APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X FCPX Debates FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

Re: FCP X features or lack thereof. Your opinion on the rationale.

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

VIEW ALL   •   ADD A NEW POST   •   PRINT
Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread


Michael Gissing
Re: FCP X features or lack thereof. Your opinion on the rationale.
on Nov 27, 2016 at 11:10:36 pm

[Tim Wilson] " I still want more. I want scripting, I want in-app codec packs, more robust effects hooks, and the like, blooming like a thousand flowers."

But the rub is - what is core? I have been totally happy both with NLEs and DAWs to have third party developers handle the FX plugins. I consider core functionality to also support established industry standard interchange for collaborative workflows.

Apple have gone part of the way with xml although any hope that there could be a standard in xml seems impossible. In other areas standards have been agreed to like AAF, OMF AES-31, EDL etc. These standards may be legacy but they are still in use and a part of established workflows. I don't think it is advantageous to leave all that to third party developers as these are critical to stable commercial workflows.

Every time a new version of OS or NLE software comes out there can be a lag getting new bugs ironed out. There are suddenly many developers that need to react. I know the people behind AATranslator are constantly chasing such variables and I have long said that bog standard legacy interchange like OMF and dear old EDL are stable and reliable fall backs during times of software change. If they are core then they still work. If interchange is possible only via a new variant of fcpxml (currently in its 6th iteration) then it breaks all interchange.

Sure not everyone agrees with this definition and so the debate goes on.


Posts IndexRead Thread 


Current Message Thread:





© 2019 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]