FORUMS: list search recent posts

Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
TImothy Auld
Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 9:35:43 pm

And if everyone puts so much stock in this Focus release then why in the hell is it not on the FCPX action page?

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 9:43:38 pm

Why? Go to fcp.co, there's a ton of case studies if you poke around. Also, here's a very short list of stuff. http://fcpxselects.tumblr.com

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:00:44 pm

Really? A Tumblr page?

I have been hearing on this forum for over a year how FCPX is really - obviously in a stealth mode- taking over many markets for NLE's. Anyone care to defend that with real numbers?

And, once again, why does not the oft cited "Focus" feature appear on the FCPX "in action" page?

Tim


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:14:28 pm

[TImothy Auld] "I have been hearing on this forum for over a year how FCPX is really - obviously in a stealth mode- taking over many markets for NLE's. Anyone care to defend that with real numbers?
"


Where was it posted that FCPX is "taking over many markets"?


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:19:36 pm

Please, Jeremy.

Tim


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:44:01 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Please, Jeremy."

I frequent this forum often, but I can't quite remember if anyone said that X is taking over. So, if you don't mind, I'd like to frame this discussion appropriately. That's all.

People seem to want proof that X is being used in the workplace (being used is much different than "taking over") and when it's provided, it is immediately rejected.


Return to posts index


TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:48:47 pm

Yes, I hear this all the time. No one (certainly not the top posters) have characterized anyone who might have a problem (any problem) with FCPX as people who are are to old/stupid/set in in their ways to not understand what FCPX has to offer.

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:50:27 pm

[TImothy Auld] "No one (certainly not the top posters) have characterized anyone who might have a problem (any problem) with FCPX as people who are are to old/stupid/set in in their ways to not understand what FCPX has to offer.
"


Comments from 2 or 3 people are not representative of all "top posters".

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:52:45 pm

So not "two or three people" as you say.

Tim


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:34:55 am

[TImothy Auld] "Yes, I hear this all the time. No one (certainly not the top posters) have characterized anyone who might have a problem (any problem) with FCPX as people who are are to old/stupid/set in in their ways to not understand what FCPX has to offer."

This is the "dinosaur" argument that comes up from time to time. I have looked to see where this frame of mind comes from, and it doesn't seem to come the FCPX side of the debate. I have never called anyone a dinosaur, or old, or stupid, but I will defend why I use fcpx. I don't really care what other people use, and generally, I like hearing about other strengths of other video applications.

If you are taking to me, directly to me, about something I've said to you, please let me know, point it out to me, and I will certainly rectify it.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:40:41 am

And apparently, I really, like the overuse, of the comma. It's highly, satisfying.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 1:56:58 am

I'm likely the single most prominent example of someone who takes about how X is doing globally compared to how it's doing in the US.

But you're putting your own spin on what I'm saying.

I've NEVER said even once that it's "taking over" anything. I've said countless times that the large industrial scale uses of the software are largely OUTSIDE the US. Azteca Broadcast in Mexico was the first large scale use case Apple posted. Since then there have been quite a few others. The most recent example of the BBC putting X and Premier head to head choosing X for a good swath of it's News operations is well documented. As is the iTV4 use and the Formula 1 Apple case study out of France.

Look, in the FCP X centric places I hang out, there is a constant chatter about larger scale industrial deployments in TV and Advertising taking place in countries in Scandinavia, South America - and most recently - one of the FXP X Facebook pages I hang out with that has 10,000 plus active international members - there's been a very significant influx of voices from the India and/or Pakistan.

If your perception that when I post these facts about what's happening in the FCP X world, that's equivalent of my saying it's "taking over" anything - that's just your spin.

Everything I've written is archived here. I'm reasonably careful to separate fact from my opinion. If you have some difficulty keeping the meaning straight when you read it, that's kinda your thing. Not mine.

I do think it SHOULD take over the whole world of editing. But everyone here already KNEW that! ; )

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


Marcus Moore
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 2:02:32 am

Anyone who's spent so much time in this thread fighting the fact that Apple AND Adobe are bound to PR schedules for the films they're involved with is either nutty or trolling.

Either way it's pointless to argue with him.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 2:08:13 am

[Marcus Moore] "Either way it's pointless to argue with him."

But it's fun! ;-)

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

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


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 2:09:30 am

If only I had the time... ;)

But I'm busy cutting a broadcast show... on FCPX!


Return to posts index


Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 2:16:38 am

[Marcus Moore] "If only I had the time... ;)

But I'm busy cutting a broadcast show... on FCPX!"


No way, nobody uses that.

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

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 2:39:45 am

[Marcus Moore] "But I'm busy cutting a broadcast show... on FCPX!"

Whatever you do, don't put a YouTubed teaser on Tumblr!


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 8:16:10 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "And apparently, I really, like the overuse, of the comma. It's highly, satisfying."

Would this make you a comma, comma, comma chameleon?


Return to posts index


Scott Witthaus
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 11:03:12 am

[Chris Harlan] "Would this make you a comma, comma, comma chameleon?"

Oh no you didn't.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 1:05:55 pm

I'm a great believer in the Oxford (I think over there it's the 'Harvard') comma Jeremy,


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 4:54:00 pm

[James Ewart] "I'm a great believer in the Oxford (I think over there it's the 'Harvard') comma Jeremy,"

Me too. Like this!:





Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 6:24:33 pm
Last Edited By James Ewart on Dec 11, 2014 at 6:25:10 pm

There is a rather wonderful little book by a lady called Lynn Truss called "East shoots and leaves"

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Eats-Shoots-Leaves-Lynne-Truss/dp/0007329067

I highly recommend it.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 6:32:51 pm

[James Ewart] "There is a rather wonderful little book by a lady called Lynn Truss called "East shoots and leaves"

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Eats-Shoots-Leaves-Lynne-Truss/dp/0007329067

I highly recommend it."


Just bought it, thanks for the recommendation. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 6:55:03 pm

Delighted and thank you.

I guarantee you will enjoy it and more than likely feel the need to share.

Merry Christmas.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:18:06 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Really? A Tumblr page? "

Hey, you wanted some examples, those are examples. What exactly are you looking for>

[TImothy Auld] "And, once again, why does not the oft cited "Focus" feature appear on the FCPX "in action" page?"

Based on my experience working with moving picture studios, my guess would be that WB doesn't want Apple to say anything about it until closer to the release date when their own campaign is done.

No defense of Apple's (non) marketing here, but I wouldn't read too much into the presence of Focus on Apple's site right now.

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:20:58 pm

I'm sorry, but what?

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:23:24 pm
Last Edited By Charlie Austin on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:26:55 pm

[TImothy Auld] "I'm sorry, but what?"

Warner Bros. probably does not want Apple to talk about their movie yet. They don't even have a full trailer out at this point, just a teaser. The marketing campaign won't even get going until after the new year. Why would they let Apple start talking about their film before they do? That was rhetorical by the way. They wouldn't.

http://www.traileraddict.com/focus-2014

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:28:15 pm

'Warner Bros. probably does not want Apple to talk about their movie yet.' Sorry, but "qoute" wasn't working.

Warner Brothers is but a fly on the windshield compared to Apple. To suggest that Warner Brothers controls this conversation is delusional.

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:29:16 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Warner Brothers is but a fly on the windshield compared to Apple. To suggest that Warner Brothers controls this conversation is delusional."

