-
Screenlight: Will Accounting Woes at Avid Spark Big Changes or an Acquisition?
-
[Herb Sevush] “Since I never worked with Avid I can’t talk to all it’s cludgy grafting on. But I did work with a program that behaved like that, with an incredibly unintuitive interface that had user options so spread out through it’s incredible maze like menu trees that it was almost impossible to know where any feature was listed – it was called Final Cut Pro. “
Classic FCP started life as a Macromedia app, and honestly it has never quite been up to the standards of most of Apple’s software. The ‘Tools’ menu in particular is sort of a random grab bag, and in my experience some large fraction of FCP editors have never quite figured out audio routing.
But for just getting footage into the app and performing basic editing operations with the mouse, ‘classic’ FCP is worlds ahead of MC in terms of usability. I think this is a not-insignificant reason for its success, and I think FCP X is even better at ‘simple things should be simple’ (as long as you’re not defining ‘simple’ to mean ‘the same as they are in [other NLE]’), and that this will pay significant long-term dividends in terms of adoption.
More broadly, FCP X is simply of a different era from Media Composer not just in terms of UI and internal architecture — there’s also pricing (it’s ~80% cheaper) and packaging (it’s available for one-click App Store installation). The whole computing world is evolving. This industry exists within that world. And Media Composer — ‘heavy’, expensive software with a proliferation of windows and modal dialogs and a — is what things are evolving away from. Existing users, particularly those who are just interested in editing and don’t really follow the broader computing industry, don’t necessarily know or care about any of this. But it will absolutely impact what choices new users and facilities make over the coming years, even if the people making such choices aren’t explicitly thinking about it.
[Herb Sevush] “And then the powers that be re-wrote it from the ground up guided by all your UI rules with modern fonts and came up with a program that could do simple stuff simply but was totally unsuitable for a large segment of it’s customer base.”
But they’ve since turned it into something with the necessary capabilities to serve the overwhelming majority of their customer base, and without abandoning ‘simple things should be simple’.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Chris Kenny] “simple things should be simple'”
You know what should be simple? Sync markers. Visual relative time code. The ability to relink and re-sync audio and video once its been disconnected.
-
[David Lawrence] “[Chris Kenny] “FCP X’s main timecode display (which is clearly designed to look a bit like a sixteen segment display under glass, though if you pay attention you’ll notice it renders some numbers in ways an actual segmented display can’t) is ‘retro chic’.
Not using modern font rendering algorithms for text in bins and dialogs because you’ve never updated your software to do so is just ‘legacy’.”
Yeah, because everyone knows that a main timecode display rendered as skeumorphic sixteen-segment lights under glass is way more important than something like out-of-sync indicators in a drab, aliased font.
“Uh-huh. But what sparkles better?
-
[Chris Kenny] “More broadly, FCP X is simply of a different era from Media Composer not just in terms of UI and internal architecture — there’s also pricing (it’s ~80% cheaper) and packaging (it’s available for one-click App Store installation). The whole computing world is evolving. This industry exists within that world. And Media Composer — ‘heavy’, expensive software with a proliferation of windows and modal dialogs and a — is what things are evolving away from.”
I agree that the modal dialogue heavy MC is what things are evolving away from. But until they evolve away with the same editing power and strength, they are actually de-evolving.
As for cheaper and Ap store availability – yes, if your 23 years old, this matters. It mattered when Avid cost $20 – 50K and FCP cost $1K, but the $500 difference between the various NLE’s today don’t make a difference to anyone with a job. Until Apple starts producing actual useful editing tools as opposed to programming niceities the cost difference won’t matter. This is not a consumer item, these products have to help me work better. Ap store BS is something to sell to your stock holders.
[Chris Kenny] “Existing users, particularly those who are just interested in editing and don’t really follow the broader computing industry, don’t necessarily know or care about any of this. But it will absolutely impact what choices new users and facilities make over the coming years, even if the people making such choices aren’t explicitly thinking about it.”
Count me as one who doesn’t care about the business side, just the editing side. As long as I believe the tools I work with will still be available I don’t care what the share price is of the company I buy it from. Apple has clearly demonstrated that being with a successful company is no greater assurance of that being true than being with a failing one.
[Chris Kenny] “But they’ve since turned it into something with the necessary capabilities to serve the overwhelming majority of their customer base, and without abandoning ‘simple things should be simple’.”
