-
Adobe – IBC
-
[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 -
[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
-
[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:
https://www.philiphodgetts.com/2017/07/evolving-thinking-on-fcp-x-collaboration/
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[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 -
[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 -
[Scott Witthaus] “I found these lines interesting:”
Your point?
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[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
-
You are welcome.
-
[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?
-
[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
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up