-
Orlando Post Pros’ NAB Recap
-
ooh – is there a fight going on, and I am missing it ?
Andy writes –
“As I have stated $49.99 is not a lot of money for a post production house but for a web blogger it is. Not everyone has clients in the year 2017. Some do it as a hobby. ”I take great exception to this statement. I am an amateur musician, and I know lots of amateur musicians. And I see plenty of kids, including POOR kids, that play guitar, drums, etc. And kids into EDM with DJ equipment. That do it for a hobby, do it for fun. And these “toys” cost a lot more than $49.99. If you are serious about your hobby, you find the money to get your toys. If you love making videos, you find that 50 bucks. And when you own DR, or Media Composer First, or Lightworks, or Media 100, or an old copy of FCP 7 that someone gave you, you still need a computer, you still need drive space, and that costs more than 50 bucks.
Bob Zelin
Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com -
[Mark Raudonis] “Thanks for posting this”
You’re welcome. We’re just the redneck cuzzins of Editors’ Lounge ☺
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Ricardo Marty] “Would like to know what makes quantel super high-end”
Up to real-time 8K on high-performance hardware.
https://post.s-a-m.com/?catalog=24&product=173
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[andy patterson] “You keep responding with strawmans. I don’t doubt Avid is top dog but how is this relevant to the fact the Adobe is not worried about the little guy? That is what my comments are about. Can you please explain why the CC would be a better option for a blogger or hobbiest than the DR? “
I’m just asking you to tell me what Adobe product was for the little guy years ago when you say Adobe cared about the little guy.
Is Premiere Elements today not a good option for the little guy? If the little guy is only concerned about price then free DR and free Media100 beat everything. They beat full price DR. They beat FCP X. They beat Adobe. They beat Avid. They beat Vegas. They beat anything that costs money (not matter how much or how little money).
As to why anything other than free DR or free M100 would be better for a hobbyist? That’s up to each individual and their wants/needs. That’s the odd thing about value, it encompasses more than just price. Maybe they use Adobe products at work and make tutorials for Adobe products in their free time? Maybe they make movies with their friends who use Adobe products so they do too in order to make collaboration easier? Maybe they chose it because that’s what the filmmakers they follow us? Maybe you could find actual hobbyists themselves and ask?
[andy patterson] “Will Google Docs make MS Office Obsolete? Probably not. Can some people get by with Google Docs. Probably. “
So MS Office can still be competitive even though it costs way more money than Google Docs? It’s almost as if a product’s value can be important than its price. I agree.
[andy patterson] “I think FCPX is what made people switch. If FCP 8 was here today who knows what would have happened? “
Certainly agree with that. Apple killing FCP Legend and launching X busted the door wide open for competition.
[andy patterson] “On the flip side the bloggers who have stopped the CC subscription always mention FCPX is less expensive and does the job. “
So Apple should make FCP X free so they can compete with free DR?
[Bob Zelin] “I am an amateur musician, and I know lots of amateur musicians… “
That’s a good point, Bob.
-
[Oliver Peters] “Up to real-time 8K on high-performance hardware.
“8K HDR RAW no less, with the toolsets necessary for high-end VFX feature film workflows that we only rarely touch on in this forum, but are daily conversations in say, our Resolve forum. There’s really no difference at all between high-end and low-end editorial toolsets. None worth talking about. But for finishing and conform, HUGE differences, even though they’re not the kind of thing that shows up on spec sheets.
Plus the things that high-end pro vendors always provide, like 24-7 support, overnight parts replacement, etc etc.
-
[Andrew Kimery] “Maybe they use Adobe products at work and make tutorials for Adobe products in their free time? Maybe they make movies with their friends who use Adobe products so they do too in order to make collaboration easier? Maybe they chose it because that’s what the filmmakers they follow us? Maybe you could find actual hobbyists themselves and ask?”
No need to ask. Look around YouTube. There’s no shortage of hobbyists using Adobe CC. If anything, I’d say that the number has been increasing over the last few years. The tutorial data point is critical — the number of non-pros making Adobe tutorials has skyrocketed of late.
I say non-pros, because I think that a number of them are following a business model pioneered by Andrew Kramer here at Creative COW before he went into orbit as Video Copilot — skillful hobbyists who use their video tutorials as the springboard to what becomes a very good living. His skills (including his intelligence, drive, and personal charisma) are not replicable (even if the projects, minus the charisma and intelligence, are frequently copied), but the path he’s shown is true. Skills making Adobe YouTube tutorials CAN turn into a professional living, which we’ve not seen as broadly with other companies.
Indeed, nobody has been more engaged with that community than Adobe. That’s much of what their purchase of the Behance community was about, and why you can see Adobe’s footprint in, let’s call it pre-professional or para-professional video, extend far beyond YouTube to Facebook and (even moreso) Instagram. This is Adobe’s wheelhouse. They don’t have to do anything different to go after those folks. They’ve got them, and their reach is growing.
Besides, as you’ve pointed out before, Andrew, these prices have been set for YEARS: Resolve free since 2009, FCPX since 2011, CC since 2013, etc etc. It’s absolute nonsense to point to price sensitivity as a serious issue, and even more nonsense to call it out as more true for hobbyists. It’s simply not, and people saying that it is betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of how pros work, how hobbyists work, recent history, and quite simply, the most basic YouTube search results. I have no idea how anybody can think that this is an issue based on anything other than their own vivid imaginations.
[Bob Zelin] “And these “toys” cost a lot more than $49.99. If you are serious about your hobby, you find the money to get your toys.”
Seriously! The idea that hobbyists are cheap is absolutely nonsense.
Bob, you and I discussed seeing this even in the 90s, when a “cheap” used Media 100 + drives + a “real” computer to run it on would start in the $20,000+ range ($50,000 new for what was then the “so cheap it can’t possibly be pro” kid in town) — PLENTY of hobbyists were doing this. Not much more than a handful of guitars and a used car.
Indeed, I was living on an island at the time, in a town of 7000 people in the middle of nowhere, and my neighbor’s kid was given the choice of a car, a boat, or a Media 100 for his 18th birthday, and he picked the Media 100. A teenager picking an NLE over a car or a boat? No-brainer for the dedicated hobbyist. Who presumably is also willing to forego sex. ????
Hobbyists certainly blew up by the turn of the decade with DV cameras, the pinnacle of which was the Panasonic DVX100 (which popularized 24p for the masses), introduced in 2002 for $4000. Also VERY popular, the Canon XL2, for $5000.
Back then, that was real money. ????
Speaking of which, I encourage anyone who wants to equate hobbyists and “cheap” to spend time with some hobbyist photographers. The money hobbyists are spending is staggering. Easily dwarfs what many pros here are spending on video gear.
Anyway, I’ve been as bad about this as anyone, but it would be kinda cool if we brought the conversation back around to this video, WHICH IS AWESOME, rather than bringing up the same things flying around on a half dozen other threads where they’d be perfectly ON topic.
So what’d y’all think of the VIDEO? ???? ????
-
[Tim Wilson] “8K HDR RAW no less, with the toolsets necessary for high-end VFX feature film workflows that we only rarely touch on in this forum, but are daily conversations in say, our Resolve forum. “
It’s ironic that Michael Cioni, who has over the years been closely associated with Apple products and FCPX, thanks to his various presentations, makes his living through LightIron. That company got its start on Quantel gear – and continues with it – and workflows for the high end film community. In the end, when you absolutely need to get the job done…
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Andrew Kimery] “Apple killing FCP Legend and launching X busted the door wide open for competition.”
Sometimes it’s all just timing. Being at the right place at the right time might be all it takes, rather than any specific features. Premiere was familiar enough and the overall community liked Adobe’s development trajectory.
FWIW – There’s a Fortune magazine article (6/15 issue) coming out about Adobe. Apparently subscription numbers, income, and stock prices are all up.
https://fortune.com/2017/06/10/fortune-500-adobe-ceo-photoshop-ai/
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “That company got its start on Quantel gear – and continues with it – and workflows for the high end film community. In the end, when you absolutely need to get the job done…”
Yep, Pablo Rio FTW.
That said, when I interviewed the Quantel guys at NAB a few years ago, the cards you needed to instal to get Rio to actually function were about $10,000 apiece – and you needed more than one IIRC.
Those same cards – a year and a half later, were worth a fraction of that – having been vastly outpaced by newer models.
So make sure your depreciation schedules are in order.
Definitely a deep deep pocket players game there.
; )
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bob Zelin] “I take great exception to this statement. I am an amateur musician, and I know lots of amateur musicians. And I see plenty of kids, including POOR kids, that play guitar, drums, etc. And kids into EDM with DJ equipment. That do it for a hobby, do it for fun. And these “toys” cost a lot more than $49.99. If you are serious about your hobby, you find the money to get your toys. If you love making videos, you find that 50 bucks. And when you own DR, or Media Composer First, or Lightworks, or Media 100, or an old copy of FCP 7 that someone gave you, you still need a computer, you still need drive space, and that costs more than 50 bucks.”
I agree but it is a straw-man because of competition they might opt for an Epiphone over a Les Paul. Yes a young person might get a free Mac Pro form 2010 with FCP7 given to them and use it until they can get something better. By not buying into the CC they may in fact be able to opt for DR and also get the Les Paul to make their own music videos. What I am saying is Premiere Pro is expensive for the average blogger compared to FCPX and DR. Can someone please post a counter argument that address that issue rather than posting a straw-man that has nothing to do with my comments.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up