FORUMS: list search recent posts

OT: And then there is this...

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Scott Witthaus
OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 4:32:48 pm

Avid cutting costs/people AGAIN.

http://www.betaboston.com/news/2016/02/29/avid-technology-slims-down-again/

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 5:48:05 pm

With any luck - assuming the opportunity were there - Blackmagic Design will buy the Media Composer IP instead of trying to turn Resolve into a mediocre editor. Then revamp MC from the ground up as BMD has a tendency to do. This would make MC a viable competitor again.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 6:31:39 pm

I prefer the interface as is in Resolve. Avid seems to be from the dinosaur age when it comes to that. Just my honest opinion. Yes, I did use the "D" word. Your eyes do not deceive you.


Return to posts index


Scott Witthaus
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 6:36:06 pm

Oliver may have a point. But I really don't see any growth opportunities for Avid unless the "whistling in the dark about Avid Everywhere" comes true. While we debate here about X, Pr, and Resolve, rarely does the name Avid come up. Hey, it's got its place and I have made money cutting on Avid back in the day, but it seems to be out of the picture sans the broadcast and film industry. But if they build it from ground up, does that alienate the precious user-base they count on?

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


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 6:42:14 pm

You bring up a perfectly valid point. While on the subject of Resolve, curious to know what marek share they would gain by adding Fusion into the mix like The Foundry has done with Nuke Studio, would be interesting to see what would happen there. This would sort of solve a round tripping issue.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 6:47:31 pm

There is an article from 2014 linked in the Boston Globe piece that stated Avid was being forced to the "top of the pyramid" catering to a small group of high-level professionals in film or aspiring to be there. Interesting analogy.

Here is the link: https://www.bostonglobe.com/business/2014/04/05/can-avid-technology-make-co...

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


Return to posts index


Joe Marler
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 9:16:43 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "article from 2014 linked in the Boston Globe piece that stated Avid was being forced to the "top of the pyramid" catering to a small group of high-level professionals in film or aspiring to be there."

The problem is despite all the "street cred", there's not much money at the top from NLE software sales. Avid's total annual revenue from all video and related products and solutions is only $233 million. That is the total from their Hollywood monopoly, broadcast news, independent film, documentary -- everything.

As the first linked article states, Avid exists in a totally different situation than when they could sell $100k workstations in 1990 ($182k current dollars). It is interesting that Avid's roots included the former workstation vendor Apollo Technology. Every RISC workstation vendor is now out of business or long acquired by someone else.

When a high margin product becomes a commodity it is difficult to stay in business. Avid has actually done very well to survive this long.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 10:19:34 pm

[Joe Marler] "The problem is despite all the "street cred", there's not much money at the top from NLE software sales. Avid's total annual revenue from all video and related products and solutions is only $233 million. That is the total from their Hollywood monopoly, broadcast news, independent film, documentary -- everything."

I'd go one step further and say there's not much money in NLE sales in general. The business model we mostly grew up with (buy a perpetual license, wait 18-24 months for a big upgrade to come out and buy that with an upgrade discount) is pretty much dead.

Apple went to a pay-once-get-free-upgrades-forever model (Mac required of course). Adobe went subscription only. Avid offers a subscription plan and a perpetual license (but the upgrade discount is gone so you either pay an annual maintenance fee or you have to pay full price again if you want access to any new software, including small point releases). Smoke, I think, went subscription only. Blackmagic just gives away a nearly fully functional version of Resolve (which requires BM hardware for I/O). Software prices continue to race to the bottom and if Avid didn't have ISIS, and the best platform for large, multi-editor environments, I think they would have been skunked years ago.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 7:21:00 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "but it seems to be out of the picture sans the broadcast and film industry"

Actually not completely. I do a number of corporate on-site edits that are Avid-based. Of course, that's because the production company is heavily invested in Avid. Nevertheless, it's not film or broadcast.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Scott Witthaus
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 7:24:32 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I do a number of corporate on-site edits that are Avid-based"

And if they were buying today, would you say Avid would be the choice again?

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 8:02:06 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "And if they were buying today, would you say Avid would be the choice again?"

In some of these cases, yes. I just did such an edit last month and these were rental systems brought in for the job. It required live recording of the general session (direct into the SAN) and 4 editors working on the same media. In a few cases we were also simultaneously in the same project file.

