-
Blog: The Future of Editing
-
“I don’t wanna spoil any remarks, but in Motion you can actually build your own double/triple- window interface and save and manage it.”
Wow, you’re right! You just rip the tabs off the pane. I can’t believe I didn’t notice that. Ugh, I feel like a dummy
Rob Grauert, Jr.
http://www.robgrauert.com
command-r.tumblr.com -
Great thread so far. I read Walter’s article on his blog first and now here again. My feelings reading this and other Pro responses have to do with the open vs. closed mindset of “Mature” Pro Editors.
Apple was clear that this was a sneak peek. Larry Jordan did a fine job reiterating this in his coverage so far. Surely, Apple will HAVE TO address all the backwards compatibility and interoperability concerns Pro Editors have with FCP X.
When you step back and look at the big picture here, you see can see the thinking involved with this product at the demo stage: they are trying to simplify and clean up how to edit. There is a bit of a paradigm shift with all the reliance on metadata, and the single viewer, and the “trackless” magnetic timeline, which poses massive concerns for those that know how to “get around” and are comfortable with what they already know.
But no one — NO ONE ON THIS FORUM ANYWAY — has experience learning this version and using it and getting the best out of it yet. All the hoopla about “will it support X or Y because we have invested in hardware or need a solution for whatever…” is immediate, but misses the point of the demo: to show Pro Editors a new / better way to edit with a shift in habits. This will take some getting used to. And surely all the concern is rightfully part of all the money and time spent investing in previous gear and habits.
But change is not always easy. It’s almost like listening to those Avid Editors which never wanted to try FCP. Or try telling a die hard AE guy that his composite is easer with a node-based solution, like Nuke.
So what if the software looks pretty and clean and “iMovie-ish?” At the end of the day, if Editor A can use FCP X more fluidly with a shorter learning curve and get more power out of it than Editor B can form his older editing software, then who cares what it looks like? And if you are upset about how cheap it is and that it narrows the gap between Pro and Consumer, well, you’re right. The argument about the artist using the tool to create and that access does not equate to good work still stands.
Everything seems very speculative to me and without using this tool no one knows if it works or doesn’t.
Even if Apple forces everyone using FCP X to abandon current gear — WHICH I DOUBT THEY WILL DO — to use this system, it might be for the better in the long run. Backwards support sure seems to hinder other platforms and systems. I mean, look at Microsoft Windows for example 🙂
Ultimately, I’m sure FCP7 and all of FCS3 will be used transitionally as people learn how to use FCP X. And all this much ado about nothing will be an afterthought.
Or not.
-
Thank you for the detailed post, very helpful for those of us who could not come see the unveiling.
-Brendan
-
[walter biscardi] “As for the multiformat timeline, they told us it supports it but never actually showed that one which was surprising for me.”
One of the screen shots from the presentation showed h.264 and prores clips mixed in.
I guess you mean you didn’t actually see it playing that content.
-
I needed recently to make a purchase. I bought a $500 windows 7 laptop and downloaded lightworks.
-
“My feelings reading this and other Pro responses have to do with the open vs. closed mindset of “Mature” Pro Editors.”
Are you implying that anyone that has a different/skeptical opinion on this is closed minded and immature?
How close-minded is it to automatically assume the new=better?
How closed minded is it to gush on and on about how great a product is that has only been shown in a limited demo?
History is on the side of the skeptic.
The list of things designers and engineers thought were ‘better’, ‘innovative’, or the ever trendy ‘paradigm shift’ that turned out to be total failures is a lot bigger, than the list of successes.
There is no doubt that failure paves the road to success, and it is the way to advance, but it is not automatic. This is something you will learn as you ‘mature’.“…but misses the point of the demo: to show Pro Editors a new / better way to edit with a shift in habits.”
This is completely subjective. At best.
I don’t recall asking Apple to show me a better way to edit. I’ve been editing slightly longer than Apple has been in business, and I know what works best for me.
In fact I don’t remember anyone else asking that either. If you can find a post in the FCP forum since the release of 6.0 where the person was looking for “a better way to edit” in this context, I ‘d like to see it. There are however, a lot of posts asking for improvements to the software and advertised features to actually work.“But change is not always easy. It’s almost like listening to those Avid Editors which never wanted to try FCP. Or try telling a die hard AE guy that his composite is easer(sic) with a node-based solution, like Nuke.”
Change, for the sake of change is unproductive. Unless you’re an interior decorator. For change to make sense in a business (that is what editing is) several things have to happen. It has to produce a clear and definable improvement. It has to make financial sense. It has to cause no unwanted consequences, or side effects.
So far, none of these questions can be answered. So those who are currently resistant to change, are probably right.You know what is worse than “listening to those Avid Editors which never wanted to try FCP”? It’s listening to pretentious know-it-all’s trying to push their hobby/brand/music/religion on others that didn’t ask for it.
I’m sure the Avid guys are tired of unsolicited opinions from FCP fanboys.
So “try telling a die hard AE guy that his composite is easer(sic) with a node-based solution,” is a good example of that.
Nodes are great. DVDSP and Color are a couple of good examples of where they work well, but I prefer the viewer/canvas/timeline for editing. If you like node better, bully for you. Your love of nodes doesn’t make you a better than anyone else.
And if the AE guy doesn’t see things your way, so what? Unless you’re getting paid as a consultant I’m guessing the AE guy doesn’t really care what you think. He is happy with what he has. It also doesn’t make him a Luddite. Maybe he is just immune to ‘group think’.“So what if the software looks pretty and clean and “iMovie-ish?” At the end of the day, if Editor A can use FCP X more fluidly with a shorter learning curve and get more power out of it than Editor B can form his older editing software, then who cares what it looks like?”
