Re: After a year has perception of FCPX changed?

[Craig Seeman]

[Herb Sevush] “how about that they make it a policy to show up at public meetings”

I’d like that as well. I’m curious to hear from others if they continue that.
This meeting was done with Blackmagic, it was public. Adobe and Avid were there as well.

[Herb Sevush] “maybe they could find some way to announce that policy publicly”

That’s why I added that the presenter emphasized that the roadmap is officially. Obviously there’s a credibility issue when they use other people as mouthpieces.

I think Apple may be feeling it finally. I’m looking forward to hearing from somebody else that Apple is continuing down the path. Where Apple sends staff (not trainer, not a facility manager) and speaks directly and takes questions directly.

I’m just documenting that they’ve done this once, done it recently and hope this becomes direct communication going forward.

[Richard Herd]

[Herb Sevush] “Such art does not have to be made with the 5 steps you outlined – the perceiving mind will create them for itself. Or as Godard once said – movies should have a begging, middle, and end, just not necessarily in that order”

Herb, that’s not what I said. I said, “As a literary interpretation method, all dramas have five basics:
1. Who is the main character?
2. What does the main character need?
3. Who or what tries to stop the main character?
4. Does the main character get the need?
5. What does the main character learn?”

A literary interpretation method…

This point has been belabored far too much.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Clint Wardlow] “It has nothing to do with me.”

I guess I’m not worried. about what the guy next door thinks about me using FCPX, if that’s what I choose to use.

I don’t care about Apple PR. They have said things, and so far they’ve done it. I am glad they have said they are going to work on FCPX and are committed to it. That keeps me around. I don’t know what else they could say.

For a 1 year old program, it’s remarkably advanced in certain crucial areas, the rest will catch up.

Or not.

[Clint Wardlow] “And frankly, Apple has been closed mouthed about its plans. I heard about modular design based on Thunderbolt and macminis here. I heard about the imac pro here (whether they happen or not is another matter because apple isn’t saying). I mean we hope they release some sort of concrete plans for a MacPro replacement this summer, but we don’t really know for sure.”

We never have. It’s pretty much always a surprise.

Clint, I’m not trying to take this personal, I’m sorry. I am just wondering what Apple has to do but keep developing FCPX. The rest will fall in to place. Either “you” like the software and buy it, or “you” don’t. Ultimately, what more does any company have to do? Sing us to sleep?

[Clint Wardlow] “I mean this is just my opinion, but I think there are a lot of folks that will never trust Apple again (and I don’t mean me) unless the company does something to assuage their fears.

These people don’t want to be wowed, they just want to be sure they’ll be able to operate 3 years down the road with what they purchase from Apple.”

Three years? People will still be using FCS3 in three years. The Mac OS is very flexible and can run on a number of machines by taking it out of any mac computer and booting it to another mac computer. It is amazing in that way. Three years from now, everything will look different again, but I bet a person will be able to dust off that old hard drive and boot to Snow Leopard or Lion from that drive.

[David Lawrence]

[Steve Connor] “In timeline terms what exactly can’t you do in FCPX that you could do in Legacy, apart from tracks of course. A specific example would be great”

I think you’re missing the point. It’s not that you couldn’t do multi-channel work in FCPX, the question is why would you want to? It’s not designed with that in mind.

Look at multi-channel audio. Even Apple knows it’s currently a mess and needs fixing. The same problems with multi-channel audio apply to multi-channel video as well. Let’s see what Apple comes up with in the next release.

Tracks and absolute time is a natural way to graphically express multiple concurrent channels of time-based media. There is no primary. There is no secondary. There are just media objects composed in parallel channels of absolute time.

For the kind of non-linear/multi-channel work Clint is talking about, the magnetic timeline’s advantages would likely be far outweighed by its single-track constraints and inflexibility. Tracks and absolute time have none of these problems.

BTW, Bjørn Melhus makes his work with FCP Legacy. Or at least he did several years ago.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl

[Steve Connor]

[David Lawrence] “Tracks and absolute time is a natural way to graphically express multiple concurrent channels of time-based media. There is no primary. There is no secondary. There are just media objects composed in parallel channels of absolute time.”

So are you saying you can’t do absolute time in FCPX?

Steve Connor
“The ripple command is just a workaround for not having a magnetic timelinel”
Adrenalin Television

[David Lawrence]

[Jeremy Garchow] “That is essentially a music video.

If you are confused as to how you might edit a music video in FCPX, it’s pretty easy.”

And how many multi-channel, synchronized video installations have you made?

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl

[Clint Wardlow]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Three years? People will still be using FCS3 in three years. The Mac OS is very flexible and can run on a number of machines by taking it out of any mac computer and booting it to another mac computer. It is amazing in that way. Three years from now, everything will look different again, but I bet a person will be able to dust off that old hard drive and boot to Snow Leopard or Lion from that drive.”

I certainly am counting on it. I am freezing my current mac in time and hoping it will still work 3 years from now even if I have upgraded to some other super computer (mac or otherwise.)

[Jeremy Garchow]

[David Lawrence] “And how many multi-channel, synchronized video installations have you made?”

More than you’d think, they just aren’t in museums.

I also think if you want to edit multichannel video in FCPX, it would also be pretty decently easy due to FCPX’s superior grouping capabilities.

[David Lawrence]

[Steve Connor] “So are you saying you can’t do absolute time in FCPX?”

I’m saying you can’t easily have multiple parallel channels of absolute time without bending over backwards. Clever hacks like Jim Giberti’s template attempt to bring some of this flexibility back but it’s still a hack. The bottom line is the magnetic timeline is a single track timeline that ripples by default and forces everything outside it to be in temporal relation to it, not the external window. For multi-channel work, there is zero advantage in this.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl

[Steve Connor]

[David Lawrence] “The bottom line is the magnetic timeline is a single track timeline that ripples by default and forces everything outside it to be in temporal relation to it, not the external window. For multi-channel work, there is zero advantage in this.”

We’ve been through this one before, it’s very easy to stop it rippling.

Steve Connor
“The ripple command is just a workaround for not having a magnetic timelinel”
Adrenalin Television