This sort of stuff is still best handled with Media Composer and ISIS shared storage. One editor was more comfortable with Premiere, so she was working separately, but then this slowed her down because she had to copy from the KiPro back-ups before she could start to edit. Fortunately her segments allowed for enough time to do this.

Could such a setup be made with FCPX or Premiere. Yes, but I question the solidify of it. And yes, I know about the TEDx conference case studies. For these sorts of jobs, Media Composer with ISIS is still a better option.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 12:19:28 am

[Oliver Peters] "Could such a setup be made with FCPX or Premiere. Yes, but I question the solidify of it. And yes, I know about the TEDx conference case studies. For these sorts of jobs, Media Composer with ISIS is still a better option."

But for how long?

When AVID was ascendent, part of that was that the only way to make the NLE work was to buy into a whole AVID CERTIFIED Ecosystem where you were forced to purchase branded hardware included "Certified" Hard Drives at WAY over retail in order to be sure everything would work. I've always suspected that was a HUGE part of why FCP Legacy succeeded. You could configure your own hardware and buy "off the shelf" and end up with a dependable edit system.

Fast forward to today. Premiere Pro REQUIRES the rental ecosystem to run - which is kinda a software equivelent of needing AVID approval to get your edit system to function - tho I doubt many editors see it that way.

And then there's X - yes, running on only ONE brand of hardware - but it's a brand that you can walk into ANY Apple retail store and replicate without the need for a consultant to insure that your drives are fast enough or that your network has enough throughput to get your work done.

When the hardware is all "off the shelf" - the software is a 10 minute download - and your clients are all hanging off the internet ready to be accessed and serviced from anywhere - and the worker can afford to maintain EQUIPMENT PARITY with the shop they work in - that's a VERY different game than the old one where editing could only take place in an office with an expensive, robust infrastructure and dedicated personnel not just to DO the work, but to service the machines and people surrounding the work.

My 2 cents.

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: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 1:02:47 am

[Bill Davis] "But for how long?"

I can run current MC software on exactly the same computers and drives that run Resolve, FCPX, and Premiere. PC, as well. No special hardware required at all. Even BMD and AJA I/O if I need it.

Yes, ISIS and its sharing components are geared for Avid, but I don't need that. I could still operate with other storage under normal operations. I just have that extra edge if I have the need for it. Conversely, I can run FCPX and Premiere with ISIS storage if I wanted to do that, too.

[Bill Davis] " and the worker can afford to maintain EQUIPMENT PARITY with the shop they work in"

Avid works exactly the same way today.

Plus the license is transferable, which FCPX is not. Technically as a business owner, not an individual, FCPX is only allowed by Apple on a single machine per license. Not all the machines you own, which are the terms for individuals (non-commercial). That FCPX install is locked to the machine (of course authorized through the iTunes account for that machine). A Media Composer license can simply be moved from one machine to another through simple on-line authorization, similar to Adobe.

[Bill Davis] "that's a VERY different game than the old one where editing could only take place in an office with an expensive, robust infrastructure and dedicated personnel not just to DO the work, but to service the machines and people surrounding the work. "

That hasn't been applicable to Avid for at least a decade, unless you are in a larger shared infrastructure, like a TV station news department. In that case, if you were on Premiere or FCPX, there would still be a lot of iron and support personnel required.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 1:49:45 am

[Bill Davis] "But for how long?

When AVID was ascendent, part of that was that the only way to make the NLE work was to buy into a whole AVID CERTIFIED Ecosystem where you were forced to purchase branded hardware included "Certified" Hard Drives at WAY over retail in order to be sure everything would work. I've always suspected that was a HUGE part of why FCP Legacy succeeded. You could configure your own hardware and buy "off the shelf" and end up with a dependable edit system."



How long is Avid going to have the best Until X, PPro, Resolve, Lightworks, etc., create a multi-editor environment as good as Avid's (or until Avid goes belly up and someone else wins by default). The DV and desktop NLE revolutions kinda came in side by side around the turn of the century yet it's 2016 and we are still asking "but for how much longer could Avid possibly have the best multi-user environment"? Honestly, no one else really seems interested in building a desktop NLE that has the mulit-user environment in mind. Saving happening in bins and the project just being a collection of folders on in the Finder is ingeniously simple, IMO. Being able to update Avid projects (which are currently being worked in) just by dragging and dropping files/folders at the Finder level makes disseminating media very quick and easy.

