-
Questions before Update
-
I just got back from California and the DV Expo where I dropped in to see a bunch of old friends – most of whom were giving the presentations that the attendees were there to learn from.
I came away totally energized by the conversations I had.
One guy told me that the way he sees it, FCP-7, Premier, Vegas, and Avid represent the best of what digital video editing has been for the past 10 years.
But FCP-X represents what it will be for the NEXT 10 years.
It’s a long play. We’re in phase one.
Over and over the same idea from people in a position to know. This is the beginning of something designed to grow and grow and grow.One guy reminded me that we’re looking at FCP-X after merely 3 months of life. And one very smart guy reminded me that the 90 day revisions just rolled out this week have already added more useful new capabilities than the original FCP added in it’s entire first year.
From that perspective, we can only imagine what it will look like in 2 more years.
Come for the ride or not. Your choice.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor
-
[Bill Davis] “But FCP-X represents what it will be for the NEXT 10 years. “
What part of it represents the next 10 years? The focus on metadata or the UI? Because if it’s the UI, I disagree. If it’s the use of metadata, I agree but I don’t believe that makes FCPX the exclusive editor of the future. All the other NLEs can add that functionality but still maintain a standard editing interface.
I’m honestly curious, what part of FCPX is going to make it the future of editing? Because if it’s not the UI, everything else can and probably will be adopted (to a certain degree) adopted by the other NLEs, thereby removing any competitive advantage FCPX might now enjoy (in relation to metadata).
—————-
Michael Hancock
Editor -
[Bill Davis] “One guy told me that the way he sees it, FCP-7, Premier, Vegas, and Avid represent the best of what digital video editing has been for the past 10 years. But FCP-X represents what it will be for the NEXT 10 years. It’s a long play. We’re in phase one.”
Bill, you’ve been presenting FCPX as a “take it or leave it” scenario. You also imply that the complaints against FCPX are all illegitimate, and that Apple is the only one thinking about the future.
I totally disagree. If FCPX doesn’t work for someone, I want them to talk about it so that Apple can hear it. The uproar over FCPX’s release was well deserved, and has resulted in a better app and better communication.
There’s a lot to like in FCPX, but there are some really questionable things, too. If Apple doesn’t make FCPX work for more working editors, how can it become what FCP was to the industry?
I don’t disagree that FCPX is a long play, but all NLEs are long plays. You’ve already ordained FCPX as the editor of the future, without considering what Adobe CS6 or Avid MC 6 will bring. You’re comparing your vision of what FCPX will become with what the competitors are today.
Pragmatically, what good is the editor of the future if it doesn’t work today? Why should a working editor care about FCPX until it can actually help them do their job?
What do you think FCPX’s new editorial paradigm and user interface enables that couldn’t be done before? Is it enough to counterbalance the loss of things that could be done before and can’t be done now?
[Bill Davis] “One guy reminded me that we’re looking at FCP-X after merely 3 months of life. And one very smart guy reminded me that the 90 day revisions just rolled out this week have already added more useful new capabilities than the original FCP added in it’s entire first year. From that perspective, we can only imagine what it will look like in 2 more years.”
What they’ve added in the first 90 days aren’t “useful new capabilities.” They’re useful old capabilities. They’re some of the things that the best of digital editing for the past 10 years have had for those 10 years. They’re features that are important to editors and should be been available at launch.
Post production doesn’t exist in a vacuum, and Apple can’t bring the future alone. If Apple enables more workflows over the next two years, then FCPX will be very interesting indeed. If Apple stays insular, FCPX will truly become iMovie Pro, and editors that relied on FCP will have to move elsewhere.
[Bill Davis] “This is the beginning of something designed to grow and grow and grow.”
Surely new features can and will be added, but I think the “new paradigm” data model and UI could be a straitjacket that’s already limiting development. See David Lawrence’s post [link] after a quick read of the XML. I’m not sure the designers understood all the downstream ramifications of their decisions while developing the FCPX user experience.
Also, if this was designed for growth, why do the XML format and APIs feel like an afterthought? Aren’t these things that should have been locked down earlier in the design process? Apple makes new Mac OS X APIs available to developers well before they make the new OS available to the public.
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 -
I’m equally curious how “after merely 3 months of life” you can make such a bold pronouncement? If it hasn’t been around long enough to come to a conclusion that it is NOT the road forward, how can you be so certain it IS?
While I was encouraged to see the incremental update, and equally encouraged to finally hear some sort of message from marketing regarding the “target” user, I am still not convinced that this is the application presents a clear vision of the next 10 years of the industry. While Apple obviously has the resources to keep this product on a slow road for development, one must wonder if the new crop of people entering the industry will be enough to embrace the product and make it consequential in “future world”.
The one thing I think Apple might be banking on are the current changes in the industry (and world as a whole). Future world will probably be one where more and more editors are freelancers, working out of their bedrooms with hardware/software that they can conceivably afford.
As someone who has been on both sides of this scenario, I would say that those folks, more than anyone else, are going to need less restrictive editing software than FCPX. You might say that it will become less restrictive as it further develops. I think this is going to be the real question that the few left at this forum will be discussing for quite some time.
Whether or not the backbone architecture of this FCPX will ever be able to be as versatile as all of the other established NLE’s? At this point, it would appear to be an island, while all the other NLE’s would appear to be airports.
Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username – vidmarv -
Well I’d much rather spend time on an Island than in an airport 🙂
“My Name is Steve and I’m an FCPX user”
-
Sure, if you don’t want to go anywhere.
Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username – vidmarv -
[Walter Soyka] “Pragmatically, what good is the editor of the future if it doesn’t work today? Why should a working editor care about FCPX until it can actually help them do their job? “
Walter, you might be missing the point. Like the current administration keeps telling us… sure the economy sucks now, but we’re supposed to stop our criticism and bitching, because in 10 years the economy will be better. How we get by until then, nobody seems to want to discuss…
Yes, the sarcasm is intentional, and I agree with all of your points…
Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.
mitch@insightproductions.com
http://www.insightproductions.com -
Well, here on the island, they are in the process of building an airport with some limited destinations.
“My Name is Steve and I’m an FCPX user”
-
Careful Mitch, bringing politics into this forum might be a bit dangerous. It’s pretty flammable without that can of gasoline (to add yet another analogy).
🙂
Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username – vidmarv -
[Marvin Holdman] “Careful Mitch, bringing politics into this forum might be a bit dangerous. It’s pretty flammable without that can of gasoline (to add yet another analogy).”
A bit late to worry about civility on this board isn’t it? Seriously, people need to develop thicker skins. Not everything thats said is directed at someone personally. It’s time to “cowboy up”…
Having been on the COW since the very beginning, I have never seen anything that has gendered this kind of response. I’m sure Apple wishes they could stuff that Genie back in the bottle.
On the positive side, Apple’s been forced to change the way they communicate. Their website lists features coming in 2012… wow… that’s new. They’ve also committed to the professional… wow… that’s new. IMO, none of this would be happening without this forum. That “pollyanna” delivery at NAB probably won’t happen again either… all because of the dialogue on this forum. Ron and Tim deserve a lot of credit for not caving to advertisers, etc. and keeping this forum up…
Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.
mitch@insightproductions.com
http://www.insightproductions.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up