-
Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
It wasn’t. It’s just that we as consumers have been told we have to have the latest or our self worth is diminished and we become “undesirables”. And many seem to be swallowing that big fat lie.
No NLE ever made a better edit decision than the next, and that is all that matters. Any NLE that makes my edit decisions get done faster is good. Plain and simple. Any tool that makes my workflow better is the tool I’d choose. Any tool that’s needed to make my living I buy, and any tool that isn’t needed I don’t buy. Making the best business decision for you is that simple, isn’t it?
And what exactly is the problem of FCP X taking cues from iMovie? People seem to complain, but sure give no compelling reasons why this is an issue that should be seriously considered as a flaw. Where’s the beef guys? Who the heck REALLY cares? Seems to me that the people that it does matter to, don’t matter. If you think for a minute that everyone and his brother will now become editors biting into your business because the interface has cues from iMovie, you’ve not been watching the market. That situation has been the way it’s been for at least a decade already. Anybody with 3k in his pocket could buy a pro NLE starting in about 1999. FCP X at $299 isn’t going to make that situation any worse at all. All that matters is your resume, not your toolset.
If the current software makes you a living, what genuine and compelling reason is there to upgrade or crossgrade? I know of an Avid that is at least 2 or 3 versions behind that makes a tidy living for it’s operator. My clients didn’t give a hang when I switched from Avid to FCP. If I’d had clients who needed me to be running Avid, I’d have kept it. There will be clients who need me to be running FCP 7 for a while yet I’ll bet, and I’ll also wager that FCP X will run side by side with any other NLE, including FCP 7.
The learning curve for FCP X is likely to be about the same as it would be for a jump to Avid or Adobe. If you think differently, you’re fooling yourself. The two monitor display setup we’ve all been familiar with may well be available in FCP X BTW… just because they didn’t show it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. They did say there were dual monitor arrangement setups if you’ll recall. Canvas/Viewer may well be there, they didn’t show it because they were enamored with the newer way of thinking about the interface, and they had very little time to show many of the new features that are undoubtedly there. And the iMac they were running really sang with the software IMHO. It’s not possible to show dual monitor interfaces on a single projector as far as I know.
That Apple is secretive isn’t any thing new, and it’s served the company very, very well though the years. If I were Apple, I’d be just as secretive. If you think about it, it’s actually American corporate law that demands they BE secretive if it makes them another dime… There’s little doubt that being silent DOES make Apple another dime or two… Theres a reason Apple is the the most valuable company in tech and it’s their innovation AND silence about the future of their products’ road maps that has contributed to this situation. It contributes to the buzz as well. Apple gets more free advertising than any company I can think of BECAUSE of this.
It’s as if people have been brainwashed to think: “well, if FCP X isn’t my cup of tea, I have to DUMP FCP 7 from my computer’s applications folder” or something. It seems to me to be really silly, and extremely immature. You’ll be needing FCP 7 for a while folks because I seriously doubt FCP X will do everything that 7 does, and I seriously doubt it will end up costing most of us a dime in future business because FCP 7 resides on our machines. Most clients just don’t give a hang about anything but results. They don’t care which NLE you’re using, they care about the success of the project, and your attitude and service.
I mean, have you ever hired a one carpenter over another because his hammer was newer? I doubt that happens very often.
I’ll be the first in line to buy FCP X. At less than a fancy meal for 4, it’s a no brainer. The features we already know about make it a no brainer. If it won’t work for me for every project I run into in version 1, so what? FCP 7 will still be on my computer to carry on with and use when it makes more sense to work in it. Not a single client will leave me because of the software I use. If they were to leave me for somebody with the latest software, I seriously doubt I really want to work with them either. It’s about edit decisions guys, not the tools.
Jerry
Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski. My Blog: https://blogs.creativecow.net/Jerry-Hofmann
Current DVD:
https://store.creativecow.net/p/81/jerry_hofmanns_final_cut_system_setup8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17″ MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX – Cinema Displays I have a 22″ that I paid 4k for still working. G4 with Kona SD card, and SCSI card.
-
55 Replies
-
Well said, Mr Hofman, well said!
-
Jerry your sane. Why did they allow you to post in the asylum?
