APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X Creative Community Conversations FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

Re: Resolve XII...

COW Forums : Creative Community Conversations (was FCPX Debates)

Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread

Walter Soyka
Re: Resolve XII...
on Jul 29, 2015 at 6:27:03 pm

Wowsers, Tim, epic post! Let me start with your list of four, and I'll try to come back to the rest.

[Tim Wilson] "1) The essential codebases came from different places. Pro Tools After Effects, and Final Cut Pro Legacy were adopted by their current parents. None of these pairs was designed to work together at the root level, and to use Aindreas' wonderful phrase, you can't bolt this stuff on."

No, you can't bolt it on. But if you're reconsidering the architecture of your product anyway, you can get there over time. Each of the products you listed evolved considerably from their original capabilities.

[Tim Wilson] "2) The applications work at cross purposes. To oversimplify, editing is horizontal and compositing is vertical. To put it another way, editing is Time, and motion graphics is Space."

Graphic design is space. Motion graphics is space-time. Neil deGrasse Tyson will back me up on this. The poor editorial control in our toolsets today is holding mograph back right now. Your answer is very "no but" and I think it could be "yes and."

[Tim Wilson] "3) The requirements of the two creative process require such incredibly different toolsets that, Flame, Pablo, Baselight notwithstanding, no single interface could contain the full range of each of them. The requirements for modal interfaces to support them is impossible to manage, because each of those applications have modal interfaces, disguised to one degree or another, but inescapably modal at the source. "

So? Check this out: in Flame, a clip is a timeline is a flow graph:

DS, which I can assume is at least a little bit near and dear to your heart, was like somewhat this. NUKE STUDIO is somewhat like this, too, today. Heck, MC with Eyeon Connection or whatever it's called today is like this with Fusion right now:
(just in case you missed my link before)

[Tim Wilson] "4) Which brings us to the kicker: so few people need the full richness of both feature sets that there's no way to monetize the superhuman efforts to overcome obstacles 1-3."

When people stop "finishing" in After Effects or begging for "Send to Motion" in FCPX, I'll believe this statement is true. It's not about the full richness of multiple feature sets: it's about the features you need, when you need them.

[Tim Wilson] "It's not walled-off crafts. It's walled-off applications."

Mr. Wilson, tear down this wall!

[Tim Wilson] "Walter, you may be the only person on earth who needs both sets of editing and motion graphics to the extremes that you you can imagine the nightmare of that degree of modality, the drain on development, the drain on performance, and the cost of merging 100% of them."


[Tim Wilson] "And as I've noted, the existence of somebody who needs the full range of feature sets and NOT named Walter Soyka is only theoretical, and otherwise easily disproved."

Ok, I giggled when I read this. You win, and I'll assume this is some kind of compliment and wear it as a badge of honor.

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

Posts IndexRead Thread 

Current Message Thread:

© 2020 All Rights Reserved