-
Reconsidering FCPX in Hollywood
-
You are correct!
I always have difficulty with the concept of being charged 12 times a year for software…It’s not natural to my brain.
And wouldn’t THAT kind of revenue results be huge news on an imaginary Adobe Earnings call!
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
All previous reasons given for the lack of full fledged adoption of FCPX are valid and there’s also the confluence of the FCPX years of release and the perceived drop in quality of the overall Apple computer brand. The trashcan came in with a loud thud in 2013 and we’re only now getting it’s replacement on the market.
The days in which the aura of Apple releases would create huge buzz and excitement at Moscone Center died with Steve.
Windows 10 Pro
i7-5820k CPU
Nvidia GeForce GTX 970
Blackmagic Decklink 4k Mini Monitor
Adobe CC 2018
Renders/cache: Samsung SSD 950 Pro x2 in Raid 0
Media: Samsung SSD 960 PRO PCIe NVMe M.2 2280
Media: OWC Thunderbay 4 x 2 Raid 0 mirrored with FreeFileSync -
[greg janza] “Windows 10 Pro
i7-5820k CPU
Nvidia GeForce GTX 970
Blackmagic Decklink 4k Mini Monitor
Adobe CC 2018
Renders/cache: Samsung SSD 950 Pro x2 in Raid 0
Media: Samsung SSD 960 PRO PCIe NVMe M.2 2280
Media: OWC Thunderbay 4 x 2 Raid 0 mirrored with FreeFileSync
“Based on your signature gear lineup – I can kinda see why you’d be suggesting that.
You’ve obviously made your allegiance bets.
As have I.
Time will tell who gains the most benefits from breaking one way or the other.
????
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[greg janza] “The trashcan came in with a loud thud in 2013 “
I figure some of that was because folks couldn’t afford it? It was like 3k without a monitor I seem to recall.
The iMac Pro is 5k before you add anything to it. I know folks who want one but don’t know any that own one.
If it doesn’t jump off the shelves I don’t believe it’s all about people hating it.People’s wages haven’t kept up with these high end boxes or a lot of other things in life.
-
I know lots of people using FCPX and not one of them cares about what they use in Hollywood, it doesn’t seem to have affected global sales at all.
-
[Andy Neil] “This is the same group of people that broke out the Holy Hand Grenade when Avid added the smart tool, a relatively minor UI adjustment.”
While it is true that there is nothing you can do to shift the perceptions of a certain class of AVID editors, this argument is not as strong as it used to be.
Many “intransigents” migrated to FCP Legacy, and many then made the jump to Premiere. In other words while there is a tiny contingent that are not prepared to accept change, there is clearly a much larger class who don’t have a problem with change in itself but to whom FCP X doesn’t seem sufficiently appealing.
That being the case, it’s Apple’s fault for not making FCP X appealing enough to them … arguably.
What’s really missing from the FCP X picture in terms of this segment of the market is convincing peer to peer “marketing” – not to say it doesn’t exist, but it has yet to achieve the tipping point and maybe never will for whatever reason.
Another part of the story is Apple itself.
Adobe made a big thing with Premiere of embedding itself in a number of high profile feature films projects (helped massively by the charismatic and talented Vashi Nedomansky) and the relationship was one where Adobe were rewriting the application on a day to day basis to accommodate requests from the editing teams.
And you simply cannot imagine that Apple in their current incarnation would ever consider being that accommodating.
Of course, Apple don’t really care that much about any of this from a business point of view. They’re presumably perfectly content with their success in other markets and don’t need to go chasing this one. But I bet there’s part of them that would still love the halo effect.
And talking of halo effects, perhaps that’s also part of the story. The perception of a product is created as much (if not more) by the users that attach themselves to it as by any other form of marketing. Broadly speaking FCP X has attracted a type of user that doesn’t necessarily shed lustre on the brand, but quite possibly has the opposite effect …
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Steve Connor] “I know lots of people using FCPX and not one of them cares about what they use in Hollywood, it doesn’t seem to have affected global sales at all.”
Bingo! Give this man a prize. Success of a product does not hinge on what is happening in Hollywood (except for Avid, a company that has put the vast majority of it’s egg into one basket, and successfully so). I know it’s a shocker to some, but the vast majority of us editors outside of Hollywood don’t really care what Hollywood uses. We have to deal with our workflow and clients right in front of us (or sitting behind us).
The guy in this video is simply doing an informational seminar on another workflow and his experiences with that alternative workflow. Using the word “proselytize” is way off base and a bit comical. Is all marketing “proselytizing”?
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Visual Storyteller
https://vimeo.com/channels/1322525
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
[Steve Connor] “I know lots of people using FCPX and not one of them cares about what they use in Hollywood, it doesn’t seem to have affected global sales at all.”
Quite.
But given that the title of this thread is “Reconsidering FCPX in Hollywood”, perhaps that’s a little off the point 😉
Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki -
[Andy Neil] “I had a friend who said they were using it over at Trailer Park.”
he might have been rogue or doing a one off project – but Trailer Park is a Premiere shop – who dabbles in Avid for specific clients.
-
[Scott Witthaus] ” Is all marketing “proselytizing”?”
Yes.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin\’ attached to nothin\’
\”Deciding the spine is the process of editing\” F. Bieberkopf
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up