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

Adobe - IBC

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Oliver Peters
Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 5:08:16 pm

For those still pining at the loss of FCP7/Studio ☺

http://www.creativeplanetnetwork.com/news/edit/adobe-previews-late-2017-cre...

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 5:19:03 pm

In more detail:

https://blogs.adobe.com/creativecloud/whats-coming-for-premiere-pro-cc/?seg...

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 6:00:50 pm

And an FCPX angle:

http://alex4d.com/notes/item/adobe-premiere-used-a-tougher-gig-than-a-david...

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 6:48:55 pm

Hopefully Apple don' t start throwing development resources at Hollywood productions like Adobe seem to be doing, I genuinely don't care if FCPX is used to cut high end features or network Television as long as it continues to develop for the vast majority of it's user base like me.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 6:53:18 pm

Can't wait for FCPX to get this....... ☺








Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 7:23:52 pm

I'm switching. Lol


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 7:24:19 pm

Curious as to how this is different from the FCP X timeline history switching we've had since 1.0?

Isn't this just storing projects (I guess "sequences" for Adobe folk) in available RAM and letting the editor navigate and cut and paste between them?

That feature was in FCP X on its launch six years ago.

What am I missing here?

Did they do something different with the concept?

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 7:45:04 pm

[Bill Davis] "Curious as to how this is different from the FCP X timeline history switching we've had since 1.0?

Isn't this just storing projects (I guess "sequences" for Adobe folk) in available RAM and letting the editor navigate and cut and paste between them?

That feature was in FCP X on its launch six years ago."


You're too used to Apple terminology Bill, a "project" in PPro is the same as a "Library" (or even an event) in FCPX.

So this enables PPro owners to have more than one "library" open at a a time and cut and paste between them.

Just like FCPX :)


Return to posts index

Michael Hancock
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 8:34:29 pm

[Steve Connor] "Just like FCPX :)"

Just like FCP7!

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


Return to posts index


Neil Goodman
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 3:26:09 am

[Steve Connor] "Just like FCPX ☺
"


Just like all the NLE's!

Essentially you could do this through the media browser in some fashion already in PP, correct? (im pretty new to premiere and not using by choice but I think i opened someone sequence today and copied elements from it).

What's missing in this video is the upcoming bin locking, which is kind of a big deal if you work on shared projects.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 9:52:06 pm

[Bill Davis] "Curious as to how this is different from the FCP X timeline history switching we've had since 1.0?
Isn't this just storing projects (I guess "sequences" for Adobe folk) in available RAM and letting the editor navigate and cut and paste between them?"


Man, are you completely confused! ☺

Premiere Pro projects = FCPX libraries (same as FCP "legacy")
Premiere Pro sequences = FCPX projects (same as FCP "legacy")

Based on your description above, you could always do this in Premiere Pro and most every other NLE. That's not what this feature is about.

[Bill Davis] "What am I missing here?
Did they do something different with the concept?"


The "new" thing is the ability to have multiple projects open at once and work between them. And yes, you could always do this with FCPX libraries, as well as with FCP "legacy" projects. So, a "feature catch up" if you will. However, the difference is the ability to lock projects. So, an editor can have a master project open with write permission, but others open with read-only permission.

The other part of this is shared Team Projects for team and enterprise accounts. This is more Avid-like. Actually it works more closely to the way FCP7 worked with FC Server with a check-out/check-in process. However, it's got a better conflict reconciliation method. But, these special-condition Team Projects are stored in the cloud, so that has pros and cons depending on your POV and needs.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 9:40:49 pm

[Steve Connor] "Hopefully Apple don' t start throwing development resources at Hollywood productions like Adobe seem to be doing"

It's precisely because the company listens to and tests out new ideas with high-profile customers that you get new, advanced features. This is just as true with Apple as it is with Adobe. The difference is that Apple is more secretive about it. Also Adobe is more willing to put alpha and beta builds in the hands of these high-profile users to see what happens, since they are probably a much better stress test than small users.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 9:54:28 pm

[Oliver Peters] "listens to and tests out new ideas with high-profile customers that you get new, advanced features. "

I hear that's what happened when they were developing 3D text ☺

Seriously though I think what "Hollywood" Editors want feature wise may not be exactly the same things that most FCPX users want and I think Apple recognised this.

Next FCPX update imminent with HDR and AR features added perhaps?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 10:06:40 pm

[Steve Connor] "I hear that's what happened when they were developing 3D text ☺"

I think they were listening to Charlie on that one ☺

[Steve Connor] "I think what "Hollywood" Editors want feature wise may not be exactly the same things that most FCPX users want and I think Apple recognised this."

We'll have to disagree on that one. For example, Avid project sharing is something that benefits major feature films as well as small 5-man shops. In the case of Adobe, there are a number of advances that have come out of feature film projects, which have directly benefitted me as a small user. In the case of Apple, extensive support for ARRI Alexa and RED cameras certainly isn't there to benefit the small user.

