lively discussion at John Nack’s blog.

[Bill Davis]

[Oliver Peters] “There’s a master file that’s a “locked picture” with a grade and a mix. How is that any different with X than with PPro or FCP “legacy”?”

Here’s the thing…

I’m trying to finish up my iBook. (last minute delivery glitches regarding a maddeningly few embedded photos throwing errors at the last stage of the Publish to the iTunes Bookstore process)

But the entire iBookstore is based on a platform that allows “re-versioning” of your content.

You publish now. If you find errors or glitches, you re-publish next week and from that instant, the consumer gets the new content.

So in a very real sense, the book is never actually “finalized”- it’s a living document that is under revision.

We see this everywhere in the computer industry. Virtually ALL software manuals now take advantage of this. And in fact, the new “broadcast” system – YouTube and Vimeo, et al, are built on this model.

Products, stats, metrics change? Re-publish the original work with fresh content to replace the old.

Being connected to virtual content on-line is different thinking from “make the master” and leave it alone in that fixed state forever.

The traditional model still has tremendous value – and people will ALWAYS want to create fixed works. I get that.

But that was the ONLY mode of creation in the past. Now, there’s another model. Being a creator in the modern era can be as much a matter of curating a stream of useful but ever-changing data as it is creating a work “once” and that being the terminal act of the creative process.

This might seem foreign, but I think it’s real… In the modern era, we can create traditional “dead” works – defined as cut off from revision … or we can create “live” works – that live in a state of connected access to their creator.

The second mode seems more interesting to me than the first.

How I see it anyway.

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.

[Michael Hancock]

[Bill Davis] “And in fact, the new “broadcast” system – YouTube and Vimeo, et al, are built on this model. “

You can’t update a video on YouTube. You can delete an old video and upload a new one, or just upload a new one, but you can’t “replace” a video that’s online. So you are, in fact, uploading two separate master files that are different from one another. It’s very much not a living document in the way you’re describing.

Vimeo allows you to replace a video, but YouTube doesn’t.

—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor

[Bill Davis]

[Michael Hancock] ”
Vimeo allows you to replace a video, but YouTube doesn’t.”

Surprised.

I use Vimeo for 98% of my client delivery.

Thanks for clarifying that.

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.

[Walter Soyka]

[Bill Davis] “Products, stats, metrics change? Re-publish the original work with fresh content to replace the old.”

So… render a new version, export a new XML to match. What’s the problem?

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

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[Richard Herd] “If they’re not happy with something, back it goes onto OUR shelf, not theirs.”

But it’s not a lens richard – I’m unlikely to put the action of editing back on the adobe shelf, and, a few years into CC, I am unlikely to be able to put the sum total of the work performed in PPro mixed with lumetri, AE, custom keyframes etc to work in a competing product I transfer to.

Yes, I myself can switch to a competing product, the question is whether or not the works I have produced will go with me. XML – sort of to some extent – but really I will be relying on PPro for quite a while if I ever choose to transition away later.

Well ala FCP7 – thats fine – i continue outputting from last paid version FCP through the switchover period – which is likely to be extended – almost open ended. Look at Walter Biscardi – he has locked 10.6.8 suites handling all the historical works. His transition period is likely to run to three or more years
but thats fine right? He paid for FCP, like we all did. He owns the tool.

The problem here is that in that scenario, say a few years down the road, on CC – you will pay adobe, no matter what, to sustain periodic access to your work, either annually, or at monthly rates, as you transition for however long it takes to run it out. At some point, eventually, that scenario is probably likely for quite a few people.

In that scenario it is hard not to see adobe as effectively owning access to your work executed with the software. That is where the lens, camera, tripod, outdoor cooker comparisons break down.

If you don’t own the software, you don’t own the product of the software. I think there are going to be certain scenarios where that really pinches.

A subscription can be quite the lock-in no?

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Bill Davis]

[Walter Soyka] “[Bill Davis] “Products, stats, metrics change? Re-publish the original work with fresh content to replace the old.”

So… render a new version, export a new XML to match. What’s the problem?”

Unless I misunderstand, what you’re doing is the traditional process of plopping files to your desktop – which doesn’t really DO anything. It’s a precursor to doing what you want to do (master delivery to the client)

In the “connected” model, Export IS the delivery. So you’re saving steps and driving efficiency.

