-
FCPX and The Great Misnomer
In my opinion, a lot of the misunderstandings about FCPX and people’s attitudes and beliefs towards it stem from some assumptions that not everyone takes for granted.
A) Apple is a great company that employs brilliant minds and so while we may not understand what the thinking process behind FCPX was, we just have to accept that it is better than what we are used to.
Apple is a great tech company, I don’t think anyone would dispute that. They have definitely made a lot of money, and rightfully so. However, even the most brilliant of minds make the stupidest decisions. It’s part of being human. And no matter how great Apple has been in the past, they can fail just like anyone else can.
B) FCPX will be the standard.While it is true that no one has directly said this, I feel like it is in the underlying message whenever someone bemoans “turning people off” to this software, as if changing someone’s NLE from FCP to Premiere/AVID is a terrible thing. In my opinion this stems from an unstated idea that FCPX will be the dominant standard once the issues are ironed out. It may or may not, only time will tell, but the writing on the wall seriously isn’t good for that to be the case. Besides, this doesn’t jive with the other stated idea of big production houses going the way of the dodo. If it’s going to be one-man band operations in the future, then why do you have to learn one over the other? That idea has always been about getting a job with a post house in the first place.
C) FCPX is a better way to edit and is poised to pave the way for the next decade
This was marketing from Apple and I’ve seen it parroted again here. First, let’s define “better.” I don’t think there is a video that has been done in the last few years that could not have been done with equal quality in any of the three major NLE’s. By “better” I feel that can only mean faster and easier. That’s really the only way to different yourself.
Is FCPX faster? I don’t think so, but it can’t be effectively argued one way or the other. You may find it faster, I might not (I don’t actually). “Easier” also suffers from the same fate. You simply cannot make this a point. And being “future proof” is also meaningless. What exactly about FCPX makes it ready for the next decade over and above the competition? That it can export to an codec for web distribution? I can do that in Premiere. That it can work with H.264 footage? I can do that in Premiere as well. I also reject the premise that it is geared towards “up and coming editors.” If you’re not an up-and-coming editor, then how do you know that it’s what these teenagers/young adults want and need? Isn’t that somewhat patronizing to think that they need something with “easier accessibility”?
D) FCPX will only continue to get better.
Frankly, I hope Apple is able to do this, simply because I think we all win if there are three heavily competing useful NLEs on the market. But it’s mere speculation that the FCPX we have in 2012/2013 will be substantially different than the FCPX that we have right now. How do we know that FCPX won’t follow a similar upgrade pattern to what has been seen with iMovie? There is simply no way to tell one way or the another until Apple either shares its vision or that new version comes out.
-
34 Replies
-
[Gary Huff] “B) FCPX will be the standard.
While it is true that no one has directly said this … “
What was it you said about hyperbole?
____
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”
-
*glomming on with own rant*
B) FCPX will be the standard.
I’m going ranty again: I am going to be forced to learn avid. AVIDFCP really is dying like bad smelly meat my end right now – that is the crazy realisation half of London is waking up to – the whole thing is actually dying, the entire conception of FCP in production and post production – the entire shagging thing. I cannot believe apple have done this.
C) FCPX is a better way to edit and is poised to pave the way for the next decade.
seriously – they just burned FCP alive – it was our shoemakers shoe. apple just broke tens upon of thousands of shoe maker’s shoes in front of the shoemaker’s eyes. They literally broke the entire concept of the application in half.
C) FCPX is a better way to edit and is poised to pave the way for the next decade.
they’re just too unstable with this software move. No facility, no post production house, no broadcast entity, no one vaguely serious could ever trust them again. This software shift is way too mental. its a ludicrous mix of their amateur software ambitions and their boiled down understanding of what they think editing should be. parts of it are like scrawls on a wall. It’s just too far gone. Which is awful because i’d sooner have to get to grips with this than avid.
C) FCPX is a better way to edit and is poised to pave the way for the next decade.
no, what they have come up with is a tagged organiser “things” app, with a rectangular colour corrector.
C) FCPX is a better way to edit and is poised to pave the way for the next decade.
no the timeline is awful.
C) FCPX is a better way to edit and is poised to pave the way for the next decade.
no, the precision editor is the pirates of the Caribbean ride of editing (things move dramatically!).
C) FCPX is a better way to edit and is poised to pave the way for the next decade.
FCPX is a horrible, confused, disrespectful, seriously poorly thought out, itunes software team sunday afternoon effort, stick a glow on that timeline mess.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Gary Huff] “C) FCPX is a better way to edit and is poised to pave the way for the next decade
This was marketing from Apple and I’ve seen it parroted again here. First, let’s define “better.” I don’t think there is a video that has been done in the last few years that could not have been done with equal quality in any of the three major NLE’s. By “better” I feel that can only mean faster and easier. That’s really the only way to different yourself.
Is FCPX faster? I don’t think so, but it can’t be effectively argued one way or the other. You may find it faster, I might not (I don’t actually). “Easier” also suffers from the same fate. You simply cannot make this a point. And being “future proof” is also meaningless. What exactly about FCPX makes it ready for the next decade over and above the competition? That it can export to an codec for web distribution? I can do that in Premiere. That it can work with H.264 footage? I can do that in Premiere as well. I also reject the premise that it is geared towards “up and coming editors.” If you’re not an up-and-coming editor, then how do you know that it’s what these teenagers/young adults want and need? Isn’t that somewhat patronizing to think that they need something with “easier accessibility”?”
Another talking point often bandied about here is everything before X is old technology like using a Steenbeck. What nonsense that is.
Steenbeck has been around since the 50’s and is still making flatbeds. Well, that’s over 50 years. Has apple manufactured any product so popular it stayed in production for even 15 years? Will apple even be around in 20 more years?
Another funny thing about the Steenbeck is that it is often used by the hipsters that want to sit and edit in the local coffee shop (don’t get me started) as a symbol of a ‘stupid old way of doing things’. But I bet that if you have enough work to afford one of these gems, you make a lot more money than these coffee shop editors that get their gigs from Crags list. And there must be enough people doing it the ‘stupid old way’ to keep Steenbeck in business.
One thing apple could learn from Steenbeck. Steenbeck supports their editor back to models made in 1979. Apple can’t even support something made 3 years ago, let alone 30.Scott Sheriff
Director
https://www.sstdigitalmedia.com“If you think it’s expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.” —Red Adair
Where were you on 6/21?
-
[Gary Pollard]What was it you said about hyperbole?
Perhaps you should be more worried about selectively quoting people?
-
It’s true, my friend.
I’m taking a Smoke class, and the instructor, within the first few minutes, points out that projects done in FCP 7 can be brought into Smoke for finishing, but not if you’re using FCP X.
“FCP X is just Final Cut Express – Advanced. It’s essentially a toy. I don’t know how long FCP 7 can last, but I doubt it’ll be more than 1 or 2 years.”
His voice is completely devoid of emotion – he’s clumsy with FCP and he’s never used Avid. He could just as easily be talking about WalMart. But as a Smoke Op for The Mill, it’s obvious his opinion is one shared by those top 5% in our industry. The effects are already in motion. We may debating it here, but the conclusion is already spilling out there.Moments later, we’re looking at Smoke’s timeline and the instructor casually draws our attention to the “Ripple” toggle – which gives Smoke’s timeline a somewhat “magnetic” characteristic.
“Make sure that’s off – you don’t want that on 90% of the time. You shouldn’t have to deal with the length of your timeline changing every time you make a decision to add or remove a clip.”
It’s like DejaVu – wasn’t David Lawrence saying that a month back? Smart cookie.And guess what’s the first thing we’re taught?
How to conform off an EDL. One of the oldest methods of transferring a story from one machine to the other – still being used – and on a system that blows nitrous-fueled-smoke-rings around FCP X.Salt and wounds.
It’s obvious he doesn’t hate Apple or FCP X or any of it. He’s not connected to them. He’s a Smoke Op who lives off of PC boxes and Linux. He’s just teaching a class, and calling it as he sees it.
