Are NLEs like bicycles?

[Bill Davis]

Nope. I will absolutely and gladly acknowledge that a ton of other editors prefer other approaches – and I never quarrel with that. That’s fine. But the way you, yourself have phrased this: that there are “problems with the way the software operates” is precisely what gets my hackles up. You may not LIKE or prefer the way it functions – and that’s totally fine. But that is NOT the same as there being “problems” with how it functions. Like many, many, many others I’ve got four years cutting in it and I’ve NEVER failed to deliver with it. That is the opposite of broken. That is DEPENDABLE. Period. Not being optimal for the way you prefer editing to operate is NOT equal to damaged. Period. You don’t like the magnetic timeline, fine. I LOVE it. It lets me edit faster. And for all the scholarly analysis of the X paradigm you’ve written about- – I confess I sometimes read that with confusion. I wonder why you seem so determined to make this so complex and hard? Because so many of the things that cause you concern? They are things I just explored for a week, and they fell into place – and that was it. I intuitively understood the idea. And moved on. And I am surely NO editing wiz. I guess I’m more like those kids the teachers here always talk about. The ones with no investment or pre-conceptions of how the thing should work, so they just except how it does. Simple. Which I like. FWIW.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.

[Andrew Kimery]

[James Culbertson] “How about the “Your NLE is crappier than mine” forum?”

Only if we add “The Debate” to the end of it. That’s the signature element. Hopefully someone at the COW has slapped a trademark(?) on it already.

[David Lawrence]

[tony west] “That’s what get’s me though David. The people in that room were reacting to what they saw in realtime.

Before they were told by others that they should hate it, they liked it : )”

I responded the same way too, Tony. I wasn’t in the room at NAB but a buddy of mine was and he msged me photos and texted what he was seeing as it happened. I watched the demo on YouTube the instant it hit and was thrilled. I remember calling my partners in LA with excitement about the new version of FCP we’d be upgrading our studio to, and how powerful and cheap it was going to be.

And then a couple months later it was released. I downloaded it, opened it up and my jaw hit the floor.

What I (and I think a lot of other people) assumed was that the demo was showing off the big new features. What I imagined was that this new version would have all the capabilities of FCP7 but done a new way with these amazing new features added.

I was shocked that the NAB demo (which was framed as a sneak peak) was basically all the program did. That many professional features I depended on were completely stripped away. The final blow was seeing that it couldn’t open any of my FCP projects but opened iMovie projects just fine. I was pissed. That led me and my brother to make a certain YouTube Hitler meme video that went viral, lol.

[tony west] “I had forgotten how bad a job the presenter did. Just in terms of how nervous he was and stumbling all over his words.

How he didn’t even have the program there to actually show how it worked. He just described how it worked and kind of poorly.”

The presenter is Peter Steinauer, Apple’s Senior Software Engineer/Application Architect for Video Applications. FCPX is his baby. Watching this clip, he doesn’t seem nervous or stumbling to me at all. Quite the opposite. I now find his presentation arrogant, condescending and revealing. Especially this section:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-77beFICSlI#t=21m05s

Here he’s comparing a FCP7 timeline with the same timeline in FCPX. Of course, what he’s conveniently not telling the audience is that it’s impossible to open the FCP7 timeline in FCPX. How do you think the crowd would have reacted to that minor detail?

Then there’s this statement:

This is what that same sequence looks like in the new Final Cut Pro. Every single edit that was in the previous one is in this. Every single cut at every single frame is in this sequence, (note – he calls it a sequence not a project!) but because of compound clips, clip connections and the magnetic timeline I’ve got a much more easy to understand sequence that I can actually do more interesting things with…

Much more easy to understand? What a joke! The FCP7 timeline is a crystal clear map of the final program. Every media element is visible and at the editor’s fingertips. It’s impossible to tell WTF is happening in the FCPX timeline because so much is hidden. And btw, there’s no way to see the hidden media in context because compound clips open in their own timelines.

The FCPX timeline looks simpler, but is it easier for an editor to read and understand? No way!

