At a Crossroads in Editing

[Chris Kenny]

I can’t speak to what’s happening in network TV, but we mostly post indie films, so I get a pretty decent idea of what’s being used for various projects there. Basically, nothing has really changed from a year ago. We still see Media Composer and FCP 7 in about the same proportions. We still haven’t seen anyone cutting on FCP X or Premiere. Though there are exceptions, people who didn’t follow the Internet drama around FCP X seem to largely have a wait-and-see attitude rather than a “Why has Apple forsaken us?” attitude.

In a way, it makes even less sense to make major changes in editing infrastructure now than in the immediate wake of the FCP X announcement. Software-wise, we’re substantially closer to the major update that Apple has promised will address most of the feature gaps in the initial FCP X release, and hardware-wise, Thunderbolt is changing the landscape very quickly. If there isn’t some extremely pressing need to deploy something new immediately, the most sensible choice is to see how things settle out over the course of this year.

In the meantime, one thing that’s settled is that Color is really dead. Learn Resolve; it’s what everyone always wanted Color to be anyway, and the free Lite version is sufficient for practically any project that doesn’t require 2K, 4K or 3D.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Dennis Radeke]

[Andy Neil] “The thing is, I don’t know if you can send Premiere or Avid projects to Color”

It’s possible to import Premiere Pro projects into Color, but it is within the limitations of XML and of course the codec (ProRes). Assuming you’re on a Mac, I’d transcode to ProRes via AME, cut your piece and then send the Premiere Pro XML to Color.

Moving forward, with Adobe’s acquisition of IRIDAS and SpeedGrade, it will be interesting to see where we go.

Dennis – Adobe guy.

[Dennis Radeke]

John – I hope you’ll give us another shot some day. Our focus moving forward is along the lines of what you infer. removing obstacles is a focus. Of course, many FCP users have to unlearn some habits when moving to another NLE (like transcoding).

That said, any switch involves ‘thinking different’ so I understand your hesitancy.

Dennis – Adobe guy.

[Marvin Holdman]

I think the concern for a majority of network TV companies regarding remaining with legacy FCP7 is continuing to generate projects in a legacy program. While it is true that it still functions, it seems only a matter of time before they pull the plug on support of this 32 bit program. At some point, getting to your legacy projects is going to be a tremendous pain, the compulsion for facilities to migrate to another solution quickly is to mitigate this future problem. While no system is safe from this, why would anyone want to continue to produce projects for the next year while all this shakes out vs. moving onto a company which at least has a viable 64 bit program? Not as much of a problem for smaller independent producers, but a real problem where teams generate substantial quantities of media that will have to be dealt in the immediate future (2-3 years).

I think many larger facilities have moved on from FCS7 with a “wait and see” attitude to what might become of FCPX. That being said, with the substantial investment necessitated by Apple with this release, it’s going to be at least 2 years before anyone will even be able to consider FCPX for a facility. If I were planning on working with a facility that had more than 10 editors, I would not waste time with FCPX.

All that being said, if you think you might freelance smaller projects, it wouldn’t hurt to have FCPX under your belt. All depends on how you would like to work. If I had to do a startup tomorrow, I might consider FCPX and AVCHD. That being said, in jobs that have specific calls for camera and edit packages, that package will be pretty limiting. FCPX and AVCHD seem quite viable for jobs where equipment is not a consideration, such as many corporate communications jobs, most local productions and most internet projects.

At this point, FCPX is an inbred application capable of doing some jobs, but not really going to be very helpful on many resumes to network TV for quite some time to come.

Add the fact that there are a great many facilities managers that have some pretty strong negative feelings about Apple/FCPX at the moment, and I’m not sure I would even mention the fact you’ve tried FCPX to many (unless ask). The ham-fisted launch has left many with bitter feelings about this software that sometimes goes beyond the program to the users of the program. Not fair perhaps, but it’s there, as evidenced by the archives of this forum.

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username – vidmarv

[Herb Sevush]

[Marvin Holdman] ” At some point, getting to your legacy projects is going to be a tremendous pain, the compulsion for facilities to migrate to another solution quickly is to mitigate this future problem.”

A major point in the argument for changing systems as soon as possible. The longer you stay with Legacy the more projects you will have to migrate, a process which is rarely without defects.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Chris Kenny]

[Marvin Holdman] “I think the concern for a majority of network TV companies regarding remaining with legacy FCP7 is continuing to generate projects in a legacy program. While it is true that it still functions, it seems only a matter of time before they pull the plug on support of this 32 bit program. At some point, getting to your legacy projects is going to be a tremendous pain, the compulsion for facilities to migrate to another solution quickly is to mitigate this future problem. “

Supporting 32-bit apps on 64-bit systems is a solved problem. Some backwards compatibility features get pulled as soon as possible because it’s a hassle to maintain them or their existence requires compromises that negatively impact other aspects of the system, but this isn’t really one of those; 64-bit systems are going to support 32-bit apps for a long time. Of course unrelated compatibility problems could crop up with future OS versions. But the fact that FCP 7 can export XML in a format widely understood by other apps (including Premiere) removes many of the risks associated with this.