This is an interesting reversal of attitude to reinforce your point. So on one hand you’re ragging on the Avid and AE guys for liking what they have, and not caring about what others think about it. And then when people are doing the same thing and harshing on the iMovie like UI of X, you revert to the Avid and AE guys attitude of if it works for me what do you care?
This reminds me of another typical double standard seen on these forums. How about all those that make cracks about us ‘mature’, ‘old timers’ not liking change, to make some group think point, and then evoking Murch’s in the next breath to make some other point.“Everything seems very speculative to me and without using this tool no one knows if it works or doesn’t.”
This is the only thing in your post that I didn’t find insulting or condescending, and can agree with.
“Even if Apple forces everyone using FCP X to abandon current gear — WHICH I DOUBT THEY WILL DO…”
Yeah, Apple would never do that, or abandon a group of loyal users…
Scott Sheriff
Director
https://www.sstdigitalmedia.comI have a system, it has stuff in it, and stuff hooked to it. I have a camera, it can record stuff. I read the manuals, and know how to use this stuff and lots of other stuff too.
You should be suitably impressed… -
Thanks for the reply Scott. I’m glad someone had something to say to me regarding that post.
For the record:
I use Avid, Premiere Pro, AE, FCP, Motion and any other tool I need in a given situation or environment. I’m not really a “fanboy” of what Apple makes. I just like well designed solutions that make things easier.
Basically, I look at things from “does it work or not” perspective. Apple is in a unique position to survey the NLE landscape from 10 years of experience and feedback and to create what they think answers a lot of problems with editing.
I “got” this from watching the demo. The way you navigate the timeline and media and, well, edit seemed like a paradigm shift to me and if felt like these smart architects were really trying to re-think editing from the basics on forward. This, of course, is my opinion. But it felt very “new” to me. And I’ve been making my living at this for over 10 years — started on Media 100, then Avid, then FCP, then PP, blah, blah, blah…
Hence, no one knows if this is going to work or not. Not yet.
And yet there is a very closed mind to this before actually testing it for an extended period of time.
So it goes…
-
Look we know the cycle, somebody jumps ahead here, everyone catches up and then they jump ahead somewhere else. Really – Sliding clips doesn’t cause clips to collide and they drop to another track. For me that is a “Duh” but not for the NLE designers. The old SD editor I used to use (DPS velocity) had that happen and all the users applauded – not because it was new, but because we finally had it. Oh that was something like 7 or 8 years ago. On the PC side, IVS edits plays most everything without rendering I believe (mixing sources on the timeline.) Didn’t Autodesk have that what a decade ago on Smoke? yes, but now it is affordable to all of us Joes.
Me, I like having AB tracks with a transition track. Makes cross fades sooooo simple for me. I don’t think FCP has it, and I’ve learned not to need it anyway. I think the applause were for features that we’ve wanted and now we have. The leaps forward – those are interesting, but only time will tell how much a forward leap they are. I’d be happy for a locking collar on the Thunderbolt connector.
Steven Gladstone
https://www.gladstonefilms.com -
[Shawn Larkin] “Thanks for the reply Scott. I’m glad someone had something to say to me regarding that post.
For the record:
I use Avid, Premiere Pro, AE, FCP, Motion and any other tool I need in a given situation or environment. I’m not really a “fanboy” of what Apple makes. I just like well designed solutions that make things easier.
Basically, I look at things from “does it work or not” perspective. Apple is in a unique position to survey the NLE landscape from 10 years of experience and feedback and to create what they think answers a lot of problems with editing.
I “got” this from watching the demo. The way you navigate the timeline and media and, well, edit seemed like a paradigm shift to me and if felt like these smart architects were really trying to re-think editing from the basics on forward. This, of course, is my opinion. But it felt very “new” to me. And I’ve been making my living at this for over 10 years — started on Media 100, then Avid, then FCP, then PP, blah, blah, blah…
Hence, no one knows if this is going to work or not. Not yet.
And yet there is a very closed mind to this before actually testing it for an extended period of time.
So it goes…”
Fair enough.
I was using you’re post as a springboard to comment on several similar type posts along this theme. And while quoting you, I was speaking in a more general sense, which is not clear in my post. I should have said that up front.“And yet there is a very closed mind to this before actually testing it for an extended period of time.”
I can justify this, and it is not about having an open or closed mind.
So if you have been around for a while, you know how much work goes into a proper upgrade. Factor in the install and the learning time, the cost, the risk to system stability, and the unknown of will my current devices/drivers/plugins/projects work with the new version and for some of us, there has to be compelling reasons to try something new. As a one seat shop, I have no interest in risking my system just to be an unpaid Apple R&D guy, or learning new software just for the sake of. If I’m not seeing any benefits to myself, that outweighs any of the potential downsides, I would rather spend that time/money shooting and editing. And with Lightworks for Mac coming out this fall, if I really want to try something new, I can do that for free.
There may be folks out there that see real upsides to the new version, or just love to tweak on new stuff as much as they like to edit. Great. Have at it, and take one for the team.Scott Sheriff
Director
https://www.sstdigitalmedia.comI have a system, it has stuff in it, and stuff hooked to it. I have a camera, it can record stuff. I read the manuals, and know how to use this stuff and lots of other stuff too.
You should be suitably impressed…
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up