[Steve Connor] "Next FCPX update imminent with HDR and AR features added perhaps?"

Neither of which benefit small customers. But, if you were to add such features, which type of customer do you think would be a better test bed?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Gabe Strong
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 5:37:03 am

I just saw an interesting online ad. If you don't think BMD has noticed that there is a number of people
who don't like subscriptions......take a look at this ad.....


Gabe Strong
G-Force Productions
http://www.gforcevideo.com


Return to posts index


Alan Okey
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 9:12:48 pm

If they can make Team Projects actually work as advertised, that will be a huge benefit in my workplace. The beta was promising, but ultimately extremely frustrating as it quickly fell over during our trials.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 10:16:32 pm

Project sharing is nice, but "remove all gaps" is closer to my heart, not to mention the 8 xtra label colors. Now if only I can get "remove all/selected transitions" I can die a happy man.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 11:45:10 pm

You really should have explored X a bit more Herb.

No Timeline gaps ( magneticism rocks) for 6 years.
And the timeline index makes global transition removal a snap.

I do hope we never do "confetti" timelines, tho, so no joy there.

Just teasing, obviously.

It looks like Premiere Pro drivers got quite a few IBC presents this year.

We'll see if us X folk get similar joy at the Creative Summit in 6 weeks.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index


andy patterson
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 13, 2017 at 11:56:16 pm

[Bill Davis] "No Timeline gaps ( magneticism rocks) for 6 years."

I can get what I call gaps (black no video) in FCPX pretty easy.


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 6:04:46 am

Andy, didn't you just have a long discussion telling us about using the right editing tool. In FCP X, Selection tool = no gaps. AKA using the magnetic timeline. Position tool = gaps likely. You know, like in PP.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 8:15:40 am

[Brian Seegmiller] "Andy, didn't you just have a long discussion telling us about using the right editing tool. In FCP X, Selection tool = no gaps. AKA using the magnetic timeline. Position tool = gaps likely. You know, like in PP."

Thanks for proving my point for the tenth time Brian. I appreciate it : )

First: Don't confuse my comment with my actual editing process. I simply pointed out that anybody new to FCPX could get gaps. I can also purposely create gaps and I admit it would be user error but gaps can happen. FCPX is not foolproof.

Second: I did not create a video for the world to see of myself using the wrong editing tool with FCPX and then blame my errors on FCPX repeatedly. Jesus did suffer from user error but he repeatedly blamed Premiere Pro. That is why I stated in the other thread if someone gets gaps using FCPX you are quick to blame the user. To prove my point you tried to blame me of user error when I simply made a comment. On the other hand if someone gets gaps using Premiere Pro you are quick to blame the NLE. My point has always been you must use the correct tools in all the NLE to get the desired result.

Third: I hope from now on you can spot user error on any NLE and not just FCPX. I also hope you will not confuse a comment with the actual editing process.


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 11:08:26 am
Last Edited By Steve Connor on Sep 14, 2017 at 11:10:28 am

[andy patterson] "Thanks for proving my point for the tenth time Brian. I appreciate it : )

First: Don't confuse my comment with my actual editing process. I simply pointed out that anybody new to FCPX could get gaps. I can also purposely create gaps and I admit it would be user error but gaps can happen. FCPX is not foolproof.

Second: I did not create a video for the world to see of myself using the wrong editing tool with FCPX and then blame my errors on FCPX repeatedly. Jesus did suffer from user error but he repeatedly blamed Premiere Pro. That is why I stated in the other thread if someone gets gaps using FCPX you are quick to blame the user. To prove my point you tried to blame me of user error when I simply made a comment. On the other hand if someone gets gaps using Premiere Pro you are quick to blame the NLE. My point has always been you must use the correct tools in all the NLE to get the desired result.

Third: I hope from now on you can spot user error on any NLE and not just FCPX. I also hope you will not confuse a comment with the actual editing process.
"


Is there any possible way we can just leave this particular subject alone now? It's getting beyond tedious and it's crossing into unrelated posts!!!


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 5:28:30 pm

You are welcome.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 12:24:13 am

Since FCPX has a different naming structure than Premiere Pro I thought I would clarify something.

Even with Premiere Pro CS 4.0 you could always import entire projects. You could import the whole project or just certain sequences. With CS 4.0 and even the Creative Cloud you can opt to just grab video files, images or sequences form other projects but all those assets just became part of the project you imported them into. You have been able to do many of the same things shown in the posted video since CS 4 (if not longer). The only thing new is that the original project it's self is imported and not just the assets of that project. It is not a big deal for me but I think it will help with collaboration based workflows.

To clarify we have been able to bring assets from other projects like sequences, images and video clips into other projects for a long long time even if the project did not import.


Return to posts index

Brian Seegmiller
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 12:42:09 am

Looks like PP wants to be like FCP X.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 11:14:17 am
Last Edited By Steve Connor on Sep 14, 2017 at 11:21:00 am

[Bill Davis] "No Timeline gaps ( magneticism rocks) for 6 years."

Really? you haven't used the 'P' tool in 6 years?

For those of us who haven't mastered FCPX enough to avoid gaps then you can also remove them all easily with the very powerful timeline index!


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 4:55:44 pm

[Steve Connor] "For those of us who haven't mastered FCPX enough to avoid gaps then you can also remove them all easily with the very powerful timeline index!"

Actually, the Adobe process is a bit more intelligent than simply removing gaps. It's closing gaps, not removing them. Let's say you have a gap on V1 (or primary storyline in X-lingo) and above that you have video on V2 (or connected clip in X-lingo) and that clip is shorter than the gap below it. The "close all gaps" command will tighten up the timeline so that the next V1 clip butts up to the previous V2 clip. If it's V1/gap/V1, then in those instances V1 and V1 clips are brought together. It's the clip equivalent to Premiere "delete empty tracks" function.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 7:38:46 pm
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Sep 15, 2017 at 7:41:31 pm

Really? you haven't used the 'P' tool in 6 years?"

It's crazy, but I'd guess I've used it half a dozen times in the last year, if that?

It's a shift in my editorial thinking.

I know it's destructive. I see that as a PITA since it potentially creates situations I then may have to waste time "fixing" - so I now kinda find myself subconsciously thinking in vertical magnetic storyline "modules" that have their own internal rhythm - and going into position mode potentially screws that up. (I probably use the tilde key more, actually, to re-position secondaries - but I try to avoid that as well.)

For me, the vast majority of shot timing is done via trimming with magnetism "on" not defeated. It just feels more X-like, to me I guess.

I guess I think a lot more "vertically" and earlier now than I did before X.

FWIW.

(Sorry for the bold - on my phone and tried to cut down the reference quote that had too much in it and screwed things up. My bad)

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 10:31:27 pm

[Bill Davis] "I guess I think a lot more "vertically" and earlier now than I did before X.
"


That makes absolutely no sense :)


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 11:49:45 pm

[Steve Connor] "That makes absolutely no sense :)"

It's getting close to 'beer-30' in Bill's neck of the country ☺

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 17, 2017 at 5:31:58 am
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Sep 17, 2017 at 5:33:01 am

[Steve Connor] "That makes absolutely no sense :)"

Basically, during my 10 years on Legacy, I'd pretty much always start with a horizontal string-out on V1 to shape my narrative - and not really "build off" that too much, too early with B-Roll and titles - because it was inconvenient to trim or move whole sections around. (Particularly with the constant legacy "re-render" penalty!)

Starting in about my second year with X (so five years ago) I started realizing that I could spend more time perfecting smaller "chunks" vertically - going ahead and attaching B-Roll, Titling, futzing with audio timing, etc, etc - and since the magnetic timeline would preserve all my vertical relationship choices - and I could subsequently move those blocks around as a unit so easily since they were "relationship connected" - there was FAR less Benefit in waiting for the Primary Storyline to come together as a unit before perfecting further.

After X, if everything arrived for "Act 3" of whatever...I felt totally free to just build THAT starting at 00:00:00. Who cares? Inserting and working on Part A or B or attaching Part E later just moved all my prior vertical assemblies ahead or behind as needed.

That's what I refer to as "thinking vertically."

You can do similar things with all NLEs of course - but magnetism drives a TON of friction out of the process in X since you NEVER mess anything else up by inserting new content either after OR before your existing work - and all the timing relationships you take the time to build are so sticky in X.

FWIW.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 17, 2017 at 7:13:55 am

[Bill Davis] "Starting in about my second year with X (so five years ago) I started realizing that I could spend more time perfecting smaller "chunks" vertically - going ahead and attaching B-Roll, Titling, futzing with audio timing, etc, etc - and since the magnetic timeline would preserve all my vertical relationship choices - and I could subsequently move those blocks around as a unit so easily since they were "relationship connected" - there was FAR less Benefit in waiting for the Primary Storyline to come together as a unit before perfecting further.

After X, if everything arrived for "Act 3" of whatever...I felt totally free to just build THAT starting at 00:00:00. Who cares? Inserting and working on Part A or B or attaching Part E later just moved all my prior vertical assemblies ahead or behind as needed.

That's what I refer to as "thinking vertically."

You can do similar things with all NLEs of course - but magnetism drives a TON of friction out of the process in X since you NEVER mess anything else up by inserting new content either after OR before your existing work - and all the timing relationships you take the time to build are so sticky in X."


That explains it, thanks. For me what you've explained isn't one of the benefits of FCPX as I've never worried about timing relationships in other NLE's whilst making edits, but I can see how it would be a benefit to some Editors.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 11:44:33 am

[Bill Davis] "We'll see if us X folk get similar joy at the Creative Summit in 6 weeks."

