Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates Forum
Openness between tools - waning?
Openness between tools - waning?
by Oliver Peters on Jun 28, 2019 at 12:42:19 pm

As each NLE becomes more full-featured in its own right, is open timeline exchange between different products going away or at least being de-emphasized?

FCPX only allows some exchange thanks to Intelligent Assistance and Marquis. Avid is adding even more finishing tools to Media Composer to keep you in the MC/ProTools sphere. Resolve is trying to become the complete, all-in-one solution. Adobe heavily pushes dynamic link. Yet, I don't see any of the majors making any effort towards interoperability between companies. Thoughts?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Re: Openness between tools - waning?
by Rich Rubasch on Jun 28, 2019 at 2:32:18 pm

I think all software developers would like to have tools that keep us within their universe....Apple did a pretty good job of that! The amount of R&D dollars that go into tools that allow the exchanging of data between software developers is going to naturally be small. One-app developers will have a hard time keeping users since the other guys are developing entire suites that integrate together. Davinci is kind of unique...let's see what other apps Blackmagic might develop to begin creating a full suite of video post tools.

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
Founder/President/Editor/Designer/Animator
http://www.tiltmedia.com


Re: Openness between tools - waning?
by Oliver Peters on Jun 28, 2019 at 2:57:39 pm

[Rich Rubasch] "let's see what other apps Blackmagic might develop to begin creating a full suite of video post tools."

I think BMD is going in the completely opposite direction. I would be greatly surprised if standalone Fusion survives more than a couple of more years. It seems like their whole focus is to fold everything into Resolve. That being said, BMD seems to have done a better job than the others in embracing the various exchange formats.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Re: Openness between tools - waning?
by Andrew Kimery on Jun 28, 2019 at 8:56:07 pm

It's been a common complaint of mine for years. Yeah, I get why companies want to keep users in ecosystems, but it's just such a PITA as an end user at times.

[Oliver Peters] "That being said, BMD seems to have done a better job than the others in embracing the various exchange formats."

I presume this is do to Resolve's history with finishing and DIT work. Resolve has users via the hardware lock down angle though, so it's not all kittens and rainbows. ;)


Re: Openness between tools - waning?
by Paul Neumann on Jun 28, 2019 at 4:55:32 pm

Outside of the timeline exchange idea, there's been real progress between say Office files/elements and the Adobe products most of use. To be able to copy and paste (or in some cases just drag) an icon or text block from a Powerpoint deck right into Photoshop or Illustrator is pretty handy. Not that long ago you'd be rendering out slides and cutting them up.


Re: Openness between tools - waning?
by Eric Santiago on Jun 28, 2019 at 7:35:34 pm

Im old enough to remember dealing with just EDL :)


Re: Openness between tools - waning?
by Neil Sadwelkar on Jun 29, 2019 at 7:38:43 am

As long as these applications permit import and export of ‘metadata rich’ formats like XML, there will be tools to ‘translate’. Avid needs to support XML, Resolve needs to support audio file names in AAFs for two-system sound, and Premiere needs to improve XML export.
But overall we’re better off than the EDL days.

-----------------------------------
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India



Re: Openness between tools - waning?
by Michael Gissing on Jun 30, 2019 at 11:21:44 pm

It would be so nice to have a universal interchange format that was open, removed from propriety software companies and able to translate more accurately.

The XML that Pr & Resolve read and generate is a legacy FCP7. AAF is AVID and still being tinkered with. fcpxml is of course proprietary and can change at the whim of Apple. Of the big three, only Resolve will import and export all three interchange types currently used plus EDL just in case. I do wish it could support OMF, as audio import via xml is poor. OMF is still the most reliable interchange as no-one is mucking around with it any more. Interchange formats are always a nightmare as long as they are being developed by companies competing for software market share.

I also swear by AAT which is able to cross translate many audio formats including proprietary software project formats.


Re: Openness between tools - waning?
by Oliver Peters on Jun 30, 2019 at 11:28:30 pm

[Michael Gissing] "AAF is AVID and still being tinkered with"

Well, actually, AAF was developed by a coalition of numerous companies, of which Avid was one. (https://www.amwa.tv)

The problem with AAF was that in order to get buy-in from everyone, companies were allowed to carve out a portion and keep it proprietary. That generally would be effects data. So unfortunately AAF has never lived up to its potential. That is a common refrain with many attempts at common standards.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Re: Openness between tools - waning?
by Michael Gissing on Jul 1, 2019 at 1:11:36 am

[Oliver Peters] "So unfortunately AAF has never lived up to its potential. That is a common refrain with many attempts at common standards.

There have been more successful attempts in the audio world. AES31 is an interchange format for audio that I found to be by far the most reliable and robust between DAWs. Of course ProTools wanted to push AAF. So it languished.

The problem is proprietary software companies not accepting open standards for various reasons. I take your point that AVID is not the sole driver of AAF but in my experience they have been the chief culprit of incompatibilities that I have experienced, both on the Media Composer and ProTools interchanges.


Re: Openness between tools - waning?
by Oliver Peters on Jul 1, 2019 at 12:23:34 pm

[Michael Gissing] " I take your point that AVID is not the sole driver of AAF but in my experience they have been the chief culprit of incompatibilities that I have experienced, both on the Media Composer and ProTools interchanges"

I would agree with that. I have more issues with AAFs to and from Avid than any other exchange. In fact AAFs exported from Resolve that don't work in MC, show up OK in Premiere Pro. So for me, XML and OMF seem to be the most reliable these days.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com





© CreativeCOW.net