-
MacBook Pros “underpowered?” Not for FCP X editors. Not AT ALL.
-
[Oliver Peters] “Clearly they designed X for skimming and broke scrubbing in the process.”
Or they simply recognized that there is absolutely nothing about scrubbing that trumps skimming.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Oliver Peters] ”
[Bill Davis] “If I were a betting guy, I’d probably bet AGAINST the focus remaining on single box “workstation” development in the future. I’d bet more on modular components attached to “at will” – as the location and tasks demand. Your I/O module might look like a laptop with some on-board storage and a utility screen, but if you’re at the “office” you connect to assets including perhaps more CPU or GPU power, nicer displays, and a fatter pipe.
”That works in theory, but is unreliable in actual practice. For example, a MBP with an external chassis with GPU is touchy at best. The better bet is cloud processing, which is already done in the VFX world.”
Not quite yet. Cloud rendering is only viable for final gather renders – you upload your finished 3D application project file, then a service renders that project out and sends the finished frames back to you. Otoy has been working on cloud processing for Octane, but the technology/service probably won’t be mainstream for a while (if ever). I’m not confident that we’ll see enough meaningful advances in bandwidth speed and reliability to make application cloud processing a reality.
Lastly, won’t running compute hungry applications in the cloud necessarily mean subscription? How does everyone feel about that?
Shawn
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Oliver Peters] “[Bill Davis] “Premiere “standard scrubbing” which I’m afraid I remain ignorant about. Perhaps you can help me by explaining how it works compared to how scrubbing works in X?”
Are you pulling my leg, or are you seriously asking me what scrubbing is? After all, it’s been in NLEs since day one and generally works the same way in most. Hold down the mouse button and move the cursor/playhead across the timeline. Same as in FCP7.
Of course, if doesn’t work at all right in X. If I turn off skimming, in order to scrub, I lose the ability to hear audio when I scrub. If I try to scrub in the event, it wants to set a range. It then won’t let you scrub within that range, because it thinks you want to drag it to the timeline. Clearly they designed X for skimming and broke scrubbing in the process.”
I’m sorry.
i must be describing this badly. Since there may be folks reading this without the years of experience you have,
let me try to be more clear.I’m talking about the behavior that has existed in FCP X since day one – to wit: the use of the cursor to either scrub (JKL or mouse control of the playhead) or skim (mouse or trackpad indicator hovering separate from the cursor location) across the content at will – in a fashion that lets you monitor the underlying content in order to easily target a specific frame location. In X, that’s obviously done partly by visual cues, but also with pitch shifted audio content. And it works the same whether you’re exploring an Event or working in a Primary or Secondary – or audio content in the Timeline.
THAT to me describes scrubbing and skimming as FCP X enables it.
It’s the overall softwares interface to allow the user to rapidly assess content and target specific frames for operations.
I’m trying to understand how the functions might (or might not) DIFFER in it’s implementation in Premiere Pro from how I’ve been using it in Final Cut Pro X for the past six years.
That’s all.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[andy patterson] “I am glad you disagree because I never made that statement. I stated it would be easier for Adobe (the programmers) to only support one OS and one GPU platform. CS 5.5 was bug free for the most part. “
You make the statement every time you say you want Adobe to only support Windows and Nvidia because you think that will lead to better performance (i.e. fewer bugs, Adobe coders not being stretched as thin, etc.,).
[andy patterson] “As I stated you don’t write software exclusively for an i7 VS an i3 CPU. “
But you could write software that takes advantage of Quick Sync, and Quick Sync is only available on some CPUs.
My point is about looking at computers holistically. For example, different CPUs can have different motherboards which can have different chipsets, drivers, firmware, etc., which means greater potential for miscommunication with the OS which means greater potential for miscommunication with Adobe’s software. That’s three totally different companies trying to work in concert (four or more if you start filling up PCI slots or plugging in peripherals) compared to Apple which oversees it’s hardware, OS, and first party software under one (soon to be round) roof.
