FORUMS: list search recent posts

Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bill Davis
Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 14, 2015 at 6:51:33 pm

My friend in London, Alex Gollner wrote a fascinating blog post last week about how the FCP X development cycle may operate - and some of the back story that might be in play as the reason that some features and issues take so long to be reflected in software updates.

This is far outside my area of expertise, but I found the story very interesting none the less.

I thought some here who like to discuss features and software progress might enjoy the read.

Here's a link:

http://alex4d.com/notes/item/apple-os-development-and-fcpx

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

David Mathis
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 14, 2015 at 8:09:09 pm

Interesting read, thank you for sharing. Loved the reference of the tent poles, kind of how I feel about FCP and Motion. Both great tools but tent needs more work to be "complete".


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 14, 2015 at 10:34:54 pm

I have worked with companies developing software features for mostly audio DAWs and so this is not an unfamiliar cycle that all development goes through. To me the significant thing is how a company defines priority. Is it led by user feedback or code writers or salesmen?

Obviously there should be a reasonable balance of all of those things but the degree to which decisions are made by those respective areas determines the usefulness of those developments to the end user. Personally I don't have to care much about how difficult it might be to code or whether it is easy to sell. As an end user I make judgments about how software develops for my usage.

Of course a company like Apple is limited in what it can achieve. Big companies are often less able to develop than lots of small companies. I think the faster turnover of OS is going to limit Apple more than Microsoft as it impacts on those smaller developers. I suspect the salesmen are driving that cycle and for stability of other software that will slow the dev cycle of user demanded features.


Return to posts index


Erik Lindahl
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 15, 2015 at 12:06:50 am

Interesting read. To me it sounds like a yearly release cykle harms more than it helps for the end product. Maintenance should of course be kept up though-out a given version but major release say every two years sounds more resonable.

Looking at for example DaVincie Resolve they pump out features like crazy folks in a very impressive way. Then they spend a year bug-fixing before massive update hit again and rince and repeat.

The link also shedds light on why major features take so long to be implemented. At least on the OS-level. I could beilive FCPX suffers due to other factors, primarily as it's not very prioritized with-in Apple anymore. If another media-related project requires crunch time I wouldn't be suspired if FCPX takes the hit.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 15, 2015 at 12:12:55 am
Last Edited By TImothy Auld on Feb 15, 2015 at 12:16:17 am

FCPX suffers because it is a low earner in the Apple multiverse. Plain and simple.

Tim


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 15, 2015 at 12:37:19 am

It did make me buy a very expensive Mac Pro though!


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 15, 2015 at 4:56:36 pm

[TImothy Auld] "FCPX suffers because it is a low earner in the Apple multiverse. Plain and simple."

I don't believe that applies here. To my knowledge, Apple doesn't run P&Ls by department or product, but rather a single balance across the whole company. Therefore, if X causes more Mac Pro tubes to be sold or iMac Retinas, then it's earned its keep.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 15, 2015 at 1:00:08 am

[Michael Gissing] "To me the significant thing is how a company defines priority. Is it led by user feedback or code writers or salesmen? "

If Ron Brinkmann's experience is still valid then features that demo easily usually get green light first. I'd assume this is the norm at any big company. One reason why, from what I've read, people at Adobe like that they aren't slaves to the 'big demo' anymore, and are able to address less sexy (though user requested) feature upgrades.

X vs Pro

"See, here’s the thing with how features happen at Apple to a great extent – product development is often driven by how well things can be demoed. Maybe not explicitly – nobody ever told me to only design features that demoed well – but the nature of the organization effectively makes it work out that way. Because a lot of decisions about product direction make their way very far up the management hierarchy (often to Steve himself). And so the first question that comes up is ‘how are we going to show this feature within the company?’ All the mid-level managers know that they’re going to have a limited window of time to convey what makes a product or a feature special to their bosses. So they either 1) make a sexy demo or 2) spend a lot of time trying to explain why some customer feels that some obscure feature is worth implementing. Guess which strategy works best?"


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 15, 2015 at 4:59:55 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "If Ron Brinkmann's experience is still valid then features that demo easily usually get green light first."

Not sure that's valid with X, since Apple has taken the approach to do very little demoing of X to the general public. They've left that to others, like FCPworks and occasionally show up at regional or market-specific events. Therefore, more "geeky" features can be demoed because the crowd understands their value. After all, why would Apple have added MXF support? There's no demo value in that.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 15, 2015 at 5:57:08 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Not sure that's valid with X, since Apple has taken the approach to do very little demoing of X to the general public. "

Ron was talking internal demos. From Ron's quote in my previous post, "...And so the first question that comes up is ‘how are we going to show this feature within the company?'... All the mid-level managers know that they’re going to have a limited window of time to convey what makes a product or a feature special to their bosses. So they either 1) make a sexy demo or 2) spend a lot of time trying to explain why some customer feels that some obscure feature is worth implementing. Guess which strategy works best?"

After all, why would Apple have added MXF support? There's no demo value in that.

Again from Ron's quote in my previous post, "... product development is often driven by how well things can be demoed." Often, not always.


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 17, 2015 at 3:48:38 am

Editing and playing back 6K Dragon footage without transcoding to a 4K monitor and having it look sharp and stunning demos extremely well.

It's worth mentioning that Apple doesn't show up at any trade shows and hold public events for any of their software, not for ten years or so.

It makes sense that FCP X exists only as a motivator to buy Macs. If they didn't offer a pro video app that pushes the limits of their top end machines, they would be depending on 3rd party companies to make their pro hardware products shine.

Does Avid still not have GPU acceleration yet after the 8.3 release? I don't think so. Premiere is getting good, but it is still far behind FCP 7 in many ways.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 17, 2015 at 6:57:54 am

[Darren Roark] "Editing and playing back 6K Dragon footage without transcoding to a 4K monitor and having it look sharp and stunning demos extremely well. "

Apparently RED footage didn't demo well enough as native R3D support didn't get added until 10.0.6. ;)

[Darren Roark] "It's worth mentioning that Apple doesn't show up at any trade shows and hold public events for any of their software, not for ten years or so. "

Apple may have stopped official going to things like NAB in 2009-ish but they still had their own road show events as well as user group presentations (revealing X at the LAFCPUG Supermeet during NAB being probably the most high profile example).

[Darren Roark] "Premiere is getting good, but it is still far behind FCP 7 in many ways."

So is X. ;)


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 17, 2015 at 8:15:26 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "[Darren Roark] "Premiere is getting good, but it is still far behind FCP 7 in many ways."

So is X. ;)"


Sure Andrew, but the ways in which X is "behind" FCP 7 are largely in the areas that editors who still want to edit like it's 2005 had come to depend upon.

As a simple cheesy example, I'm not sure how many people who keep up with NLE evolution would trade the magnetic storyline for OMF compatibility.

Personally, since I don't edit in Premier,I'd be interested in a list some of what the editorial engine in Premier does today that other NLEs didn't do 10 or even 5 years back? I'm not dismissing Premier's strengths - among which I acknowledge the suite interchange linkage for After Effects and other similar systemic data transfer modes, but when it comes to cutting content - are there areas where today's Premier outshines yesterday's Premier in the same fashion that range tagging, and multi-res background rendering, magnetism and roles have made X a far superior and faster editorial assembly system when compared to FCP Legacy?

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

Shawn Miller
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 17, 2015 at 8:59:23 pm

[Bill Davis] "Personally, since I don't edit in Premier,I'd be interested in a list some of what the editorial engine in Premier does today that other NLEs didn't do 10 or even 5 years back?"


The Mercury Playback Engine, Warp Stabilizer, support for native file formats (which many FCP editor were against, before FCP had it), masking and tracking, and adjustment layers to name a few. You can decide for yourself if Premiere Pro 2014 can do things that other NLE's didn't do a decade ago.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_Premiere_Pro

Shawn



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 6:08:11 pm

[Shawn Miller] "The Mercury Playback Engine, Warp Stabilizer, support for native file formats (which many FCP editor were against, before FCP had it), masking and tracking, and adjustment layers to name a few. You can decide for yourself if Premiere Pro 2014 can do things that other NLE's didn't do a decade ago."

The Mercury Engine is NOT about Premier. It's underlying technology. If you get that, then I get the entire OS X rewrite including all the Core modules and AV Foundation. I don't fully understant the Warp Stabilizer, but if it's primarily about removing camera shake then X has it's own version which may or may not be similar. As to "native file formats" again, a red herring. X has had them from day one. The number and efficiency of any NLE including that lies on intellectual property issues. Apple has native support for everything Apple has IP rights to via invention, consortium participation, or licensing agreements. EXACTLY as every other NLE. Masking and tracking and adjustment layers are also built into X. You may argue that the implementation is superior in Premier, and that may or may not be true.

