-
scary thought
-
I’ve been reading your blog Walter – very interesting.
We have done something very similar in the last few years, but we didn’t wait for FCPX to make the change. I watched with amazement as a colleague of mine made edits, after effects work, photoshop work and cut Blu Rays with Adobe dynamic link and a relatively cheap workstation and decided to move to windows machines. We spent about £3.5k building a superfast PC with Blackmagic hardware and have never looked back. We still have a Mac Pro with FCP but it hardly ever gets used anymore.
If you look at FCPX development it’s on a “fast track” (which brings some bumps along with it as far as QC and bugs) but they are pushing very hard. Updates have been at about a 12 week clip and of the three that have happened so far, two had significant feature additions.
Craig – this goes back to one of my earlier points. Adobe software is already better, more professional and better value for money than FCPX (yes FCPX is cheaper, but something that is half price that doesn’t work very well is not worth $5 let alone its full price is it?). If Adobe keeps improving, what does this bode for FCPX? Adobe is also on a fast track with improving CS6 and beyond…. I cant wait to see what we are editing with over the next few years, but after moving away from Apple hardware and software, I will be quick to move to whichever is best in the future. For now and the forseeable future, it is Adobe and by a long way.
-
[Tom Sefton] “Craig – this goes back to one of my earlier points. Adobe software is already better, more professional and better value for money than FCPX (yes FCPX is cheaper, but something that is half price that doesn’t work very well is not worth $5 let alone its full price is it?).”
And the one thing Adobe has above all is a suite of products that work hand in hand pretty much seamlessly. So for the extra money you get a suite of products that outperforms everything that Apple ever put into the FC Studio suite. For my money, and especially for the use of freelancers around Atlanta, Adobe and Avid are a much better choice for us than FCPX.
X will have to rise from the bottom up again like the original FCP did, though with everything changing so much now compared to 1999 when it first came out, I’m not sure you’ll ever see the market dominance by FCP again. Adobe is the one company that will most likely come out on top because their creative tools just work so incredibly well, in particular Photoshop and After Effects which are used in every edit suite I’ve ever visited. Now drop Premiere into the workflow and suddenly you realize you’re working faster than ever. Adobe still has a lot of work to do in terms of support for 3rd party cards like the AJA Kona board, but I’m hopeful we’ll see some improvements with CS6.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media“This American Land” – our new PBS Series.
-
[Tom Sefton] “Craig – this goes back to one of my earlier points. Adobe software is already better, more professional and better value for money than FCPX”
There’s not much reason for a current facility to consider FCPX in its current tool except for a few of its “specialty” functions. I think there’s going to be an “emerging” market where some people will buy and grow with it as it grows. Anecdotally, I see it making inroads in some smaller in house corporate markets.
-
[Craig Seeman] “Anecdotally, I see it making inroads in some smaller in house corporate markets.”
That’s a market where it’s already making inroads and it’s a great tool for that. Kind of an “all in one swiss army knife.” I’ve met a few folks creating materials only for websites or in-house presentations that are using the tool precisely for that reason.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media“This American Land” – our new PBS Series.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up