You can certainly setup other NLEs to function in a multi-user environment, I've worked with FCP Legend and PPro that way, but neither was a good as Avid in that capacity. Now, how much that asset is worth to someone is certainly depends on their workflow and budget.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 2:22:46 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Avid going to have the best Until X, PPro, Resolve, Lightworks, etc., create a multi-editor environment as good as Avid's "

But isn't the multi-editor environment just a niche at the top of the pyramid?

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


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 7:38:40 am

[Scott Witthaus] "But isn't the multi-editor environment just a niche at the top of the pyramid?"

I don't think so, no. With NLE cost of ownership (hardware + software) plummeting over the last 15yrs it's more feasible than ever to have multiple editors working collaboratively on the same project or working with the same media pool on separate projects. For example, I used to work for a website that had a dozen editors sharing assets and cranking out web videos on a daily basis and there's just no way to make that work w/o shared storage. And no way they could have done it w/o the relative inexpensiveness of FCP Legend running on off-the-shelf Macs. For another example, currently I'm doing some AE work on a doc at a small shop (4 people including myself) and they have 32TB of shared storage. I'm on two computers ingesting, prepping, exporting, etc., and an AP is on another computer logging footage. If I had to guess I'd say the shared storage is going to pay for itself inside a year or two due to increased productivity and because there's no need to but a ton of drives so create multiple, local storage copies of all the media.

I've also worked at places that could have really benefitted from having shared storage but while the cost of shared storage has come down a lot in the last 10-15 years it hasn't dropped as fast as computer and software prices have. It also still takes speciality knowlege to build and maintain. If there was a reliable, Plug and Play shared storage system you could pickup at Best Buy and then easily setup by just plugging in a couple of wires I think the adoption rate would be much higher. Most NLEs not really being designed for a multi-user environment is another hurdle because it adds to the complexity to the situation.

I think this is why a viable cloud-based shared storage solution for video editing is so sought after because it does create a plug and play experience for the end users (just connect to the Internet at a fast enough speed and you are good to go). The downside of course is getting your footage into the cloud in the first place.

Are there multi-editor environments that are so cost prohibitive that only a nice at the top of the pyramid can afford them? Of course, but there are single editor environments like that too.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 12:05:58 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "For another example, currently I'm doing some AE work on a doc at a small shop (4 people including myself) and they have 32TB of shared storage. I'm on two computers ingesting, prepping, exporting, etc., and an AP is on another computer logging footage. If I had to guess I'd say the shared storage is going to pay for itself inside a year or two due to increased productivity and because there's no need to but a ton of drives so create multiple, local storage copies of all the media."

I have 21 computers together using a 32Tb Terrablock storage system where the main NLE is X. Teams can spread out to multiple computers and do the same work you mention above (I think). Some are doing grfx, others are pulling music from DeWolfe, and others are keywording footage in X. All are accessing the same partition and adding material at the same time. Is this similar to what you describe above or are there folks actually cutting the same footage in the same project at the same time?

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 12:41:09 pm

It's funny to see this discussion of shared storage and cost as related only to Avid. A small production company I have worked with for years set up an FCP 7 shared environment completely based on FC Server a few years ago. Serious investment in iron and outside consulting. Then they got screwed when Apple pulled the plug on all of it. They would have been better going Avid or no sharing at all.

If you work on TV shows (yes, I know it's a niche) there simply is no comparison with using Avid versus anything else. You really jump through hoops trying to create one-off systems and procedures and rules trying to create a similar environment with FCP legacy, FCPX, Premiere, etc.

Maybe Mark Raudonis could share his experiences on that point, having gone from Avid to FCP and back.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 6:21:32 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "All are accessing the same partition and adding material at the same time. Is this similar to what you describe above or are there folks actually cutting the same footage in the same project at the same time?"