Are you expecting a sneak peak with a release later this year, like before? I certainly hope so. But, are you simply speculating? If so, would this be tied to macOS High Sierra or the iMac Pro?

Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 11:46:13 pm

I don't have a clue.

(100% speculative uninformed by anything rambling follows, be warned)

It seems to me that a HUGE driver of the change to X was the new possibilities afforded by the dual factors of migration to OS X and the huge increase in procrssing power modern CPU/GPUs allowed.

These boxes (even the smartphones!) have WICKED power now.

Heck, I got a link from my friend Michael Kammes earlier that kinda shocked me.
https://thenextweb.com/apple/2017/09/12/apples-new-iphone-x-already-destroy...

The new iPhones appear to have processing power pretty much on par with modern Laptops. And we know the gap between those and desktop computers is pretty narrow and closing fast.

So it seems to me that there is a MUCH more "open horizon" in NLE potential today than we've ever seen before.

We know Apple is into Ai and Machine Learning as are other similar vendors. But what we don't know is what form that will take.

We did have a spirited discussion on another board between guys using an IPad running Colorista via Duet as a "live" grading interface for X.

They said it worked surprisingly well!

When everything things run this fast, new possibilities open up, I guess.

Fun times.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 1:10:45 am
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Sep 15, 2017 at 1:32:58 am

[Bill Davis] "It seems to me that a HUGE driver of the change to X was the new possibilities afforded by the dual factors of migration to OS X and the huge increase in procrssing power modern CPU/GPUs allowed."

Hmm... I understand what you are saying, but I don't see any large migration to macOS or Mac computers in general. At least not more than 7 years ago, for example. Yes, the numbers are up, but not significantly. Especially among folks who work with media, as they have already historically been a large part of the Apple user base. And for power, the PC side still has Mac beat (leaving cost out of the equation).

Of course, more powerful Macs benefit Apple's NLE competitors just as they do FCPX, although X is (theoretically) more optimized for these machines. Either way, Apple wins ☺

[Bill Davis] "The new iPhones appear to have processing power pretty much on par with modern Laptops. And we know the gap between those and desktop computers is pretty narrow and closing fast."

True, but raw processing power is only part of the story. That doesn't necessarily translate into a good media computing platform. Although I've run LumaFusion on my iPad and it's very fluid with things that would definitely be challenging on a Mac.

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2017/08/12/lumafusion-an-ios-nle/

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 11:45:38 am

[Bill Davis] "You really should have explored X a bit more Herb."

The exploration I did do left me very impressed with many FCPX features. Ppro, and Legacy before it, are very far from perfect. Still if I envy anything about X it would be Auditions. That is something I would use on a regular basis that has no corolate in any other NLE.

[Bill Davis] "And the timeline index makes global transition removal a snap."

I'm hoping there is more than a global removal, I'm hoping there will be a "remove all transitions in selected area," as there was in Legacy. That's the functionality I really want.

[Bill Davis] "I do hope we never do "confetti" timelines, tho, so no joy there.
"


If your referring to the increased label colors, they don't show up in the timeline, they are more like the color lables in OSX Finder - you can add a color box and assign it to certain properties - sequences are green, audio only clips blue, gfx are yellow - but they only show up in the media browser window and do not carry thru to the timelines in anyway. They're helpful in visually organizing your assets, just as in the Finder window. Visual organization is a big thing for me, YMMV.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 11:59:20 am

[Herb Sevush] "[Bill Davis] "And the timeline index makes global transition removal a snap."

I'm hoping there is more than a global removal, I'm hoping there will be a "remove all transitions in selected area," as there was in Legacy. That's the functionality I really want."


Easily done in the timeline index


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 12:07:29 pm

I think I missed the part about shared projects. Like Team Projects but on SAN/NAS systems. Makes it more Avid-like for collaboration. Spelled out here:

http://www.premierebro.com/blog/premiere-pro-cc-2018-preview-5-must-know-ne...

Apple really needs to up its game and come up with a similar feature before many shops take X more seriously.

Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 12:52:53 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Makes it more Avid-like for collaboration. "

[Oliver Peters] "Apple really needs to up its game and come up with a similar feature before many shops take X more seriously."

Why? To become more like Avid? An increasingly niche product? What good can come of that?

No, let's hope Apple keeps focusing on a product that is fast, stable and works. One that can be expanded with approved plug-ins for those who need it, not bloating the core software. Focus on integrating Motion and Logic for the shops that DON'T need shared or multi-editor projects, which I would dare opine are the vast majority in the visual storytelling space. Zag, Apple, don't zig with Adobe. :-)

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 1:08:26 pm

[Scott Witthaus] " One that can be expanded with approved plug-ins for those who need it, not bloating the core software."

What value do you see in only allowing Apple-approved plugins?

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

Herb Sevush
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 1:20:33 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "let's hope Apple keeps focusing on a product that is fast, stable and works. One that can be expanded with approved plug-ins for those who need it, not bloating the core software."

What is this obsession many of you X guys have with "not bloating the software." Unless your a programmer I venture to guess that you don't have the slightest idea of what "bloats" the software or not. I keep hearing this refrain whenever someone mentions a feature that you are not personally invested in. Why not ask for features and expect that Apple, or any NLE provider, do it elegantly. It's not a zero sum game - you can get what you want, others can get what they want, and the software can still work efficiently.

I'm not interested in VR. Every time Adobe announces more features for VR in Premiere I think it's a waste of time. But I'm not running around saying "oh no, you provided VR, and now my software is too bloated to move." It's a feature I don't use but I expect that it s designed properly and won't interfere with what I do use.

I get that you don't want to have to pay for additional features but i don't get this fear that if the NLE adds additional features that it will somehow ruin the whole ap.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 1:28:03 pm

[Herb Sevush] "[Scott Witthaus] "let's hope Apple keeps focusing on a product that is fast, stable and works. One that can be expanded with approved plug-ins for those who need it, not bloating the core software."

What is this obsession many of you X guys have with "not bloating the software." Unless your a programmer I venture to guess that you don't have the slightest idea of what "bloats" the software or not."


It's been demonstrated that the FCPX app is already bigger than its competitors. So is it already bloated?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 3:35:45 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Unless your a programmer I venture to guess that you don't have the slightest idea of what "bloats" the software or not."

Feature bloat, Herb. Feature bloat. Like you, I know little of the code behind it.

It's like the creeping bloat of the CC as a whole. I want a good editor. I don't need a "social panel" nor VR. Nor do I need 75% of the rest of the cloud. I want a solid, fast editing platform where I decide how to expand, not paying Adobe to decide for me.

...blood in the water! ;-)

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 8:01:03 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "It's like the creeping bloat of the CC as a whole. I want a good editor. I don't need a "social panel" nor VR. Nor do I need 75% of the rest of the cloud. I want a solid, fast editing platform where I decide how to expand, not paying Adobe to decide for me."

With Adobe you only download the aps you want, so what do I care how many other aps they make for CC.

Within Ppro I haven't noticed any "slowing down" when they add features. Those features are invisible to me as I go about my daily work. And who knows, someday when my workflow changes I might be very happy they are there.

Not interested in VR (and really, who is?) - it's invisible to me. Don't use close captioning; I still don't know where they keep it. Don't want to use their stock footage services? Then don't. No interest in their new Graphics Panel ? Just stick with the old legacy tittler. The new features neither slow me down nor get in my way.

I probably use less than half the features available with any software I use - Word, Excel, Ppro, Ae, Photoshop - so why get all upset about it.

I really don't get it.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 8:13:49 pm

[Herb Sevush] "so what do I care how many other aps they make for CC."

I care because they are spending subscription dollars developing them. Selfish, yes, but I don't want to pay a monthly for sh** I don't use.

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 9:40:42 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Sep 14, 2017 at 9:41:57 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "I care because they are spending subscription dollars developing them. Selfish, yes, but I don't want to pay a monthly for sh** I don't use."

But, by that logic, there are folks who believe FCPX should be $50, because it, too, has stuff in it that they don't need or don't want to use.

Or better yet, why can't it be free like Resolve (non-Studio versions)?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 9:26:56 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "It's like the creeping bloat of the CC as a whole. I want a good editor. I don't need a "social panel" nor VR. Nor do I need 75% of the rest of the cloud. I want a solid, fast editing platform where I decide how to expand, not paying Adobe to decide for me."

Apple does decides what is best for you and you pay them. There is not really any difference between Apple and Adobe in that respect.

[Scott Witthaus] "I care because they are spending subscription dollars developing them. Selfish, yes, but I don't want to pay a monthly for sh** I don't use."

Apple develops Apple TV, The iPad Pro, Garage Band, Numbers, Pages, iMovie etc.

I am not a fan of the monthly subscription paradigm but having said that you seem very angry and upset with Adobe. Why? Are you letting us know that if Adobe sold Premiere Pro for $299.99 with a free upgrade path for life that you would dump FCPX for Premiere Pro?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 1:31:48 pm

[Scott Witthaus] " for the shops that DON'T need shared or multi-editor projects, which I would dare opine are the vast majority in the visual storytelling space. Zag, Apple, don't zig with Adobe. :-)"

Maybe you should read this:

http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2017/07/evolving-thinking-on-fcp-x-collaborat...

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 3:31:15 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Maybe you should read this:"

I found these lines interesting:

"But FCP X? I can only speculate because I am confident I know nothing. No hints, or conversations that I can recall that would give any clue to future plans.

I would not rule out collaboration in Final Cut Pro X at some future time. Should Apple decide that’s something they need to allocate resources to, they will, but we agreed they won’t do it until:

They can do it right (in terms of engineering)
They can make it as accessible for the high school group (with no IT help) as they can for a ‘Hollywood’ TV show or movie."

"It’s not surprising that the Resolve and Premiere Pro approaches to collaboration are very similar to that in Media Composer: people involved in the original Media Composer implantation now work for both Blackmagic Design and Adobe."

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 4:21:26 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "I found these lines interesting:"

Your point?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 7:07:30 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "Why?

Increased usability in a growing market that FCP X is already a part? When someone says "collaborative editing" the knee jerk thought for many is big movies or TV shows but there are also many boutique shops, indie docs, schools, New Media creators, etc., can/could utilize it as well. If I had to guess I'd say the number of people using shared storage is trending up, not down because the cost and technical hurdles are disappearing more and more each year (just look at what LumaForge is trying to do with Jellyfish), and my rule thumb is that if a place finds shared storage useful then they'll find collaborative features in an NLE useful.

In my personal experience, even when it's just been myself (working as an AE) and an editor cutting out of the backroom of the director's the advantages of shared storage and a collaborative NLE are obviously.


[Scott Witthaus] "No, let's hope Apple keeps focusing on a product that is fast, stable and works. One that can be expanded with approved plug-ins for those who need it, not bloating the core software. Focus on integrating Motion and Logic for the shops that DON'T need shared or multi-editor projects, which I would dare opine are the vast majority in the visual storytelling space. Zag, Apple, don't zig with Adobe. :-)"

One man's bloat is another man's feature request though. For example, couldn't expanding integration with Motion and Logic be seen as a waste of time by someone that doesn't need/want more integration with Motion and Logic?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 9:13:52 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Sep 14, 2017 at 9:23:32 pm

BTW - is there any Apple or FCPX news out of IBC yet?

PS: I do realize that the FCPX World presentations aren't until this weekend.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 12:16:55 am

I personally doubt it, but I could be wrong.

The fact that the totally FCP X focused Creative Summit is just 5 weeks away makes me think Apple marketing would rather do any reveals when they can get complete market Focus.

But the NAB thing was a surprise to me this year so who knows?

Bummed I had to cancel on Amsterdam myself. I had flights booked and everything, but family issues over the past week made my cancellation a month ago look like I was positively channeling Uri Geller.

I've promised my wife next year for sure.

Oh well.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 10:47:40 pm
Last Edited By greg janza on Sep 14, 2017 at 10:48:37 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "Why? To become more like Avid? An increasingly niche product? What good can come of that? "

Avid, while now considered Niche, was at one time the gold standard for NLE's and I've yet to see any NLE that has a better overall design.

And many of these latest developments are really just getting us back to where we were many years ago on Avid. Shared projects, locked bins, etc. All standard Avid features circa 2010.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 11:04:28 am

[greg janza] "Avid, while now considered Niche, was at one time the gold standard for NLE's"

Key word is "was". Why emulate that?

Trust me, I cut a bunch on Avid products in my career. Having been a freelancer for so long, I can thank Avid for allowing me that career. Hell, I still own a little stock in the company (yeah, THAT was a great investment!). It is still the gold standard for Hollywood and broadcast, but you must agree it is struggling outside those niche environments.

[greg janza] "And many of these latest developments are really just getting us back to where we were many years ago on Avid. Shared projects, locked bins, etc. All standard Avid features circa 2010."

For a small percentage of editors.



more blood.... ;-)

Scott Witthaus
Owner, 1708 Inc./Editorial
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 11:52:37 am

[Scott Witthaus] "I cut a bunch on Avid products in my career."

Scott, You know me and know I mean no disrespect. But, how much of this seat time is with MC versus DS? And how much of it is in shared storage/collaborative environments (MediaShare, Unity, Isis, Nexis)? Or for that matter, FCP or Premiere in shared/collaborative environments?

[Scott Witthaus] "For a small percentage of editors."

I would disagree. I've worked a lot in small shops (2 or more stations) - with and without shared storage. Some with collaborative tools (Avid, FC Server), too. The workflow is significantly better when you can efficiently share media and even better when you can easily share projects. If that's a small percentage, so be it. A professional tool needs to be able to do more than service one-man-bands.

Clearly there's a market for it with FCPX:

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/1999-collaborative-workflow-in-fcpx-wi...

It's just a matter of whether Apple steps up to the plate or not. It's a misnomer to harp that 'you need an IT department' to do it. There's plenty of collaboration using shared storage and sharing tools without any IT expertise in sight. Heck, LumaForge is building an entire business up that premise.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 12:06:13 pm

[Oliver Peters] "A professional tool needs to be able to do more than service one-man-bands."

Why? what if that tool is marketed for people that are exactly that. FCPX seems to have sold very well without some the capabilities of other NLEs


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 1:28:26 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Sep 15, 2017 at 2:24:20 pm

[Steve Connor] "what if that tool is marketed for people that are exactly that"

Do the user stories on this page look like they are marketing to one-man-bands?

https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/

You also don't bring on guys like Wes Plate and Tim Dashwood to keep FCPX a simplistic app either. All of this points to an internal direction to make FCPX more advanced in ways that will benefit single, but also multi-user environments.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 2:43:02 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Do the user stories on this page look like they are marketing to one-man-bands?

https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/

You also don't bring on guys like Wes Plate and Tim Dashwood to keep FCPX a simplistic app either. All of this points to an internal direction to make FCPX more advanced in ways that will benefit single, but also multi-user environments.
"


Good point, I hope that's true and that their onward development doesn't start to exclude what is clearly their core user base in single-user environments in a grab for the smaller, higher end of the market.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 3:35:11 pm

[Steve Connor] "I hope that's true and that their onward development doesn't start to exclude what is clearly their core user base"

I think if you look at how Apple handles things when they make these changes, they typically strip an app down to the core essence. Then they slowly build it up again over successive versions. Take a look at what is happening now in Photos. The new upcoming version adds back a lot of the image editing capabilities that used to exist in Aperture.

Often Apple will not add a function if they can't do it 100% correctly. Those tasks they leave to third parties. They could have made an FCP7 to FCPX conversion utility if they wanted to. However, the translation would always be flawed at some level. Thus the task went to Philip and Greg.

So as more capabilities get fleshed out - and as the needs of the marketplace change - Apple reacts in ways that may get them in front of the curve. The 2013 MP was such an effort. It's a great machine, but ultimately the wrong design for most customer needs for that type of computer. The puck isn't always going to be where you think it will be. ☺

Another factor is that X was one of the last things influenced by Steve Jobs. Apple is now very much Tim Cook's company, which quite likely is having a major effect on FCPX, too. Hopefully, good.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

greg janza
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 2:53:48 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "Key word is "was". Why emulate that?"

The downfall of Avid is all related to the company not being forward thinking. They stubbornly stuck with the proprietary architecture for far too long and by the time they realized their mistake it was too late.

I too spent many years cutting on Avid and I also owe my entire career to Avid. In addition, I worked primarily in Avid shared environments. It needs to be emphasized that the shared edit environment is incredibly efficient. I no longer work on Avid at all but it's design should be emulated.

Personally, I could cut ridiculously fast on an Avid because of it's phenomenal keyboard layout that was so highly customizable. The Avid engineers built a product that worked extremely well for any user. Premiere Pro and FCPX have adopted those customization options but so far it ain't the same.

I Hate Television. I Hate It As Much As Peanuts. But I Can’t Stop Eating Peanuts.
- Orson Welles


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 5:24:49 pm

[greg janza] "The downfall of Avid is all related to the company not being forward thinking. They stubbornly stuck with the proprietary architecture for far too long and by the time they realized their mistake it was too late. "

I'll add also that the price remained too high for too long and their customer service tanked during the Adrenaline days. The mid-2000s were not a fun time to be an Avid customer. The ire from that era still exists today even though we are 10-15yrs removed from it.


[greg janza] " It needs to be emphasized that the shared edit environment is incredibly efficient. I no longer work on Avid at all but it's design should be emulated."

It's also dead simple because an MC project is just an MC project. There is nothing you need to do to make it a multi-user project or to share your bins with others. You can even copy the whole project onto a laptop to work on it out of the office then copy it back to the shared storage when you return and it all just works. All you have to remember is that a locked bin means you have read-only access so if you make changes you'll need to do a Save As if you want to save those changes.

Now, what Resolve is doing by letting users work on the same timeline concurrently is a type of collaboration that Avid doesn't offer and understandably requires a bit more work by users to coordinate things, but on a basic level I think making collaborative features as straightforward as they are in MC should be the goal of the competition.


[Steve Connor] "Good point, I hope that's true and that their onward development doesn't start to exclude what is clearly their core user base in single-user environments in a grab for the smaller, higher end of the market."

Out of curiosity, aside from multi-user collaboration (which is just a single feature), what other features do you think would be of no use in a single-user environment and/or of no use in the lower end of the market (which itself is composed of both single-user and multi-user environments)?

This kinda continues a reoccurring a riff about software in that people in general want software be tailored to the needs of their niche in the industry and any feature not tailored to their niche is a waste, but one man's steak is another man's cardboard so it's impossible for one application to be all things to all people w/o anyone pointing to features they think are useless bloat.

Many times we make broad delineations between high-end and low end (typically this is based on budget), but from a practical perspective I think workflow is a more meaningful guide to go by than budget since high and low budget projects will often have similar workflow hurdles. For example, the people making the fan film "Star Trek: Axanar" are going to run into a lot of the same problems that J.J. Abrams ran into making "Star Trek" (just probably on a smaller scale) so a tool that helps Hollywood make movies can also help YouTubers make movies. And it doesn't have to be movies. Corporate videos, weddings, game shows, etc., can all have similar workflows needs even if one is high budget and the other is low budget.

Or take multicam as another example. At one point in time multicam was a niche feature because having multiple cams could get really expensive really fast. Now video cameras are a dime a dozen so even no-budget projects can have half a dozen cameras w/o breaking the budget, so multicam isn't considered a high end feature anymore but a staple of any good NLE.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 9:59:01 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "Trust me, I cut a bunch on Avid products in my career. Having been a freelancer for so long, I can thank Avid for allowing me that career. Hell, I still own a little stock in the company (yeah, THAT was a great investment!). It is still the gold standard for Hollywood and broadcast, but you must agree it is struggling outside those niche environments."

I don't consider Hollywood (the movie industry) or broadcast facilities a niche environment for video production. 25 years ago that was about the only market with a few niche markets here and there. With the internet gaining bandwidth over that last 25 years there is more media outlets but broadcasting facilities and movie studios are still the standard as far as I can tell. People would prefer to have their work on TV stations throughout the world or in theaters throughout the world as opposed to being on YouTube or a closed circuit system at the local high school or the local mega church. Having said that a lot of A/V facilities could probably benefit form a collaborative workflow.

There are a lot of media outlets in the year 2017 all with different work environments but I don't think the broadcast facilities and the movie industry are a niche environments in the year 2017. Maybe in the 2025 they will be.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 14, 2017 at 11:58:48 pm

[Herb Sevush] "They're helpful in visually organizing your assets, just as in the Finder window. Visual organization is a big thing for me, YMMV."

Yeah, not going to help you I'm afraid.

One of the big shifts in X thinking was a huge diminishing of the traditional emphasis on Finder organization via virtual folders. It's just not very important to x workflows since X's "tagged Range" system pretty much eliminates folders as interim steps between what the editor wants - And calling up and landing that asset into a storyline.

it's a different approach for sure.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 1:28:31 am
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Sep 15, 2017 at 1:30:12 am

[Bill Davis] "One of the big shifts in X thinking was a huge diminishing of the traditional emphasis on Finder organization via virtual folders"

That's no different than in any other NLE. A finder folder doesn't have to be the same as the bin/folder inside of the NLE interface. In fact, for most editors, they aren't the same. Effectively an FCPX Event is the exact same thing as an Avid Bin - and it's more or less the same as a Premiere Pro bin.

The innovation of X is the use of keyword collections as well as range selections. But that doesn't negate Event/Bin/Folder/etc thinking in X anymore than in other NLEs. Unless of course, you adopt Simon's total smart collection-driven approach.

https://fcpxpert.net/2016/05/14/guest-post-one-smart-collection-to-rule-the...







- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 1:55:23 am

I'm finding it interesting that both Adobe CC and Blackmagic Fusion are developing and pushing their VR tools. I know many here dismiss VR as a gimmick and history would say you are right. But recently I have experienced some interesting developments in VR and augmented reality and with the release of newer phones with amazing screens like the Hydrogen and the general CPU/GPU improvements in both Apple & Android phones, I think they might be banking on a generational shift in visual entertainment based around these next gen mobile devices.

Unlike nuclear fusion which has always been 'within the next ten years' VR actually seems to be starting to deliver. I watch this development with interest.


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 2:55:43 am

I think VR has merit for training proposes. I also imagine other avenues for VR will start to emerge but I don't know if VR content will ever be more than 10% of all the media produced in a given year. The numbers will probably be small but the results of VR will be very effective for certain projects. I have seen some VR media that does look.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 2:56:45 am

[Bill Davis] "One of the big shifts in X thinking was a huge diminishing of the traditional emphasis on Finder organization via virtual folders. It's just not very important to x workflows since X's "tagged Range" system pretty much eliminates folders as interim steps between what the editor wants - And calling up and landing that asset into a storyline."

Herb was talking about color coding (the reference to the Finder was just an example).


[Michael Gissing] "I'm finding it interesting that both Adobe CC and Blackmagic Fusion are developing and pushing their VR tools. "

Don't forget Apple. They made a big deal about upcoming Macs being powerful enough for VR and mentioned FCP X will get native 360 editing too.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 3:06:34 am

[Andrew Kimery] "Don't forget Apple."

It would seem an obvious extension to their NLE and how it may be used in mobile VR & augmented reality so I'm interested to see what they will do. I also think a lot of the rusted on X editors here might not give a toss for that feature set as do many for Adobe & Blackmagic's VR tools. Fear of feature bloat seems to have taken over from fear of actual code bloat.


Return to posts index

Tero Ahlfors
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 12:05:11 pm

I think I've posted this before but hey: As someone who is actually working in a company that is doing VR projects I wish people would stop calling 360 videos VR.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Adobe - IBC
on Sep 15, 2017 at 7:00:38 pm

[Tero Ahlfors] "As someone who is actually working in a company that is doing VR projects I wish people would stop calling 360 videos VR."

Just be careful Tero,

One false move and you become the guy hollering because some company used the term "project" differently - and then all hell breaks loose! 😉

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

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