Is FCP X part of your five year business plan?

[Steve Connor]

[Shawn Miller] “Also, if most paid web content originates from traditional post production workflows”

What do you define as traditional?

Steve Connor

There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum

[Charlie Austin]

[Chris Conlee] “Like a carpenter’s toolbox, there are special tools for special needs.”

How dare you post a rational reply on this forum?! 🙂 You are correct, of course. 🙂

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Steve Connor] “What do you define as traditional?”

You know, making a work print, taping together your cut, having the negative conformed, etc. 😉

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Craig Shamwell]

No not all! FCPX is great for Web Producing because it’s so fast and media friendly! But there are those who discount this section of producing as not professional! When there are those making a good living only producing for the web. I so wish I could work on films but I may never have a chance to do that, who knows?

[Craig Seeman]

[Steve Connor] “What do you define as traditional?”

You know, like CMX 3400 controlling 1″ machines to a hardware encoder for web of course.

[Shawn Miller]

[Steve Connor] “[Shawn Miller] “Also, if most paid web content originates from traditional post production workflows”

What do you define as traditional?”

Maybe traditional is the wrong word. How about standard? My point is that the web content that most people are paying to see, is for the most part, films and shows which were originally produced for broadcast, theatrical and DVD/Blu-ray distribution. So I was curious to know what this meant:

[Craig Shamwell] “Producing content for the web far outweighs any film and television production.”

Again, is the web more relevant for the majority of working editors…? is web content more important in the grand scheme of the editing universe…? is television and theatrical distribution irrelevant now that we have the web…? help me out here. 🙂

And if this is all true, what makes FCPX a better choice for producing this kind of content?

Shawn

[Shawn Miller]

[Craig Shamwell] “No not all! FCPX is great for Web Producing because it’s so fast and media friendly! But there are those who discount this section of producing as not professional! When there are those making a good living only producing for the web. I so wish I could work on films but I may never have a chance to do that, who knows?”

Ah, I see. I completely understand, 90% of what I produce is for web and intranent too. 🙂

Shawn

[Chris Harlan]

[Herb Sevush] “with the worst record for customer service.”

I take it you’ve never met or corresponded with Marianne Montague. If you had, your take on Avid customer service would probably be quite different. Very specifically because of her, I rate Avid’s customer service pretty high these days. And I think you’ll find a lot of other Avid editors who will back me up on that.

[Chris Conlee]

+1000 for Marianne. I too put Avid at the top of the heap with regards to customer service because of her.

Chris