-
FCPX Newbie – is learning FCPX worth the time?
-
Imagine some poor sap who suffers a lost wallet or some ID theft a couple of days before the software has to “re-activate” and who’s on deadline that same week.
Talk about a nightmare.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor
-
[Bill Davis] “Imagine some poor sap who suffers a lost wallet or some ID theft a couple of days before the software has to “re-activate” and who’s on deadline that same week. Talk about a nightmare.”
Is that really any different than any of the other auto-billed dozen services you might rely on?
ID theft is bad all around, but you could move your account’s billing to another card in about a minute and a half on the web site.
I think you’d have some time to work it out, too. From the CreativeCloud FAQ [link]:
Do I need ongoing Internet access to use my Creative Suite applications?
Because your Creative Suite applications are installed directly on your computer, you will not need an ongoing Internet connection to use them on a daily basis. However, you will need to be online when you install and license your software, and at least once every 30 days thereafter. The software will alert you when you need to connect to the Internet for a license status check.Again, subscription may not be right for everyone — but just because it’s different doesn’t automatically make it bad, right?
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] “Creative Cloud costs $50 per month. If you start work at 9:00am, your month’s fee will be paid for by 10:00am on the first day of every month. “
that’s put beautifully.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[TImothy Auld] “Practically speaking we are tethered to our clients and also tethered to telling a story. And in both those respects X does not work for a great many people at the moment, despite all your (completely speculatory) claims that X is the future.”
Tim,
Well, we certainly disagree here. Not about the clients or storytelling stuff. We agree on that.
But I’ll push back strongly on any implication that X “does not work.” for some hidden reason.
It’s possible that it doesn’t work for “a great many people” simply because they haven’t taken the time to understand it well enough to get the results they might if they took the time to investigate it more.
I know this contention will annoy many here, but what else can it be?
Look, my needs can’t be that much different than yours. I want to shoot careful, properly produced video. And I want to bring it into a tool that lets me easily identify and focus on the parts of the program that are the most beneficial to my audience. I want to arrange these, add titles, graphics and sound to enhance the programs effectiveness for my audience. And output a great looking master.
In a nutshell, that’s what video production is. And X does all of that perfectly.
I freely acknowledge that many editors have complex and sophisticated learned workflows and habits that they feel are central to both their comfort and effectiveness in doing their jobs.
And I also freely acknowledge that to the extent X makes them change their approach or habits, will leave them feeling uncomfortable about trusting it to produce work to their standards.
That’s perfectly rational.
But that simply don’t change the fact that for MOST editors doing MOST kinds of typical editing work – X is an exceptionally capable editing program. if you use it at all, you know it’s capable right out of the box of generating superb quality output. It’s got excellent general purpose content management tools – and whether you “approve” of stuff like it’s optional magnetic timeline or not – nobody with a brain can say it doesn’t do the vast majority of anyone’s traditional list of basic editing tasks with speed and efficiency.
It’s primary problem is that it doesn’t do these jobs precisely the way too many editors are USED to doing them. So it makes them uncomfortable at first. But that’s very different from saying that it’s somehow inept at of doing professional quality work, because that’s simply not true.
If the next season of Leverage doesn’t get to air, and we see articles saying that X was the cause, I’ll re-assess. But if it does. Then just like Cold Mountain broke Legacy into the big time, all the nay-sayers will be left with is the same line we’ve heard all along.
I don’t like it cuz it’s different.
That’s fine. But it’s also arbitrary, individual and WAY short of persuasive, IMO.
Seriously. What can’t X accomplish that any editor needs to accomplish in your view? Where is it’s glaring weakness? Have you delivered anything with it yet? Why not? What’s stopping you? What’s missing – not that you’re merely accustomed to relying on – but that you NEED in order to use it effectively?
I’m truly curious because it seems to me that after this much time, most of the angst here, is still because it requires one to change their thinking and workflow. NOT because it lacks any actual fundamental editing capability.
“It doesn’t work the way I’d like it to work” is perfectly fair for any editor to think about X.
“A pro can’t edit with it” is not. And that’s the implication that keeps coming up here again and again.
FWIW.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor
-
[Walter Soyka] “Again, subscription may not be right for everyone — but just because it’s different doesn’t automatically make it bad, right?”
Hi Walter.
Nope, it’s not a fatal flaw. Just a small concern from someone who’s lost a wallet and realized that because I had to cancel and get ALL my cards re-issued, it took a week to 10 days to get everything sorted out.
And yes, it’s probably not a mission critical problem since Adobe doesn’t vet ownership viability in order to launch.
That said, I still like Apple’s idea of using the new electronic distribution model to drive costs down so low that the barriers to ownership have virtually disappeared.
The Adobe way might be functionally kinda the same. But you can’t deny that Apple in choosing to emphasize low-cost ownership over the Software as a Service model, has perhaps given their customers a bit more to feel secure about.