This demo is being given by an engineer, not a video editor. The presenter’s assumptions and language the reveal this. What we wind up with are UX design decisions reflecting engineering values. To an engineer, the FCPX timeline is more clear because it’s simpler. But a video editor might well say that it’s less useful, because it hides so much vital information. To an engineer, the clip connections, compound clips, and the magnetic timeline, make “interesting” things possible like moving chunks around without “damaging” the program. A video editor might say that’s great, but what about the times it gets in the way?

I don’t mean to imply that there aren’t innovative ideas here. There definitely are. But there are also some unnecessary design flaws and unintended consequences that could have easily been avoided. Maybe they’ll get addressed sometime in the next five years, lol!

And don’t get me started on the demo of the precision editor. From the language he uses, it seems clear these developers have no idea how experienced editors do precision trimming (hint, it’s usually done by feel with looping and the keyboard).

[tony west] “When Evan showed up, it was impossible to make the argument that he had never seen that program.”

I’m sure they gave out preview copies, but I sincerely doubt they incorporated any critical feedback. The bottom line is Apple built the video editor they wanted to build.

And I say hooray for that. It was a mess when they released it but ever since they fixed libraries, it’s been quite fine and great choice for everyone who likes it. And it’s certainly made the NLE playing field a lot more interesting!

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
https://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums

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.

[David Lawrence]

[Bill Davis] “But the way you, yourself have phrased this: that there are “problems with the way the software operates” is precisely what gets my hackles up. You may not LIKE or prefer the way it functions – and that’s totally fine. But that is NOT the same as there being “problems” with how it functions.”

Bill – a long time ago before I became a full-time video maker, I was a software and UX designer. So I can say with absolute confidence, based on direct experience that all software has problems.

There are brilliant things about FCPX. And there are things about FCPX that are completely, undeniably, lame.

And this is also true about FCP7 and Premiere Pro, and Avid, and Vegas, and Resolve, and Edius, and Lightworks, and every other piece of software on the market.

All software has problems. That’s not a value judgment, it’s simply a fact.

I think it’s wonderful you’ve found a piece of editing software you LOVE. Enjoy it. But even if it doesn’t affect you, I assure you it has problems, just like every single piece of complex software ever written by human beings has problems.

FCPX is not precious and if you want it to get better, it good to be open to thoughtful critique of how it operates. That’s my intention when I write.

So let your hackles fly. I’m just calling it as I see it!

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
https://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums

[Mark Suszko]

As a former Discreet Edit*6 user, I can only shrug at the collective drama going on here. But it’s not going to sway the faithful on either side.

[Dennis Radeke]

[Andrew Kimery] “No offense to our Adobe friends here, but AFAIK Premiere (and I don’t just mean Pro) has been crapped on as an only-for-wedding-videographers, also-ran NLE by Avid and FCP users up until about CS6 or CC so that’s a good 15-20yrs.”

None taken and I can agree wholeheartedly.

[Andrew Kimery] ” And to be perfectly honest, if Apple had released FCP 8, instead of FCP X, PPro would still be on the outside looking in. It wouldn’t have mattered about how good it was because, well, it would still Premiere.”

I think FCP8 would have been a great Star Trek “alternate reality” universe. For me, I feel Adobe video ENG teams and Premiere Pro in particular had a very clear focus of where we wanted to get to. With CS5, the Mercury Playback Engine, 64-bit native, etc. etc. we started our trajectory to where we are today. I feel we would have gotten there anyway even if Apple had done FCP8, but it is a great “what if” question if ever there was one for this group… 😉

[Tony West]

[David Lawrence] ” I was pissed. That led me and my brother to make a certain YouTube Hitler meme video that went viral, lol.”

hahaha I had no idea that was you David : )

[David Lawrence] “The presenter is Peter Steinauer,”

Oh I knew who he was, I watched them introduce him and say his title. Speaking while the audience is cheering is a basic no no. People can’t hear you when you do that. He couldn’t even do basic stuff like that right. Not having the program on the screen instead of stills. Evan blew him out of the water for my money. Arrogance? (or confidence) Evan had that in spades, remember that point when he looked at the audience and said, “do you like this? I mean, I don’t care” hahaha He was keeping it real. He didn’t care if they liked it or not, he liked it.

