FORUMS: list search recent posts

Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Chris Stevens
Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 6:26:58 pm

Hello. I've used FCP for over 8 years.I've worked as an editor on projects for the BBC, Warner Bros. etc. La la la blah... yawn. Here is my shocking perspective:

I love FCPX.

For me, the new, modular, structure of FCPX seems like a very sensible decision from Apple. It means that users like me, the vast indie-masses, don't have to subsidise the niche-tools of a tiny fraction of the user base. FCPX is now the backbone, and everything else can plug-into it. For me, this modularity is reflected in the low price of the app. Right now, sure, it sucks for various entrenched workflows, but in a couple of months third-parties will furnish the market with endless treats.

If you want feature X, you will buy a third-party plug-in.

95% of us don't need your legacy support for tape etc, etc, so why should we, the indie masses, subsidise the development cost of those features for you, the 5% who do? Your obscure feature is my increased expense on the app store. Think of me and the indie masses when you launch into your requiems.

FCPX has taken a much more sensible and modular approach.

Watch and wait. Third-parties will develop the legacy tools for the tiny percentage of self-styled 'pros', while the rest of us – working with solid-state capture – don't have to subsidise a tiny fraction of the user base.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 6:49:17 pm

You make an interesting "needs of the many needs of the few" argument but the "self-styled 'pros'" crack seems unnecessary. Said the man who called randy ubillos a baboons testicle or something..


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

TS O'Grady
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 7:21:04 pm

LOL!



Return to posts index


Jamie Franklin
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 7:15:09 pm

Good god. Don't take the bait.

Why wait, we go go buy 1 standard NLE feature right now for the low low price of 500$...or put that towards a serious toolset and let that supposed 95% play with their holiday "events"


Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 7:17:23 pm

God love the "indie masses". Honestly, some of my favorite people in the world are indies.

Some of us have to make a living with this stuff though, and one thing you are right about is that it is NOT for us. One tip.... I wouldn't suggest adding FCPX Editor to your signature anytime soon. It won't be getting you any jobs. FCPX may become a closet dalliance for some professionals, but it will be a LONG time before it ever regains the status of "credential".

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index

Tom Wolsky
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 7:28:11 pm

"I wouldn't suggest adding FCP Editor to your signature anytime soon. It won't be getting you any jobs."

Boy, that so takes me back to 1999.

All the best,

Tom

Class on Demand DVDs "Complete Training for FCP7," "Basic Training for FCS" and "Final Cut Express Made Easy"
Author: "Final Cut Pro 5 Editing Essentials" and "Final Cut Express 4 Editing Workshop"


Return to posts index


Marvin Holdman
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 7:44:18 pm

@ Tom

Yeah, I remember 1999 as well. I was a closet FCP editor in those years. I got a LOT more jobs by putting "Avid" on my marketing materials. It was a long while before FCP was a professional credential. The youngsters weren't around to know. Deja vu, all over again!

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 8:18:46 pm

[Tom Wolsky] "Boy, that so takes me back to 1999."

Or even 1989.

I remember facilities with multiple $2M online rooms buying ONE Avid for $60K or so and putting it in a walk in closet or nook in the hallway or in the back corner of some room. It was an inexpensive technical curiosity with resolution so low it was barely serviceable for offline work. Faces couldn't be identified and hand movement was fuzz balls.

I worked at one facility owned by a multi Emmy award winning editor who had invested heavily in two CMX6000s as first NLEs complete with a room built to burn the discs. He bought one of those toy Avids and took a look at the picture quality and said it was entirely unusable even for the roughest of offlines

. . . a year later they were offlining a nationally syndicated TV series and several TV specials. All using a bevy of freelance editors they had so much work coming in. They had two Avids by then along with the two online rooms which had become online only since all offline was done on Avid. They had only one client left still booking one of the two CMX6000s because the owner himself still refused to learn how to use the Avid.

Somewhere someone is going to have an FCPX toy room . . . and one day it wont be a toy (maybe). Guess who's going tog get the freelance work when they see a year of FCPX experience that few others will admit or have.



Return to posts index

Chris Stevens
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 7:43:46 pm

I see in the 'indie masses' the strongest and smartest men who have ever lived. An entire generation armed with digital SLRs and cheap edit gear.

While the 'pros' ingest tape from spools, the 'indie's' camera firmware is hacked to obscene bitrates by Russian code-jockeys. They run solid-state workflows, self-manage color-correction. They deliver straight to YouTube. Their 100mbit footage looks like a million-dollars, but it cost them just a few hundred. While the 'pros' rewind their digi-beta decks, the 'indie' screens his work to an audience of millions across the planet.

The original FCP had the 'indies' chasing complex workflow, working jobs they hate so they could buy software with a feature-set they didn't need.

They are the middle children of history, with no purpose or place. We have no great war, or great depression. The great war is a spiritual war. The great depression is our lives. We were raised by television to believe that we'd be millionaires and movie gods and rock stars -- but we won't. And we're learning that fact.

Get editing before the 'indie' gets even.


Return to posts index


james carey
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 8:54:23 pm

[Chris Stevens] "The original FCP had the 'indies' chasing complex workflow, working jobs they hate so they could buy software with a feature-set they didn't need.

They are the middle children of history, with no purpose or place. "


lol, ah to be young firebrand, blissfully ignorant. go get em kid. and thanks for the laugh. i mean that, more power to you.

btw, with FCP7 i can and do edit programs for both youtube and network. I can and do deliver clients finished videos on whatever medium and to whatever specs they demand. I can and do ingest formats from decks, camcorders, as well as every digital format currently available. I can and do share my timelines, my xml's, my omf's with media professionals all over the world. So good luck with your brave new world.

Just another middle child of history, having apparently, no purpose or place.

Jim Carey
Director of Video, Radical Entertainment
linkedin: http://ca.linkedin.com/in/jcarey256
mobygames: http://www.mobygames.com/developer/sheet/view/developerId,17212/


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 12:53:37 am

Jesus Christ Chris, I mean, Jeeesus Christ. What was that? "ten days that shook professional"?

You sound like Tolstoy meets a coffee house in shoreditch?


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Martti Ekstrand
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 2:32:05 pm

[Chris Stevens] "Get editing before the 'indie' gets even."

Getting even by working for less wages than flipping burgers for a living? 'Cause that's what you are setting yourself and your fellow 'indies' (if there are any more) up for with the hyperbole in your post ...

And ripping off a Tyler Durden rant from Fight Club when discussing missing features in a editing app from the world's most know luxury consumer electronics brand... oh the irony! Awesome!

check out my shorts: http://vimeo.com/marttiekstrand


Return to posts index


Walter Soyka
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 7:30:46 pm

[Chris Stevens] "Your obscure feature is my increased expense on the app store. Think of me and the indie masses when you launch into your requiems."

I suppose this is your way of saying thank you to the many thousands of working editorial professionals, whose willingness to purchase NLE software has pushed the cost of a single-seat post-production setup from well over a $100,000 several years ago down to $299 plus a laptop?

While I appreciate your point that you don't want to pay for features you don't need, the people that you are now blasting created the market that lets you be an indie.

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 Stevens
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 7:49:18 pm

Isn't it going to be the best of both worlds?

The 'indie' gets to keep costs down with a set of strong core-features from the FCPX-backbone, the 'pro' gets niche-support using tools from third-parties who have much more vested interest in supporting those legacy workflows.

Then, eventually, the 'pro' can evolve into the indie.


Return to posts index

J Hussar
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 8:51:20 pm

Chris Stevens
Member Since:
June 29th 2011

Not to belabor this, but it seems a tad fishy that people who joined in the last few days go into a rah, rah sales pitch for the FCPX new engine - it doesn't inspire much confidence in me. You may be real, but where have you been for all these years? You just found the cow? I certainly haven't seen any new joiners who are critical of FCPX.



Return to posts index


Chris Stevens
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 9:12:30 pm

I'm real. I think. This is me. Been reading the forums here for a few weeks and felt that the other side of the debate wasn't being represented here. The 'pro' has been representing his case, thought the 'indie' should too.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 9:35:14 pm

Well, that's cool. But I thought it was super cool thinking you were a fictional character from Northern Exposure. Ah, well. You're passionate and real, so, welcome!


Return to posts index

J Hussar
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 10:46:47 pm

No prob - I've just noticed a certain amount of hit and run accounts. There was girl who came on day one of the fiasco, attacked some very valid points that were being made and then whoosh - gone. Most of us have our livelihoods on the line - hence the intensity on some of the threads.

Especially those of us with many older jobs (hundreds +) and tape libraries, who are literally in stunned disbelief at being left high and dry after being the biggest boosters of FCP. I hope you have some appreciation of that.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 9:15:26 pm

Now, I believe he has been hosing/operating a small one man radio station up in Cicely, Alaska.


Return to posts index

Chad Nickle
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 9:16:16 pm

Yes, you accused me earlier of being an apple employee, like I said before, I have an itinfoilhat for sale if you need one..

As to the original OP, very well said. Why should apple cater to 5% of the market when third parties can take that role? I DO understand the frustrations of many on here, but you are in the extreme minority weather you like it or not.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 9:27:19 pm

[J Hussar] "Not to belabor this, but it seems a tad fishy that people who joined in the last few days go into a rah, rah sales pitch for the FCPX new engine"

I don't think I'm exaggerating (too much) when I say that the release of FCPX has been the most polarizing event in the post industry since Avid took on CMX.

I'd certainly expect that an event of this magnitude would encourage a lot of post professionals to sign up and share their opinions. We may disagree, but I think we should welcome their participation instead of automatically questioning their motives.

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

Walter Soyka
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 9:05:41 pm

[Chris Stevens] "Isn't it going to be the best of both worlds? The 'indie' gets to keep costs down with a set of strong core-features from the FCPX-backbone, the 'pro' gets niche-support using tools from third-parties who have much more vested interest in supporting those legacy workflows."

I don't disagree at all. A modular approach could work. The number of moving parts in a workflow may get a little scary, but there's nothing unworkable about a modular approach per se.

The point of my post was to remind you (as an indie) of your roots. The pro's "niche tools" and "legacy workflows" that you are so handily dismissing have subsidized the creation of the low-cost, "strong core-features" you have today -- not the other way around.

As each generation of technology and each generation of media producers disrupts or displaces the generation before it, I think a little appreciation for history and respect for those who paved the way is called for. Build some good karma, you know? You may need it soon, because...

[Chris Stevens] "Then, eventually, the 'pro' can evolve into the indie."

... I think this is backwards, too. If history is any guide, the indie will evolve into the "pro" and then been displaced again by the next wave.

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: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 8:17:29 pm

Chris -

You are who FCPX was targeted at. I am not. I used to own a Harley, I took it into the shop and my mechanic turned it into a moped. It works for you, your commuting to work, you can save some money. It doesn't work for me, I'm going cross country.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Jeremy Doyle
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 9:55:10 pm

[Herb Sevush] "You are who FCPX was targeted at. I am not. I used to own a Harley, I took it into the shop and my mechanic turned it into a moped. It works for you, your commuting to work, you can save some money. It doesn't work for me, I'm going cross country."

That is awesome.



Return to posts index

Lucas Merino
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 10:14:56 pm

[Chris Stevens] "If you want feature X, you will buy a third-party plug-in. "


When your 3rd party plugin doesn't work, who are you going to call for support, Apple or the 3rd party? And when you call that person and they tell you to call the other company, then what?

And then what happens when Apple updates fcpx and it breaks the 3rd party plugin?

...And what happens if you are in the middle of a project and it's an auto update from the appstore, just like when Quicktime gets updated when you don't want it and it kills After Effects export.

If they are going for a modular 3rd party approach, Apple has set up a horrifying precedent with how they released fcpx.


Return to posts index

Chris Stevens
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 11:25:32 pm

[Lucas Merino] "When your 3rd party plugin doesn't work, who are you going to call for support?"

I'd hope the modular system would police itself for ongoing compatibility and inspire third-party tools.

I think it's a mistake to assume that Apple chose to strip-down the FCPX feature set out of malice for a 'pro' user. From my perspective, as an 'indie', it looks different: What has happened is that Apple has concentrated on providing a solid foundation for editing, while (relatively) niche functionality has been implicitly outsourced to third-parties.

This is good for several reasons:

1) It will provoke rapid innovation in the plug-in industry
2) These plug-ins will be much more advanced and more regularly updated than Apple can manage alone.
3) These specialist tools can become more focused to address individual 'pro' workflows.

The end result is that the core cost of the FCPX 'backbone' is low for the majority of users who don't need these legacy tools.

It's also cheaper for the 'pros' in the long-run too. Now you can decide whether a seat requires a full suite of plug-ins or just the 'backbone' of FCPX. You'll also get much better tools for dealing with your current process, supplied by third-parties.

Apple did the same thing with iOS. Rather than attempt to provide a complete feature set themselves, they implicitly outsourced that to third-parties. Consider that the iPad didn't even ship with a calculator app. Let's wait and see how the industry addresses the plug-in possibilities here.