Anyone interested in risk mitigation is sort of in trouble in this industry anyway.

The risks of adopting FCP X at present are obvious. Apple has said they’ll deliver a bunch of additional features, but they haven’t done it yet, and there aren’t really proven high-end workflows around FCP X so far.

You could go to Media Composer, but the risks of standardizing on software from a company that can’t reliably turn a profit are also obvious, and Avid has been on a decade-long downward trajectory that it’s not at all clear will end with the end of classic FCP. FCP X could still succeed, or Premiere could simply take over where classic FCP left off eating away at Avid’s market.

You could switch to Premiere, but Premiere still doesn’t seem to have quite gained acceptance in many segments of the industry, which makes it awkward if you need to work with outside editors, DI facilities, etc. or if you’re a facility trying to hire editors. The risk in adopting Premiere is that it’s not yet clear when or if this will change.

There’s also a certain amount of additional risk with Premiere or Media Composer in that you’re betting against Apple, which might not be a great idea given their record of successfully playing the long game, and the promising foundation FCP X provides. You could go out and buy a few $2500 Media Composer licenses and replace your Macs with Wintel machines and then Apple could spend the next two years turning the $300 FCP X into a killer product that dominates the industry by 2016. I think it’s fairly likely Apple could do this if they were sufficiently determined, so betting that they won’t requires accurately reading their motivations and deciding they’re not that determined. Infering motivations like that is a dicy prospect with a company as cagey as Apple.

By the end of the year (probably more toward the middle) several things will be a lot clearer, like whether Premiere will reach critical mass, whether Apple will deliver on its promises of additional pro features for FCP X, whether the Mac Pro will be updated (and how viable Thunderbolt makes iMacs and MacBook Pros as editing machines if it isn’t). Given that there are various ways to move FCP 7 timelines to other apps if necessary, I just can’t see the ‘legacy file format’ issue as something that should drive people to make potentially expensive decisions before being able to see where things are going.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Dennis Radeke]

[Chris Kenny] “You could switch to Premiere, but Premiere still doesn’t seem to have quite gained acceptance in many segments of the industry, which makes it awkward if you need to work with outside editors, DI facilities, etc. or if you’re a facility trying to hire editors. The risk in adopting Premiere is that it’s not yet clear when or if this will change.”

I won’t argue about the statement outright but would point out that the acceptance you speak of is growing quite rapidly. We’ve had success at major broadcasters(CNN, BBC and Hearst are all public on our website) and film (Avatar, Social Network etc.). There are many more that are in process or are not public (we respect our customers).

So, while I agree that we have room to grow, I do think that we a) are a completely acceptable professional tool b) are growing in the space c) listening to our customers d) intend on supporting them

In the end, when we speak of 45% growth on the Mac (public video), it didn’t all come from lower end users. 😉

Dennis – Adobe guy

[Michael Gissing]

Dennis, like many at the crossroads I am watching developments. FCPX doesn’t fit my area (pic & sound post on broadcast docos). I need mostly a finishing grading tool to output an onlined final to HDCam (yes so yesterday but it feeds the family).

Can you spill any beans on Speedgrade? Da Vinci beckons whilst Color & FCP7 chugs on.

[John Davidson]

Thanks Dennis. Believe me – we absolutely want to start using Premiere (we have 5.0). Nobody wants Adobe to nail it with CS6 as much as I do.
We’ve done lots of research into it. Our editors used it in school. The dream of perfect integration with AE should make our lives much easier.
There are some really fantastic possibilities. I just think that there should be much more ‘ease of use’ included in the Adobe suite of apps.

Here’s a great example. Do you want a reflection effect in any apple product (iWeb, iPhoto, motion, etc)? All you need to do is click a single check button. To do it in illustrator, well, there’s a 7 step process if you can google some tutorials. Wanna do it in AE? Go buy the plugin RG Warp, or try using all kinds of masks and do it yourself. The point is, it’s not simple or easy. These are the types of things that I really want Adobe to focus on. Simplify the interface. Think about adding things like a default dual monitor window setup. Many people who buy your products probably have a dual monitor system.

Let’s put it like this. I’m all dressed up and ready for our date this spring, I just need Adobe to buy me the lobster :). Thanks for being on the forums and facing the firing squad. That really does mean something.

j