[David Lawrence] “The final blow was seeing that it couldn’t open any of my FCP projects but opened iMovie projects just fine.”

Yes, this was a killer for so many. For me, it wasn’t that big of a deal since you could still use FCP
If I wanted to work on an old project I could open it in the program that I had been using for years.

In theory, of course it should, but in practice, I wasn’t really doing that anyway. My clients weren’t coming to me wanting some old video I did for them 2 or 3 years ago. They wanted fresh new stuff.

So many things have changed so quickly. When I look back at stuff I shot before the affordable large sensor cameras, I cringe. I want to re-shoot all that stuff with my primes. Heck, I’d rather you pay me to do a whole new video anyway so I can make more money : )

I hear you and others, it just wasn’t a deal breaker for me.

[David Lawrence] “he’s conveniently not telling the audience is that it’s impossible to open the FCP7 timeline in FCPX. How do you think the crowd would have reacted to that minor detail?”

I think they would have booed him depending on how he did it.

Once again, it’s presenting 101 You get out ahead of bad news, you don’t let people find out on their own. He should have said that you won’t be able to do that but you will still have FCP to work with. Apologize and move on.

[David Lawrence] ” It’s impossible to tell WTF is happening in the FCPX timeline because so much is hidden. And btw, there’s no way to see the hidden media in context because compound clips open in their own timelines.”

You can just hit “break apart clip items” and it expands all clips back out “in’ the timeline.

When guys post stills of their timeline on here they don’t ever post a bunch of CCs, they want you to see their work. It’s always expanded.

CCs is just a tool I use from time to time when I don’t want to scroll up and down so much while I’m working. I know I can always expand the clips back when ever I get done or need to.

If I have a ten layer deep graphic section, why do I need all that head room? I just compress it for now while I’m working. It’s an option. You don’t have to ever use it.

[David Lawrence] “I’m sure they gave out preview copies, but I sincerely doubt they incorporated any critical feedback. “

Then why give out copies? If they don’t want to hear what he has to say he can just wait like the rest of us.

We know they listened to the guys on Focus because they came out and publicly said so.

[David Lawrence] ” It was a mess when they released it but ever since they fixed libraries, it’s been quite fine and great choice for everyone who likes it. And it’s certainly made the NLE playing field a lot more interesting!”

Indeed : )

[Andrew Kimery]

[Dennis Radeke] “I think FCP8 would have been a great Star Trek “alternate reality” universe.”

But who gets to wear the goatees and the sashes? 😉

[Dennis Radeke] “. I feel we would have gotten there anyway even if Apple had done FCP8, but it is a great “what if” question if ever there was one for this group… 😉
“

I have no doubt that PPro would have arrived at the same place regardless of what Apple did, but if Apple had released FCP 8 I don’t think very many users would’ve been motivated to see what Adobe had been up to. To a lesser extent I think this is true with Avid as well. For example, there are three good-sized places I used to work at that were FCP for a very long time but now two are on PPro and one is on Avid. If FCP 8 had been released I couldn’t imagine any of them switching to PPro or Avid over 8.

For the industry though I think the shake up has been a good thing as it’s forced people to take a hard look at their situation and surroundings. For NLE usage it’s a legit three dog race between the Three A’s (with a couple of dark horses in Resolve and Lightworks) and I think the competition is a good, healthy thing.

-Andrew

[Brett Sherman]

Thanks for writing the most well-thought out post on this thread. 🙂

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[James Culbertson] ” folks who have not been here before might get the idea it is about personal preferences specific to FCPX when it is really more about general NLE preferences at this point.
“

well no. this forum, ideally, exists to remind any potential reader, viewing it in a debate context, that X is kind of irritatingly awful, and that they should salt the earth before they would lay hands on it given how crazy apple’s decision making has been over time – and how utterly insane the random distressed chrome 3D type updates have been lately.

Some people think this should be an arena within which people discuss the varying merits and methodologies of specific editing software over time, and the meaning of editing that lies behind it all.

but, the thing is, they are wrong. This is actually the forum that allows you to therapeutically knee FCPX in the groin until the sun grows cold. The forum also allows some other people to sit around and defend it.

that’s how I’d pitch it anyway.

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics