Murch and NLEs from IBC

[James Ewart]

Let’s face it – the tide has well and truly turned.

[Herb Sevush]

Vashi –

Thank you for that informative post.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

[Oliver Peters]

[Tony West] “Michael Cioni is describing the letter he sent to Apple.”

I re-watched those videos last night and his letter seems to be no different than what many of us have sent to Apple folks we know on the inside directly. Your own list of feature requests sent to Apple Feedback probably carries as much weight. I think you are making far too much out of this letter.

Note in his comment that it also went to Philip Hodgetts. From what I can tell it’s Intelligent Assistance who created needed products based on those requests, not Apple. You’ll note that nowhere in Cioni’s comments did he say Apple added XYZ features out of these requests. IMHO, their contribution stopped at FCPXML.

I do know for a fact that Apple has encouraged many of the third-party developers to create add-on utilities that they didn’t want to do in-house. So I’m sure there have been quite a few behind-the-scenes efforts in which Apple was involved that helped grow the overall ecosystem.

[Tony West] “Did you ask Cioni why he sent that letter personally and what he expected back from it?”

I haven’t interviewed Michael Cioni on “Focus” – only Mike Matzdorff, Jan and Glenn. I have interviewed MC on other films. I will point out that he does not use FCPX other than on personal projects. His company is built on Quantel products and his company rents DIT systems and quite a number of Media Composer systems, because that best serves his market and customers.

– Oliver

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

[Oliver Peters]

[Tony West] “If I need help and ask Apple for it and they respond to solve my problem.
“

PS: By that definition many – maybe all on this list – have received direct help from Apple through their Feedback page. I don’t view that as the same thing in the context of this conversation.

FWIW – neither Apple nor Adobe come anywhere close to the direct help that Avid offers in the form of Marianna Montague. She’s a incredible asset that any of these companies should strive to develop on their own side.

– Oliver

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

[Mark Suszko]

“I do know for a fact that Apple has encouraged many of the third-party developers to create add-on utilities that they didn’t want to do in-house. So I’m sure there have been quite a few behind-the-scenes efforts in which Apple was involved that helped grow the overall ecosystem.”

Ironically, I read this just after I got an email from the good folks at MotionVFX, announcing an inexpensive plug-in for FCPX that does the Premiere Pro “Morph Cut”. Around fifty bucks. I think this is a great way to go forward and speed the improvement of FCPX, by getting more third-party plugs going.

[Oliver Peters]

[Mark Suszko] “I think this is a great way to go forward and speed the improvement of FCPX, by getting more third-party plugs going.”

That’s the way it’s been from the very beginning. Apple apparently never intended to recreate FC Studio when it embarked on FCPX. Provide the hooks (FCPXML, Motion templates) and keep the cost low. Let third-party developers create what Apple deemed as niche tools. That’s why I’m not very optimistic to see any of the major requested features that make so many lists added to FCPX. Hopefully the next update will prove me wrong.

– Oliver

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

[Steve Connor]

[Oliver Peters] “Hopefully the next update will prove me wrong.
“

I imagine the next uptake will be an El Capitan maintenance release

[Tim Wilson]

[Oliver Peters] “Provide the hooks (FCPXML, Motion templates) and keep the cost low. Let third-party developers create what Apple deemed as niche tools.”

I’m a fan of this approach, actually. Keep the core development focused on core values.

It doesn’t even need to be niche features. I’d originally thought it would be cool to have Apple outsource codecs, for example. Just do like After Effects and say, whatever you hand me, I promise not to mangle.

AE has this down to a science of course, and few NLEs have ever pulled it off consistently. “Introducing fields when rendering 720p/50 footage? Done! You’re welcome!” But I thought it’d be slick to have 100% codec support from Day 1, automatically, from not having to wait for Apple. THAT would be revolutionary I says to myself.

[Oliver Peters] “That’s why I’m not very optimistic to see any of the major requested features that make so many lists added to FCPX.”

I agree that this is the most likely outcome. I’m happy to be wrong (I’ve certainly got plenty of practice), but I don’t see any sign that Apple has even been working on better hooks for third parties.

I’m sure they have something up their sleeves — right? RIGHT? — but the trajectory for the first go-round was having all the major features in place halfway through the development cycles. Year 6 of 12: multicam. After that, refinement, including the admittedly major Pro Res in Year 8, but really, 6 years in was it.

So within the conversationally acknowledged 10 year product life cycle, we’re probably within a release or two of everything currently on the whiteboard. Have the last couple of releases reflected any hurry to cross off some big requests as having been fulfilled?

I’m not asking rhetorically. I honestly don’t know, but as a spectator, it doesn’t appear to be the case.

[David Lawrence]

[Tim Wilson] “So within the conversationally acknowledged 10 year product life cycle, we’re probably within a release or two of everything currently on the whiteboard. Have the last couple of releases reflected any hurry to cross off some big requests as having been fulfilled?

I’m not asking rhetorically. I honestly don’t know, but as a spectator, it doesn’t appear to be the case.”

Agreed.

For example, since we’re talking about sound and DAWs in this thread, I really wonder how likely it is we’ll ever see a roles mixer. I would say this particular request is a pretty big deal. Especially since it’s always proposed as the solution whenever someone brings up the deficiencies of a trackless timeline for complex audio mixing.

It’s year five and we don’t even have color-coded roles yet. And that’s an easy change. Integrating an automated roles mixer is a lot more challenging.

I really hope it happens but what you see may be what you get. I would like to be surprised but I wouldn’t bet my business needs on being happily surprised by Apple.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
https://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl
vimeo.com/dlawrence/albums

[Ronny Courtens]

I’ve talked with people that run decent size facilities in LA and they used to have a direct line to a rep from the Pro Apps team but that ended after X came out.

To be fair, I have no problem whatsoever contacting people from the FCP X team directly and getting responses. And in one particular case there has been an update to FCP X that included a very specific little feature that was requested by a company I work with. So I have no complaints at all about Apple listening to my clients, and acting to it. Granted, I only work with big companies. But I felt I needed to set this straight to keep the discussion honest.

– Ronny