-
Point Me In the Direction of A………..
-
Almost everything either you or anyone else, on either side of the argument, have said about Apple’s motivations or future intents in this forum is totally speculative for the simple reason that Apple ain’t talking. Or to quote Lao Tzu
“He who knows, does not speak; he who speaks, does not know.”There are no facts that incontrovertibly prove anything in this mess; everything is up for interpretation. What seems logical and unassailable to you seems asinine to me, and I’m sure it’s quite vice versa. Apple’s appearance at the Super Meet, the Macromedia quicktime licensing issues, the alex4d code findings are all open to multiple interpretations that collectively prove nothing. (If you so desire I’ll give you the alternative interpretations for each.)
As of today there are no facts and no evidence beyond the existence of FCPX as it is currently distributed, and the one page FAQ that Apple published; so railing about other peoples speculations while you are speculating away like crazy does not cede you the high ground.
As you might have learned from your HP postings.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
[Rich Kaelin] “1. I have heard that FCPX will not open projects from older versions, that would be a HUGE con.
2. Can you have 7 & X loaded on same machine at same time with no issues?
3. I hear that FCPX is missing a lot of features real editors would be loathe to give up.
4. In direct relation to 3, I hear FCPX is a “work in progress” and will have many upgrades soon to come, in other words, it was released too early and incomplete.
5. What exactly comes with FCPX package? ie-motion, compressor, color? you see, I am having a hard time with the app store, and can’t even find it on there…my searches return lots of final cut stuff, just not FCPX.”1. It cannot open FCP7 projects.
2. Yes, have it on a Lion and on a snowleopard
3. Depends on your needs. We have produced several broadcasts with FCPX already and while we miss some, I would miss some on every platform. It is not finished with features, but you can work with it on a high level already.
4. Again….i can work with it, although i miss features that are yet to co,e.
5. ? Weird. Fcpx, Motion and Compressor are 3 different apps to be purchaßed within the Appstore. Maybe you need an upgrade of your Osx? -
Specluation based on facts.
https://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/
and concrete findings
https://alex4d.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/secret-fcpx-xml-multi-user-editing/
at least provide a sound basis.If someone comes in to the house wet and I open the window and see and feel the rain, it might indicate why the person is wet. It might not (they walked out of the shower down the hall with their close on) but at least I can point to facts to speculate about conclusions.
There is substantiate and the lack of and I always find the former much more compelling.
If someone wants to refute my evidence please let them provide evidence that shows the contrary beyond an unsubstantiated statement.
There are certainly arguments to the contrary based on concrete information but one should include them if one is to be persuasive. For example, there’s the argument that Apple has never had wide industry success with an in house developed app. That might speak to success or failure but it still doesn’t show that FCPX target market doesn’t include pros.
-
[Scott Sheriff] “You heard right. No tape I/O, no XML, no OMF, no multi-cam, no ability to open legacy projects, no way to share a project with another editor due to file structure, no way to assign tracks. Theres more, but that should give you an idea.”
Yes, and FCP7 is 32-bit, has no background render, no skimming, no keyword tagging with smart collections, doesn’t playback different codecs as smoothly, needs renders on even the simplest composites, no magnetic timeline, no “conform” within the timeline, terrible 3-way colorcorrector, overcomplicated editing-tool-selections…I could go on for a while. How anyone call it a professional tool in August of 2011 is beyond me. Oh yes, because their workflow is dictated by the investments of 2004. That must be it.
-
Actually unlike the days when an NLE might set you back $60k or more, it’s quite possible to have Avid, Premiere, Final Cut and just use the best tool for the job at hand. The added expense, in large part, is hardware compatibility. Avid has a limited selection of compatible hardware at least regarding i/o.
-
As I see it here’s the best refutation of all your beliefs –
Apple remains silent.
Only they can end all this speculation, and they can end it immediately. They choose not to.
If Apple was interested in not alienating the “complex workflow” professionals they could do it in one day. They choose not to.
So as someone who does, sometimes, know when it’s time to come in out of the rain, I interpret that to mean they don’t care if they are alienating that group – how’s that for substantiatin’?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
There are some great articles here at the COW as well.
In order from NAB forward:
FCPX: Ready or Not, here it comes
FCPX: Why We Can’t Use Final Cut Pro X at Our Companies
FCPX: What Pros Find Missing In Final Cut Pro X
FCPX – First Cut with the new Final Cut Pro X
FCPX: Three Camps – The Pro vs. Non-Pro Debate
A Final Cutter Tries Out Premiere Pro
FCPX: Hardware Changes, Part Two
The Magnetic Timeline: Thoughts on Apple’s New Paradigm
Here are links to interviews with execs at Avid and Adobe reiterating that, without pros, their companies cease to exist.
I’ve left out a dozen or so, but you get the idea.
As for FCPX tutorials, we’ve got bunches. Most recently, a 6-part series by Kevin McAuliffe on switching to Avid Media Composer, starting here.
Hey, maybe you’re looking for tutorials for FCPX itself. 🙂 Yeah, we’ve got those too. In addition to some of the text-based lessons above, we have bunches of video tutorials as well, covering things like working in the timeline, animating with keyframes, matching EQ, taking projects on the go, and more.
So yes, in addition to chatter, we have articles and tutorials. 🙂
Yr pal,
Timmy
Creative COW -
[Herb Sevush] “Apple remains silent.”
They posted an FAQ. There’s the “London” meeting that Alex4d and Peter Wiggins posted about. That’s not silent. Maybe it’s not enough for some but it’s not silent.
Then I also see Stu Maschwitz of RedGiant posting that they are talking to Apple about issues they’re running into as a plugin developer. Maybe it’s a one sided conversation but I assume Apple is talking to them and Stu was able to state that much.
We certainly don’t know the conclusion to any of the above but Apple has been talking, albeit very softly and sometimes through others who have talked to them directly.
[Herb Sevush] “If Apple was interested in not alienating the “complex workflow” professionals they could do it in one day. They choose not to. “
Like the FAQ? They could do an update. These features aren’t going to happen in one day. Nor would a press release make any sense. Maybe a big marketing event . . . which might lead to accusations of Jobs (or Ubillos?) reality distortion field. The FAQ is the closest we have for an upcoming feature list/development direction.
[Herb Sevush] ” I interpret that to mean they don’t care if they are alienating that group – how’s that for substantiatin’?”
Nothing wrong with that claim. Fact is they certainly have upset that market. Yes that can easily be substantiated. The question is what strategy do they have that can do that and still gain them market share. I can only speculate on that and have little to substantiate that speculation. The only substantial thing I can say is Apple does things in order to make money. They invested R&D in FCPX with intent, even if that intent may fail.
What I can say substantially is that beyond the SuperMeet, there hasn’t been much obvious marketing in any direction at all. No Special Event. No Apple Home Page Splash Page. I can (and have) speculated about that but the fact is, the marketing isn’t typical of a product targeting “mass” use. There’s a lot of iCloud and Lion marketing though.
-
Apple is losing thousands of editing licenses to Avid and Premiere.
If they want that to stop they could hold moderated question and answer sessions with hand picked industry insiders who would, politely, be asking the questions we hysterically speculate about on this forum daily. If the answers matched your expectations the hysteria would stop – while they might still loose seats in the near term, they would hold on to a much larger part of their base. There are a myriad ways of accomplishing the same goal – not doing it is costing them this part of the user base. To me it looks like they don’t care about this loss, and since I agree with you that they are only in it for the money, my interpretation is that the answers would not help them hold onto this market. Whispering into Peter Wiggins ear will not quite do it.
“They invested R&D in FCPX with intent, even if that intent may fail.”
No agreement there – it’s just that I see the intent as catering to a different slice of the “pro” pie – applying a high-end filter, cutting out all the “noise” above a certain level of complexity so that their app will play better with a larger audience.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“No agreement there.”
That was supposed to read “no argument there” – what’s that about a Freudian slip?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up