In my current situation it's just me prepping footage but eventually it will be an editor and an AE working together on a single documentary. I've worked a lot in both situations though (people just sharing the same media pool while editing 'individual' projects and people sharing the same media pool while collaborating on the same project at the same time). At one place I worked at it would change depending on need, so mall projects would usually just have one editor working on them where as large projects could have 4-5 editors working collaboratively at the same time (someone gets Act 1, another person gets Act 2, etc.).


[Oliver Peters] "You really jump through hoops trying to create one-off systems and procedures and rules trying to create a similar environment with FCP legacy, FCPX, Premiere, etc.
"


Right, and not having that extra busy work is one reason why MC functions so smoothly in a multi-editor environment.

For example, on my current gig it's just me and two machines hooked up to a SAN and I'm prepping footage for a doc in PPro. I have Project A (main Mac) and Project B (helper Mac) and ultimately all the footage, sequences, etc., need to end up in Project A. There are basically four steps to my workflow, Ingest, Tag, Sync, Export and I'll constantly bounce between between both projects to maximize what I can get done in a day. If Project A is syncing footage then I'll use Project B to ingest and tag footage. If Project B is doing a lot of exports (I use Media Encoder but it can still slow the machine down) then I'll use Project A to ingest footage. Part of my workflow involves tracking which steps are done in which project so I can make sure nothing gets overlooked and everything ends up back in Project A.

If I was in Avid I wouldn't have to worry about micro managing separate projects, using the Media Browser to transfer from one project to another, etc., because it would all be happening inside of one project. And it's not like you can't use X, FCP Legend, PPro, etc., in a multi-editor environment (many people have, including myself, and have done so for years) it's that Avid's implementation is better because it's been designed with that functionality in mind. I spent over five years working with FCP Legend and an Xsan and, no joke, the first day I was back on an MC/ISIS gig I said to myself, "Man I missed multi-user done right." I know I've mentioned it before but being able to do things like update Avid projects by just dragging & dropping folders, bins, etc., via the Finder (or Windows Explorer) is amazingly simple and effective.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 4, 2016 at 1:30:27 am

[Andrew Kimery] "where as large projects could have 4-5 editors working collaboratively at the same time (someone gets Act 1, another person gets Act 2, etc.)."

I have never worked this way. Isn't it a pain in the ass? Where is the continuity of the storytelling if you have multiple editors cutting a show?

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 4, 2016 at 1:59:31 am

[Scott Witthaus] "I have never worked this way. Isn't it a pain in the ass? Where is the continuity of the storytelling if you have multiple editors cutting a show?"

It takes some coordination but after a bit it's second nature, and many times it's the only way to meet deadlines. Splitting it up by act works out well since acts are usually self-contained to a degree, but I have had times where two editors were working on the same act (one on the first half, the other on the second half) and that starts becoming a PITA making sure the two halves come back to form a nice whole.

With regards to the continuity, many times if you are the new guy on a show you'll watch past episodes for reference and then producers will help guide you until you get the feel for the show down. Many shows have lead editors too that will get all the finished individual acts, put them together and do a 'style pass' at the end to make sure the look/feel of the episode is appropriate and consistent. Even if you split it up to where each editor gets their own episode you would still need to maintain a cohesive feel between episodes.

Also, going into the edit either the writers or the story producers have written a script (or at least an outline) so there is a structure to follow (at least initially) so it's not like each editor gets an act, does whatever the hell they want, and then you hope it all comes together at the end.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 4, 2016 at 2:17:35 am

[Andrew Kimery] "It takes some coordination but after a bit it's second nature..."

To expand on that, some of this depends on the show type. A show I worked on was made up of various studio and field segments, so it got broken down by segments. Then you have individual producers, the exec producers and a post supervisor who supervise everything. You also get consistency in that one person did all the final conforms/color correction (Symphony) and one of the other editors who always built the show opens/teases.

Based on who was available to do what, the editors were always working on each other's segments. One person might have cut a segment and then a few days later another was cutting it down for time and making changes to address notes. Plus you are working on several different shows at any given time.

In another example, look at feature films. While the majority of films are done by one editor and 2 or more assistants aiding the process, there are a few with 2 and even 3 editors. Sometimes the director does some of the editing with scenes and reels bouncing back and forth between the director and the editor.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 4, 2016 at 3:09:53 am

[Oliver Peters] "To expand on that, some of this depends on the show type. A show I worked on was made up of various studio and field segments, so it got broken down by segments. Then you have individual producers, the exec producers and a post supervisor who supervise everything. You also get consistency in that one person did all the final conforms/color correction (Symphony) and one of the other editors who always built the show opens/teases.

Based on who was available to do what, the editors were always working on each other's segments. One person might have cut a segment and then a few days later another was cutting it down for time and making changes to address notes. Plus you are working on several different shows at any given time.

In another example, look at feature films. While the majority of films are done by one editor and 2 or more assistants aiding the process, there are a few with 2 and even 3 editors. Sometimes the director does some of the editing with scenes and reels bouncing back and forth between the director and the editor."


Happens alot with Promos and Trailers too. Multiple editors jumping in on each others cuts because producers only can book so much time with an individual editor. Some people are using the same footage to cut different spots. One persons working on the :30 while another is working on the :15, then the :10,etc. Someone's doing the launch and another is doing shoulder programming or an episodic.

All in the same project with the same source files and elements. Works like butter.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 7:33:03 pm

[David Mathis] "I prefer the interface as is in Resolve. Avid seems to be from the dinosaur age when it comes to that."

Why? A lot of Resolve's editing design mimics Media Composer already. It's a hybrid. I suspect it would be easier to rework the MC interface into something like Resolve and be fully developed as a well-performing NLE, than the work it will take to get Resolve into a good - not merely functional - NLE. Right now, as an NLE, the quality of Resolve's real-time performance - within the edit tab with all modules open - is unacceptable to most editors.

Plus there's a built-in market for Media Composer. Right now it's shrinking, but that isn't a given. There's really little interest in having Resolve be an NLE, except by people who want a free one. Most colorists could care less. People who would pay for an NLE don't care.

OTOH - there's still a lot of name value on Media Composer - so... streamlined, lower priced, and with improved marketing - it has a shot. Remember, BMD picked up a dying company when they bought the assets of DavInci and then gutted everything except Resolve and Revival software. The control surface is their own product, not carried over from Davinci, although based on the same general design. When they did the purchase, they immediately vacated all existing support contracts and cut the chord at the remaining parts inventory and moved on. Rough for owners of older systems, but arguably saved the company in a fashion and created many more Resolve users than would have ever existed otherwise.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 8:26:58 pm

[Oliver Peters] "There's really little interest in having Resolve be an NLE, except by people who want a free one. Most colorists could care less. People who would pay for an NLE don't care."

Maybe that's only because Resolve is not (yet) an awesome NLE.

BMD's decision to build an editor into their color system is pretty similar to Adobe's decision to build a color system into their editor: they're both attempts to flatten the workflow.

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

Oliver Peters
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 2, 2016 at 11:01:30 pm

[Walter Soyka] "BMD's decision to build an editor into their color system is pretty similar to Adobe's decision to build a color system into their editor: they're both attempts to flatten the workflow.
"


Sure. The concept was started years ago when Media Composer was augmented with better color tools to make Symphony, and Quantel turned an NLE into a powerful grading tool. Resolve can make a good finishing tool if your goal is basic performance, however, there are some architectural problems. The color pipeline for a good grading tool seems to conflict with its ability to be a fluid editor. Unless you put some heavy iron behind it. Plus the way project data files are stored isn't very editor-friendly.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 1:12:11 am

This is a big sticking point. While appreciated, I think Resolve should be strictly for color grading. Trying to cram too many things into one package dies always work right. I wonder about the performance of Nuke Studio as well though it does not have a big color correction tool set as Resolve does.


Return to posts index

Scott Thomas
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 6:38:09 am

One way to think about it though, is that the editing backbone has to be there anyway for importing EDL or XML, so why not expose this to the user with an interface? If the edit is already done, you don't need to touch it, but it's there if you need it.

It makes me sad to see this kind of news about Avid. I loved my MC1000 back in the day. A station I later worked at in Orlando bought one on my recommendation, which caused problems with the union. (Producers couldn't edit!)

Avid burned a lot of bridges though. There was a ton of politics going on between Microsoft and Apple and Avid I believe was one of the pawns. Microsoft put money into Avid, Adobe was moving development to PC first and I think that prompted the purchase of Final Cut from Macromedia.

But that just one stage. Where I'm working currently, we bought a large, multi-channel Pinnacle MediaStream video server, just as Avid was buying Pinnacle. Avid took on the product, but quickly killed it as it appeared they didn't want to develop it or fix its flaws. We had to quickly jump off the burning platform. An investment that should have lasted 6 to 8 years became 3 to 5. Avid was a very expensive mistake, and I doubt they would buy from them again


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 7:07:18 am

I for one love Media Composer, and will be sad to see it go (not that i think itll ever happen). Im not a dinosaur either. At 35 years old - I am considered pretty young in this field. Ive used all the NLES and keep on going to MC

If it does indeed cease to exist - ill move on. NBD.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 12:57:02 pm

Part of this discussion has turned to criticizing Avid as it has been. That's old news. What's far more interesting is Avid - or at least Media Composer - as it could be. That's where I believe a BMD acquisition of the IP for MC has a lot of possibilities. Granted, it's pure sprculation, but it certainly has breathed life and growth into various other moribund brands.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 1:41:38 pm

[Oliver Peters] "That's where I believe a BMD acquisition of the IP for MC has a lot of possibilities. Granted, it's pure sprculation, but it certainly has breathed life and growth into various other moribund brands.
"


But if BMD owned it they would probably update the UI and we all know how Avid Editors would love that :)


Return to posts index

Don Walker
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 10:38:07 pm

[Oliver Peters] "That's where I believe a BMD acquisition of the IP for MC has a lot of possibilities. Granted, it's pure sprculation, but it certainly has breathed life and growth into various other moribund brands."

But with all the price cutting and innovation BMD has done with Resolve, they still (after 3 or 4 years) haven't made a functional editor out of it, no matter what their marketing department says.

Their hardware products are very appealing from a price stand point, but regularly ship with advertised features missing, sometimes never to be seen over the life of the product.

I have in my office 6 to 8 various converters and DA's with outputs or inputs that just died. I have an ATEM switcher with a couple of inputs and 1 Aux output that are also dead. (to be fair, this MAY have been due to a lightning strike, but there are others that complain about the same thing) Their computer IO software drivers are seriously messed up at this time also.

Is this really the company that you want buying a legendary NLE to save it and improve it?

don walker
texarkana, texas

John 3:16


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 5:49:03 pm

[David Mathis] "I wonder about the performance of Nuke Studio as well though it does not have a big color correction tool set as Resolve does."

NUKE STUDIO strikes me right now as a compositor with a timeline, geared really specifically for conform rather than editorial. I'm not aware of anyone using it as an NLE.

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

Misha Aranyshev
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 2:20:54 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Maybe that's only because Resolve is not (yet) an awesome NLE.
"


At least the team making Resolve understands that a nudge is a nude, no matter roll, ripple, slip or slide so there is nod need to have four different shortcuts for it.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 11:35:10 pm

[Misha Aranyshev] "At least the team making Resolve understands that a nudge is a nude, no matter roll, ripple, slip or slide so there is nod need to have four different shortcuts for it."

What are you talking about? In MC, select with one of the Smart Tools, then the comma and period keys to nudge left or right.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Misha Aranyshev
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 4, 2016 at 1:09:22 am

But slip is different in MC and in most other NLE's


Return to posts index

Misha Aranyshev
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 2:15:31 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[David Mathis] "I prefer the interface as is in Resolve. Avid seems to be from the dinosaur age when it comes to that."

Why?"



Because you cannot slip a clip from keyboard in MC?


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 3, 2016 at 2:51:06 pm

[Misha Aranyshev] "Because you cannot slip a clip from keyboard in MC?
"


Sure you can. There's even a keyboard shortcut you can assign to it so you don't have to go into trim mode first. There's no equivalent keyboard shortcut for slide, but there's definitely one for slip.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Misha Aranyshev
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 4, 2016 at 1:09:58 am

Thanks for correction. Slide, of course.


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: OT: And then there is this...
on Mar 4, 2016 at 3:14:12 am

Slide is option shift, lasso and then < or > to nudge by frame or M and ? to nudge by 8 or ten frame increments depending on the frame rate.

would be nice to have a kb shortcut to enter slide mode but its a non issue and fast already enough already.

You dont even need to pick a tool or anything to slip. Just park over a clip and < or > or M or ?


Return to posts index

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