My essential point is that none of what you list is UNIQUE to Premier.

While the internal database features, magnetic timeline, Roles and numerous other things that are foundational to X ARE unique to X.

Remember, I'm NOT saying Premier isn't a fine program. I'm saying that it's not functionally very much different from all the other NLEs we've been using for 20 years.

While FCP X "is" foundational different.

Simple as 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


Andrew Kimery
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 6:33:05 pm

I'm confused, Bill. Shawn very clearly answered your question which was,
[Bill Davis] "Personally, since I don't edit in Premier,I'd be interested in a list some of what the editorial engine in Premier does today that other NLEs didn't do 10 or even 5 years back?"


[Bill Davis] "My essential point is that none of what you list is UNIQUE to Premier.

While the internal database features, magnetic timeline, Roles and numerous other things that are foundational to X ARE unique to X."


Ah, I see, you just did a poor job of wording your leading question.

FWIW, the Mercury Playback Engine *is* about PPro. From Adobe, "'Mercury Playback Engine' is a name for a large number of performance improvements in Premiere Pro CS5." (https://forums.adobe.com/message/3377595). You might be confusing the MPE with CUDA (the Nvidia tech that Adobe originally leveraged to power the MPE).


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 7:00:58 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "FWIW, the Mercury Playback Engine *is* about PPro. From Adobe, "'Mercury Playback Engine' is a name for a large number of performance improvements in Premiere Pro CS5." (https://forums.adobe.com/message/3377595). You might be confusing the MPE with CUDA (the Nvidia tech that Adobe originally leveraged to power the MPE)."

Then I stand corrected here.

I didn't understand that the MPE was exclusively a PPro function.

We'll score that as a solid point for PPro.

I did some reading and it appears that MPE is less a "thing" than a marketing bucket for CUDA, Open CL, and 64-bit processing. Which now all have equivalent systems in X, Correct? (not taking away that Adobe got there first.)

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

Walter Soyka
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 7:28:59 pm

[Bill Davis] "I did some reading and it appears that MPE is less a "thing" than a marketing bucket for CUDA, Open CL, and 64-bit processing. Which now all have equivalent systems in X, Correct? (not taking away that Adobe got there first.)"

There's a lot of engineering on top of GPGPU and 64-bit, but forget the technology for a minute.

The Mercury Playback Engine is what lets you do all kinds of effects and compositing in Premiere Pro without rendering. No-transcode and no-render workflows are a huge deal, leading to a very healthy portion of the efficiency improvements you see moving from 7 to X. It's easy to take them for granted now, but these were pretty forward-looking in 2010.

BTW, markers in Premiere can be longer than a single frame, just like a range, and the latest Premiere release added a databasey feature called "search bins" which I think you would like.

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

Bill Davis
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 7:43:33 pm

[Walter Soyka] "
BTW, markers in Premiere can be longer than a single frame, just like a range, and the latest Premiere release added a databasey feature called "search bins" which I think you would like."


Walter,

I suspect would probably like it many of the attributes of Premier very much but for two things.

I'm making MORE money now with X because I get a lot more done, faster and easier then I did before database driven magnetic editing - plus you know thatI HATE the coercive fishhook rental model with the burning passion of a thousand white hot suns.

I'm pragmatic enough to tolerate it with Lightroom/Photoshop because of the dearth of qualified alternatives. But am devoutly praying almost daily for the deliverance from my rental bondage via Serif.

Where's Moses when we really need him?

; )

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

Oliver Peters
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 9:39:13 pm

[Walter Soyka] "The Mercury Playback Engine is what lets you do all kinds of effects and compositing in Premiere Pro without rendering. "

Bill, according to Adobe, MPE is basically a system-wide optimization for Premiere Pro. NVIDIA did a lot of marketing around MPE and CUDA leading folks to equate CUDA with MPE, but in reality it's more than CUDA. It's a combination of leveraging RAM, the GPU (CUDA, OpenCL and/or software emulation) and the 64-bit architecture. To add to Walter's comments, the result is that given the identical older Mac Pro tower, you get responsiveness (unrendered,with effects and a variety of codecs) that simply leaves FCP X in the dust on that same machine. Granted, X is tweaked for newer machines, but simple timeline playback of large files in X versus PProCC is a world of difference.