All due respect, but you have no clue how movie marketing works. There are NDA's involved. Believe whatever you want though...

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:32:06 pm

Really? I don't? OK.

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:34:17 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Really? I don't? OK.
"


Sorry for the tone, But seriously, the relative size of a company makes no difference when it comes to the control of their intellectual property.

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

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 2:02:02 am

[Charlie Austin] "There are NDA's involved."

I'll back that up, since I deal with studios, editors and PR folks a lot on some of the film interview stories I write. Nothing gets out until the studio OKs it. Working professionals will not cross that line either if they expect to continue working in the film industry.

Furthermore, it has been my experience that Apple does not do this type of marketing for features, except for their own PR. For example, with an Avid-related film, or "Gone Girl" for Adobe, both the studio publicists and Adobe's and Avid's PR folks were simultaneously working the press on these stories. Apple simply handles it differently.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 2:05:21 am

We'll have to see- this is the first big studio feature since X launched in 2011. Previous to that Apple did lots of PR pieces on their work with Copola, the Cohens, Fincher, etc...

So we'll have to see if it's just another "In Action" article. I hope not.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:30:45 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Warner Bros. probably does not want Apple to talk about their movie yet. They don't even have a full trailer out at this point, just a teaser. The marketing campaign won't even get going until after the new year. Why would they let Apple start talking about their film before they do? That was rhetorical by the way. They wouldn't.
"


This would be my guess too. Everyone is probably under insane NDAs until the movie is released. I know some editors that, due to NDA, could not say what project they were working on even though you can look them up on IMDB and see exactly what they are working on.

All the PPro articles about its use on Gone Girl didn't appear until around the same time the movie hit theaters, right?


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:31:30 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "All the PPro articles about its use on Gone Girl didn't appear until around the same time the movie hit theaters, right?"

Correct.

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

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:01:42 pm

[TImothy Auld] "why in the hell is it not on the FCPX action page?"

One has to wonder about Apple's marketing of FCPX. The In Action page is "dormant" to say the least.
Personally, these days I think Apple's marketing is the weakest link.

Of course if Apple has decided word of mouth from "professionals" is important than arguably 10.1.4 was their "marketing" release given that MXF may cause some involved in broadcasting to talk more seriously about FCPX.



Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:05:35 pm

That is what is would characterize as surrender.

Tim


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:26:49 pm

Is "everyone putting so much stock" in the release of Focus?

No-one on here has claimed that FCPX is taking over any markets, care to provide a link to where it's happened?

Apple's marketing for Pro-Apps has been pretty poor for quite a while now, not sure it means they are surrendering?


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:36:11 pm

Get a grip fellas. NDA's do not apply to corporations. Corporation set the terms of NDA's. If you think that Apple or Warner Brothers are constrained by any NDA the you are deluded.

Tim


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:45:30 pm

[Charlie Austin] "there is no way that WB want's the conversation a"

So you speak for Warner Brothers?

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:47:36 pm

[TImothy Auld] "So you speak for Warner Brothers?"

No Tim, I don't. But what I do, is movie marketing. I work with the marketing dept's of movie studios. I know how the process works.

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:50:19 pm

And what does that mean? At the core: does the corporation with more money set the agenda? Or am I wrong about that?

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:52:56 pm

[TImothy Auld] "And what does that mean? At the core: does the corporation with more money set the agenda? Or am I wrong about that?"

It has nothing to do with that. WB has a movie. They spent a ton of money on it. They want to control the conversation about it as much as they can. Even people who worked on it can't mention it by name yet. Apple is, in some ways, in the same business. They will talk about it when WB says it's OK for them to do so.

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:56:16 pm

If you are trying to tell me that the corporation with more money trumps the corporation with less money then I think I many not agree with you.

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:00:19 pm

[TImothy Auld] "If you are trying to tell me that the corporation with more money trumps the corporation with less money then I think I many not agree with you"

I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying the WB's marketing dept. is calling the shots about what gets said about their movie and when it gets said. And Apple is happy to go along with that. Why would they piss of a movie studio with whom they have a lot of business (music/TV/Movies). They'll shout it from the mountaintops when they can. Trust me.

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:05:21 pm

Warner is not calling anyone's shots in this matter. If "Focus" is not on FCPX's in action page then it is because Apple does not care to have it there.

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:10:36 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Warner is not calling anyone's shots in this matter. If "Focus" is not on FCPX's in action page then it is because Apple does not care to have it there.
"


You speak for Apple? Sorry man, you're wrong.

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:19:27 pm

I never said I spoke for Apple and I don't have the slightest idea how you drew that inference. I am making a pretty reasonable case for why "Focus" is not in FCPX's In Action page. Would you like to take the opposite case? What have you got on your side?

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:21:54 pm

[TImothy Auld] "What have you got on your side?
"


The fact that I work in movie marketing, I work with movie studios. I know how this stuff works. You can choose to discount that if you want. But I'm right. ;-)

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

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:24:24 pm

[TImothy Auld] " never said I spoke for Apple and I don't have the slightest idea how you drew that inference."

The same way you drew this inference...

[TImothy Auld] "So you speak for Warner Brothers?"

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:25:59 pm

Yeah, you win that one.

Tim


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:34:01 pm







Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:35:27 pm

I'm here for abuse. :-)

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

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


Return to posts index

Claude Lyneis
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 6:58:47 am

Now the Monty Python made reading call the arguments above,worthwhile. As a FCPX guy, I have been feeling marooned on an island, since taking a video production class at the local college in Berkeley, where they only use PP. Unless I learn PP, (unlikely), I am limited in collaboration opportunities for sure.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:02:17 pm

I think that last year Warner brought in about 5 billion. That is their gross. Compare that with Apple's profit. And tell me again that Warner has even the slightest influence over what Apple does.

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:04:06 pm

[TImothy Auld] "I think that last year Warner brought in about 5 billion. That is their gross. Compare that with Apple's profit. And tell me again that Warner has even the slightest influence over what Apple does.
"


It. Has. Nothing. To. Do. With. Money. It's how the glamorous entertainment business, of which Apple is a part, works. The End.

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:12:17 pm

When someone in show business tells you it has nothing to do with money then you'd better be damn sure your wallet is still in you back pocket.

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:20:18 pm

[TImothy Auld] "When someone in show business tells you it has nothing to do with money then you'd better be damn sure your wallet is still in you back pocket.
"


Well, that's true. :-)

But this Focus thing is about marketing, not money. And about companies who are doing business together working together. Apple may sell a few more copies of X by blabbing about Focus right now. In the process they would lose the cooperation of WB and possibly other entertainment conglomerates. Their Pro Apps profit wouldn't cover that loss of goodwill/money, so they won't do it. Maybe it *is* about money. Just not the way you think it is...

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:25:06 pm

Saying that marketing is not about money is like saying milk is not about cheese.

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:30:46 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Saying that marketing is not about money is like saying milk is not about cheese."

Of course it is, and I don't believe I said that. What I'm saying is that WB doesn't want Apple, or anyone else, to talk about their movie yet. And Apple is going along with that. It has nothing to do with Apple's feelings about FCP X. At all.

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

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:36:01 pm

[TImothy Auld] " I am making a pretty reasonable case for why "Focus" is not in FCPX's In Action page."