Return to posts index

Tom Wolsky
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 12:12:00 am

I think the real problem is that by the time that happens the pros are going to be gone and not coming back. There are three significant problems here, one, a failure to appreciate the huge importance of forward compatibility, two, what is perceived as an failure in trust by bringing out this product after a very, very lengthy wait rather than a fully featured, robust product the video production and entertainment industry were counting on, and third, a really clunky editing interface that needs badly to be fixed. Nobody asked for a paradigm shift, especially not one that took us all backwards.

Yeah, yeah, I know, you asked for a better horse, and I gave you a car; unfortunately my horse will be there and back in the barn by the time your car gets started, and even then it's never going to finish the race because it doesn't have any finishing tools or any way to get to them (to mix metaphors and facts).

All the best,

Tom

Class on Demand DVDs "Complete Training for FCP7," "Basic Training for FCS" and "Final Cut Express Made Easy"
Author: "Final Cut Pro 5 Editing Essentials" and "Final Cut Express 4 Editing Workshop"


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 12:31:14 am

[Chris Stevens] "I think it's a mistake to assume that Apple chose to strip-down the FCPX feature set out of malice for a 'pro' user. From my perspective, as an 'indie', it looks different: What has happened is that Apple has concentrated on providing a solid foundation for editing, while (relatively) niche functionality has been implicitly outsourced to third-parties... Apple did the same thing with iOS. Rather than attempt to provide a complete feature set themselves, they implicitly outsourced that to third-parties. Consider that the iPad didn't even ship with a calculator app. Let's wait and see how the industry addresses the plug-in possibilities here."

I would feel better about this if Apple had explicitly involved third-party developers (as they have done with iOS).

Apple has been just as secretive and closed with important third-party FCP developers as they have been with customers and users. Only a select few were privy to pre-release development. If Apple were seriously focused on professionals, I think they would have done a much better job involving major developers in the process.

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

Lucas Merino
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 12:40:55 am

[Walter Soyka] "I would feel better about this if Apple had explicitly involved third-party developers (as they have done with iOS)."


I totally agree with you here, except remember there was no appstore when the iPhone launched.

But as I said about the precedent they set with the launch of fcpx, there was no mention at all about "modular design" and base systems where indies could get by with minimum addons and pros could buy all sorts of things (which really I feel this is exactly how it works now anyway... some people can afford/need Sapphire and Automatic Duck and some people cannot/don't).

Had they presented the product this way, and also launched with 20-30 3rd party companies with plenty of "addons" ready to go, I think it would be a totally different forum right now. Kinda like when they roll out app developers on stage during a presentation.


Return to posts index

Russell Calkins
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jul 1, 2011 at 12:25:31 am

[Chris Stevens] "I think it's a mistake to assume that Apple chose to strip-down the FCPX feature set out of malice for a 'pro' user. From my perspective, as an 'indie', it looks different: What has happened is that Apple has concentrated on providing a solid foundation for editing, while (relatively) niche functionality has been implicitly outsourced to third-parties... Apple did the same thing with iOS. Rather than attempt to provide a complete feature set themselves, they implicitly outsourced that to third-parties. Consider that the iPad didn't even ship with a calculator app. Let's wait and see how the industry addresses the plug-in possibilities here."

I would feel better about this if Apple had explicitly involved third-party developers (as they have done with iOS).

Apple has been just as secretive and closed with important third-party FCP developers as they have been with customers and users. Only a select few were privy to pre-release development. If Apple were seriously focused on professionals, I think they would have done a much better job involving major developers in the process.


New to the forum, but i think this conversation is exactly on point....for a couple reasons.

1) Apple wants out of the Mix/Grade game
Sountrack Pro flopped (i don't know anyone who uses it for anything other than quick and dirty clean-ups), and they probably deemed Color wasn't worth the money they were putting into it. They clearly want to get out of the Mix/Grade game.

If that's what you need, Apple is going to make you go to 3rd parties. Automatic Duck is doing backflips, but the price point will not remain at $500, or due to 10-fold volume, somebody is gonna seriously undercut them.

Regardless, the workflow from Cut to Mix to Grade didn't get cheaper with FCPX, it got more expensive...mostly because Apple doesn't find it profitable, and didn't want to support it with volume sales that they (probably rightly) assumed 80-90% of their consumers didn't use anyway. Get over it. The software solutions for professional workflows will roughly double or triple (my estimate). But really, software costs that amount to a grand or two a seat are less than a drop in the bucket for total post costs.


2) Apple is now focusing on "platforms", not software.
iOS is the perfect example. It's been beyond successful for them, and at this point, i think it's a universal corporate strategy. They're not going back, and they're not giving in. Name the last time Apple backtracked on something bold. If we like FCP as a general platform, we better hope this works. They'll terminate the platform before they'll move backwards.


3) The backlash is due to the exclusion of 3rd party participation from an earlier stage.
Apple chose the splash. They kept the wraps on this development (in classic Apple style) so they could make headlines with something "revolutionary" that no one had seen before. The only way you can do that is to keep non-Apple involvement in development to an absolute minimum. Otherwise forums (like this one), would leak everything.

However, the shift to reliance on 3rd party support without 3rd party access to early designs leads to a half-baked release. FCPX really can't do anything right now, it's a bare platform. I can cut (granted in a new way), but i can't Mix or Grade to anything resembling a professional standard.

That DOESN'T mean it wont happen. Just like with iOS, Apple just laid down a pot of gold for developers like Automatic Duck, Black Magic, Red Giant, Aja, etc. I bet these people are hiring. They're racing for solutions. But they're also at least 6 months to a year away.

They obviously underestimated how the pent-up demand for the new platform would turn to vitriol and massive backlash at a half-baked release. They fanned the flames for this for at least a year...and then didn't deliver something that was ready to go.


It'll be interesting to see if cooler heads prevail, and wait for the 3rd party developers to catch up before they jump ship. I'm betting the vast majority of gaps in the professional workflow will be filled within 12-18 months. The only question is whether Premier/Avid is superior enough to FCS3 to make that year matter.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jul 1, 2011 at 12:48:51 am

"It'll be interesting to see if cooler heads prevail, and wait for the 3rd party developers to catch up before they jump ship. I'm betting the vast majority of gaps in the professional workflow will be filled within 12-18 months. The only question is whether Premier/Avid is superior enough to FCS3 to make that year matter."

I think you're underestimating the anger that's out there.

I don't know about anybody else but I'm not an Apple guy, I'm an editor. I owned 2 different PC NLE's, both of them EOL'd, before I came to FCP about 7 years ago. I was looking for stability and assumed Apple was a mature company. I have no interest in Steve Jobs and could care less about Apple as a cultural icon. Since the introduction of FCPX last week I have heard constant refrains about how Apple always "eats it's young", they always start out with under developed programs and then add functionality, they are always secretive. I don't give a s**t what they always are, their behavior this past week is intolerable.

If Microsoft tried something like this, tried bringing out a version of Excel that was incompatible with all previous versions, they would get annihilated. That's because they deal with large businesses who wouldn't put up with this sort of behavior. That's why Windows isn't cool, and why wintel machines are 90% of the PC market.

Apple has just EOL'd my workflow and software investments. My business plan calls for equipment upgrades next January. Unless FCPX blows me out of the water at that point, and I don't think even the most ardent supporter thinks it will be fully on par with Avid and PPRO by then, I will be back in the land of wintel. And I don't think I will be alone.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Russell Calkins
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jul 1, 2011 at 1:47:27 am

"Apple has just EOL'd my workflow and software investments. My business plan calls for equipment upgrades next January. Unless FCPX blows me out of the water at that point, and I don't think even the most ardent supporter thinks it will be fully on par with Avid and PPRO by then, I will be back in the land of wintel. And I don't think I will be alone."


You're 100 percent right. Apple obviously dropped an atomic bomb on any previous FCP workflow, and started from scratch. They also dropped a big FU on anybody who was married financially to their existing workflow. They're betting that what comes of it a year from now will be compelling enough to reestablish FCPX as the industry standard for the foreseeable future.

They're bitches because they didn't tell anyone this was coming, and provided no roadmap for the future for companies like you to use for planning.

Additionally, they're not reliable. They're arrogant. If their product isn't the best in any market, they axe it. If the package that comes out of this is clearly inferior to Adobe/Avid offerings, they may very well make the decision for you, and axe the platform themselves. (then again, they may just not tell anyone, and let it die slowly on the vine for 3 years).

But that's what they do. They've ridden the secret and nuke strategy to the 3rd highest market capitalization of any company in the world. Getting upset about it is like getting upset that a tiger has stripes.

Now they've asked for an industry wide referendum over the course of the next year or two. And how they've handled it has basically destroyed any effect of customer loyalty on the process. It'll probably just come down to people like you making rational decisions based on the competencies of the various platforms. I'm just saying it'll be interesting how long people will wait to make up their minds, and if the anger they've created will factor into that timeline.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 1:11:58 am

"I'd hope the modular system would police itself for ongoing compatibility and inspire third-party tools."
Quotes Chris Stevens.

HAAAAAA hahahahahaha. Oooooo. Wipe. My. Eyes. Ohhh, she'll be policing alright - self regulating bio-mimetic compatibility defense mechanisms built right in. real Hal 9000 those API hooks are.


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Bob Bonniol
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 10:24:58 pm

GIANT fan of yours Chris. Alice for iPad is awesome...

Having made the shift to an all Adobe based workflow sometime ago, this whole scenario has been interesting to watch at an admitted distance. I tend to agree with your modularity opinion. I relate to the workflow pain being expressed here as well...

Hell, who likes to be a practitioner who finds there main tool a completely different thing when they pull it out of the box ? Bound to be uncomfortable, if not downright infuriating/frustrating.

I'll say this: We are in a time of incredibly rapid change. Tools, workflows, delivery methods, market places, demographics, EVERYTHING shifting on a second by second basis. In my bread and butter business, large scale concert video, the display technology, processing, and serving changes every 6 months. The stuff I used 18 months ago has departed for the dust bin, or has been appropriated by DIY culture and repurposed into something unexpected. The only thing I can do is consciously set aside my own bandwidth to keep up, and to adjust my pipeline and workflow. I know that's not an analog for mainstream production. What a giant pain in the ass this is for many of you. Still, if I were a betting man, I think that the view of post production/editorial in 3 or 4 years will have FCP-X probably sitting in a very central position, maybe among all of us, maybe among a new generation of practitioner... Change happens. The universe is naturally entropic. Adapt or don't. Whatever you decide to do, the world will proceed.

Have a great day everybody...

Bob Bonniol


Return to posts index

Chris Stevens
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 11:40:14 pm

[Bob Bonniol] "GIANT fan of yours Chris. Alice for iPad is awesome...
The universe is naturally entropic. Adapt or don't. Whatever you decide to do, the world will proceed."

Thanks, Bob. Glad you like Alice!

Agree with your thoughts here. Will be fascinating to see where FCPX stands this time next year and then re-read these posts.


Return to posts index

Tom Olsen
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 10:56:57 pm

It is called Final Cut Pro, not Final Cut Indie. Apple could have made a consumer version for the app store for the indie people who dont need obscure features like being able to output split tracks or XML for use with other programs, or the other features they left out, but instead, they killed FCP, DVD Studio Pro, Color, FCP Server and Soundtrack Pro. To me that says Apple is out of the Pro market and just doesnt have the guts to actually admit it. I doubt they will add those features. I was a beta tester of Avid, coming from a film and tape background, and this is not the same situation; Avid made our jobs easier, it didnt make us pine for the splicing block.


Return to posts index

Chris Stevens
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 29, 2011 at 11:33:51 pm

[Tom Olsen] "I doubt they will add those features."

The argument I'm putting forward is that Apple don't need to add these features. A third-party plug-in market will blossom around the edges of this meteorite impact zone (FCPX).

The 'indies' get more affordable access, the 'pros' get better specialist tools in the long-run. Give it time?

I think we'll both win in the end.


Return to posts index

Sean ONeil
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 12:48:50 am

Most of the backlash has to do with metadata conversion (importing, sharing - even the ability to use a separate tape capture app). Personally I'm somewhat impressed with FCPX. The under-the-hood performance jump is off the charts. I watched someone scrubbing around and doing elaborate RT effects on an iMac with media that was on a consumer NAS drive. And I like the modular philosophy. Allowing FCP to get bogged down with all that easily breakable junk is what held it back in the first place. I agree with you on that point. I really don't see why metadata conversion needs to be built into the program you use to edit with. Automatic Duck made it possible for me to switch from Media100 to FCP years ago. I'd actually rather experts on metadata translation be the ones making it happen instead of some cubicle drone at one of the world's largest corporations.

But I disagree with your view on the future of the post production business. All the arcane things the pros still use that should have been obsolete for years now (tapes, broadcast monitors, SANs, even interlaced video formats) provide something an indie with a DSLR and iMovie can never provide: Confidence. The people who control the purse strings don't know or care if a $50 hard drive can store what HDCamSR tape can (sans the $80k deck), or that a properly calibrated Vizio TV is probably better for color grading than any uncalibrated broadcast monitor. They just want to make sure that when things go wrong (and they always do), nobody blames it on them for being cheap and not going with "the best." That's the barrier that the "indies" (as you call it) will have difficulty breaking.

Sean


Return to posts index

Tom Olsen
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 8:16:27 am

So you want us "pros" to have to pay $500 to get our tracks out split (hardly an "obscure" feature, even for the most mundane project), and then have to pay a la carte for features that other NLE's have standard, plus not be able to open the multitude of projects we have created? AND we have to wait and see if someone actually takes the time to make a plug -in or if Apple deems a feature worthy of putting back into the app? No thanks. As someone who makes a living as an editor, I am glad I have 23 years of Avid experience to fall back on, since FCP7 has now been deemed EOL by Apple and FCPX is absolutely not suited for the types of programs I work on.
The win -win is that us "pros" will be hired to do the jobs that require NLE's with the "obscure" features and the "indies" (whatever that means anyway) will get the projects that can be done with a crippled NLE like FCPX.I think in the long run the indies are getting a bad deal. Final cut studio was about the same price when you add in compressor and motion and Automatic Duck to the price, and you also got a decent color corrector, an ok mixer and DVD Studio Pro to boot.


Return to posts index

Stephen Bakopanos
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 11:27:15 am

[Tom Olsen] "It is called Final Cut Pro, not Final Cut Indie. "

Nor is it called "Final Cut Broadcast". Some people here seem to think that being a "pro" is the exclusive domain of broadcast editing.


Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 10:07:31 pm

[Stephen Bakopanos] "Nor is it called "Final Cut Broadcast". Some people here seem to think that being a "pro" is the exclusive domain of broadcast editing."

Well that's just silly. I don't believe there are any amateur broadcast editors, so it would seem your hypothesis is wrong.
However there are plenty of amateur film editors, and the term "indie" is just a euphemism for amateur.
Either you get paid, or you don't. It's just that simple and there is no in between. If you're an unpaid amateur, you can sugar coat it all you want with terms like indie, but you're still an amateur. If you get paid, your a professional.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com

I have a system, it has stuff in it, and stuff hooked to it. I have a camera, it can record stuff. I read the manuals, and know how to use this stuff and lots of other stuff too.
You should be suitably impressed...

"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair


Return to posts index

Stephen Bakopanos
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jul 1, 2011 at 4:44:50 am

[Scott Sheriff] "Well that's just silly. I don't believe there are any amateur broadcast editors, so it would seem your hypothesis is wrong.
However there are plenty of amateur film editors, and the term "indie" is just a euphemism for amateur. "


I think you're missing my point. The "pro" industry is not just limited to broadcast editing, which is what a lot of people in this forum seem to suggest. I for one consider myself a professional, but I rarely do any broadcast work any more - instead I specialise in producing videos for online delivery. Once FCPX has XML and OMF it will be more than suitable for what I do - for my mind, that makes it a "pro" app. Whether or not it's a broadcast level app is another question.


Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Why should I pay for your obscure-use scenario?
on Jul 1, 2011 at 6:22:39 pm

[Stephen Bakopanos] "I think you're missing my point. The "pro" industry is not just limited to broadcast editing, which is what a lot of people in this forum seem to suggest. I for one consider myself a professional, but I rarely do any broadcast work any more - instead I specialise in producing videos for online delivery. Once FCPX has XML and OMF it will be more than suitable for what I do - for my mind, that makes it a "pro" app. Whether or not it's a broadcast level app is another question."

OK, I get that. But I think you're dismissive of the broadcast markets size and scope. In America broadband internet penetration (wired, not counting sat delivered) is only around 40%. TV is in the high 90's.
Except for shows where a guy like me is sitting behind a switcher cutting the show live, are posted in some form of NLE. Even some of those shows are touched up in post, or have pre-produced elements that had to get posted.
All of this material has a much more complicated workflow than a youtube video.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com

I have a system, it has stuff in it, and stuff hooked to it. I have a camera, it can record stuff. I read the manuals, and know how to use this stuff and lots of other stuff too.
You should be suitably impressed...

"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair


Return to posts index

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