-
Interesting take on Apple’s view of “Pros”
-
It’s “Tangier”
-
I hear you Brett, but those were third party add ons, just like they will be in FCPx.
At the time, Cinewave was 5 grand if I remember correctly.
I think it is safe to say that HDSLRs are the new DV in the sheer scope of availability. You also have to take the overall growth of media outlets in to consideration. FCPx is just like FCP v1 in many ways just swap dv for h264 tapeless. Fcp1 had deck control built in because it had to, there was no tapeless. It still required non Apple devices and drivers if you needed rs422.
Once third party support is more available, capability will grow is how I feel about it. For now, we learn the interface, give feedback on how to improve it, and wait… or move on to a new system of that’s ways best for the situation.
-
[Bret Williams] “super high end features like film cuts (which was an add on to composer anyway)”
FilmLogic was available for Adobe Premiere before FCP was out but only when paired with FCP it really became a real alternative to Avid and Lightworks for film projects
-
>>I wonder what “pros” thought of the first AVID release?
We were pretty darned impressed.
In 1987 (I think….), I was one of a select group that was shown what was to become the Avid Media Composer in a suite at the original MGM Grand (now the Ballys) during NAB. Bill Warner had put together a system running on an Apollo minicomputer, using magneto-optical drives and a self invented video compression scheme, that he had designed multiple interfaces for. One was based on online editors, one was based on a film rewind bench metaphor, and there was one other that I can’t quite recall. At the time, nonlinear editing systems had already arrived and were being used on network television shows (i worked for Lorimar at the time). Ediflex, Montage, Touchvision, Editdroid – all of these were based on having multiple copies of all your source material and multiple transports that would precue for a real time playback of your “virtual” edit. They worked amazingly well, but Bill saw that the future of computer based editing was, well, in the computer. In the demo, we saw postage stamp sized, highly pixellated images, but it was clear that the complete random access nature of what Bill was doing was the future. We came out of that demo and my boss at the time said we’ve just seen how we’ll all be editing in 5 years. The only thing he was wrong about was the timetable, it was actually 3 years. By the next NAB, Avid on a Macintosh was born.
The difference between the introduction of the Avid and FCPX is that Avid didn’t try to tell editors how to cut, and they didn’t try to change the editing approach. They used new technology to get rid of all of the physical transport limitations, and provide some assistance in terms of organization (although they used the “bins” metaphor for a good reason…..). Apple is trying to tell editors that they know more about what they do, their thought process, their cutting room organization, and their working habits than the editors do. And that editors should just tell their producers and clients that they don’t need tape or hard copy deliverables any more, because Apple says they don’t. And that’s why they’re getting the reaction they’re getting.
-
> As for the comments from the prosumer that wrote that Adobe AE was just a toy <<< Michael, The "prosumers" you reference were Flame artists and other equivalent FX pros. The same people who said After Effects would never be used for high end film or broadcast work.
-
So by extension any PRO trashing FCP X is making the same mistake as the Flame Snobs??
I think it is fair to say that the only snobs are Apple trashing all of their paying broadcast clients who committed to an FCP workflow then are told hey you guys are old school.. we are cutting edge.. too cutting edge even for you guys…New lexicon does not make better product. If Apple wants to try and come up with a new process that makes things faster and better then I am all for it but it certainly doesn’t seem that way so far. They do need a reality check for sure but I guess they can’t see past their stock pile of cash…c’est la vie -
Michael, I wouldn’t call them or anyone today a snob. It just appears that some folks are more open to change than others and can see the possibility in new ways of doing things. Doesn’t make the old ways obsolete either… I’ll be using FCP7 for awhile yet for projects I would imagine, even when I do begin to use FCPX.
-
Please save me on the sanctimonious “change” concept. Most of us have gone from linear tape and switchers to the current software on multiple platforms and learned Nuendo to boot. I hardly think we are allergic to change. I guess you could say I am allergic to blindly following a path with no set course just because it has an Apple logo on it. I am allergic to double speak… releasing a product at a Broadcaster trade show and then summarily informing people that we are in a tapeless world and inputting or outputting is simply not in the cards for ANYONE.. All broadcasters use tape as do program producers .
Tape is still the cheapest and most robust bullet proof format out there. People use tape backup for their hard drives. I am allergic to a company that completely ditches its most noteworthy customers and does not keep them in the loop. New isn’t always better. BETTER is better. Do I want to go back to film editing on a flatbed… nope but I certainly don’t need a hammer without a handle that is for sure. Call me when you add the handle Apple. -
Funny how much you sound like some of the AVID editors I knew when the original FCP came out.
They said the same things about change. And they were sure FCP was different, and were allergic to blindly following some new paradigm.
Time will tell. Talk to you in a year.
-
Oddly enough I was a proponent of FCP from FCP 1… because as an experienced editor it offered things AVID did not at a price AVID COULD not.. at least at that time. Strangely enough AVID was pretty smug at that time too.. much like Apple is today. But as you say.. give it a year and we’ll see if THEY come around
Honestly you summarily dismiss people as being buffoons without such an inkling of fact. What I am stating is fact. Apple ditched their broadcast clients literally overnight with not a word of warning. People built whole infrastructures around this software and Apple just turned their back on them hinting they had the latest greatest new rock in the quarry… Whatever dude if you want to make 5 copies of a project every time you want to make a revision knock yourself out. KInda reminds me of a very young young “editor” who in order to distinguish his clips from other peoples would use an odd symbol before each clip name. Trying to reinvent something that already existed.. called the English language.
Now when Apple comes up with something called the iCar that runs on bullsh$%t they will likely have an infinite supply of fuel… mostly from their software development team !
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up