The reason Focus isn't on FCPX's action page is the same reason it's not all over the FCP X blogs/websites, the people working on Focus are under NDAs. Same reason Avid and Adobe don't plaster details about movies/tv shows that haven't seen the light of day yet either.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:44:13 pm

OK, now I get it. I guess that's why Adobe did not heavily promote "Gone Girl."

Tim


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:03:35 am
Last Edited By Marcus Moore on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:03:56 am

Yeah- when GONE GIRL was released!

Other than the blanket announcement "GONE GIRL TO BE CUT ON PREMIER", none of the numerous BTS stuff from Adobe or the article here on Creative Cow were published until October, and mostly November- AFTER the film was released.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:05:02 am

[TImothy Auld] "OK, now I get it. I guess that's why Adobe did not heavily promote "Gone Girl.""

Please go back to the historical record and see if you can figure out when Adobe "officially" began promoting it. Hint: It was right before the film came out, and well after the ad campaign was underway. If Apple and others aren't talking about Focus this February I'll eat my hat. ;-)

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:09:10 am

Citation, please. Why do I have to go back?

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:11:55 am

[TImothy Auld] "Citation, please. Why do I have to go back?"

You don't. But that was the timeline. Please continue to believe whatever you want.

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

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:12:53 am
Last Edited By TImothy Auld on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:13:23 am

And I will be holding your hat in my hand in order to make it easier for you to eat it. Or I will apologize deeply and hope that someone will hire me as an FCPX editor (I do have experience.)

Tim


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:35:17 am

[TImothy Auld] "And I will be holding your hat in my hand in order to make it easier for you to eat it. Or I will apologize deeply and hope that someone will hire me as an FCPX editor (I do have experience.)
"


I'm saving this! ;-)

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

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


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 1:28:56 am

Hmmm looks like Adobe was promoting Gone Girl Editing at least 7 months before the movie opened...how can that be if the NDA's and Studios' prevent that? Hmmmm


http://nofilmschool.com/2014/04/adobe-going-to-hollywood-david-finchers-gon...

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 1:49:13 am

[Andy Field] "Hmmm looks like Adobe was promoting Gone Girl Editing at least 7 months before the movie opened...how can that be if the NDA's and Studios' prevent that? Hmmmm
"


Because the studio was fine with Adobe making the announcement?

It was already stated in this thread that Adobe announced it was happening earlier this year, but articles, videos and panel discussions from Adobe about the details of the collaboration didn't start until around the time the film was released. NDAs and media embargos aren't rocket science.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 1:50:27 am

This was a blog post to a blog post, with no real information.

Just like we know Focus is being cut on X now, we knew Gone Girl was being cut on Pr, then.

It's about equal in information and details.

Once Gone Girl was close to release, more details came out about the workflow.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 2:04:36 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "This was a blog post to a blog post, with no real information."

Well, Adobe did include a basic connection to Fincher and Premiere in some of their PowerPoints to press and key influencers months before the film's release. No specifics, though.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 2:07:37 am

[Oliver Peters] "Well, Adobe did include a basic connection to Fincher and Premiere in some of their PowerPoints to press and key influencers months before the film's release. No specifics, though."

The underlying point (which you've also made) remains unchanged though. Media access and information was controlled. No one had carte blanche to talk about this ongoing project with the media, and the media probably had embargos themselves about when they could release the information they were given.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 2:12:49 am

[Andrew Kimery] "No one had carte blanche to talk about this ongoing project with the media, and the media probably had embargos themselves about when they could release the information they were given."

A couple of points. First, even if there are no actual NDAs, most experienced feature film editors know that it is not their place to step out front and start talking about a film early. They are generally far too busy, but more importantly, they don't want to step on anyone's toes.

Second, press embargoes are generally only in place once the PR machine starts to roll. For example, you might see a screener for a film and be asked not to print anything about it (including tweets, blogs, etc.) until after a certain date. That's pretty common for studios, but also equipment and software vendors.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 2:09:33 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Jeremy Garchow] "This was a blog post to a blog post, with no real information."

Well, Adobe did include a basic connection to Fincher and Premiere in some of their PowerPoints to press and key influencers months before the film's release. No specifics, though.
"


Surely.

I think we can all agree that Adobe didn't expose a whole lot of information until GG was very close to release.

There was some presentation when the new MacPro was announced (can't remember the guy who did it) who said that there was a $100mm movie being cut right down the street on FCPX/iMacs, but also scarce on the details.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 2:18:27 am

Regarding Apple, I would note that in the past few months, Apple PR has been gong through some changes and reorganization, so FCP X might not be a focus. In addition, Apple PR is very focused to promote what the official company "new item" is at any given time. There's not going to be any early promotion of a film and FCP X, when the marching orders are Yosemite, iOS8 or the Watch. Apple is the most disciplined company on the planet when it comes to that. Each item gets promotion when Apple feels the time is right.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 2:02:12 am

[Andy Field] "Hmmm looks like Adobe was promoting Gone Girl Editing at least 7 months before the movie opened...how can that be if the NDA's and Studios' prevent that? Hmmmm"

Depends on what the NDA says or what the relationship is between Fincher and the studio. As someone who's written an interview story about "GG" for DV magazine, I can attest that I didn't get any press access to anyone until the time was right. That's in spite of the fact that I had interviewed the editors about several previous films. I presume that in the case of Adobe, they were allowed to acknowledge the use with "GG" but nothing more. The same is true between Coens and Adobe.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:40:03 pm

And what I'm saying is that even is WB wanted to suppress that "Focus" was cut in FCPX they would not be able to. Money does control the conversation. And Apple has money. Yes?

Tim


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:46:14 pm

[TImothy Auld] "And what I'm saying is that even is WB wanted to suppress that "Focus" was cut in FCPX they would not be able to. Money does control the conversation. And Apple has money. Yes?"

Hypothetically, Apple could've gone to WB and been like, "Hey, we really want X to be used on a big, hollywood feature" to which WB replied, "Sure, but no info gets out until the movie is in theaters." Apple's market cap don't mean jack if WB has what Apple wants. It's about who needs who more.

Of course this is all assuming Apple is directly involved with X being used on Focus. It could just be that the editors on Focus wanted to use FCP X so they did. That would be my first guess.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:58:20 pm

A lot of assumptions there.

Tim


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:05:32 am

[TImothy Auld] "A lot of assumptions there."

A lot of assumptions started this thread.

I don't think "Hey, maybe the editors just wanted to use FCPX" is that big of assumption. How many projects are cut on FCP 7, X, PPro, Avid MC, Lightworks, etc., just because that's what the editor(s) and/or post supervisor wanted to use, and how many projects use those tools because of a deal between the production company and the NLE provider?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 2:14:25 am

[TImothy Auld] "A lot of assumptions there."

Well, one assumption is that Apple was somehow directly involved. From the tidbits that have been alluded to by the assistant editor, it seems to have been a personal decision made by the director and editor. Testing was carried out to convince the studio before anything was shot.

If you recall "Cold Mountain", Apple did not support Murch. His support came from Digital Film Tree. To my knowledge only the Coens were originally helped out by Apple when they first embarqued on using FCP "legacy".

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 16, 2014 at 10:26:35 am

I think Apple are playing a much smarter "long firm" game than you suppose. They are long term planners. Why make a big song and dance about one movie? Especially if nobody knows yet if the movie is going to be any good or not.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:02:14 am

[Andrew Kimery] "the editors on Focus wanted to use FCP X so they did. That would be my first guess."

And that is what happened. And for Tim, it's not an assumption. Here is the editors twitter feed. He likes FCP X. Weird huh?

https://twitter.com/S0nofaB1tch

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

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


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:16:42 am

[Charlie Austin] "Apple may sell a few more copies of X by blabbing about Focus right now."

OR

the movie might suck and now they have damaged their halo around X. ;)


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:44:09 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Get a grip fellas. NDA's do not apply to corporations. Corporation set the terms of NDA's. If you think that Apple or Warner Brothers are constrained by any NDA the you are deluded."

Whether they are or aren't, there is no way that WB wants the conversation about a big budget movie that they haven't even started the campaign for, to be started by the company that makes the editing software they used. And I'm pretty sure Apple isn't going to piss of WB for the sake of a bunch of curious people on the internet.

We know they used FCP X. We know the editorial team had a good experience. Not perfect, but good enough that they'd happily do it again. The details will appear when the movie does.

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

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


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:29:05 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Get a grip fellas. NDA's do not apply to corporations. Corporation set the terms of NDA's. If you think that Apple or Warner Brothers are constrained by any NDA the you are deluded.

Tim"


No... NDAs between corporations are as common as rainwater in Seattle. EVERYONE respects them and NO ONE breaks them, those that do open themselves up to years of litigation and potentially millions of dollars in court costs and fees. So yes, I think Charlie is completely right. Breaking agreements and running roughshod over WB's marketing department does nothing for Apple, playing nice helps them retain access.

Shawn



Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:01:24 am

No. NDA's do not exist between corporations. That is governed by contracts. NDA's exist between corporations and individuals. Cite me something to the contrary.

Tim


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:15:25 am

[TImothy Auld] "No. NDA's do not exist between corporations. That is governed by contracts. NDA's exist between corporations and individuals. Cite me something to the contrary."

NDAs are contracts. The parties they bind may both/all be corporations.

I'd cite the NDAs that my company is bound to as examples, but I can't disclose that without opening my company up to serious liability.

Instead, I'll cite Wikipedia:

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-disclosure_agreement

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:34:32 am

[Walter Soyka] "[TImothy Auld] "No. NDA's do not exist between corporations. That is governed by contracts. NDA's exist between corporations and individuals. Cite me something to the contrary."

NDAs are contracts. The parties they bind may both/all be corporations.

I'd cite the NDAs that my company is bound to as examples, but I can't disclose that without opening my company up to serious liability.

Instead, I'll cite Wikipedia:"


Dang, scooped by Walter Soyka again! :-)

Tim, I would be nervous to even HINT at things covered by NDAs which were signed by my company (which I'm obviously bound to). It really is that big of a deal. I'm sure Tim Wilson or Dennis could tell you all about it. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:19:50 am

[TImothy Auld] "No. NDA's do not exist between corporations. That is governed by contracts. NDA's exist between corporations and individuals. Cite me something to the contrary.

Tim"


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-disclosure_agreement

"NDAs are commonly signed when two companies, individuals, or other entities (such as partnerships, societies, etc.) are considering doing business and need to understand the processes used in each other's business for the purpose of evaluating the potential business relationship."

Shawn



Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 1:17:11 pm
Last Edited By James Ewart on Dec 11, 2014 at 2:17:51 pm

"Get a grip fellas. NDA's do not apply to corporations. Corporation set the terms of NDA's. If you think that Apple or Warner Brothers are constrained by any NDA the you are deluded"

Excuse me but if you think Apple can use a movie it's software was used for its own marketing without the OK of the movie concerned you are quite simply wrong. With or without NDAs that wold give them a very bad vibe in movie and or anywhere land.

There's a time and a place and what's the rush? This is a long term game.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:41:32 pm

I don't understand what Tim is even asking for. Where the hell are you going to get "quantifiable" evidence for these things for ANY software. The "quantifiable" data is the amount of downloads? Nothing to see here. Move along.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:42:51 pm

If you don't understand it then you can't supply it.

Tim


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:02:50 pm

[TImothy Auld] "If you don't understand it then you can't supply it."

So what is it? What are you looking for that Adobe or Avid can supply as well?

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 11:07:37 pm

What?

Tim


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 1:29:26 am

MotionVFX. How the hell are they staying in business? Who are they selling their insane amount of plugins, templates, etc to? Corporate? Weddings? Small TV stations? India? I don't know but a lot of people must be buying. And why is REd Giant and so many others interested? They must have research and quantifiable sales numbers. I don't see any developers dropping out. If say the products are increasing faster than It ever was for FCP legacy. Why are all these 3rd parties bothering?


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 12, 2014 at 1:55:36 am

[Scott Witthaus] "So what is it? What are you looking for that Adobe or Avid can supply as well?"

Of course, if Tim were to answer this question, then the whole premise of his initial question about FCPX would be negated.

The rest of us know the answer to that and Tim's initial question, why feed his illogical and uninformed obsession.


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 4:03:09 am

[Steve Connor] "Is "everyone putting so much stock" in the release of Focus? "

I would hope not since a February dumping means it's probably gonna suck.


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 1:57:53 pm

[Craig Seeman] "One has to wonder about Apple's marketing of FCPX. The In Action page is "dormant" to say the least.
Personally, these days I think Apple's marketing is the weakest link."


I completely forgot about this page.

If I wanted FCPX news, I come here and rarely visit fcp.co.


Return to posts index

Anders Utterstrom
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 9, 2014 at 10:55:02 pm

Funny Post! I was just talking about the tools with a fiend that we can use today, compared just a few years ago. I like FCP X. It's like my Audi is better than your BMW. Ciao!

Anders Utterstrom
Chicago, Illinois


Return to posts index

Dan Stewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:41:40 am

I respect you trying to revive the debate Tim, this forum was a lot of fun for a long time. But FCPX is long dead - not just rotten or even a skeleton but reborn into a field of peaceful flowers swaying lazily in the breeze.

(To head off the usual suspects: Not that it's not a fairly functional -and certainly unique- piece of software for those that like it. Which may, every couple of years, include at least the rumour of a TV show or feature. But really, for those of us who get told what we can cut on, the debate is sadly long over.)



Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 3:34:38 pm

[Dan Stewart] "for those of us who get told what we can cut on,"

And this is truly a shame.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 4:05:38 pm

[Dan Stewart] "for those of us who get told what we can cut on,"

[Scott Witthaus] "And this is truly a shame."

Why?

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 4:49:56 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Why?"

How can one make an informed decision or commentary then they are forced to one platform? I know this is the reality for many staff editors at larger shops.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 4:55:11 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "How can one make an informed decision or commentary then they are forced to one platform? I know this is the reality for many staff editors at larger shops."

Speaking as an artist, of course I always want to use my favorite tools... but speaking as a project manager, the idea of everyone on a team getting to use whatever software they like best, without regard for the pipeline, makes me break out in a cold sweat.

(Jeremy, I hope you don't mind, but I borrowed a few commas.)

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 5:00:53 pm

[Walter Soyka] "(Jeremy, I hope you don't mind, but I borrowed a few commas.)"

That's it!

As Comma Chameleon, I am calling the Comma Police!







Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 1:12:53 pm

[Walter Soyka] "but speaking as a project manager, the idea of everyone on a team getting to use whatever software they like best, without regard for the pipeline, makes me break out in a cold sweat."

Oh, I know this Walter and I agree. I ran operations for a company that had 8 locations nationwide and dozens of edit suites. We used Avid because that standardized our company (and we were doing mostly long-form broadcast). Now, with my own one man show, however, I can try and work on the best product for me and my clients. Currently that is FCPX. That might change again, but X does the best job for me right now.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 6:18:51 pm

[Scott Witthaus] " I know this is the reality for many staff editors at larger shops."

Even freelancers in larger markets have to go with the prevailing winds. The biggest knock against X for me is that I can't make a living as a freelance editor in LA with X. Assuming X follows a similar path as Legend then in the next 3-5 years X will become a more viable option for types like me.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 6:26:05 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "The biggest knock against X for me is that I can't make a living as a freelance editor in LA with X."

To some extent this is a chicken-or-egg problem. A producer or production manager isn't going to bless the use of a given tool on a large project unless there is staff. If I hire an editor and the preference is for FCP X, then I'm stuck with that person. If their work is unsatisfactory or the project runs longer than they contracted for and have to move on, then I have to replace them with another editor who is savvy on X. Right not that pool is not very deep at the top end.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 9:06:44 pm

[Oliver Peters] "To some extent this is a chicken-or-egg problem. "

Certainly a chicken/egg problem.

What helped FCP Legend was that it made it affordable for editors (and smaller productions) to own their own NLE (as opposed to renting an Avid) and as people got comfortable with it on smaller projects they started lobbying to use it on bigger work and eventually you hit a point where it's not only a trusted platform but it also has a large enough user bases that productions can easily staff shows.

A big difference between now and then is that X does not have the massive price advantage that Legend had and people are already used to having an NLE at home (ok, thats two differences). 10-15 years ago choosing an NLE was an investment because prices were higher and you ended up in an echo system for that NLE. Today, well, I have Avid, FCP 7, PPro, and Lightworks on my laptop (and X is only a download away if I need it).


Return to posts index

Daniel Frome
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 12:53:36 pm

It seemed like they had a good amount of purchases ... myself included. Sadly, I haven't even used it much.

Purely speculation: Based on water-cooler talk with fellow editors in my realm of broadcast, it seems like Premiere Pro has basically won the passage rights to be the "next NLE." That's not to say FCPX isn't technically superior in some ways ... there's just so many people out there that aren't caring/using FCPX that it's sort of a circular argument.


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 1:49:27 pm

[Daniel Frome] "Based on water-cooler talk with fellow editors in my realm of broadcast, it seems like Premiere Pro"

I have no doubt that's true. But places where editors don't hang out by the water-cooler are places where FCP X can gain traction. This includes documentary production, news production, one-man band productions, wedding productions, web video production, institutional productions, to name a few. Whether FCP X develops more market share in broadcast work or not, there is still a sizable market for it.

Personally, I use FCP X because it's the fastest at what I need to do. I think there are also broadcast edits where this is true also (not every edit, you trolls). In places where people don't care whats "in" and what's "out", I think FCP X can make some headway.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 2:09:41 pm

Maybe we are all responding to the wrong question. There probably is a lot of "quaint" use of FCP X.

;-)

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Ronny Courtens
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 5:23:50 pm

Feels to me like a completely useless and boring thread. The good old times are back (-:

- Ronny


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 5:34:10 pm

[Ronny Courtens] "Feels to me like a completely useless and boring thread. The good old times are back (-:"

I'd be curious to understand how evidence of market penetration (or evidence to the contrary) would actually impact anyone's thinking here.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Claude Lyneis
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 5:57:01 pm

Reminds me of two decisions I made in the 1980's. First, I went Betamax vs VHS. Lost that one. Then I went Mac vs PC. That looked really dicey before the second coming of Steve Jobs. I went Blu-ray vs HD-DVD and in the end it hardly mattered. With the abandonment of FCP7 by Apple, the choice was learn something structurally different or go to PP, which was more familiar. Apple's roll out was close to a disaster.

Now I think market share probably matters to get jobs and to find collaborations.

As in the 80's, I went with FCPX and I am not going back. However, I don't depend on this for a living, like many on the forum.


Return to posts index

Ronny Courtens
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 6:32:27 pm

Walter, I don't think it would. That's why I say this discussion feels useless to me.

- Ronny


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 7:29:39 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I'd be curious to understand how evidence of market penetration (or evidence to the contrary) would actually impact anyone's thinking here.
"


It wouldn't effect mine that much. I was using X when it first came out and people were really talking bad about it.

My experience from St. Louis, or these days I should say that city that's attached to Ferguson.

I have worked this market as a freelancer for over 20 years from commercial work to national news to sports.
Production houses, stations I have pretty much worked almost every place in this town at one point.

I'm also on the executive board of our union which has a contract with all the stations and most houses along with 90 percent of the freelancers. it's a great town to work.

The breakdown

FOX SPORTS Midwest staff use AVID in-house but freelances on the trucks for games us X
So split one to one.

NBC Affiliate Edius
CBS producers were using X and legacy but that station just got bought by a company that owns other stations that have AVID so last I heard they were going to bring AVID in. I don't if producers will still use X

Local PBS does a great deal of production and live shows. They actually use all 3 AVID Prp and X
the commercial editors love X so it's a 3 way split

Post houses that I have been in recently had more Prp than anything.

Since everybody in the market knew me as an early adapter to X many folks who want to know about it approach me. Within the last month I have had 2 people say to me they were gonna start using X
One wedding and a one man band.

That's my market.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 8:48:27 pm

[Ronny Courtens] "Feels to me like a completely useless and boring thread."

Exactly. Totally useless thread. "Show's over, folks. Move on...."

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 10, 2014 at 9:27:38 pm

[Brett Sherman] "I have no doubt that's true. But places where editors don't hang out by the water-cooler are places where FCP X can gain traction. This includes documentary production, news production, one-man band productions, wedding productions, web video production, institutional productions, to name a few. Whether FCP X develops more market share in broadcast work or not, there is still a sizable market for it."

I've seen web production brought up a lot and I think that's an interesting section of the industry because "web production" is almost as broad of term as "the industry" since everything from cat videos to successful indie projects (like Video Game High School) to b'cast style productions House of Cards can fall under the term "web production". I've worked on web projects for Viacom, Yahoo, and NBC and they certainly have workflows and facilities that feel similar to a broadcast environment (multiple editors, shared storage, etc.,). Big and small projects (and workflows) will find homes on the web.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 7:49:17 am

[Brett Sherman] "I have no doubt that's true. But places where editors don't hang out by the water-cooler are places where FCP X can gain traction. This includes documentary production, news production, one-man band productions, wedding productions, web video production, institutional productions, to name a few. Whether FCP X develops more market share in broadcast work or not, there is still a sizable market for it."

Exactly and I would imagine this is a bigger market than broadcasters and facilities, I know of 8 local corporate production companies using FCPX around here, not one uses Avid.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 1:07:54 pm
Last Edited By James Ewart on Dec 11, 2014 at 1:28:32 pm

Has anybody ever talked about more than the software making inroads?

Sounds to me like to and Aindreas Gallagher should get to know each other Timothy, I think you'd get along pretty well.

