And the first major Hollywood feature to be edited in FCPX and released is…

[Michael Gissing]

Jeremy it seems that my reference to historical concerns about frame accuracy before neg cutting is meant to insinuate anything about modern NLEs. Because the stakes are higher when neg is cut there was a great concern about using any system other than AVID.

My point was that these days there is not such sensitivity and as all NLEs are frame accurate there is no longer any problem other than nuisance when shoddy work flow means wrong shots get linked when projects are moved from an NLE to Resolve for grading via XML. The fact that a job last week had that issue from Pr was down to file name duplicates caused by poor location work flow not the NLE but the truth is that I itf was a neg cut,the consequences would not be trivial.

Anyway I still stand by the observation that there isn’t the level of significance with this feature that there was with Cold Mountain. It is more mole hill than mountain.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Michael Gissing] “t is more mole hill than mountain.”

And those are dinosaur moles right?

[Michael Gissing] “Jeremy it seems that my reference to historical concerns about frame accuracy before neg cutting is meant to insinuate anything about modern NLEs. Because the stakes are higher when neg is cut there was a great concern about using any system other than AVID. “

[Michael Gissing] “My point was that these days there is not such sensitivity and as all NLEs are frame accurate there is no longer any problem other than nuisance when shoddy work flow means wrong shots get linked when projects are moved from an NLE to Resolve for grading via XML.”

I see what you’re saying but X was laughed out of “professional workflows”; literally bounced on it’s ass while the door blasted it right out to the gutter. It had zero interchange and couldn’t handle a feature film.

Now, it’s much more mature, has a brand new interchange language that seems to work well enough for the less sensitive digital workflows.

Perhaps, what you are saying, is that this is to be expected, and if so, maybe you are right. It is impressive that in a relatively short time, FCPX was ready enough to handle feature film work when it couldn’t when it started, Cold Mountain moments or Kodak moments aside.

[Michael Gissing]

All I am saying is that the editing landscape is not the same as when FCP broke through with Cold Mountain. Everyone remembers the name of that film because it changed the edit world profoundly. I don’t think any NLE can have such an effect anymore.

For an Apple NLE to get back to be used in features is noteworthy and for those that have bled at the edge a toast is justified. But our rapid news cycle and the fact that many NLEs are feature capable means that I bet hardly anyone will remember Focus as a pivotal point in NLE history. Big tick yes, revolution hardly.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Michael Gissing] “Big tick yes, revolution hardly.”

I must be losing something in the translation.

I think what you’re saying is that, it wasn’t the fact that a movie was edited in an NLE, it was that it was edited on something besides Avid. And the marketing push behind that effort, began to legitimize Final Cut Pro as an NLE that could work at that level, even though there was a lot of “behind the scenes” tinkering to FCP to get it to work at that level.

And now, Final Cut Pro X, the skate punk NLE, after being shunned for a long time, by long time professionals, proves capable of editing a main stream feature, and this news is a footnote.

Perhaps.

I would also think that there’s quite a number of film making professionals that would be interested in hearing about how this was done, considering all the FCPX hoopla. And for the younger film makers who have a laptop and a camera and want to make a movie, this may give them a little more imagination. Cold Mountain was billed as using laptops editing dv footage in the actual nearset mountains (not mole hills). This was also a major shift in thinking for what was required to make a movie, or what was possible to do closer to production. You and I might not be interested in Focus being made in X, but I would bet that the buck does not stop there, especially since NONE of this was possible with X when it launched.

[Timothy Auld]

There is no way that I can fathom that an industry burned by Apple many times over is going to adopt FCPX as a standard. It may be used here and there where it suits purposes. But if this feature is such a game changer for FCPX then where is Apple in all of this? Why isn’t it all over their PR?

Tim

[Timothy Auld]

It must be the “third party” strategy.

Tim

[Charlie Austin]

[TImothy Auld] “There is no way that I can fathom that an industry burned by Apple many times over”

Seriously?

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Timothy Auld]

Yes, seriously. Now what about the rest of the question?

Tim

[Timothy Auld]

Need I go through the list of software that Apple has purchased and then killed?

Tim

[Charlie Austin]

[TImothy Auld] “Yes, seriously. Now what about the rest of the question?”

Oh, right…

[TImothy Auld] “But if this feature is such a game changer for FCPX then where is Apple in all of this? Why isn’t it all over their PR?”

First, Apple didn’t “burn” an industry. Second, the only People calling this a “Game Changer” are people on blogs. I’m sure Apple will put this on their In Action page at some point.

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~