Failing so hard

[Jason Jenkins]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “why would they? apart from anything else its crappy, buggy software that is barely fit for purpose on any professional level.”

I’ve made quite a bit of money editing on FCPX so far. I find I can get my work done faster with it.

[Aindreas Gallagher] “FCPX was expressely designed to monetise iMovie users. That is its reason for being.
that is what Apple chose to do with FCP – monetise their iMovie users.”

I’ve never used iMovie.

[Aindreas Gallagher] ”
It is not an application built for, or intended for, anything we could vaguely describe as the professional market (say where your Job depends on its capabilities and reliability): it is intended to take three hundred dollars out of the pocket of the casual enthusiast”

I’ve got six figures worth of work lined up for next year. Based on my experience with FCPX so far, I anticipate using it for the majority of that work. Not bad for a casual enthusiast.

Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production… with style!

[Aindreas Gallagher]

six figures of advanced billings booked for next year already? Well that’s impressive..

You don’t find FCPX problematic then? You don’t have issues with stability, reliability, the canned effects from motion with limited parameters, inability to manage large projects, how do you work with music based edits? Are you flooding the primary with the audio? That’s the only thing I can do, and that just feels incredibly stupid. Don’t you find the fact that we’re being asked to use iMovie and iPhoto events in the least annoying? Isn’t that a bit of a stupid paradigm for professional use? Anyway.. Either end, if it works for you, it works for you, and good luck with it.

The people who acknowledge the bugs and instabilities in this software while defending it, will always call it beta software- but when you look at the basic architectural flaws like the project file mutating in size to a point where the software grinds to a belt, based on basic edits, compound clips and markers *MARKERS* – that too me just doesn’t look like particularly good software. I don’t think this is very good software. What is so special about it? Seriously – what is so amazing that I couldn’t have picked up in iMovie? This feels like a very, very, very buggy expansion of iMovie.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Steve Connor]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “You don’t find FCPX problematic then? You don’t have issues with stability, reliability, the canned effects from motion with limited parameters, inability to manage large projects, how do you work with music based edits? Are you flooding the primary with the audio? That’s the only thing I can do, and that just feels incredibly stupid. Don’t you find the fact that we’re being asked to use iMovie and iPhoto events in the least annoying? Isn’t that a bit of a stupid paradigm for professional use? “

Within it’s known limitations FCPX is perfectly usable, I’ve used it on a dozen projects and it’s been great. Many others are using it for commercial work and it’s fine for them also. Cutting music based edits is NOT a problem when you actually learn to use the software. I don’t give a monkeys about the iMovie and IPhoto imports because I never use them.

Have you started learning Avid yet?

“My Name is Steve and I’m an FCPX user”

[Aindreas Gallagher]

Still january. New rig = learn Avid time.

Wasn’t talking about iMovie imports – was talking about the event paradigm itself. I don’t understand how people cannot see that events were intended as , and designed as, chronological buckets arcing back in time for casual consumer use in iMovie and iPhoto. that is what they were made to do – that is their function. No consumer wants to turn off events. But we have to – because we don’t match the behaviour for the intended customer for what is clearly a souped up, (and amazingly buggy) iMovie+.

we turn off chronological ordering, and we begin monkeying around with events in the finder to get a workable professional schema out of a consumer orientated product.

It’s a consumer enthusiast product filled to the brim with consumer simplifications. Apple could not care less if it enters into broad professional paid usage. That’s not what they designed it for – they designed it to expand and monetise the deep consumer base familiar with, and regularly using, iMovie.

That the odd professional here and there perseveres with it is sort of here nor there – sure as jeremy said – its the editor not the tools, whatever works, but apple simply don’t care, we are not in any way who this product was designed for.

http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics