-
A documentary about FCPX’s target audience and how they’re disrupting the creative profession
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Foolcut will get you out to all of the initialisms with some rigamarole:
Intelligent Assistance is working on FCPX to FCP7 translation that will allow you to go straight to the interchange formats from 7.
Yes, FCPX can’t do it natively, but the capability is there. It will only improve with time.
I know, some people don’t have the time.”
OK, so I know it’s a bit late in the day to be asking this question but …
… why does it bug me so much that Apple can’t be bothered to develop these interchange formats themselves? Why should tiny third parties have to take up the slack (in ways that for now look like a pretty Heath-Robinson-couple-of-paperclips-and-an-elastic-band kind of deal, worthy as they are) when Apple could have so easily found the time, the money and the manpower to do it themselves?
It feels to me like an utterly contemptible dereliction of duty – though no doubt someone can come up with an honourable sounding excuse for it.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
I also wonder why Apple, with so much money in the bank, seems resource constrained when it comes to software development.
On the other hand, it does seem like a really nice business opportunity for those small software shops. With some decent programing skill and a little ingenuity, someone should be able to craft a very nice translation tool.
Perhaps this is like asking why Apple opened the App Store to developers instead of creating all of the content themselves? We live in a world where small groups of people or even individuals can have an enormous impact developing software if properly motivated.
-
Tastes change. Whats relevant 50 years ago, looks ridiculous now.
50 years, gee, I guess we’ll throw out Citizen Kane, Lawrence of Arabia, Gone wit the Wind, Casablanca, Doctor Zhivago, On the Waterfront, Marty, Paths of Glory, It Happened One night, It’s a Wonderful Life,
etc.BTW, your spelling, writing and grammar…are you, a), a bad typist; b), illiterate or C) Foreign?
-
I’ve been pondering that myself and have entertained the possibility that FCP X was really a way to allow Premiere to flourish with its own ecosystem – eventually luring them into the app-store machine. After all, the people who supplied food and beer at the famous gold rushes in early America made more money than those who were actually there looking for gold (or so I’ve been told). Set up the atmosphere for buying and selling, take a small piece of the action, and you generate money while you sleep. Actually, the banking systems operate on the same principle, but that’s another topic.
However, that doesn’t explain Apple’s actions entirely. So I still come back to my belief that Apple’s “pro-division” is staffed by professional engineers who, through their own creations, have become “democratized” artists. Talk about irony – heh.
That would be the topic to a very interesting documentary, wouldn’t it? When toolmakers become “artists,” and then become their own consultants.
There’s an old saying about being your own lawyer – maybe it’s time for an update.That said, I think there is one flaw in Apple relying on 3rd party involvement for mission-critical features. Every time 3rd party developers (3PD) contribute to a product, they generally add nominal value to it. But consider if a basic product has no value to me until a 3PD becomes involved, then the strength/value of that basic product becomes completely dependent on the 3PD – which are generally smaller and vulnerable to being bought out, getting bored, or simply collapsing.
Look at Automatic Duck.
If OMF export is critical to my workflow, I could have adopted FCP X a month ago, with a purchase of AD to meet all my needs.
But today, what are my purchasing choices? Can I buy FCP X today and get OMF? Not as far as I know. Unless I plan on following a convoluted process with FoolCut and the Adobe product line, or abandoning OMF completely – which isn’t going to happen.This is a serious flaw that is beyond dereliction of duty – it’s a brick wall.
So, yeah, the FCP X team needs to change their strategy on this . . . unless they’re already overworked and have no choice in the matter. But, that, too, is a different topic. -
Yes, it’s almost like they have mastered the art of delivering art that limits how we make art.
Heh 🙂 -
They did listen to professionals – the “democratized” professionals. And how did they know who to trust? Well, I suspect the FCP X development team are “democratized” artists themselves. Isn’t that what Apple has pushed for all it’s life? The “democratized” experience?
There is nothing “democratized” about nodes and wires and the infinitely malleable logic of Shake – better dump that. But maintaining sync? Oh,yeah, baby. That’s as democratized a concept as the one-button mouse! Even the word “storyline” is so much more democratized than “timeline.” What’s time got to do with telling a story, anyway. That’s so confusing. Like clips. What are clips? From my fingernails? But “events!” I understand “events.” I went to my 3rd grade graduation and that was an “event!”Yeah, I’m a Brian Regan fan.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A194vDpXzyA&feature=related
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
I’m not any kind of artist.In 25 years I’ve edited tons of horrible and boring things.
I try to be artist when I make movies (write, shot, edit, cc,..) for my self.
Then, beside the much or little talent/art that I might have, I apply my 25 years learning (still) every single thing I could on video, to get the most of my technical resources (lighting, camera, video processing,..).
A video-editor is a craftsman and doesn’t need to be an artist, the same that artists doesn’t need to be a video editor.A little artistic but skilled video-editor, beside an artist will always accomplish more than any artist without skills. Simplifying tools won’t change nothing when simplifying means handicapping them and compromising the results.
For the people so much concern about art: Artist do not only pay a lot of attention to their tools.
They also pay a lot off attention to the RAW MATERIALS.But, if we are artists, which is our raw material?
For me is very clear: Video (Picture and audio. Light and sound).
Something that, most times, start in a camera and happens to have TRACKS (After manipulations, I end up making something that is call A MOVIE, that its happens to be a video too, with the same TRACKS structure. Art and talent, as needed).Understanding the nature of the raw material is fundamental for the artist (The stone is an obsession for the sculptor. The artist may don’t care about the quality of his tools and material only when he knows he has the best).
But I don’t really understand which is the raw material within FCPX.
Events?
Then Apple should have avoided to present FCPX as “Video Editing” tool.
Should have find a new PARADIGMA (fed up of this word) to replace the word VIDEO.
The new model is to make the same than the old (Movies) but “Video Editing”doesn’t describe his functions. Call it “Movie Building”or something ore marketable, but not Video Editing.About Presets:
Using Presets is like filming in AUTO.
Is like giving the same medicine to people with different symptoms (you want to cure them or just send then home?).Presets are only justified is a “Preset Ecosystem” with Preset needs” and “Presets requirements”.
When you want more, you don’t go preset.Are OK as guide or base settings.
No customization is assuming that a preset is PERFECT, but is there any thing that can’t be improved?
In most cases there are nothing better than your eyes to see what your picture needs (treatments, levels, processes, data-rates,..) The more Pro an app is, the more customizable will be.Is very curious, with so much art&metadata around, I haven’t heard no critics or feedback about FCPX on issues that used be of FCPs editors concern just few months ago: Up/downscaling, de-interlacing, compression.
Is that FCPX is perfect on those tasks? or, is that nobody has paid attention because those are not anymore editor matters?
Best,
Rafael -
[Don Scioli] “BTW, your spelling, writing and grammar…are you, a), a bad typist; b), illiterate or C) Foreign?”
All of the above.;)
Quobetah
New=Better -
Another example of democratized talent coming out from the woods with little resources but genius product!:)
Quobetah
New=Better -
[Rafael Amador] “Up/downscaling,”
Better than FCP Legacy
[Rafael Amador] “de-interlacing”
You can do it in FCPX without a filter, and it’s OK. You can roll a deinterlace effect from Motion if you need greater control.
[Rafael Amador] “compression.”
Meaning?
[Rafael Amador] “Is that FCPX is perfect on those tasks? or, is that nobody has paid attention because those are not anymore editor matters?”
It matters and people have been paying attention. FCPX does render in proper 3:2 pulldown from 24p material on a 1080i/525i timeline.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up