FORUMS: list search recent posts

FCP-X and misrepresentation

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bob Zelin
FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 12:05:43 am

I am about to get myself in trouble. I often do this, and I am about to do this now.

Before I get myself in trouble, let me say that while I have my opinion of FCP X, I have become pretty familiar with FCP X, and am trying to be as open minded as possible about FCP-X. I accept the reality that the "next gen" of editors that comes into our market may totally ignore Adobe Premiere and AVID Media Composer (and will have never seen FCP 7) and only use FCP-X. But even now, there are plenty of pro users with FCP X, and I have installed quite a few shared storage systems with FCP X users (including our beloved John Davidson from Magic Feather). So I am NOT close minded to FCP-X.
I accept it.

Now for the trouble -
When FCP-X first started, there was a video, from a big, real company in NY - @Radical Media, that was preaching the gospel about FCP-X.
Here is one link to the gospel from @Radical Media -


http://www.lafcpug.org/phorum/read.php?19,277611,277674

and here is another -
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/in-action/radical/

WELL - it turn out, that in REAL LIFE, as of 12/2/2013 - @Radical Media DOES NOT USE FCP-X, and is STILL using FCP 7 on all of their systems. I was shocked to hear this, as I thought that if there was only one big, well known company that was using FCP-X from day 1, it was @Radical Media.

So once again, I am not bashing FCP-X, and actually, I am trying to embrace it, and look forward to the new release. I acknowledge that
FCP-X is one of the tools that is available today, in addition to AVID Media Composer, Adobe Premiere, legacy FCP7 (and I guess a few Vegas and Edius users). But it just bothers me about the preaching, when none of it is true.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
maxavid@cfl.rr.com


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 12:18:09 am

I'm sure the temptation at the beginning to be featured by Apple was pretty irresistible. I know that Evan Schechtman was a big advocate of the software at the start. But I haven't seen anything from him FCPX related since last year.

But perhaps as time went on Radical realized there were still hurdles to overcome- around any number of workflow problems, that FCPX wasn't ready to address yet.

I'd love to know why they backed away.

But if they're still on FCP7 then it means they haven't made a decision to go another way either- which is interesting in itself.



Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 12:21:03 am

[Bob Zelin] "(including our beloved John Davidson from Magic Feather)"

I'm beloved? Somebody tell my wife.

John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.


Return to posts index


Shawn Miller
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 12:25:42 am

[Bob Zelin] "FCP-X is one of the tools that is available today, in addition to AVID Media Composer, Adobe Premiere, legacy FCP7 (and I guess a few Vegas and Edius users)."

Just out of curiosity, are you seeing Vegas in any mid sized post houses 'out there'? I've always liked Vegas and thought that it was one of the most underestimated NLEs of all time, especially when it comes to audio mixing and mastering. But I sometimes wonder if its made any real traction in broadcast and independent film.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 7:09:19 am

I'm fairly mid-sized, 6'2", 230lb and I use Vegas! Have for 13 years and though, like FCPX, it has it's shortcomings, it's still by far the best NLE when it comes to audio. Matter of fact I just installed a new Blue Sky Sky One surround system and will mix all my shows in 5.1 in Vegas regardless of the NLE I use. I've cut many a show in Vegas including the Emmy winning Back at the Barnyard for Nickelodeon - it's a weird and wonderful NLE and rumor has it it may be ported to Mac...

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: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 8:33:28 am

[Lance Bachelder] "I'm fairly mid-sized, 6'2", 230lb and I use Vegas! Have for 13 years and though, like FCPX, it has it's shortcomings, it's still by far the best NLE when it comes to audio. Matter of fact I just installed a new Blue Sky Sky One surround system and will mix all my shows in 5.1 in Vegas regardless of the NLE I use. I've cut many a show in Vegas including the Emmy winning Back at the Barnyard for Nickelodeon - it's a weird and wonderful NLE and rumor has it it may be ported to Mac..."

I guess by that standard I'm also mid sized. ;-) Seriously though, I think it's cool that you've done so much broadcast work using Vegas, and I completely agree with you regarding its audio capabilities. I'm just wondering what the uptake is like these days. I do hope that Vegas get's ported to the Mac as well, it would be good to see Sony spreading out a bit more and making the NLE market even more competitive. My daydream is that someday we'll all have a lot more hardware and software choices, and that our work will be connected by open standards media and exchange formats.

I know some people want the whole creative community to have a single vendor for everything from their mobile phones to their NLEs to their television sets... but man, what a recipe for disaster! Would love to see Vegas sell a LOT of seats on the Mac... and hopefully on Linux too someday. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 2:23:19 pm

[Lance Bachelder] "it's a weird and wonderful NLE and rumor has it it may be ported to Mac..."

Don't see why they wouldn't after porting Sound Forge to it.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 3:21:51 pm

[Gary Huff] "Don't see why they wouldn't after porting Sound Forge to it."

Lets hope the Vegas port is better than the Sound Forge port, which was buggy and awful and hasn't been updated since it's release.

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


Return to posts index

Keith Koby
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 12:38:22 am

So you are saying that the article on apple's website was inaccurate? It just said, if i recall correctly, that radical felt confident enough with the fcpx to edit a big important commercial with it. I don't see how that's a big lie... I didn't take the time to go back and read that article again though.

I have no idea what they actually are doing now. I could ask Evan. I can tell you that a few blocks down the street we have a significant user base on fcpx, but up until a month ago, more than half of our users were still on 7. We'll probably still have people on 7 well into next year and maybe longer.

Sorry Bob. I enjoy reading the tone of what I interpret as your salty integrator "crankiness". And I appreciate the time you've taken over the years to build such a great knowledge base of solutions here. I'm just not sure what you're upset about here.


Return to posts index


Bob Zelin
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 1:13:13 am

Hi Keith -
in a recent press release from Promise -
http://www.promise.com/news_room/news.aspx?rsn=1137&m=23®ion=en-global

the quote -
“SANLink2 and Pegasus2 have set new standards for performance and flexibility, creating a whole new realm of possibilities for multimedia pros and power users,” said James Lee, CEO, PROMISE Technology.

I commented on this when it was released on the SAN networks forum (I can't find the press release on Cow, or my comment) -

but I commented that I highly doubt that the Pegasus2 will ever outperform a current (old) Promise VTrak 16 bay fibre chassis, yet the press release indicates that this new technology will create new standards for performance. Perhaps I am mis reading this. But to me, it's misrepresenting the facts - even from the same manufacturer.

So my comments about @Radical Media come from perhaps MY misinterpretation of the original videos. When I first saw them, I thought to myself "boy, I must be missing the boat here - this guy, who is an expert is saying that this is the greatest thing since sliced bread". Again, I am NOT bashing FCP-X - I am trying to embrace it and adapt to it. But when you see a video like this, you tend to believe (well, at least I tend to believe) that these guys think it's great, and they are switching. But it's not true. Same with the Promise press release. When I read the press release, it gives ME the impression that this will set NEW PERFORMACE STANDARDS, meaning that the new Pegasus 2 will do greater than 1500 MB/sec. Will this be true ? If it's not, then Promise has MIS REPRESENTED themselves in this press release.

Remember the old FCP ad (around FCP 3 time) - the $50,000 edit suite, now $995 ? It was never $995, because you always needed these little things like "computers" and "monitors". And that ad had a Digi Beta machine in it. Maybe Apple got a good deal on the digi beta machine !

When John Davidson gets on Cow (and you get on Cow) and talk about FCP-X - you guys are USING FCP-X, and that's what counts. Marketing videos that are not accurate, and misrepresent the facts - well, it's just not right. So am I a baby ? Maybe.

And for the record, when I was in NY, I installed @Radical Media's AVID systems.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
maxavid@cfl.rr.com


Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 1:21:48 am

I think that maybe what Promise means is that those new performance standards are being set in the Thunderbolt realm. Vague, for sure, but until we get our hands on one who can say?

[Bob Zelin] "When John Davidson gets on Cow (and you get on Cow) and talk about FCP-X - you guys are USING FCP-X, and that's what counts. Marketing videos that are not accurate, and misrepresent the facts - well, it's just not right. So am I a baby ? Maybe. "

In regards to our FCPX On Air videos, we've updated quite a few elements of our hardware, networking (Thanks Bob!) and even location in the past year, but I've just not felt the need to add anything else because:

1. The software and our workflow has been basically the same. What you saw is still how we do it.
2. There are better and more talented individuals that instruct people on the usage of software than me
3. With the big update coming I don't want to waste any time adding to a discussion that might fundamentally change in a matter of days or weeks.

My whole goal with the series was to show that you can, in fact, do much of what people said couldn't be done with FCPX. It might be nice to show off the new Mac Pros and 10.1 in a somewhat personal pet project. I LOVE the idea of shooting something that looks great on an RX100 and Rode iPhone lav mic, but it really boils down to if we have time.

Big changes are coming very very soon for FCPX. If the 3 month update cycle starts fresh this month, who knows what we'll get for FCPX in time for NAB.

John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 2:35:06 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I would suggest that there are a number of "tech gurus" floating around the net that like to tout the "next big thing" in technology. The truth is that none of them shoot or edit. They are pundits, trainers, tech leaders at companies with heavy iron and so on. It's all just marketing and self-promotion."

QFMFT


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 5:26:00 pm

"The truth is that none of them shoot or edit. They are pundits, trainers, tech leaders at companies with heavy iron and so on. It's all just marketing and self-promotion."

QFMFT"

Sheesh. Of COURSE it's all marketing and self promotion and what's wrong with that?
We live in a world where there's a tangible business advantage to rising at least a bit above the noiise floor. If you don't do that, you get buried in the stew. And when Oliver wrote: "none of them shoot and edit" it was a presumptive phrase because in all likelihood, they all DO shoot and edit. The unknown quantity is how well. And that's a huge slowly sloping curve.

Your QFMFT is facile. It says "I know the truth and THIS is it."

But it's not. Because while the guy who "shoots and edits" may think that only they know "the truth" about shooting and editing, they (we) all have blind spots the size of warehouses. Oddly, we all seem to most highly prize the stuff WE know how to do best. Go figure.

Truth is the system, with all the players - planners, artises, hacks, writers, shooters, editors, post game analysts, historians, and even clueless bloggers motivated to stick their (our) necks out in public and risk redicule in the marketplace of ideas - have no more claim to superiority than any one else.

IMO, to the extent we help others - we win by advancing the whole game a fraction.

But when we give into our natural tendencies to think we have superior access to the MFT - we're just showing the world we're worried that the TRUTH we think we know - might be increasingly unimportant.

And there be monsters there.

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

Gary Huff
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 7:34:05 pm

[Bill Davis] "
Your QFMFT is facile. It says "I know the truth and THIS is it.""


Funny you go after me because I agreed with it, but not the original sentiment itself.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 9:30:07 pm

[Bill Davis] "Sheesh. Of COURSE it's all marketing and self promotion and what's wrong with that?"

FWIW - I removed my post from last night after reading Evan's reply this morning. Not because I felt it was off-base in general, but rather that I didn't really think it applied to him. Especially after reading his explanation of their approach. I just didn't think it contributed to the discussion. I certainly appreciated his post. This place is a tough crowd at times. Being a CTO for a shop like @Radical is very difficult, especially when trying to read the tea leaves and making the right choices for the technology, staff and clients.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index



Evan Schechtman
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 3:31:31 am

Hey Bob,
I have never replied to a post in my life, but since my public actions and business practices are so provocative to you, I thought I can at least answer some of your questions and offer a bit of an insight. Its a great reminder that when you put yourself out there, someone will remember and hold your feet to the fire. That is why I mean what I say, when I say it.

On its release( FCPX), I was quoted in an article that "People who make rash decisions in technology are idiots!" Of course I was called the idiot.

http://www.studiodaily.com/2011/07/in-defense-of-final-cut-pro-x/

Apple doesn't need me to defend them, and I don't defend their actions or foolishness in the way the transition was communicated. It is a transition. I addressed two real major issues in my speech.

First was our emotional response to technical change. An understandable one, as we all make our living using tools we don't make, for the most part. Of course highlighting change is a constant. We all wanted change but not this much, this fast-and not tied in a bow. The second issue was that it was time for a major technological shift- at the core- and within this a few items. What defines "Professional", hardware at base design level? What does our OS need to manage more files than ever, larger images than ever? How do we really go faster? What does our storytelling tool really need to do for me in an ecosystem of inexpensive specialized tools?

The GPU is now king for the professional Apps I use. The CPU while still important has been de-emphizsed as a primary indicator of media application performance. For those Applications that use it. There are of course ways of supporting multiple GPU’s now, and in the PC and gaming world its common. And DSP cards and other accelerators have been around for years, but lets be real- I use my blue ice card as an ashtray now. I need the the new MacPro. I want a solid state machine with stock dual GPU configs, that are a set of tasty badasses. We needed multiple GPU support at OS level. We needed Thunderbolt 2 to support any performance on GPU breakouts that can make a difference.

We are there now. The company that everyone said does not care about the professional has- designed a machine from scratch to a modern spec. Not a small Investment on their part. An investment. (sure we can sit here for an hour and complain about how I can’t rack mount it, and need to hot glue Thunderbolt connectors to the back of it and my storage).

Mavericks to me, is the first “professional" OS. I can list the ways but I will sound like an ad. XSAN (not for everyone) is built in.

And FCPX, is an editor built on a modern engine, on top of a modern OS with new media underpinnings, soon to run on top of custom made hardware with ridiculously fast but not perfectly practical built in IO.

For me, when I look around, I call that all built for the professional.

As for Radical. Our transition has been interesting. And is coming to a head in the next few weeks. Many of us use FCPX. The facility is 95% FCP, sure. And has been the entire year. I am glad you used the date in your post to emphasize the uncovering of this horrible conspiracy. We used FCPX on real client work around 10.0.3/4. Overall there was no doubt then that there were many things that showed me that this was the future. There were to many things missing. It was not the Macro sized changes that were the real show stopper, it was the micro things that were missing and the lack of an efficient way to collaborate that made us wait to roll it out. Many of us began to use it on our own, and in some areas, including myself, I did not do any work in 7 last year. My use is quite different however. Over the months we got through 9 releases? Some pretty major. We are awaiting the new release that had been announced.

The application has come a long way, completing a picture of the role metadata really can play. We saw what looked like course corrections and many meaningful additions. We got to see their approach, and commitment. We also got to see what Apple is leaving to the third parties. I am a fan of them leaving the niche and highly specific to the dev community to do, and focus on core features, speed and infrastructure.

We are ready to roll it out on 2 major jobs that are starting fairly soon, we are working on timing. During the year I can say with certainty, when in an engineering staff transition that I observed clever workarounds and “workflows” in FCP7 that get the job done, but are clumsy and time intensive. Almost every time I needed to look for solution, FCPX had a FUNDAMENTAL feature that was the answer- On multi cam stuff, and on 3D workflow as compared to Premiere- easily for what I needed.

And for Premiere, its awesome in that its super capable. It works with everything. It has GPU acceleration kind of. Its dynamic link for many people is the key. We did a big job on premiere, in 3D, on a beefy box, for a big director. Like anything- if we chose that path, we would find the hardware formula to dial in just so, but we did not find that on this job. The job had some nutty requirements, and FCPX was in the mix, where it clearly outshines Premiere in a few key areas of core workflow. FCPX slaughters everyone at actual speed, You have been using it, so I hope we can agree on that. I will have Premiere in the studio for sure. We will need it from time to time. It does things no one else does. I started on Premiere. When deck control cost extra from Pipeline. Seems history repeats.

We had a media 100 and two Avids back in 99 when I got together with Radical.
We have only had a few Avids over the years, the last big one was 2002 or 3 for Metalica because David Zeiff wanted one. He largely used FCP7 shortly after that, and some Avid. There were two Adeline systems when I was doing Miramax work for a year. There are four seats floating around now when we need to use them or someone requests in- in what is largely an edge case. We use 3rd party software to get it on XSAN and it works. Did you do the Avids back in the day for us?

I have to worry about the staff. Editors, Assistants, Engineers, Producers, and Clients. There will be a learning curve, for sure- and it will cost time and money, no doubt. It has to happen and If I am going to disrupt the facility for a major shift, it will be when I feel the tool has come to enough maturity - and not to learn a different version of the old thing. They need to be trained, and we needed to secure additional people to ensure a smooth transition. And, personally speaking - I have had it with FCP 7. Its not fit for the work we do, they way we want to do it. I knew it would show itself when it was time.

I don’t need to tell you that planning a migration takes time.And there are surely plenty of gotchas. Through my live testing, during the “transition” we realized the real value of the GPU, and what ram does to a 64 bit App. VaVooom. All machines will be brought to an absolute minimum of 16gb ram, and all will have gpus with a min of 1gb. Many machines that had 512’s swapped were new again for HD pro res.

All this is not to mention what OS I run, and there is the meta-data controllers. Will they even run the new OS? I am not migrating on a .0 release. I use open directory- do I continue, how do I migrate that? What does Apple keep doing to the server version of the OS? What will Applecare do for me? Why did Lost end so badly?

These things suck. How could they do this to us? Its an imperfect system. Its the cost of change. Constant change. It is what it is, and keeps us employed and keeps me planning and timing and waiting for the entire picture to present itself. It takes time and money to transition. Period.

I have kept my word, and explored all avenues during the transition. I have let the situation breath. The actual transition is coming and in 2014 and we will full scale test it on two important jobs. A real investment Radical will make. I don’t take it lightly- I judged when it would be time. I will put my money where my mouth is as it were- and pass or fail you can post it here. I think I used up all my energy to respond to it in this one go however.

I hope this has answered your questions and criticisms directly, I am very easy to find and happy to speak to you at length should you have the desire.

Sure, I may sound like an ad for Apple, but I am literally just telling you why I choose what I do. It feels like the right choice to me. Maybe it is me who is the idiot?


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 4:10:14 pm
Last Edited By Herb Sevush on Dec 3, 2013 at 4:21:06 pm

[Evan Schechtman] "The facility is 95% FCP, sure. And has been the entire year. "

and how does this jibe with the following quote from the article that started Bob on this thread:

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/in-action/radical/

"Schechtman notes that the company has already moved 25 percent of its current projects to Final Cut Pro X, including a high-profile campaign for Grey Goose Vodka and recuts of the film celebrating the 25th anniversary of Paul Simon’s Graceland."

25%, 5% -
"numbers, numbers, I've got lots of numbers" Chico Marx, The Cocoanuts

[Evan Schechtman] "I hope this has answered your questions and criticisms directly"

I think it does. It's 2 1/2 years later and your still talking about switching over to X at some future date.

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


Return to posts index

Evan Schechtman
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 4:18:07 pm

Boy, I am already sorry I even responded. For the record. I do not get paid by Apple and have not received anything for free from them related to FCPX.

At the time we were testing a good deal of work was being done on FCPX. This was pulled back @ 10.0.4.

2 1/2 years of watching the product, continuing in business, testing other systems. Its the responsible thing to do.

Guys, enjoy picking me apart in your echo chamber of bitterness. Having an opinion in these threads does nothing to move anything forward.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 5:06:00 pm

[Evan Schechtman] "Boy, I am already sorry I even responded."

I am not sorry you responded. Thank you for responding.

For whatever this is worth:

My relationship with FCPX is very very similar to Evan's, just on a reduced scale.

I have been watching FCPX, I have been using FCPX on real projects, but I have not rolled FCPX out to the rest of the people here, and when I say rest of the people, it's only several of us.

I knew, pretty early on, that FCPX was probably going to be the next NLE for me and for us.

With anything, you take the good with the bad. At first, there was some obvious bad in FCPX. All you had to do is turn on the internet and it was the usually the first headline in any trade rag/discussion mechanism to go in to great deal just how "poorly" the FCPX unveiling was handled.

But to those of us who dug in, there was also some obvious good. The obvious good was the hard stuff to do, real speed, new ways of working, real power, rudimentary but a decent start at media management, and really early hints at some sort of sharing being built in to FCPX (if you had an honest to goodness SAN, San Locations were the hint. They have been in the app since 10.0.3 or so). I could see the underpinnings of the platform being built, and I knew this type of work was going to take a while to structure. I, too, thought that offloading some of the specialized work to developers is actually a smart move, not only from a potential business move for Apple, but for devs being able to work with Apple's underpinnings, give feedback and make it better. Sure, I, as user, can give bug feedback and point out when things aren't working quite right, but developers can see bigger holes, alert Apple to bigger problems, and help get those things solved and working hopefully for the better. This will then allow devs to build better tools.

It would also be beneficial for us as users, as you can send feedback to a smaller developer and get answers much more quickly than you can with Apple.

I was not one of the ones to subscribe to sparse disk images and other OS hacks to get FCPX working (no disrespect to those that do use them). I waited until our SAN could handle an FCPX workflow, and that feature showed up fairly quickly. Now, I have to wait for Mavericks support. Currently, our SAN does not work with Mavericks, and that's OK. We will wait until it works.

We, still, have not made any major investments in computing hardware. For the most part, we are still running a lot of older computers on a traditional PCIe infrastructure. We have brand new production gear, and FCP7 can't even handle it natively. FCP7 is literally dead for certain jobs for us. Everything must be transcoded outside of any FCP7 integration, and 4k material doesn't even work. FCPX handles all of this without a problem. When I saw that people were getting real work done on a similar level or sometimes a bit faster with cheap iMacs over their several year old MacPros, I knew Apple was building something specific for ProApps.

We also knew that Thunderbolt was going to get a revision in fairly short order.

For those of us that have waited this long, we get to skip the first generation and go right to the next one. The investment will still be expensive, but at least it will be with the newest of technologies that Apple/Intel is making available.

I, too, looked around. I demoed all available Mac software, but I kept coming back to FCPX as it is the most logically modern software that I am comfortable for furthering my career. I am also not quite ready to roll it out to everyone here at work. It's not there yet, but it sure is close. This type of transition takes some time, and in that time I have learned a new NLE. I am now waiting for everything else, hardware, software, and infrastructure, to catch up.

There is nothing wrong with recognizing potential, talking about and discussing this potential, but waiting for further development before fully utilizing that potential.

There's a baseball analogy in here, but I'll leave those to Herb.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 5:25:56 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "There is nothing wrong with recognizing potential, talking about and discussing this potential, but waiting for further development before fully utilizing that potential.

There's a baseball analogy in here, but I'll leave those to Herb."


I'm a Yankee fan and therefore have been proven to know nothing about evaluating and developing potential.

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 6:44:13 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "There is nothing wrong with recognizing potential, talking about and discussing this potential, but waiting for further development before fully utilizing that potential."

Your quite right, there is nothing wrong with your approach, nor the approach outlined by Evan in his response to Bob.

But that has nothing to do with the question Bob raised at the beginning of this thread. The question under consideration is if there's something wrong with proclaiming the virtues of something, seeking publicity for that proclamation, and then quietly not acting in accordance.

It's not about being right or wrong, it's about hype and BS. Apple published that article about Evan's company trying to use his example as an argument to sway people to buy into FCPX today, not tomorrow. I didn't read anything in that article about "waiting for development." Nor did I read anything in the post I linked to from 2 years ago.

Evan's post here was logical, concise and persuasive - but it wouldn't have gotten him the pub he received by being highlighted by Apple, and they weren't interested in writing about "waiting for future developments."

I suggest you read the article and then explain to me how you would reconcile it with Evan's post on this forum.

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/in-action/radical/

I am wounded to the core at this dissembling and now feel like crying "the tears of a sad baby unicorn."

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: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 7:07:10 pm

[Herb Sevush] "I suggest you read the article and then explain to me how you would reconcile it with Evan's post on this forum."

Evan mentions that at the time, FCPX was being used on real projects, now, it's being used on only some projects. The scale was pulled back.

"At the time we were testing a good deal of work was being done on FCPX. This was pulled back @ 10.0.4."

So, is Apple going to print that on their webpage? I doubt it.

The only way I can truly reconcile it is that my personal journey with FCPX mirrors Evans. There are many things said in the first response post that I have found on my own. The quotations in the Apple article (the actual parts in quotes), I also agree with as I have experienced the same advantages.

For people who don't really like FCPX, even 2.5 years later, these things still may be hard to believe.

Aren't the people that don't like FCPX the ones that say "There's no reason to use just one NLE anymore!" a lot of the time? Well, those of us that like FCPX feel the same way, and perhaps it is for different reasons.

[Herb Sevush] "I am wounded to the core at this dissembling and now feel like crying "the tears of a sad baby unicorn.""

!!


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 7:21:15 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Evan mentions that at the time, FCPX was being used on real projects, now, it's being used on only some projects. The scale was pulled back.

"At the time we were testing a good deal of work was being done on FCPX. This was pulled back @ 10.0.4."

So, is Apple going to print that on their webpage? I doubt it."


Which is the crux of this whole thread. There was a lot of Pub about Radical Media converting to FCPX as far back as the fall of 2011. The fact that he needed to "pull back" and has not yet fully converted has gotten zero Pub, until right here and now. I do not think it unfair that the unannounced pull back get at least a percentage of the notice that the supposed conversion did.

This has nothing to do with the viability of FCPX now or in the future. It has to do with standing honestly by your public pronouncements, and if you have good reason to change your course, say so with the same voice you used before as opposed to running and hiding and blaming everyone else for being unfair to you, like a sad little baby unicorn.

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: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 7:38:34 pm

[Herb Sevush] " It has to do with standing honestly by your public pronouncements, and if you have good reason to change your course, say so with the same voice you used before as opposed to running and hiding and blaming everyone else for being unfair to you, like a sad little baby unicorn."

I'm not quite sure "changed course" is an accurate description of the situation.

"As for Radical. Our transition has been interesting. And is coming to a head in the next few weeks. Many of us use FCPX. The facility is 95% FCP, sure. And has been the entire year. I am glad you used the date in your post to emphasize the uncovering of this horrible conspiracy. We used FCPX on real client work around 10.0.3/4. Overall there was no doubt then that there were many things that showed me that this was the future. There were to many things missing. It was not the Macro sized changes that were the real show stopper, it was the micro things that were missing and the lack of an efficient way to collaborate that made us wait to roll it out. Many of us began to use it on our own, and in some areas, including myself, I did not do any work in 7 last year. My use is quite different however. Over the months we got through 9 releases? Some pretty major. We are awaiting the new release that had been announced."

I am sure that at the time the article was written, it was accurate.

Setting up a bunch of people to test a new NLE on a shared system is no small feat, even if it was somewhat temporary. @Radical did not stop using FCPX, nor did they switch to Linux or Windows or take some other drastic measure.

They simply stayed with what they have and use FCPX when appropriate. It's is exactly what we are doing and while we are in the midst of changing course, we did not do a course change.


Return to posts index

Evan Schechtman
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 4, 2013 at 12:20:05 am

Herb,
You are essentially asking me to publish a retraction of an article that was written, not by me. When I saw FCPX I recognized it as the future- I felt compelled to speak up as I saw people having the same reaction to it, as they did the beloved FCP 7 in the first place. Turns out it was not the immediate future. I don't know why you and Bob decided to pick that up now, and start a thread that Bob even said would cause an issue. I wrote a response telling the entire story. If that doesn't satisfy you and get you to drop it, then thats your damage at this point. I would like to see you go through every article written on a company and check their timeline of usage and dedication. I primarily responded because I do not like what you are Bob insinuated in the first place. Its off base. In the future if you have a question you can email me or call me like many strangers who read the article or who saw me speak do. I do not seek publicity- I do not sell products or even consumer services- I have no way to benefit by pulling the wool over anyones eyes.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 4, 2013 at 3:28:11 pm

Evan,

One of the main topics of discussion on this Debate forum is the growth and viability of FCPX in major facilities handling high end productions - features, broadcast, commercials. Examples of such use are still relatively rare and when examples are produced they are big news here, in this little pasture of the Cow. Radical Media is one of the main examples of this high end acceptance because of the very public statements you have made about it and because you are featured prominently in Apple's marketing of X.

The fact that Radical Media has not been using FCPX for over a year is therefore big news in this environment. It is a surprise, to say the least. The fact that you so publicly chose to champion your use of FCPX and then so privately decided it was really not ready for use in your facility is a reasonable subject for conversation. The fact that this conversation is public and not private was dictated by your choices.

[Evan Schechtman] "In the future if you have a question you can email me or call me like many strangers who read the article or who saw me speak do. I do not seek publicity- I do not sell products or even consumer services- I have no way to benefit by pulling the wool over anyones eyes."

How can you say you do not seek publicity - did Apple hold a gun to your head? Did the guys at Tekserve drag you to their store by force? What you obviously don't seek is bad publicity - but sorry to tell you that is part of the price for all the good Pub you've gotten from that Apple article. I realize you make nothing for your demo's, that they are in effect a public service, and I know that Apple doesn't pay you a penny for your testimonials, but that does not mean you do not benefit by them. You do, anybody in your position does.

I believe that you are honest and sincere with your opinions, I do not believe you set out to deceive anyone with your statements, and I have no reason to doubt that you will be switching your facility over to X in a few months time. But for the past year you have knowingly allowed Apple to mislead people by using your example. It must be embarrassing to be put in that position and for that position to then be made public. But don't shoot the messenger.

[Evan Schechtman] "You are essentially asking me to publish a retraction of an article that was written, not by me."

I wasn't asking you to do anything, but if I were to advise you I would say you have three reasonable choices:

You could ask Apple to pull the article until such time as you have switched back to FCPX.

You could write a piece about why you stopped using X at the time you did, even though you fully intend to switch back. The details of what worked and what didn't would be very informative and helpful to editors and facilities who are still exploring making these kind of changes.

You can do nothing and go about your business knowing this tiny tempest will blow over before your next cup of coffee.

(Personally I would prefer number two.)

But what is not reasonable is to come on here all hurt and upset that someone actually noticed that what you had been doing did not match what you had, very publicly, been saying.

[Evan Schechtman] "I wrote a response telling the entire story. If that doesn't satisfy you and get you to drop it, then thats your damage at this point."

Looking back through the first series of postings I will admit to being more than a bit snarky and for that I apologize. But for the tone, not for the content.

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 8:53:00 pm
Last Edited By Chris Harlan on Dec 3, 2013 at 9:09:51 pm

[Evan Schechtman] " your echo chamber of bitterness"

No, a link to "the echo chamber of bitterness" can be found in this thread here:

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/62130


A stellar turn of phrase, though! I'm not sure what prompted Bob to post what he did in the way that he did, and I appreciate your responding. Its clear you were excited, you deliberated, and it wasn't yet time. No biggie. Your current deliberations are interesting and I'm sure we would like to hear more about them.

FWIW, I know several places here in LA that have made the change to X, and they're fairly happy about it, Ain't right for me yet, but maybe someday.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 4:49:24 am

[Bob Zelin] "So my comments about @Radical Media come from perhaps MY misinterpretation of the original videos."

Here's a quote from a thread about Radical Media CTO Evan Schectman and FCPX from November 2011.

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/20688#21022

Craig Seeman"Outpost Digital's founder Evan Schectman spoke at MoPictive (Moving Pictures Collective formerly FCPUGNY) in addition to his usually FCPX demo he said that he'd been beta testing the next major release of FCPX coming next year. Obviously with the NDA guns pointed at his head all he could say is that he's very happy with the way Multicam is being implement, broadcast monitor is good, there's other good stuff coming and he'll be moving his facility to . . . FCPX on that release. He feels it'll be ready to take on their professional work."

So I don't think Bob was off the mark with his criticism.

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


Return to posts index

Nicholas Kleczewski
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 2:32:26 pm

I have a friend pretty closely connected to that whole situation and it pretty much all was a big PR stunt to get publicity and free stuff. Almost immediately theres was mega problems, particularly at that time when getting in and out of FCPX to other professional tools was much more difficult.

Anyway, not piling on FCPX at all, i couldn't be a bigger supporter and at this point pretty much don't think there isn't anything it can't handle. Well, except huge huge databases but Im all but sure thats going to be fixed very soon...

Director, Editor, Colorist
http://www.trsociety.com


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 2:37:53 pm

[Nicholas Kleczewski] "I have a friend pretty closely connected to that whole situation and it pretty much all was a big PR stunt to get publicity and free stuff."

Well, it definitely gained publicity, but it seems like that publicity was nothing more than a blip. And free stuff? Did that work out?

Too often people put their foot in their mouth for what turns out to be little gain, because they misinterpret the blip of publicity that others got in the past.

I tend to look at what happened a year later to see if certain actions got the kind of response that I would desire for myself.


Return to posts index

Liz Mason
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 6:48:47 pm
Last Edited By Liz Mason on Dec 3, 2013 at 9:00:42 pm

[Nicholas Kleczewski] "I have a friend pretty closely connected to that whole situation and it pretty much all was a big PR stunt to get publicity and free stuff."

Would love to know who your "friend" is that is giving you such mis-information. I'm the Managing Director of Outpost Digital - Radical's post company - and we have never received anything free in the 10 years that I've been here. It's obviously a concern of mine that someone is spreading a rumor like that, especially if they are so closely a part of our day to day. Feel free to contact me through the Outpost Digital website if you would prefer to discuss offline.

As for FCP X, I am a full supporter of this FINAL transition we will be making, as it has been, in fact, a transition which started a bit before the time of those articles. As Evan stated, we have editors, projects and clients to worry about and have been of the mind that showing them what FCP X can do, and what other NLEs can not, is the friendliest way to convince them of their inevitable future. Not everyone is as forward thinking as we have to be in this business, but we know that and so coax them along at a pace they are more comfortable with.

best,
Liz


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 9:07:12 pm

[Liz Mason] " Not everyone is as forward thinking as we have to be in this business, but we know that and so coax them along at a pace they are more comfortable with.

best,
Liz"


Where solid business sense meets forward thinking solutions to real world problems.

No wonder you guys are doing well.

Now stop it.

The brand of this board is "relentless contentiousness in service to editorial egos."

And if I can't play in that pond, I'm gonna take my towel and go home, dammit!

; )

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: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 9:11:03 pm

[Bill Davis] "The brand of this board is "relentless contentiousness in service to editorial egos."

And if I can't play in that pond, I'm gonna take my towel and go home, dammit!
"


As you've said many times, Bill. And are fond of saying still.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 4, 2013 at 1:16:09 am

[Chris Harlan] "As you've said many times, Bill. And are fond of saying still."

Gosh, you'd think that I spent a lot of my early career in advertising - where reach and frequency are critical elements in successfully spreading an idea.

; )

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: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 8:18:57 pm
Last Edited By Craig Seeman on Dec 3, 2013 at 8:33:38 pm

I'm not about to read all these posts (but I have a hunch I will) but I heard Evan Schachtman talk about this at CCW. The issue hanging them was collaborative workflow. From his comments on that panel he's about to switch with 10.1. Keep in mind he's very likely a beta tester.

EDIT: Evan seems to have answered in full detail.



Return to posts index

David Jahns
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 9:37:00 pm

Ah, yes.. the NEXT update is going to be awesome. It's always that "next" update for some reason... ;-)

Yeah - I think we can all agree that the horsepower/GPU is all great, but from Day 1, my biggest beef with X was the lack of project sharing. I'm in a facility with 20 full time people, and we're ALWAYS bouncing project around to different editors/assistants, working simultaneously, etc... The Avid Bin Locking structure is by far the best implementation of that workflow, and FCP 7 could (accidentally) imitate it reasonably well.

If they ever get a workable project sharing capability for FCP-X, I'll give it another look - but in the meantime, Premiere/Avid (& FCP 7) are doing the job quite nicely, thank you very much...

David Jahns
---
Joint Editorial
Portland, OR


Return to posts index

Bob Zelin
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 3, 2013 at 11:49:45 pm

be it FCP-X, or Thunderbolt, or RED Cameras, or SSD's or problems with Blackmagic and AJA cards with Adobe Premiere, I respectfully reserve the right to post my observations on a public forum. I started doing this with AVID Media Composer on AVID-L, (which became AVID-L2, and then FCP-L) and now Creative Cow, that seems to have taken over most of the other forums out there.

There is nothing that drives me more crazy than when you have a problem with a product - and you think that you are an idiot because you can't get something to work - and you contact the company, and they tell you "no one else is having this issue". It's these forums that allow the truth to come out. My memorable one for Creative Cow is when both Walter Biscardi and myself were having AJA Kona 3 audio popping problems with 720p video, and at the time AJA told us independently that they had never heard of that problem, when both of us were complaining about the same problem at the same time to the same people. It is only because of forums like Creative Cow that the truth comes out. Now I LOVE AJA, and Walter Biscardi LOVES AJA (that's all he uses, and that's all I try to install), but when there are problems, it should NOT be a secret, and it should not seem "disrespectful".

I am not bashing FCP-X - I think it's becoming a great product, and while it may have problems, so does Adobe Premiere CC. And everyone knows that @RadicalMedia is a top production company in NY, that has the long track record to prove it over and over again. I was just stating my observation, which took me by surprise. I should have no negative feeling about making my observation - no differently than when Adobe/AVID/Blackmagic/AJA/Apple, etc. comes out with the new 2014 product XYZ - and if there are problems, they should be discussed RIGHT AWAY on Creative Cow (and other forums). That's the whole purpose of being here.

If we can't do that, then I might as well go back to reading Videography and POST Magazine, that would NEVER tolerate behavior that I have exhibited in threads like this.

Bob Zelin

Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
maxavid@cfl.rr.com


Return to posts index

Evan Schechtman
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 4, 2013 at 12:42:41 am

Bob,
You can post your opinion all you want. You called me, and my firm out directly, so I needed to respond. You knew you were causing trouble, you said so - and were just so thrilled to blow the lid of this big conspiracy that doesn't exist. Instead of bringing people into the fold and just directly ask me the question -you felt a desire to ostracize someone you don't even know. What was the point of punctuating your post with that you installed my Avids? Which I can't even remember? In the end, I can't be upset with you, I put myself out there and this is what I get. Keep telling yourself you should have no negative feelings. I hope the post had the desired result for you. Please continue picking me apart. Now, I have to get back to work.


Return to posts index

Mark Raudonis
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 4, 2013 at 5:29:30 am

I guess Bob's NOT getting invited to the @Radical Christmas Party this year!



Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 4, 2013 at 7:49:59 am

Is this why we can't have nice things?




Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 4, 2013 at 3:10:07 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Is this why we can't have nice things?


"


No. Apple doesn't make nice things anymore, 'member?!

:)


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 4, 2013 at 9:11:24 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "
No. Apple doesn't make nice things anymore, 'member?!
"


touché.




Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCP-X and misrepresentation
on Dec 4, 2013 at 2:55:29 pm

Evan, just wanted to drop in and tell you that I appreciated the segment you did in front of that window that evening : )

Really man, you are a talented brother and at the time I didn't know of anyone that had your experience (and film credits) saying anything positive about X to the extent you did that night.


I also appreciate your response on here and update on what you have been doing.
It might not have come to you the way you preferred, but the way I see it, it gave you a chance to rise to the occasion and the questions, which I think you did quite well.

As did Liz BTW (that's how I would have handled that. Put a name on it or else how do I know you didn't just make that up) If you are going to make that type of accusation about somebody man up with your name. She even said they could contact her privately.


Sometimes we can find positives in things that we first see as totally negative.


I was curious myself as to what you were up to. Not so much that I would take the time to call or write you. Thanks to this thread I'm not anymore.




I look forward to you in a window again : )


Return to posts index

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