[Walter Soyka] "BTW, markers in Premiere can be longer than a single frame, just like a range, and the latest Premiere release added a databasey feature called "search bins" which I think you would like."

Furthermore, source clip markers can be labeled and those labels show up in the viewer. So, not only do you see ranges with the picture, but know what those ranges are. No browser view needed.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 7:06:34 pm

[Bill Davis] "[Shawn Miller] "The Mercury Playback Engine, Warp Stabilizer, support for native file formats (which many FCP editor were against, before FCP had it), masking and tracking, and adjustment layers to name a few. You can decide for yourself if Premiere Pro 2014 can do things that other NLE's didn't do a decade ago."

The Mercury Engine is NOT about Premier. It's underlying technology."


Underlying technology of...

I know your original question was about the "editing engine", but if MPE isn't about editorial, what is it about? Also, weren't your questions about the state of Pr 2014 vs Pr 1.5?

[Bill Davis] " I don't fully understand the Warp Stabilizer, but if it's primarily about removing camera shake then X has it's own version which may or may not be similar."

Bill, you asked what exists in the Premiere Pro editorial engine that didn't exist in other NLEs 10 years ago, and what made Premiere Pro 2014 as superior to Premiere Pro 1.5 as FCPX is to FCP Classic... you didn't say anything about comparing FCPX to Premiere Pro 2014.

[Bill Davis] "My essential point is that none of what you list is UNIQUE to Premier."

I didn't say any of those features are unique to Premiere Pro TODAY. I was comparing Premiere Pro 2014 to Premiere Pro 1.5... in response to you original statement and question:

[Bill Davis] "I'd be interested in a list some of what the editorial engine in Premier does today that other NLEs didn't do 10 or even 5 years back?"

[Bill Davis] "...are there areas where today's Premier outshines yesterday's Premier in the same fashion that range tagging, and multi-res background rendering, magnetism and roles have made X a far superior and faster editorial assembly system when compared to FCP Legacy?"

Premiere Pro 2014 is a COMPLETELY different animal from Premiere Pro 1.5; from the Mercury Playback Engine, to masking and tracking, to native file handling, to a host features that would have seemed like magic to any NLE in 2005. And yes, these features make editing in Premiere Pro 2014 a LOT faster than editing in Premiere Pro 1.5.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 7:17:02 pm

[Shawn Miller] "Premiere Pro 2014 is a COMPLETELY different animal from Premiere Pro 1.5; from the Mercury Playback Engine, to masking and tracking, to native file handling, to a host features that would have seemed like magic to any NLE in 2005. And yes, these features make editing in Premiere Pro 2014 a LOT faster than editing in Premiere Pro 1.5.

Shawn"


OK,

Fair enough. Thanks for clarifying the yardstick.

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

Darren Roark
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 17, 2015 at 9:12:01 pm

[Bill Davis] "[Andrew Kimery] "[Darren Roark] "Premiere is getting good, but it is still far behind FCP 7 in many ways."

So is X. ;)""


I'm in the hated it the first six months, love it now category.

At this point over three and a half years running, what can't you do in FCP X that you can do in 7 that is actually necessary? Batch export has been a big one which is now possible by the 3rd party dev app called Primaries. Gang sync? I barely ever used it in 7 so I don't miss it.

I'm including the 3d party apps which have been working great because they can address professional level problems quickly whereas waiting for Adobe or Avid to push out a software update to the all in oneness of their NLEs.

Bill brings up OMF support, when I am asked by post supervisors for them I have to act like google search and say "did you mean AAF?"


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 17, 2015 at 9:26:16 pm

[Darren Roark] "Bill brings up OMF support, when I am asked by post supervisors for them I have to act like google search and say "did you mean AAF?""

Yep.







Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 17, 2015 at 9:53:50 pm

[Darren Roark] "Bill brings up OMF support, when I am asked by post supervisors for them I have to act like google search and say "did you mean AAF?""

Either. OMF is still useful and in many ways more stable. It is my preferred deliverable before I start sound post. Collaborative workflows are still relevant in 2015, just like they were in 2005.

This thread is specifically talking about how companies like Apple decide what to develop. So it is perfectly instructive to point out what Apple didn't and hasn't included in X that are common in other NLEs. If third party developers choose to make an app, they seem to be doing knowing Apple are not intending to just add that as a feature. This is instructive if deciding on which software vendor to hinge your business success.