I appreciate that.
I might be old-fashioned, but I feel more comfortable OWNING the tools of my trade than renting them.
But that’s probably just me.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor
-
[Walter Soyka] “Again, subscription may not be right for everyone — but just because it’s different doesn’t automatically make it bad, right?”
Agreed. I own my copies, and plan to continue that way. What I really like is that I can scale seats up or down quickly if I need to. It becomes a nice side option.
-
[Shane Ross] “I didn’t say it wasn’t aimed at professionals. I said it wasn’t aimed at my specific market in Hollywood. Because it lacks pretty much every feature we need. EDL support (yes, we still work with EDLs and deliver EDLs), OMF or AAF support for DAWs (Apple didn’t do it…third parties did). Capture from non-firewire tape based decks. Oh…yeah, they rely on third parties to solve that too. It is designed for people to do everything INSIDE the app, including color correction (Yeah, speaking of THAT tool…aimed at beginners, not professionals) and audio mixing.
I’m not evangelizing here, just trying to correct what I see as misinformation. Third parties or not, you can do all that stuff with FCP X. I’m not saying it’s seamless yet, it absolutely isn’t, but it’s do-able if you need to. I happen to think it’s going to get better, and I say this as someone who needs this stuff as well.
[Shane Ross] This app isn’t aimed at us…it is aimed at OTHER editing professions. Sure, a lot of people have gotten it to work for their specific broadcast markets…and with the aid of third parties who fill the gaps Apple couldn’t be bothered dealing with, some in my neck of the woods have gotten that to work. But it’s all a shoe horn. FCP 7 did ALL of this, and a lot more. It did everything I needed, everything a lot of people needed. But then FCX comes out lacking a majority of what I need…and even with the updates they have done, they still lack a majority of what I need done. Again…relying on third parties to fix what they cannot be bothered with.
Well… first, I don’t see it as a bad thing that you need to go to third parties to do some of this stuff. Not everyone needs it, and if all ya gotta do is spend a few extra buck to get the added functionality you require, assuming it works well, who cares? Keeps the cost of adding seats down.
Second, I suppose I’m looking at FCPX with a slightly different perspective. X is really a version 1 application, and in comparison, version 1 of the original FCP did exactly *none* of the things you listed above. Everything was a shoehorned kludge. Everything. I was trying it out then cuz’ i liked the timeline/interface better than my Avid, and all I heard was pretty much exactly what everyone is saying now about X. But I liked it, and cut some stuff on it, and somehow managed to make it work and finish a spot. That was in Feb 2000, about 10 months after FCP came out. Not long after that I got the company I was at to start switching over, other companies started switching and now, FCP is a de facto standard. I’ve got the exact same vibe now with X.
I guess I just get annoyed when folks (in general, not specifically you BTW) rag on Apple, when all they’re really doing is exactly what they did with the original Final Cut. We’ll see how it works this time I guess… 🙂
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
[Shane Ross] “It works for most…not for me. Not for most LA productions…and I cannot see it ever gaining the same market share that FCP Legacy did.”
I think Shane is right that X won’t move much toward the traditional “Hollywood way” of working.
The more interesting question, perhaps, is whether Hollywood will move more toward the X way of working over time?
Will X (in year 5) be sitting in a small suite in Hollywood exporting regularly scheduled network programming directly onto the satellites and internet – toe to toe with HBO and NBC?
That’s something I actually wouldn’t bet against. After all, it’s not like the company that produces X lacks program development muscle. ; )
Will “Network Broadcast TV” may become just another delivery target on everyones Share menu.
Time will tell.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor
-
[Bill Davis] “I might be old-fashioned, but I feel more comfortable OWNING the tools of my trade than renting them. But that’s probably just me.”
No, I’m with you. I do have one Creative Cloud license, but I kept my perpetual licenses, too.
I just think it’s good that the option is there to get access to all the power in Creative Suite for less than a fancy dinner.
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 -
[Bill Davis] “70% of the capability. 10% of the cost.”
The same could be said of X. Some of us need the other 30%.
[Bill Davis] ” the expert Marlin fisherman are all well and good, but they aren’t the ones putting the food on the worlds tables. That’s left to those who spread the wide nets, not the targeted fishing lines.”
That’s why I said there’s room for both approaches.
[Bill Davis] ” But I don’t see many Nagras out there anymore. Nor Kleig lights. Nor Mitchell BMCs. So perhaps sometimes things actually DO change for the better.”
I never said some things don’t change for the better, I merely said that all things don’t change for the better. Violins haven’t gotten any better, pitchers don’t throw any harder, buildings don’t last near as long – and I haven’t noticed any vast improvement in the quality of movies or other media I end up seeing – I just notice that the ratio of crap to quality has suddenly gone up.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up