Incidentally where is Aindreas these days?


Return to posts index

Dean Neal
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 1:19:43 pm

Surely you have more on your plate Timothy than generating flame bait? ;-)

There are several production concerns in Australia that are using FCPX for TV broadcast delivery.

Including me.

I edit and produce national Post-produced sporting content that airs regularly on FOX Sports here and also on National Commercial, Free to air Networks.

Does that mean FCPX is taking over Australia post production? No.

Is its footprint emerging, however? Definitely, yes.

Dean Neal...


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 11, 2014 at 9:03:49 pm

Seems relevant to the discussion:

http://postperspective.com/radicaloutposts-evan-schechtman-talks-latest-fcp...

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 12, 2014 at 2:54:36 am

Thanks for this Oliver. Because I never work in any of these collaborative workflows where people are simultaneously needing to access media I am curious about this side of things.

I understand Avid is the winner for simultaneous media sharing but am surprised to see him also favouring premiere and FCP7.

FCP7 still has some advantages for this kind of workflow over X? I'd be interested to know which and how if anybody can spare the time.

Thanks

James


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 12, 2014 at 2:58:46 pm

[James Ewart] "FCP7 still has some advantages for this kind of workflow over X? I'd be interested to know which and how if anybody can spare the time"

It's not that you can't do the same things with X, but the process is more fluid (and certainly more familiar to most) using FCP 7. The most basic issue is that Editor A can send Editor B a segment of a common show simply by sending an FCP 7 project file that only includes the edited sequence. This can easily be moved into Editor B's project by drag & drop.

There are also several workarounds in existence that permit Avid-style project sharing with FCP 7. EditShare has been doing that for years.

In addition, if collaboration involves outside audio post and color correction, FCP 7 internally generates the proper files (EDL, OMF and/or FCP 7 XML) without any additional translation step. Not all mixers will accept AAF files and not all color correction houses will work with XML or FCPXML.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 12, 2014 at 4:00:32 pm

[Oliver Peters] "It's not that you can't do the same things with X, but the process is more fluid (and certainly more familiar to most) using FCP 7."

Besides Editshare like capability, those can't be the reasons.

FCPX has drag and drop sharing, just make a new library w/Event drag, drop the Project. Open that Library on another machine, drag, drop, the Project in to whatever Event. Keywords come over, if the media is shared, it automatically links, it's pretty straight forward and very similar to FCP7 project sharing. You could teach someone to do this in 30 seconds.

[Oliver Peters] "In addition, if collaboration involves outside audio post and color correction, FCP 7 internally generates the proper files (EDL, OMF and/or FCP 7 XML) without any additional translation step. Not all mixers will accept AAF files and not all color correction houses will work with XML or FCPXML."

The transition to AAF for us, personally, has been flawless. Whenever I ask if someone accepts AAF, it's always "Of course!". Not one complaint, not one slow down, not one botched transfer or file. EDL-X is available for purchase from the AppStore, and this minimal cost isn't going to slow down someone like @RadicalMedia. Also, you can tee up EDLs for free through Resolve if you really really don't want to spend $99 to buy the specialized EDL tool.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 12, 2014 at 4:36:15 pm

Jeremy I think this is what Ripple call the 'Transfer Library" and it seems a very tidy solution although you cannot rename it I(i don't think) if FCPX is going to be able to automatically link the files.

Or is that the drive name you can' rename even though it's different drive?

Must go back and check I have confused myself.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 12, 2014 at 4:46:09 pm

[James Ewart] "Jeremy I think this is what Ripple call the 'Transfer Library" and it seems a very tidy solution although you cannot rename it I(i don't think) if FCPX is going to be able to automatically link the files."

But we are talking about a shared storage situation, where the media files sit on one drive that isn't renamed, and Libraries are passed between editors at different stations. Since the media hasn't moved, it will relink. Sometimes even if the media IS moved to a different directory on the same drive, the media will relink, in my experience.

Yes, you are right, in that if you transfer everything to a different drive, you will need to relink, unless that drive has the same name.

I just don't see how X is any worse than 7 in shared projects workflows.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 12, 2014 at 5:52:51 pm

Sometimes "worse" just means "different"?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 12, 2014 at 5:56:33 pm
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Dec 12, 2014 at 6:14:22 pm

[James Ewart] "Sometimes "worse" just means "different""

I think you have FINALLY found the new name of this forum!


Return to posts index

jon smitherton
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 14, 2014 at 12:41:32 pm

Cut this 6 part series for Al Jazeera in FCPX:

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/wildlife-warzone/

The most that I can say is that after getting used to for a couple of weeks, it is an extremely fast editor without having to worry about tracks; in/out bang! (overwrite, assemble, overlay).

Last couple of projects in AVID, track assigning gets real tiresome...and the fluidity of the interface - like touch something and it stops - is just ludicrous, as Pro Tools does this. (and don't get me started on usable audio waveforms until the latest releases...)
FCPX, was able to trim and reorder(!), while it was playing in the timeline! (yeah it'd drop a frame or 3...but what the hell)

Jon.



Return to posts index

Joseph Owens
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 15, 2014 at 8:00:10 pm

[jon smitherton] "it is an extremely fast editor without having to worry about tracks; in/out bang! (overwrite, assemble, overlay)."

There you go. For standard, templated productions with an unstructured media source -- that is, most of "news" or improvised timeline structures - as opposed to scripted - that's what this little editor was built to do. A standup, some B-Roll, an overlay... done. Right from the words "this is your timeline in X" on that fateful night in 'Vegas.

"Quantifiable" market penetration data would be difficult to supply -- it would also have to contain the word "verifiable" because sales does not equal utilization. I can cite handfuls of colleagues who have downloaded the thing, and then toasted it. Not with champagne, immolated is what I mean.

Also astonished at the apparent innocence around the prevailing influence of financial considerations. Especially Americans should be acutely aware that their own government at almost every level has been compromised by the overwhelming presence of Big Money. Institutions that can (*) pull off the biggest frauds in history, in plain view, and not even investigated. *Allegedly*, for legal reasons....

"Eats Shoots and Leaves" is plenty of fun... try "Amusing Ourselves to Death."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amusing_Ourselves_to_Death

The biggest difference I find today between arguments as to whether Orwell's nihilistic vision in 1984 is still relevant, is that we now have to take the http://WWW into account -- which is far, far more serious, and something he never knew about. Doublethink? I think the term is now "spin", which I see used here in a pretty cavalier way, and blithely accepted, which is the way to make it work.

jPo

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


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 15, 2014 at 8:14:05 pm

[Joseph Owens] "here you go. For standard, templated productions with an unstructured media source -- that is, most of "news" or improvised timeline structures - as opposed to scripted - that's what this little editor was built to do."

I would agree with you Joseph, but I also find it very good for scripted documentary and narrative work. Anecdotally, I am finding more and more editors locally who are using it for every kind of production; which editor you use is really coming down to personal preference (and sometimes facility preference) more than any particular feature limitations.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 15, 2014 at 8:55:32 pm

Have you watched Black Mirror, jPo?


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 15, 2014 at 9:26:42 pm

[Joseph Owens] " whether Orwell's nihilistic vision in 1984 is still relevant"

To Postman's point in Amusing Ourselves to Death, it's almost completely irrelevant compared with the numbing effect of being overwhelmed with nonsense, a la Brave New World, where TV can never be turned off and thinking is discouraged. Surveillance doesn't need to be stealthy and sinister when people are stumbling over themselves DEMANDING to expose everything about themselves.

But I think both are overstated, and neither is on topic to the DEBATE over the appropriateness of FCPX to a task OR NOT.

Wow, FCPX or Not: The Debate. We should name a forum after that! Sure seems to describe an awful lot of threads, where people DEBATE whether FCPX is the right choice OR NOT.

So please tread lightly around dystopian fiction (my favorite genre, btw, that and teen vampires), as politics are specifically not on the menu chez COW.

You do raise an interesting point about expense, though, which I'll also gently disagree with that too. If EVERYTHING was about cost, then the cheapest thing would ALWAYS win. I'm obviously overstating your point, and cost is certainly an issue, especially where public budgets are concerned (thinking more about schools than government agencies per se), but I don't see much evidence that decisions are being driven BY cost.

See, there's no debate about cost. But there IS debate about the appropriateness of FCPX OR NOT for a given task, AND for different styles of working, AND for different personalities.

That's why I'm ultimately not too interested in FCPX market share, even by verticals (within schools, within indie production, within commercial production, within SoHo, etc.), because none of those tell me anything important about ME. And it really is all about ME. LOL Does YOUR experience have anything to do with ME?

I continue to believe that feature sets, workflow, compatibility, and price are ALL secondary to personality traits. I like what I like, and nobody's experience is going to budge me. You liking what you like is only meaningful until I try it myself, at which point your experience ceases to have any relevance whatsoever.

Speaking metaphorically rhetorically. LOL

In that sense, I'm far more interested in seeing a correlation between NLE choices, verticals and Meyers-Briggs Type Indicator. (INFJ, holla!) What works for ME has a lot more to do with I'm LIKE than what I DO, no matter what I like to tell myself about how rational I am and how carefully I consider every choice. I do. I use the "draw a line down the middle of a yellow legal pad and list the pros and cons" approach to EVERYTHING, including what to wear today.

(I haven't decided yet, but I'll let you know.)

But seriously? In the end, I go with what I LIKE, and make it fit my needs because I WANT it to.

That is in fact the history of this forum in a nutshell. People WANTED X to work, and forced themselves into workflows that X demanded because people WANTED to use X. Then, over the following couple of years, X has continued to evolve to be more capable out of the box....but in fact, there's an extent to which people are going to use it because they WANT to use it, and will let everything else about their working experience flow from that.

Which, again, I think is not only a good thing, but an inevitable thing. And, if we're being honest, the ONLY thing.

In fact, I was going to say "except in cases where clients or markets force other choices," but a big part of this forum is also people liking what they like and forcing the issue AGAINST clients or markets where necessary.

So, somebody give me a quantifiable PERSONALITY correlation between FCPX OR NOT, and you've got my attention.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 16, 2014 at 6:10:39 am

[Tim Wilson]"Speaking metaphorically rhetorically. LOL"

Is this your favorite forum Tim? In all the vast world of Cow this does seem to bring out in you a certain..I don't know what.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 16, 2014 at 8:37:27 am

[Michael Gissing] "this does seem to bring out in you a certain..I don't know what."

Thanks for noticing! LOL For better and worse, that's pretty much just me. I really do talk like this in real life, including liberally LOL-ing.

But yeah, I love this one for sure. I've had to be away from posting at the COW for a while, and I saw a couple topics here that jumped out at me, so I merrily jumped right back on...

...but over the long haul, I think I might post more often at one of our least-trafficked forums, TV & Movie Appreciation. The original idea a long time ago was simple: we're sophisticated consumers of media, and I think we're generally sophisticated consumers of media...but we almost never talk about it.

That forum HAS changed names. It was originally called "Film History & Appreciation," but now, TV is often better than movies, and it's more about current stuff than historical stuff, which is fine by me. I'm going to be able to come up for air in a little bit, and while you'll definitely see me here more often than I've been around lately, I suspect you'll find me over there even more often.

There's only like a dozen of us, and it's been pretty quiet of late, but when we're cooking, I love talking about this stuff. I've turned several of my posts there into articles, and could probably turn a couple more into articles as well.


Depth of Field: Gregg Toland, Citizen Kane and Beyond

and

TV's All-time Greatest Openings, Part 1: Friday Night ABC 1971-72

are actually two of my favorite pieces of writing at the COW, and both started as posts, adding a few pictures and subtracting a little psychosis.

The Toaster & Tim's Vermeer was one of a handful of pieces I've written where I got to combine both sides of it -- the making of media and the watching of it. A cool interview on a strange subject that was turned into a cool movie.

Here's the thing I learned from that forum and this one, though. The COW has never been about ideas. We celebrate our 20th anniversary next spring, and we've ALWAYS been about ACTIONS and NEEDS. It just so happens that needs and actions have intersected with ideas in this forum over the past couple of years...but without the DEBATE (yes, debate) about FCPX OR NOT (yes, that's mostly what the debates are about), this forum would cease to exist.

Nobody wakes up and says, y'know, this is a great day to talk about what I want from an NLE. The DEBATE (or debates, but yes) about FCPX OR NOT (which is mostly what the debates are about) are the spine of this forum, maybe also the heart. Nothing survives without a spine and a heart.

(Notice: no mention of a brain. Jury's still out on that. LOL And actually, now that I think about it, plenty of folks seem to be getting by without much in the way of a heart or a spine either.)

I also know this from having tried to start a general-interest forum along these lines many times over the past 20 years, and them never taking off. Why now? Why this time? Because there was a DEBATE over FCPX OR NOT. It's not general interest AT ALL. It certainly spins OFF into other generally interesting stuff, but it all starts in a very specific place.

The COW as a whole will survive us all, but as long as there's some question over the suitability of FCPX to a given task or market, OR NOT, this particular forum will be around. We'll know almost to the day when the debate ends. It ain't yet.

Anyway, the other thing that fires me up is music. I've tried MANY times to start up a music forum here, but none of 'em have worked, for the same reason that general-interest industry forums haven't taken off in the COW. Nothing to talk about RIGHT NOW, no reason anyone HAS to speak up, so no spine and no heart.

Music is actually what I write about in my spare time (hahaha). I've had to put a music-cultural history kinda book on hold for the moment, but I do write a TON about it. That means plenty of overly long, not-as-witty-as-I-think writing along those lines too.

One of these days, I might even getting around to linking to my off-topic music stuff in my sig. Right after I make a sig. LOL

I do love this industry, though, and I feel lucky to have come at it from so many directions: owning a business, making lots of different kinds of TV shows, user groups, software development, marketing, trade shows, vendor partnerships, writing and editing a trade magazine, and a bunch more, including watching what alla y'all are talking about. It's fun, and I like having fun.

Thanks again!


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 16, 2014 at 11:41:03 pm

I particularly enjoyed the Tim's Vermeer article. Music? I think the majority of people are so visually oriented in the film/digital image world that they find it harder to talk about sound. When they do they often use visual words like bright and dull to describe frequency.

Music is such a subjective thing as well. From various online forums that I have visited over the years, audio ones tend to get very technical and threads are short. Not so much debate.

I have enjoyed this forum over the three years and I sense the slow fade to black for me at least as there is less to debate and I have found a workflow direction that has taken me away from Apple.


Return to posts index

Anders Utterstrom
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 17, 2014 at 8:08:19 am

Why are you all so aggressively negative towards FCP X.?
Are you afraid it will take your work away?

FCP X works and it is fast!

Someone said that it must measurable. Well, I would say FCP X is at least 60 % faster than Avid or Premiere.
But, it's not the speed we should be measuring it's the art. I'm slow at art. I change my mind a lot.

If you are fast at art, use your thing.

Personally I'm diving into Nuke Studio right now.

Ciao!

Anders Utterstrom
Chicago, Illinois


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 16, 2014 at 5:06:37 am

[Joseph Owens] "There you go. For standard, templated productions with an unstructured media source -- that is, most of "news" or improvised timeline structures - as opposed to scripted - that's what this little editor was built to do. A standup, some B-Roll, an overlay... done. Right from the words "this is your timeline in X" on that fateful night in 'Vegas.
"


I'd be curious to know why scripted dialogue editing is not possible in X, and why X was built without scripted projects in mind.

Qua(i)ntifiable reasons only, please.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 16, 2014 at 10:35:29 am
Last Edited By James Ewart on Dec 16, 2014 at 3:44:57 pm


I do understand there are limitations for the multi user shared media workflow (although even this also seems debatable) but to suggest the software can do a magazine show but can't manage a scripted movie or TV drama without telling me why? Now that is a little puzzling ...


Return to posts index

Joseph Owens
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 16, 2014 at 8:16:55 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I'd be curious to know why scripted dialogue editing is not possible in X"

You know, it probably is... inventing workarounds and a third-party plugin business is what this version of editing software depends on.

What I meant by "scripted", though, is a deliberately planned, blocked, shot, slated, shared-collaboration that has a formal structure consistent with the film-finish workflow established over the past hundred or so years. It is possible that sign-off structure is somewhat ossified, but human decision-making being what it is -- coupled with -- and this is an industry norm -- individual quirks -- I've witnessed editors throw the whole thing over just because they hated the cataloguing system, let alone the hoops they would have to jump through to export all the capital assets required by support contractors. Not saying that progress has not been made, just that some ships are just too big to get turned around in the Panama Canal. Per "swinging a cat." None of which has anything to do with the "feature set", that is, how-to-do-things.

"Black Mirror"... I will have to look for that. You know I am a foreigner. Is it on Netflix?

jPo

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 17, 2014 at 4:44:50 am

[Joseph Owens] "You know, it probably is... inventing workarounds and a third-party plugin business is what this version of editing software depends on."

I have a really hard time with this comment (not with you, just the general comment), which comes up from time to time, about the style of the FCPX timeline being a "work around". It's only a work around if you try and force it to work like Final Cut Pro 7 works (or Avid, or whatever the track based, source/record skeuomorph represents). It's really simple, FCPX doesn't work that way. The track based, source/record skeuomorph was designed back when computers became capable of editing, to make the transition from "analog" to "digital", or linear to non-linear palpable. If that is the case, then that model is also a "work around".

That model, for better, worse, or indifferent, is changing. My 2.5 year old son will not care about analog TV, or transmission, or the amount of innovation it took to beam a signal around the world, or film. His media consumption and frame of reference will be vastly different from 100 years ago, and so will his visual language. If he knew exactly how to use them (I could probably show him), the very tools that he already has at his fingertips at his very young age to communicate, and subsequently share those moments of communication is rather astounding if you can stop and think beyond fraudulent accounting and ossified workflows. He is 2.5 years old, and he already knows how to play his own music, the songs that he picks out and wants to listen to mind you, and it isn't by winding up one of these:



And as fast as third party support, Final Cut Pro 7, and other NLE's and video applications, rely on an extensive third party system to fill gaps in the workflow. FCPX requires some of this mortar in interchange. Big deal. These programs are very affordable, and in my experience, work very well. It does not make me feel that FCPX is any less capable as a creative tool because it doesn't have fossilized workflow methods built in to it.

If the non-exportation of capital assets is going to be the downfall of FCPX, then I would imagine someone would invent a capital asset exporter, (it probably already exists under an assumed name), and FCPX can also export from pretty much anywhere in the program, so unless there's something that is truly unique to the asset delivery process, I'm not even sure that this is a check mark against FCPX in the long list of Pros and Cons of any video software.

Im not saying everyone's going to like the software. It does represent a fair amount of work to open it up and learn it (or not) and that is time not everyone can afford. Certainly, they aren't. It was also pretty well busted when it was first launched. I also understand the animosity toward Apple Incorporated, but where does that leave ME (as Tim Wilson spelled it)? I understand why someone wouldn't use fcpx, but why tell me it's not good enough for me (again, not directed to you specifically, just the general sentiment)?

[Joseph Owens] ""Black Mirror"... I will have to look for that. You know I am a foreigner. Is it on Netflix?"

The first two seasons (a whopping 6 'episodes'!) just arrived on Netflix in the US a few weeks ago. It's a British show, so it's 'foreign' to me as well. :) Pretty great satire on 'amusing ourselves to death'. The show is commonly referred to as "sci-fi" which seems to be a bit of a misnomer. If you can find it, its worth checking out.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 17, 2014 at 7:44:27 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "
The first two seasons (a whopping 6 'episodes'!) just arrived on Netflix in the US a few weeks ago. It's a British show, so it's 'foreign' to me as well. :) Pretty great satire on 'amusing ourselves to death'. The show is commonly referred to as "sci-fi" which seems to be a bit of a misnomer. If you can find it, its worth checking out."


+1 for Black Mirror, it is a great show. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 17, 2014 at 8:07:56 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "[Joseph Owens] ""Black Mirror"... I will have to look for that. You know I am a foreigner. Is it on Netflix?"

The first two seasons (a whopping 6 'episodes'!) just arrived on Netflix in the US a few weeks ago. It's a British show, so it's 'foreign' to me as well. :) Pretty great satire on 'amusing ourselves to death'. The show is commonly referred to as "sci-fi" which seems to be a bit of a misnomer. If you can find it, its worth checking out.
"


It's also worth searching YouTube for some of Charlie Brooker's( the Writer of Black Mirror) other work.

Here is his take on News Editing!







Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 17, 2014 at 4:10:49 pm

[Steve Connor] "Here is his take on News Editing! "

I remember this one! I had no idea it was Brooker, thanks for connecting the dots.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 20, 2014 at 6:33:34 pm

Forgive me for asking this question Joseph as I know it could be construed as provocative, but let me assure you it really isn't.

What is your experience of working with FCPX in terms of numbers of and kinds of projects?

Genuinely curious.


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?
on Dec 16, 2014 at 10:28:36 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "[Joseph Owens] "There you go. For standard, templated productions with an unstructured media source -- that is, most of "news" or improvised timeline structures - as opposed to scripted - that's what this little editor was built to do. A standup, some B-Roll, an overlay... done. Right from the words "this is your timeline in X" on that fateful night in 'Vegas."

I'd be curious to know why scripted dialogue editing is not possible in X, and why X was built without scripted projects in mind."


It's totally possible (and in fact, quite efficient, fast and fun) to edit scripted dialogue in FCPX. A better question (since at this point it is only a matter of personal preference) would be to ask folks like Joseph why they personally do not find FCPX suitable for such editing.


Return to posts index

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