-
Lightworks Mac Public Beta
-
Oooh, art metaphores! I’ll play.
They released X and everyone thought it was just for cartoons.
Then somebody noticed stuff like Peanuts and Pogo arriving.
Which evolved into a flood of graphic novels. But the serious artists kept saying “see, it’s only for cartoons!”
Then wow, Toy Story.
And Spirited Away. and Sin City and Roger Rabbitt
And before you knew it freeking Frozen was making monster bank and nobody could remember themselves saying… “see, it’s only for cartoons.”
The End
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
[Bret Williams] “To expand on your statement, are you saying…
The run and gun low end doesn’t have any need for it and the high end gets great results from specialization?
So where does that put the CC integration market? The mediocre middle? Just extrapolating. :)”
Well, yeah though I think mid tier (in terms of specialization) is more apt than mediocre. If you need/want more graphical, compositing and/or color grading abilities than what you can get stock in an NLE then Adobe CC is a good choice because you get access to specialized tools that are connected via Dynamic Link/Direct Link. ‘Sharing’ timelines between AE, PP and SpeedGrade is certainly nicer than the import/export dance that has to happen between apps that don’t talk to each other.
I think Adobe CC could be good for people that have different departments in house (or for an individual that wears many hats and need more than what an NLE alone can provide). If they can get SpeedGrade to be a close competitor to Resolve then I think they’ve got a pretty slick combo in PP & SG. It’s very cool that when you get a PP timeline back from SG that the color grading is an applied as a filter (always wanted the FCP 7 to Color round trip to work like that).
Of course how quickly (and deeply) Resolve turns into an editor could make the PP/SG direct link less mind blowing than it otherwise could have been.
-
Agreed. And while low end / high end were Kevin’s words, and mediocre was my word , it was a question posed to him. If he’s defining the high end and low ends as such that don’t care for integration, then where does he see CC fitting? But it’s all tongue in cheek anyway because I’m pretty sure he didn’t mean any malice by calling Bills work low end.
In my experience, the specialists are going to use whatever app suits them. Nuke, AE, resolve, 3D studio max, pro tools, etc. and on the scheme of things, this whole CC thing is never going to mean much to them. Is that what we really want anyway? The MS Office of video production? Let’s celebrate the tools that make different apps from completely different developers work together. Adobe apps are great, but integration shouldn’t be the selling point. Let’s make sure 1984 isn’t like 1984. Can’t we all get along?
-
[David Lawrence] “Yet.”
2014 is the year of Linux on the desktop! I just know it!
-
[Bret Williams] “In my experience, the specialists are going to use whatever app suits them. Nuke, AE, resolve, 3D studio max, pro tools, etc. and on the scheme of things, this whole CC thing is never going to mean much to them. Is that what we really want anyway? The MS Office of video production? Let’s celebrate the tools that make different apps from completely different developers work together. Adobe apps are great, but integration shouldn’t be the selling point. Let’s make sure 1984 isn’t like 1984. Can’t we all get along?”
The Adobe apps aren’t insular — you can use Ps, Ae, Pr or whatever in conjunction with any other app you like — but Adobe does have a pretty compelling integration offering with technologies like Dynamic Link and Direct Link.
If that extra integration isn’t valuable, why do we see so many requests for “Send to Motion” here from FCP X users?
I think that Creative Cloud punches well above its weight, specifically because of its diversity and integration. Ae/Au/Il/Pr/Ps/Sg are a set of specialist tools that happen to be packaged together, and taken together, they offer a really broad toolset that (for the price) is surprisingly competitive with a big hero finishing box.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[Bret Williams] “Let’s celebrate the tools that make different apps from completely different developers work together. Adobe apps are great, but integration shouldn’t be the selling point.”
Personally I’d love it if all apps (even from different vendors) could integrate the way Adobe’s apps do (or the way some of the Final Cut Suite apps did). Having to use third party apps like Automatic Duck or interchange formats like XML is kludgey because it’s rarely a 100%, seamless exchange of information.
-
[Andrew Kimery] “Personally I’d love it if all apps (even from different vendors) could integrate the way Adobe’s apps do (or the way some of the Final Cut Suite apps did).”
I thought that the way the Baselight was moving towards a plugin that worked in an extremely functional but limited way in a host app, and then integrated to a standalone system was a really cool way to proceed. And that after grading in the standalone base light, you could send that info back to FCP and render.
Alas, FCP7 was killed mercilessly in battle, and unfortunately, Baselight for FCP became a casualty of that war.
-
[Andrew Kimery] “Personally I’d love it if all apps (even from different vendors) could integrate the way Adobe’s apps do (or the way some of the Final Cut Suite apps did). Having to use third party apps like Automatic Duck or interchange formats like XML is kludgey because it’s rarely a 100%, seamless exchange of information.”
Not that I think this is what you’re looking for but Adobe has ‘content panel’ technology that allows third party vendors to integrate with Adobe video products.
As for Automatic Duck, XML, AAF, etc. they are good for what they do because they seek to resolve how different companies handle media, timelines and the like. Granted they’re not perfect, but they are generally acceptable. To truly get the kind of deep or ‘perfect’ integration you seek, my personal opinion is that there would only be one company in the market in order for that to happen. That frankly wouldn’t be good for anybody.
My 2 cents,
Dennis -
[Jeremy Garchow] “I thought that the way the Baselight was moving towards a plugin that worked in an extremely functional but limited way in a host app, and then integrated to a standalone system was a really cool way to proceed. And that after grading in the standalone base light, you could send that info back to FCP and render.”
I’d forgotten about that. Yes, that was a unique approach to the problem. Baselight made a similar plugin for Avid though I think the very powerful Resolve Lite was like an atom bomb dropped on competitors in the growing desktop colorist market.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I thought that the way the Baselight was moving towards a plugin that worked in an extremely functional but limited way in a host app, and then integrated to a standalone system was a really cool way to proceed. And that after grading in the standalone base light, you could send that info back to FCP and render. Alas, FCP7 was killed mercilessly in battle, and unfortunately, Baselight for FCP became a casualty of that war.”
Baselight Editions is carrying on. There’s an Avid version out, and a very exciting NUKE version in beta, due out soon. (Doubly exciting in the context of NUKE STUDIO, due out late this year.)
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn]
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up