I’ve been trying to say variations on what you’ve posted . . . but the sky is falling.[Jerry Hofmann] “If it won’t work for me for every project I run into in version 1, so what? FCP 7 will still be on my computer to carry on with and use when it makes more sense to work in it.”
And with Apple’s new App Store distribution model they won’t need to wait to accumulate features to burn new discs, design and manufacture boxes, warehouse, ship on an 24 months schedule. They’ll be able to roll out improvements quickly and for a lot less money. If FCPX is missing something it likely won’t be the wait it was from version 1 to 2 (NAB 1999 to around NAB 2001 I believe). What’s missing in June might be there in December.
[Jerry Hofmann] “If you think for a minute that everyone and his brother will now become editors biting into your business because the interface has cues from iMovie, you’ve not been watching the market. That situation has been the way it’s been for at least a decade already. Anybody with 3k in his pocket could buy a pro NLE starting in about 1999.”
And there were people who were upset that what they did in a $2 Million online room could be done by someone who had a $150,000 Avid Symphony.
[Jerry Hofmann] “just because they didn’t show it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.”
If one has worked with people who study early childhood development, there’s a stage in a child’s understanding of the world that if it’s not visible it doesn’t exist. This is, in part, the basis for the amazement in games like “peak-a-boo.” Judging from some of the posts on this list it seems a large number of editors never moved beyond that stage of development.
Sorry to be so “cheeky” in this and other responses but your voice of reason seems scarce in this forum.
-
just to keep us all open minded – holding an opinion different to one’s own does not actually make the other party insane..
and also: calling editors with misgivings mentally challenged infants might be taking things a *little* too far?
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
There are some that show concerns but there are others that are making what, to me, are wild flights of fear . . . like Apple not supporting input/output cards or abandoning the “pro” market. I do think some of the responses are off the deep end and while a newbie might not have the past history to make reasonable estimations, I do not expect this of people who have worked in or managed facilities for a number of years.
-
Actually I think it was Apple that said you had o upgrade to the latest and greatest. IPhone, iphone3g, iphone3gs, iPhone4′, iPad, iPad 2′, iPod, iPod shuffle, iPod nano,
Need I say more?
-
Absolutely no law written that we have to upgrade, particularly since it’s essentially a 1.0 release. If Apple wants to re-boot the franchise, that’s fine.
So you say we should expect to run FCP X and FCP 7 simultaneously on the same machine? How inefficient is that? Two software packages to the do same job?
The problem with FCP 7, at least for us, is the lack of support for all the other codecs out there. Converting H.264 to ProRes takes a ton of time that would be better spent editing. For instance I have over 20 hours of GoPro camera footage we need for a documentary. Gonna take a 12 core Mac 3 days to convert all of that to ProRes when I could just simply start editing with it natively in Premiere or Avid today.
Oh wait, you say FCP X will edit that natively now? So I can go ahead and edit that in FCP X, but if I need something from FCP 7, I can just use that? Well, with Apple’s notorious lack of backwards compatibility, we won’t be able to edit in FCP X and then switch over to FCP 7. Wouldn’t matter anyway because if we’re editing in H.264 in FCP X…. well we all know how ugly that will be if you try to step back to FCP 7. Spinning beach ball and unexpected quit anyone?
So in my case, I’m looking for all the current features in FCP 7, but with the efficiency of being able to work with more codecs natively which is what I expected from a new FCP 8. Not something that takes away features that I need for the sake of re-booting the franchise and then expecting us all to celebrate like it’s 1999.
So no, we don’t have to upgrade, nor do we have to celebrate Apple taking a product for which many of us earn our living and instead of giving us a solid, robust platform, building on 10 years of development and telling us to “remember when FCP 1.0 came out, this is sort of like that again.” Actually it’s not like that at all. More on that shortly.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media -
[walter biscardi] “So in my case, I’m looking for all the current features in FCP 7, but with the efficiency of being able to work with more codecs natively which is what I expected from a new FCP 8.”
“All the current features” is the wrong mindset, and not at all how Apple thinks in general. “Better overall for the things people are doing in the real world” is the right mindset, and almost certainly what Apple is aiming for.
[walter biscardi] “So no, we don’t have to upgrade, nor do we have to celebrate Apple taking a product for which many of us earn our living and instead of giving us a solid, robust platform, building on 10 years of development and telling us to “remember when FCP 1.0 came out, this is sort of like that again.” Actually it’s not like that at all. More on that shortly.”