This is most valuable in workflows where the creator is the ultimate gatekeeper between the timeline and the audience. Those who aren’t might get time and efficiency savings in delivering review copies to upstream decision makers, but the tool works best (in comfortable consort with Apple’s long-held “empowering creatives” bent) when it’s deployed by a person both creating and selling their work for direct personal benefit – perhaps more than someone working for a larger company or corporate content owner.

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.

[Oliver Peters]

[Bill Davis] “So in a very real sense, the book is never actually “finalized”- it’s a living document that is under revision. “

OK, I understand what you are saying now. I think that’s a possible (one of many) viable approach for someone “self-publishing” video. I’m not sure it is realistic in the “work for hire” video production world though. Mainly because it ultimately holds you – as the editor – liable for managing the assets and master without future renumeration (aside from the actual logistics of doing it).

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Walter Soyka]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “If I’m up to my eyeballs in PPro in 24 months time, my timelines are likely to have warp stabilisation, dynamic links, lumetri looks, adjustment layers, you name it really, not to mention push pulls done with the pretty peerless keyframing system, where the acceleration curves are best of breed. I mean, yes, the XML will get a form of the timeline out, but it will miss a fair bit of my intent, and working practise. So it goes or whatever – but there is no way that the tool and the product, the outright personal creative property originating from that tool are not quite deeply enmeshed?”

I get the ideology here — I’m very Ae-dependent, and there are no real alternatives there.

But so what? Let’s talk about this practically. Why are you revisiting this project, after x amount of time in mothballs? Presumably there’s some value here?

So pay for it. Rent the tool for a month and bill it back to the client. Pay a guy like me who’s still on subscription to reconform your old project for you and deliver it back to you in whatever format you like and bill it back to the client. Tell the client it can’t recovered, start from scratch again with new tools, and bill the client.

It’s not worth that? Cut what you need to from the master.

Years ago, restoring a project would mean having access to whatever tapes it was on. How much of your work is sourced on Beta? Do you have a Beta deck ready to go to restore those old projects?

Remember, I’m the guy who just hunted down a working 5.25″ floppy drive to attempt to read some thirty year old disks. The content on there was valuable to me, so I paid for a way to get it back. If I had wanted to “own” this myself, I would have had to keep an operational IBM PC frozen in time for 30 years in order to be able to read those diskettes. It was a lot more practical for me to get what I needed when I needed it than it was to maintain a full legacy system for the original workflow.

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]

[Bill Davis] “Unless I misunderstand, what you’re doing is the traditional process of plopping files to your desktop – which doesn’t really DO anything. It’s a precursor to doing what you want to do (master delivery to the client) In the “connected” model, Export IS the delivery. So you’re saving steps and driving efficiency.”

Ok, so… “deliver a new version,” export an XML to match. What’s the problem?

I’m suggesting there’s a simple thing you can do that takes seconds as a part of your delivery process that future-proofs your product.

Otherwise, if you switch NLEs, you’ll have to either A) go through all your old projects and export XMLs en masse when you switch, or B) maintain an old system with your legacy app to open old projects and export XMLs on demand.

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]

[Oliver Peters] ” I’m not sure it is realistic in the “work for hire” video production world though. Mainly because it ultimately holds you – as the editor – liable for managing the assets and master without future renumeration (aside from the actual logistics of doing it).”

Two points.

I undersand why you see it in those terms, but the history of our industry is littered with technologies that were initially “solo practitioner” oriented (like DV vs Betacam) that went on to transform the larger game. The key driver is value. If the technology delivers enough value compared to the old, then the market adopts it.
I can see massive swaths of functioning video where “versioning” will be a powerful driver of efficiency – so I think it’s more inevitable than niche.

As to future remuneration – again we see this very differently. I see versioning as a driver of revenue. Because in the modern market, fresh, revised content – offered at incremental cost into an existing customer stream – is a long established model. For instance, we’ve all been traditionally delighted when we get new capabilities in our $89 software, but only have to pay $19 bucks for the upgrade because we’re an existing customer.

Do you suppose that model won’t migrate to publishing or on-line video?

And what if, because distribution costs are virtually ZERO – if you can build a 100,000 customer database for a piece of content, and revise it – and only ask a low barrier upgrade price of say, 99 cents.
You can generate a whole lot of incremental income with a sales model like that.

The underlying truth is that the entire economic model of generating income off intellectural property is changing. That’s the huge driver of all this change, in my mind.

Brave new world, indeed.

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.