflows the price might come down or disappear."

Or it might go up.

And so what if it's profit or not? You still have to pay. I guess it's not about the money -- it's about the money.


[Herb Sevush] "While it is a subscription cost, it is really not similar to the Adobe situation at all."

Except for the part that if you don't pay, you can't meaningfully open your project since you can't read the media.


[Herb Sevush] "I cannot imagine any circumstances where Adobe would make the CC free."

I can't imagine any circumstances where the free version of Lightworks would be preferable to the paid version.

I'm not bagging Lightworks. I'd be delighted to see them offer a perpetual license. I just can't understand how so many here argue so passionately against a subscription plan on principle, then so passionately for a cheaper one.

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

Herb Sevush
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 11, 2013 at 4:44:27 pm

[Walter Soyka] " so what if it's profit or not? You still have to pay. I guess it's not about the money -- it's about the money."

The comparison to Lightworks does not hold up in any way. The fee's from Lightworks are a pass along from other parties. Lightworks is offering their software at no cost. You can perpetually use it, open files, manipulate your timeline, export data at no cost. If Adobe included Colorista and was charging a subscription to use it, nobody would be complaining, since you can choose to work without it and still access your files. I also have to pay a monthly electric bill to open my computer to work on the files, but I don't hold that against Lightworks either.

It's not just about the cost - it's about the dongle of monthly, not yearly log-ins to implement, the lack of faith in Adobe's future pricing policy's and then for some yes it's also about the cost.

For me the CC cost seems quite reasonable but the dongle implementation does not.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 11, 2013 at 5:13:30 pm

[Herb Sevush] "The comparison to Lightworks does not hold up in any way. The fee's from Lightworks are a pass along from other parties. Lightworks is offering their software at no cost."

So when is subscription not subscription? When the vendor doesn't profit on it? Does that change the fact somehow that critical features expire if you don't pay up?

I actually want my vendors to make money. I need them to stay in business, so they can keep providing me tools I want to pay for.


[Herb Sevush] "You can perpetually use it, open files, manipulate your timeline, export data at no cost."

But if your subscription license for reading or writing any modern codec other than DNxHD expires, what can you actually do? How can you meaningfully use the software without decoding the video sources, or encoding video output?

I am not so good at my job that I can work on a set of clips that all say "Format Unlicensed" and then just tell my client about the great work I did without actually exporting it.

I want to see Lightworks succeed. I'm not trying to bash Lightworks. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see them release a perpetual license in partial response to this mania. Lance has mentioned a couple times that they're trying to figure it out.

I just don't understand the argument that subscription is unacceptable when Adobe does it, but totally fine when EditShare does it.

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

Herb Sevush
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 12, 2013 at 6:58:50 pm

[Walter Soyka] " just don't understand the argument that subscription is unacceptable when Adobe does it, but totally fine when EditShare does it."

If you go to the "Adobe or not Forum" you will find that many posters are asking for an Adobe Lite perpetual version as a compromise. This is what Lightworks offers now. As a matter of fact the free version would have been all I ever needed up until 2 years ago when I switched from DVCPROHD to ProRes. The free version handles DVCPROHD and uncompressed just fine, which means it's a viable free offering for many workflows now and in the future. If I wanted to get mad with someone for the subscription fee for the Pro version it would be with Avid and Apple, who are the companies charging the fees.

If I have the pro version and later dropped the yearly fee I can still open my timeline and export XML's and EDLs to my hearts content. I can choose to selectively transfer my assets to either uncompressed or DVCPROHD and have full access to my projects - in other words I have options, workflows that might be a pain to deal with, but that still offer ways to access my project files without ever having to pay anything. There is nothing equivalent in the CC offerings and I find it to be a huge difference.

While I have said before I find the CC pricing to be quite reasonable and I don't see them raising the monthly prices drastically anytime in the near future, the one area I am concerned with is the whole "if you need it in the future just pay the one month fee." I can easily see a future where Adobe has succeeded in converting it's offerings to Cloud only and decides to impose a 2,3,6 or more month minimum on Cloud membership. This won't bother current subscriber's who think they'll never drop out, and even if it does, what can they do about it. This would mean it might cost anywhere up to $300 or more to gain future access. Paranoid you might say, possibly I would answer, but I can guarantee that one of the things that would quell this uprising would be written guarantee's about future pricing going 5 years out, and it's one of the things that Adobe will never do.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 10, 2013 at 3:17:45 am

[Herb Sevush] "I cannot imagine any circumstances where Adobe would make the CC free."

Ad based software.

I'm only half joking.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Crickets chirping in this forum now
on May 10, 2013 at 3:28:08 am

[Herb Sevush] "I cannot imagine any circumstances where Adobe would make the CC free."

Herb,

In App purchases.

1.00 per Undo.

I stole that joke.

Franz.


Return to posts index

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