-
DaVinci Resolve 8.1 — now with FCPXML roundtrip support
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “It is of course much more likely that Apple just happened to design FCPX along the exact same lines as iMovie without having remembered that they’d done it all before, than that FCPX, heaven forfend, is in any way descended from iMovie.”
And if it is? So what?
-
Given that Randy Ubilos wanted to give the new program that replaced iMovie, a different name, First Cut. Perhaps he thought even then that he was building a framework which could be superficially easy but sustain a very advanced feature set. Sadly, by not giving the product a new name then, it made an association that would be a bit more difficult for PR to handle.
I think the seriously mistaken reasoning is that iMovie 2nd generation is consumer and, therefore, FCPX is based on a consumer app. Whereas iMovie (First Cut) was simply a foundation in which in its simplest form could be used broadly while it could be”built out” into the advanced form FCPX.
While many argued (rightly) about import and export from FCPX, that iMovie import (First Cut import) is really a way for clients to give you rough cuts and selects that can be edited rather than hand typing in time codes.
That some use FCPX’s iMovie (First Cut) lineage as means to denigrate FCPX is, IMHO, flawed reasoning.
-
[Craig Seeman] “That some use FCPX’s iMovie (First Cut) lineage as means to denigrate FCPX is, IMHO, flawed reasoning.”
I agree with this — but I don’t think that’s what Simon was doing at all.
He was pointing out that to the extent that FCPX and iMovie share concepts, interfaces, and data structures, FCPX has effectively been in development for more than 4 years.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] “He was pointing out that to the extent that FCPX and iMovie share concepts, interfaces, and data structures, FCPX has effectively been in development for more than 4 years.”
Yes, iMovie was the skeletal origin of FCPX. I’d add that I think this was done with forethought for a more advanced app. I think, over time, the reasoning behind some of the elements will make more sense and serve better purpose than they do know.
Tangentially a better lineage might be iMovie (First Cut) Quicktime based Desktop, iMovie iPad AV Foundation based, FCPX AV Foundation based Desktop.
-
[Walter Soyka] “I agree with this — but I don’t think that’s what Simon was doing at all.
He was pointing out that to the extent that FCPX and iMovie share concepts, interfaces, and data structures, FCPX has effectively been in development for more than 4 years.”
Thanks, Walter – that’s exactly what I was trying to convey. I had to go the long way around to try and make the point … !
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Jeremy Garchow] “And if it is? So what?”
As Walter kindly pointed out on my behalf, my point was to try and establish that the development cycle for FCPX has seemingly already been a fairly lengthy one …
And this being so, the pace of that development seems less than encouraging.
I am an enthusiastic fan (yes, I can be a fan too!) of the relatively new 3D application called Modo. It’s made by what appears to be a pretty tiny company that just happen to be passionate about what they do – and who incidentally are making a genuinely outstanding and beautifully designed product. (I have no financial or other interest in the product or the company.)
With their relatively limited resources they manage to turn out major updates pretty much once a year and the latest version (Modo 501) released last Xmas is currently on its fifth Service Pack – yup, that’s right SP5!
With the greatest respect to the technology and design behind FCPX, I find it hard to believe that it is as complex a product to develop as a professional level 3D package (I speak from total ignorance, of course).
My point, which I have finally arrived at by a circuitous route, is that I don’t see Apple working at this sort of rate of development with this product. Conversely, I do see a company like Adobe pushing the barriers of what is possible in ways that are truly breath-taking … for example with innovations like this:
Granted FCPX is new and controversial but is it really as technologically ground-breaking as the ideas that regularly come out of Adobe?
OK, so FCPX is going to move on and we may well not have seen the half of it yet – but is it really moving fast enough in today’s world?
Heck, I don’t know – just posing the question …
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.comSome 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.
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “As Walter kindly pointed out on my behalf, my point was to try and establish that the development cycle for FCPX has seemingly already been a fairly lengthy one …”
But MY point is that even though they look the same, they aren’t. Sure they might have the same look and feel, but they aren’t the same application or code base.
Imagine building a full size working model out of painted balsa wood, then having to remake it in steel, even though the product has the same veneer (paint), they are totally different. It takes a while to go from working model to production.
[Simon Ubsdell] “I am an enthusiastic fan (yes, I can be a fan too!) of the relatively new 3D application called Modo. It’s made by what appears to be a pretty tiny company that just happen to be passionate about what they do – and who incidentally are making a genuinely outstanding and beautifully designed product. (I have no financial or other interest in the product or the company.)
With their relatively limited resources they manage to turn out major updates pretty much once a year and the latest version (Modo 501) released last Xmas is currently on its fifth Service Pack – yup, that’s right SP5!”
That’s what this guy is saying: https://digitalcomposting.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/x-vs-pro/
You want your tools to come from people who’s life depends on your buying their software. It’s a blessing and a curse, really.
In 3 months, FCPX had two releases, the launch, then .1 with a .2 or whatever they are going to call it, in another 6 months or less.
FCP 7.0.2 came out in March of 2010, 7.0.3 in September 2010.
[Simon Ubsdell] “My point, which I have finally arrived at by a circuitous route, is that I don’t see Apple working at this sort of rate of development with this product. Conversely, I do see a company like Adobe pushing the barriers of what is possible in ways that are truly breath-taking … for example with innovations like this:”
I’m not being snide, but if Adobe is impressing you with their demos, then what are you still doing here?
Adobe has made a conscious effort to live out loud. Apple has never done that. There is no right or wrong way, just different. Just because Apple doesn’t talk doesn’t mean they aren’t developing, just because Adobe shows previews doesn’t mean that it’s going to work like the cool demos. Two companies, two plans, two styles. Let’s not forget, Adobe is a huge publicly traded company as well.
[Simon Ubsdell] “OK, so FCPX is going to move on and we may well not have seen the half of it yet – but is it really moving fast enough in today’s world?”
I leave you with this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1CZTLk-Gk
Jeremy
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.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I’m not being snide, but if Adobe is impressing you with their demos, then what are you still doing here?”
Because I’m interested in all of this stuff – the good, the bad, the success stories, the disappointments, the questionable, the arguable, and more than anything else, without partisanship, the genuinely great ideas, whoever happens to come up with them.
But I’ll shut up now and retrieve my outdoor attire …
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Jeremy Garchow] “But MY point is that even though they look the same, they aren’t. Sure they might have the same look and feel, but they aren’t the same application or code base. “
That’s a pretty definitive statement. They’re clearly not the same application, but how do you know they’re not sharing the same code base? Just curious.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Simon Ubsdell] “But I’ll shut up now and retrieve my outdoor attire …”
Don’t shut up, please keep it going.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up