A year ago the fact that Final Cut Pro was an aging, 32-bit Carbon app was evidence that Apple didn’t care about pro users. Today, somehow, that aging 32-bit Carbon app is a “solid, robust platform”, and its shiny new 64-bit, OpenCL and GCD-enabled, 4K-supporting, float-processing, Cocoa-based replacement is taken as evidence that Apple doesn’t care about pro users.
Go figure.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read Does FCP X make project files obsolete? on our blog.
-
It may be that in order to make the whole thing more efficient they had to leave old code behind. Not all the new code/features may be ready in June.
I expect by June when they can make OFFICIAL comments it may be clear what is there as well as what is coming (or not). So if you decide you can’t upgrade in June you’ll have the option to wait until December (or whatever) or move to Premiere which, judging from your description, actually does meet your needs now.
Given the new distribution model, if there are any critical features not there in June, they will follow much more quickly than in the old press disc and ship package days.
Apple has always been forthright when abandoning something so I don’t doubt, come June, they’ll be able to say things like, “AJA and BM are introducing new tape in/out controllers or “XML output track assignments will be coming soon.” Of course if they aren’t forthcoming in June, then you’ll have to decide to move on to Premiere or Avid.
I don’t believe Apple will keep things “secret” once the product has been released. It’s just not something a developer does while things are still being worked on an subject to change.
-
[Craig Seeman] “I don’t believe Apple will keep things “secret” once the product has been released. It’s just not something a developer does while things are still being worked on an subject to change.”
But again, nothing we’re asking is secret. These features already exist in the current Final Cut Pro.
What Apple showed us at the FCPUG SuperMeet were some of the secret new features. So some of the “secrets” are already out.
Why you have to keep OMF support, assignable track support, Edit to Tape support secret is beyond me, but then I’m not Apple.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media -
[Chris Kenny] “”All the current features” is the wrong mindset, and not at all how Apple thinks in general. “Better overall for the things people are doing in the real world” is the right mindset, and almost certainly what Apple is aiming for.”
The real world? You mean like cutting four feature documentaries over, delivering hundreds of HD and SD broadcast masters to five networks, cutting multiple weekly episodic series? Is that not a definition of the “real world?”
The “real world” is anyone who is currently using Final Cut Pro to earn a living. What they are able to accomplish today is exactly what they should be able to accomplish with the new software with much greater efficiency.
[Chris Kenny] “A year ago the fact that Final Cut Pro was an aging, 32-bit Carbon app was evidence that Apple didn’t care about pro users. Today, somehow, that aging 32-bit Carbon app is a “solid, robust platform”, and its shiny new 64-bit, OpenCL and GCD-enabled, 4K-supporting, float-processing, Cocoa-based replacement is taken as evidence that Apple doesn’t care about pro users.
Go figure.”
Does the shiny replacement allow the user to assign tracks? See that’s a huge part of our workflow for the documentaries when we have 26 tracks of raw audio.
We use tracks 1 – 4 for primary narration.
Tracks 5 – 8 for soundbites.
Tracks 9 – 14 for primary natural sound.
Tracks 15 – 20 for secondary natural sounds
Tracks 21 – 26 for rough music and SFX
When we send the mix to the ProTools designer, we send along a document outlining what’s what so he knows exactly what he has when we send the mix.
I honestly have no idea if we can assign tracks. The “sneak peek” didn’t tell us, they just extolled the virtues of trackless editing. Just throw the video and audio in there, who cares, the app will just make a place for it. Apple’s certainly not talking.
So if that one item is not available when Final Cut Pro X ships in June, then that tells me Apple did not consult enough Pro Users. What I just described is a very standard workflow in broadcast and film editing.
I believe that’s a very simple question that won’t break any big “secrets” from Apple that will have Adobe and Avid scurrying to match that feature.
So it’s about time Apple updated the software, but did they retain the features that made it so great for pro editors or did they just create something they wanted to be slick and then figure out what they need to add back after the fact? That will be the determination on whether we just purchase the one copy or install copies on every workstation and throw it into production.
Who cares how many formats it can handle, how much realtime it can have, it has to retain very basic professional functions that took it from being a laughingstock in 1999 to the standard by which everything else is judged in 2011.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up