[andy patterson] “As I sated you are implying Adobe would get a performance boost by excursively using only a Sky Lake Quad Core i7 , Zotac GTX 1070, Corsair Power Supply and Crucial RAM. I am saying that would not be the case. Some one would pop in an 8 Core AMD and blow it out of the water. “
Hardware is the constant and software is the variable in this situation. Hypothetically, let’s say Adobe makes two versions of PPro. One version is what we have today and it supports MacOS, Windows, OpenCL and CUDA. The other version is tailored for only Windows and CUDA. Both versions on installed on a Windows PC with a GTX 1070 card. Which version do you think runs better on that PC?
[andy patterson] ” I want options as far as hardware goes. What I am saying is opt for Windows and CUDA only. “
That seems a bit contradictory. ????
[andy patterson] “None the less this thread has been interesting.”
Agreed. 🙂
-
[Bill Davis] “I’d simply ask, how can this be seen as moving the “industry” forward, if the ONLY way you can get access to any of this is to use Adobe products? Is that “industry innovation” or just one company’s product development goals. “
I assumed in this conversation that “moving the industry forward” was like advancing the state of the art: making something possible or practical, for the first time. I think the most interesting advancements in our space are largely proprietary, whether they’re Apple’s magnetic timeline or Adobe’s marketing integrations.
[Bill Davis] “I’m having a bit of difficulties with the rest because in VR and HDR , it seems I have all of that available to me as well – just done in the Apple fashion of external modules from 3rd party vendors rather than bolted into the software in a fashion where editors that may not have any need for the capabilities, get lumped in a pool paying for their development anyway.”
1) I’m all for third-party development. I’m convinced that After Effects is only where it is today because of it’s vibrant third-party ecosystem. But there are still limits to third-party extension, and there’s still a need for ongoing first-party development. First-party integrations can be deep, because they can obviously extend the application’s architecture. Third-party integrations are often shallower, because they must fit into an existing architecture that was not designed for the feature they’re adding.
2) Don’t forget that the features you love in your own favorite apps might be viewed by others as bolt-ons they didn’t need and had to pay for anyway. It’s really hard to draw the line.
[Bill Davis] “I would argue that the largest “innovation” Adobe has brought to the table so far hasn’t been any feature or even concept, but rather the “subscription” model. It’s changed things the most. And also, as you know, worries me the most. … I don’t actually see customers clamoring for MORE monthly subscription models in other categories beyond software. Or am I missing something and the tide is sweeping in that direction out there?”
Isn’t XinTwo subscription-based?
Ordinary desktop software (product alone) is unplugged. It can’t benefit from network effects, from cloud computing, or from real-time analytics. Product with services opens up all kinds of new possibilities, and subscription is probably the most viable model that allows products to be built with/around services. I want to see where this goes.
[Oliver Peters] “In addition, I would also argue that the origin of the modern proxy concept goes to Avid Media Composer with its offline/online edit workflow. This included the ability to work with low-res and high-res linked media as the same time. Certainly not as elegant was the forked media system FCPX has today, but definitely there earlier as a concept and with a practical application. Also quite possibly Montage even before that.”
I’m sure you’re correct. My point is definitely not that Autodesk/Discreet was first, but rather the design of the FCPX media system was shipping in Smoke five to eight years before FCPX’s release. I know “great artists steal” and all, but FCPX did not innovate the push-button original/native/proxy managed media system.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[Bill Davis] “I’m talking about the behavior that has existed in FCP X since day one …..
……I’m trying to understand how the functions might (or might not) DIFFER in it’s implementation in Premiere Pro from how I’ve been using it in Final Cut Pro X for the past six years.
“Hmm, I thought I had explained it. At the risk of being pedantic, JKL playback is not the same as skimming or scrubbing, but never mind. Premiere’s scrubbing works like FCP7’s scrubbing. Essentially this is the same as FCPX skimming (not clip skimming), except that you have to hold down the mouse button in Premiere. Then drag left or right in the (source or record) viewer time bar or the timeline window. This displays the changing frame and/or audio under the playhead/cursor as you move it.