But it’s also obvious that the FCP X debacle is starting to color everything else Apple does. For those inside and outside the Final Cut community.
When he updated his MacBook Air to Lion, and discovered that it not only broke Nuke, but his screen-capturing software, he gently reminded us of the dangers in trusting your pipeline to a company that doesn’t seem to value backwards-compatibility.
Ouch.
It’s not something I’d thought about before.
Apple’s actions haven’t just affected the FInal Cut community. Everyone in our industry is gazing at this mess, and the conclusions are already seeping into the mainstream and into our education.
Of course, the “rebels” and “believers” will maintain their faith in Apple, and that is their right and their choice.
But seeing this play out in front of me – like the results to a 2-month long experiment – seeing “the elite” influencing “education” and our industry’s “culture” – I can’t decide whether I should laugh or cry.
;- -
Either you believe it or you don’t. You are inferring from people’s posts, just as some here like to infer about Apple’s plans (which you apparently don’t support, at least if those inferences are positive)
An admitted straw man is still a straw man.
And by definition, that’s hyperbole.
____
“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”
-
So, lets join in!
So far nothing really bad happend. FCP7 is still a very reliable, stable professional software. This will continue at least for the next 12 months. We produce very little DVDs any longer. This was different 2 years ago. So I wouldn’t continue with DVDPro. In a max. of 2 years time the DVD will be dead. USB sticks are taking over. If we are friendly we could argue, that FCPX is a start, which has to be developed. I was looking into Smoke, and it is a tremendous piece of Software. But too expensive. If you make the most out of the FCP package, you achieve similar results – for most of the jobs I do. Clearly the greenscreen with smoke is far better, and other things look just great. Smoke for me is Motion, colour and FCP in one piece. If you work with 3D Models regulary then Smoke is perfect. The more price sensitive option is Premiere pro. We all work with photoshop and After effects, so Premiere is for free then. It is very similar to FCP. Avid is a choice as well. Bur Avid does not support our beloved AJA Kona cards. Also the surrounding package is weak (compared with FCP Studio or CS5.5).
So what do we do?
Folks out there, we will just wait and see, what comes up. And we’ve got time. We still can feed the needs of the TV industry for the next 2 years, with what we have got. We can decide wether we step up to smoke, start with Avid or Adobe, or we go continue with FCPX in an advanced version. I truly believe FCPX will be developed, it has to be. If not, it will die for the professionals. But for us – it is just switching to a new hammer with a different feeling – but with the same professional results – excellent programs, films, shows, clip etc.
Let us see what the future brings to us. In the end, we spend the money.
Wait and see.Rainer
-
This pretty much echos an experience I just had with a heavy hitter Producer.
In order to make things simple for the final cut x glee club and a bit more interesting, just select a number from this list in your response.
If you want to get creative, string together several numbers, or use a combination to add up a number not on the list, and we will guess what numbers you picked.
Please no binaries, I haven’t had my coffee yet and it’s too early for that heavy math.1. The Smoke op doesn’t know what he is talking about.
2. The Smoke op is stuck in the 90’s, with a 90’s workflow.
3. The Smoke op is just a hater.
4. The Smoke op is just a snob, or elitist.
5. Final Cut X is a work in progress, and pretty soon it will be so kick ass that guys like Cameron will be able to movies like Avatar with X and a stereo GoPro.
6. Move on if you don’t like X, and it doesn’t work for you. Shouldn’t this be posted in the Smoke forum?
7. All of the above.
Scott Sheriff
Director
https://www.sstdigitalmedia.com“If you think it’s expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.” —Red Adair
Where were you on 6/21?
-
[Rainer Wirth] “We produce very little DVDs any longer.”
Who is this “we”?
I do them on every job. Seen plenty of posts from others saying the same thing. Your experience is anecdotal, at best.Scott Sheriff
Director
https://www.sstdigitalmedia.com“If you think it’s expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur.” —Red Adair
Where were you on 6/21?
-
We as a production company (sorry) not we as a whole.
Rainer
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up