I wonder why so many are in automatic defense mode whenever a post somehow implies that features that are useful are missing or reliant on third party apps. Why do some editors feel defensive about such valid critique? Just saying it isn't important any more or that things that X does are so much better that missing features are OK. All NLEs are open to such observation. Nothing wrong with pointing out that for some workflows there are better choices than X. We are not personally criticizing your choice of NLE. Solid and constructive critique makes for improvement for all.

I want X to be better in my area as people want to use it but still struggle with hand over to me for sound & picture post. I am about to start my fourth X job in three & a half years and the editor has been struggling to get the AAF sorted.This is an experienced editor who loves editing with X but hates this stage. Why should it be so?


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 1:30:11 am

[Michael Gissing] "I wonder why so many are in automatic defense mode whenever a post somehow implies that features that are useful are missing or reliant on third party apps. Why do some editors feel defensive about such valid critique? "

I'm going to say it's a mix of confirmation bias, post-purchase rationalization and a warped sense of White Knight Syndrome that compels some people to ride to the rescue of a multi-billion dollar global corporation.

What's absolutely hilarious is apparently I touched a nerve by just copy and pasting the exact words Ron Brinkmann (a former Apple employee) used to describe his time at Apple. I even tried to preemptively avoid feather ruffling by saying this is probably the MO at most big companies and gave Adobe as a specific example, but, hey, some people will always love the Emperor's new clothes.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 6:44:28 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "I'm going to say it's a mix of confirmation bias, post-purchase rationalization and a warped sense of White Knight Syndrome that compels some people to ride to the rescue of a multi-billion dollar global corporation.
"


Perfectly fine pesudo behavioral analysis!

And since thats the game, lets also add in a touch of Stockholm syndrome and consumer level pseudo PTSD.

After all, for more than 2 years, everyone was telling us X editors that we were clueless noobs that didn't deserve the title of professional editor - so perhaps we all just have very fragile egos and are still overly pissy about it!

Then again, since we're plumbing the depths of fake psychoanalysis - perhaps there's a bit of transference happening as well.

Confirmation gets cut more than one bias, after all. It's possible that a "pro" editors' thinking can be unnecessarily constrained by their prior NLE preferences - and that they become unwilling to change due to a mixture of a deep desire for comfort and convenience - even when such a change could be personally beneficial?

Lets dub that "crumbling-confirmation rationalization syndrome" for fun.

Oh, and I'm confused. Who's playing the object of the White Knight scenario? Tim Cook? If EVER there was a person who seems to NOT be in distress - it's Mr. Cook. And what are we supposed to save him from? Another world record breaking quarter? Please. FCP X also doesn't need a White Knight for the simple reason that virtually ALL the initial attack memes have proved to be transitory and kinda dumb in retrospect. The early haters got MASSIVE amounts of their analysis almost completely wrong. They mistook a universal change in how software gets created, delivered and refined and tried to parse the new model through the sieve of their experiences with the old model.

The truth is X is great for those who want to look forward. Premier is great for those who want to move forward, but simultaneously deathly afraid to leave ANY of their expertise behind. That's my personal opinion based on the features in the latest Premier releases that I've ready about and has been confirmed by the responses to this thread. I asked about INNOVATIONS in the Premier Editing Approach. And there don't really appear to be any. Which just says they believe that editing 2005 style is all the market wants or needs.

That and monthly payments forever.

Go figure.

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

Andrew Kimery
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 19, 2015 at 12:47:09 am

[Bill Davis] "Oh, and I'm confused. Who's playing the object of the White Knight scenario? Tim Cook? If EVER there was a person who seems to NOT be in distress - it's Mr. Cook.
.
.
.
FCP X also doesn't need a White Knight...
"


Yeah, that's the whole point of White Knight Syndrome. Someone feeling the desire to come to the aid of someone else (or in this case some thing else) even if that person/thing doesn't need saving. Apple is doing fine. X is doing fine. Yet any perceived criticism of Apple (even just a first hand recounting of Apple's internal MO) or a feature suggestion for X is met with a big pushback as if Apple and its products are above reproach.

[Bill Davis] "Confirmation gets cut more than one bias, after all. It's possible that a "pro" editors' thinking can be unnecessarily constrained by their prior NLE preferences - and that they become unwilling to change due to a mixture of a deep desire for comfort and convenience - even when such a change could be personally beneficial? "

Interesting comment considering your FCP X-centric perspective.

Of course confirmation bias isn't limited to just one thing. Mac/PC, Chevy/Ford, Sony/Microsoft/Nintendo, etc.,. Some 'Avid' editors rag on FCP (old and new), some old (and new) 'FCP' editors ragged on Avid, pretty much both Avid and FCP editors ragged on Premiere, Vegas, etc.,. Early in my editing career I used Avid, FCP and Premiere (non-Pro version) on various projects for various reasons so maybe my early exposure to variety kept the NLE-indoctrination (and confirmation bias) at bay. FCP Legend turned into my personal favorite, but it certainly wasn't the best tool for all jobs and certainly wasn't above reproach. I'm sure once I get around to learning X I'll find it great for some situations and not as great for others.

[Bill Davis] "The truth is X is great for those who want to look forward. Premier is great for those who want to move forward, but simultaneously deathly afraid to leave ANY of their expertise behind. That's my personal opinion based on the features in the latest Premier releases that I've ready about and has been confirmed by the responses to this thread. I asked about INNOVATIONS in the Premier Editing Approach. And there don't really appear to be any. Which just says they believe that editing 2005 style is all the market wants or needs. "

Ah, the classic, 'you are free to choose any NLE you want but the only right choice is X' comment. Been a while since I've seen this guy. Welcome back old, buddy.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 19, 2015 at 12:58:09 am

[Bill Davis] "The truth is X is great for those who want to look forward. Premier is great for those who want to move forward, but simultaneously deathly afraid to leave ANY of their expertise behind. ..."

[Andrew Kimerly] "Ah, the classic, 'you are free to choose any NLE you want but the only right choice is X' comment. Been a while since I've seen this guy. Welcome back old, buddy."

Classic indeed. Although I didn't specifically aim my original comments at anyone, it is interesting that Bill is the only one who felt the need to respond. My truth is different to yours however as X did not enable me to move forward at all and still remains the awkward one in my workflow.

Also as far as I know, Stockholm Syndrome is the result of being taken hostage, not freely volunteering or paying. But hey, pop psychology doesn't need peer review.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 19, 2015 at 1:25:08 am

[Bill Davis] "I asked about INNOVATIONS in the Premier Editing Approach."

Maybe they don't get mentioned because some of these innovations are rather old news in the Adobe world. Take for instance their use of metadata and tie-ins with Adobe Story. This has been around a few years before FCP X. The implementation might not be everyone's cup-of-tea, but it's innovation nonetheless.

Another under-the-hood innovation is that the UI is built upon web services. Effectively Adobe can take the entire Premiere front end and have it function as a UI for a cloud-based editing application. That's effectively how Adobe Anywhere works, which by-the-way would be another innovation.

There's the entire interoperability among the apps - AE/PPro, Photoshop/AE/PPro, PPro/Audition, PPro/SpeedGrade.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 6:39:36 pm

[Michael Gissing] "Either. OMF is still useful and in many ways more stable. It is my preferred deliverable before I start sound post. Collaborative workflows are still relevant in 2015, just like they were in 2005."

In what cases does an OMF work out better than an AAF? I want to know what to look out for.

The indie features I've had to 'post supervise'* that were cut in X, AAFs have saved a lot of time in the sound design/mix being able to preserve more of the sound design work the editor performed. Aside from some oddball audio formats that had to be sorted, as long as the roles were set on import XtoPro has worked without issue with a lot less work prepping for the mix.


*(I say this lightly as I come in at the end and deliver the cut to sound and color finishing usually with a lot of having to fix non specific to any NLE workflow issues.)


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 19, 2015 at 12:51:39 am

[Darren Roark] "In what cases does an OMF work out better than an AAF? I want to know what to look out for."

AAF requires a license. So not all audio systems have it as a standard unlike OMF which is far more universal. Because it is long since EOL'd, most DAWs can import an OMF without issue as the format has, over time, become more robust and less likely to change with NLE software updates.

Very little of an editors SFX work is actually useful. Translating dynamic levels or EQ will rarely be accurate. EQ between systems can be markedly different. Levels also change when audio is routed through bussing and compressor/limiter dynamics are applied. Also editors are almost never monitoring properly through a 5.1 system or in a good acoustic and frankly very few editors are good sound mixers. I can see on simple fast turnaround 'reality' style shows there may be some time saved but on documentaries that I work on there is no advantage.

For me the additional items to translate are nearly always needing to be reset so I can control the tracklay editing & mixing better. A simple example is denoising. Levels need to be reset prior to such processing as changes in noise floor with clip gain change the noise threshold settings so clips have to be done individually instead of in a batch.

So for my license fee I usually have to take the extra step of deleting things like clip gain and dynamic levels, EQ etc. Also many plugins cannot be translated like pitch etc so for me an OMF is simpler and better.


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 19, 2015 at 1:28:27 am

[Michael Gissing] "So for my license fee I usually have to take the extra step of deleting things like clip gain and dynamic levels, EQ etc. Also many plugins cannot be translated like pitch etc so for me an OMF is simpler and better."

That makes sense. With XML there is no reason a third party couldn't make an app that could generate one.

I quite like having the 3rd party apps deal with this stuff, if something doesn't work right the XtoPro people and the Intelligent Assistance people are very accessible with support.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 19, 2015 at 2:23:25 am

[Darren Roark] "I quite like having the 3rd party apps deal with this stuff, if something doesn't work right the XtoPro people and the Intelligent Assistance people are very accessible with support."

This is only true to a point. They are never as solid with their solutions as it would be if it were actually engineered by Apple internally. That's because they never get the full info from Apple and are always chasing changes. It's made worse by the fact that they have to be sandboxed, which leads to some kludgy workarounds.

Just look at all the bug fixes that come down and these are always because of something that's cropped up because of the host application.

Automatic Duck originally came out with the first utility, which generated an OMF out of FCP X. This was promptly broken in the first few updates and then Wes Plate was picked up by Adobe. So the tool died on the vine.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 19, 2015 at 9:48:47 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Automatic Duck originally came out with the first utility, which generated an OMF out of FCP X. This was promptly broken in the first few updates and then Wes Plate was picked up by Adobe. So the tool died on the vine."

And now Wes is independent again, and busy diving deeply into X.

I know that because he's logged into a couple of our recent live X oriented Google Hangouts to chat recently and ask X questions.

He's coming along really fast, as you'd expect.

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

Oliver Peters
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 19, 2015 at 9:59:54 pm

[Bill Davis] "He's coming along really fast, as you'd expect."

Yes, I know. Wes has a lot to offer the ecosystem.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 19, 2015 at 2:26:19 am

[Michael Gissing] "AAF requires a license. So not all audio systems have it as a standard unlike OMF which is far more universal. Because it is long since EOL'd, most DAWs can import an OMF without issue as the format has, over time, become more robust and less likely to change with NLE software updates.
"








Return to posts index

Jeff Markgraf
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 17, 2015 at 7:44:35 pm

Don't know about Avid's GPU support, but I've watched the 8.3 demos with 4K footage. Between finally getting AMA to be useful and apparently generating R3D proxies in real time, Avid may finally be getting it's act together for large frame video. Many of their new features seem to be taking a page from the X playbook. Assuming you have the equipment horsepower, of course.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 12:18:50 am

I'm not sure that OS X and iOS provide a good reference for understanding the FCP X development cycle.

Operating systems are orders of magnitude more complex than application software. They have a huge number of interrelated sub-systems. They have major security concerns. They run closer to the metal and interface more directly with hardware. Being software that powers other software, they have vastly different QA requirements than application software does.

I blather on about data models here because they are the heart of our application software. You come up with some way to represent a real-world task as data, and you come up with tools to manipulate that data representation. You build these tools as frameworks and use them to implement user-facing functionality in your application.

Within that schema, there are some things that are easy and fast, and other things that are hard and time-consuming. New features that can be built within the existing data model and with the existing frameworks are the former. New features that require changes to the existing data model and frameworks are the latter.

If you look at the development and release patterns of nearly any major software, you'll see a pattern of a large architectural change followed by a series of smaller feature changes (and of course bug fixes).

Operating systems like OS X and iOS are exceptions, because in large part, the feature changes ARE architectural changes.

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

Bill Davis
Re: Alex 4d on the FCP X development cycle...
on Feb 18, 2015 at 7:02:48 pm

[Walter Soyka] "f you look at the development and release patterns of nearly any major software, you'll see a pattern of a large architectural change followed by a series of smaller feature changes (and of course bug fixes).

Operating systems like OS X and iOS are exceptions, because in large part, the feature changes ARE architectural changes."


Nice post, Walter.

That really helps clarify things.

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

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