Premiere’s “hovering scrubbing” lets you “skim” through a clip in the browser when set to frame view. You don’t have to hold down the mouse button. It doesn’t play audio and it only updates the frame in that viewer icon. However, you can make the frame sizes in the browser as big as you like. Primarily it gives you the function of quickly identifying what’s the full footage within any given clip.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Thanks for that, Oliver.
It helps me understand the similarities and differences more clearly.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Walter Soyka] “Isn’t XinTwo subscription-based?”
It definitely will be.
But my experiences with Adobes implementation of subscriptions is precisely why I’ve made sure that the subscription model we use is EVERY BIT as easy to stop for our customers as it is to start.
I’ll will be extremely grateful if somebody subscribes for even a single month. And if they then feel they’ve learned what they needed – if they wish to opt out of the service – that’s their right. At the same price everyone pays.
My partner is in charge of the entire back end including plumbing in the payment system while I’m focused on the content, but he knows how I feel about this.
Again, I’ve never said a bad thing about what I characterize as “non-fishook” subscription services like Lynda.com.
You sign up, pay until you feel you wish to stop. Then STOP. Fair.
Lynda has never made it difficult for me to stop a subscription. Not once.
On the other hand, I spent yet another hour on the phone with Adobe a few months back trying for the third time to get them to cancel at least ONE of my duplicate Photo subscriptions. It’s still hitting my credit card as of yesterday.
I know it’s my own damn fault. I should be more relentless in getting what I want. But who has time.
I know I’ve spent 15 minutes interacting with the forum on-line and I should probably have spent that time on the phone with Adobe billing instead – but I feel good when I spend time chatting with people here – and I feel TERRIBLE when I spend hours on hold trying to get my credit card billing untangled within the Adobe system.
It’s my fault, I guess.
And so it goes.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bill Davis] “hours on hold trying to get my credit card billing untangled within the Adobe system.
It’s my fault, I guess.
“Yep, use PayPal next time, much easier to “switch off”
-
[Bill Davis] “You sign up, pay until you feel you wish to stop. Then STOP. Fair. “
Yeps. Because that model isn’t the least bit comparable to what Adobe and others are pulling off in broad daylight. Since in the case of Lynda etc. you don’t get a permanent block installed into your brain barring you from utilizing everything you’ve learned up that point (at least I hope not). If you’ve forgotten everything or not e.g. downloaded before you stopped paying, your bad. Exact same goes for any course you may have taken in school/collage (which are, at least here, all FREE anyway), no?? Or does someone expect to have an automatic, lifelong subscription to every teacher they ever had, for just having taken a course with them for a semester? Stupid question, right?
Well let’s see… with Adobe et al? You pay, you create, you use… and whammo! The day you decide to stop paying or, for whatever reason, simply CAN’T pay anymore, you are affectively locked out of your own work. Bra-vo! Think about that for just 3 seconds. Everything (at least in most cases, such as PPro, InDesign, Audition etc. etc. etc. etc.) past that moment is beyond your reach, period. If you need access… you effectively pay ransom money for said work to access it.
No idea on what planet or by which logic that actually figures out to being a sensible, let alone reasonable business model. Other than for Adobe of course, duh! Brilliant deal! They’ve got you firmly by the creative maracas! ????????
For anyone else? Mindblowingly stupid in my book. At least for any straight thinking adult and not some “ooooh, all THAT for ‘just 50 bucks‘??!” kid. In which case I don’t give a flying poon how long any feature list is or if it kicks the pants off of everything else on the planet… which it doesn’t. The rudest awakening of them all in the end.
Factually nothing that could ever happen to me with Final Cut Pro X or any other non-Ponzi model of that kind. Simple. And if Apple ever introduced any such model for X, I’d work my way all the way down to Movie Maker if I had to or would simply become a pro-level basket weaver before I bought into such nonsense.
– RK
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up