That is pure supposition. X doesn’t have the necessary capabilities for me, it doesn’t have the necessary capabilities for any editor I’ve been in contact with in real life. This forum is the only place where I’ve met any pro editor who doesn’t treat X with with either disdain or indifference. My anecdotal evidence is no more authoritative than Bill’s or Jeremy’s, but it’s not any less so. Just because Apple has sold a lot of copies it doesn’t mean people are using it. Adobe has sold many copies of PPro and most of them sit unused in a drawer. For this, as in many other things, I’ll bow to the wisdom of Aidnreas and ask “where are the job postings for this oh so popular application?”
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “As for cheaper and Ap store availability – yes, if your 23 years old, this matters. It mattered when Avid cost $20 – 50K and FCP cost $1K, but the $500 difference between the various NLE’s today don’t make a difference to anyone with a job.”
Since a primary focus of this discussion is adoption by new editors, things that matter “if you’re 23 years old” are actually kind of important here. It’s also worth noting that these price differences add up pretty fast for a facility with multiple seats.
And… $500 difference? If you don’t qualify for cross-grade pricing, etc. Media Composer is still $2500. there’s a fair chance it’s more expensive than most of the computers it’s installed on these days. That’s not nothing.
[Herb Sevush] “Until Apple starts producing actual useful editing tools as opposed to programming niceities the cost difference won’t matter.”
You really can’t use the idea that FCP X isn’t a useful tool as a starting premise in an argument in a forum where many people believe it is.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Chris Kenny] “In Media Composer, you have to go create a /Avid MediaFiles/MXF folder, then create a numbered folder within it (numbers only, please!), then quit Media Composer, place your media in that folder, re-launch Media Composer, access the Media Tool, check all the correct boxes (which is a little confusing in its own right), and then drag the clips from the resulting window to your bin. This is completely undiscoverable, and, frankly, crazy. And it’s not an isolated example.”
You can also open Avid, create a bin, drag & drop the media files from the desktop into the bin or use the File->import command and your files will import into Avid (it automatically creates the folder structure it needs). Material already in an Avid codec that matches the project settings will be rewarpped into MXF, not transcoded. The only Avid wrinkle here is that users need to understand that imported media will be transcoded to match the current format and framerate settings of the project (with the previously mentioned exception). Though is that really worse than users tossing in every format under the sun, wondering why performance sucks and eventually transcoding into a less CPU/GPU dependent codec?
From an asset management perspective having everything given a unique alpha numeric file name and kept in a centralized place is great especially in multiuser, shared storage environments. Sure, it forces some aspects of asset management on the user but I don’t really see that as a bad thing in the long run. I’ve worked in places where you could import whatever you wanted from wherever you wanted and it’s an operational nightmare. I spent years editing and developing workflows in a FCP7 mutli-user environment (over a dozen editors and a 40TB Xsan) and when I got a new gig working in a similar situation but with MC and ISIS I had forgotten what a joy it is to work in an all Avid environment. Yes, it has it’s problems but it is very easy to tell that Avid’s sweet spot is shared storage, multi-editor environments.
To walk the dangerous road to Analogy-ville… without instruction sit one new user behind the wheel of an automatic, another behind the wheel of a manual and tell them to start the car and drive around the parking lot. The user of the automatic will probably be on lap 30 around the lot before the user of the manual figures out how to start the car and successfully get in first gear. Is it accurate to extrapolate from this that manuals are inherently inferior to automatics?
There are certainly things I dislike about MC (stills imported as video, the effects handling, etc.,) but things like it’s media management are great and I’d hate to see that disappear because no other NLE currently has anything comparable.
-
[Chris Harlan] “Uh-huh. But what sparkles better?”
Ponies!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftvZFUg4HPc_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhlSome contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Chris Kenny] “Since a primary focus of this discussion is adoption by new editors, “
Since when. This started as the death knell to Avid Thread. While it’s focus is on the future of editing it is not specifically about 23 year old un-employed editors. Attracting editors does not equal only attracting 23 year olds. sometimes it means attracting editors using an orphaned system. Sometimes it means simply trying to get editors to switch tools. Many young editors drop out. Others learn whatever system their boss wants them to. Others might learn FCPX.
[Chris Kenny] “If you don’t qualify for cross-grade pricing, etc. Media Composer is still $2500. there’s a fair chance it’s more expensive than most of the computers it’s installed on these days. That’s not nothing.”
If your a Pro you qualify for cross grade. If your a student you get it for beans. A $500 to $1500 dollar difference over the life of the software is less than nothing if you earn a living with it. If you really think a few hundred dollars is that important you should be pushing Lightworks. It’s free. That’s more than a million times less than FCPX.
[Chris Kenny] “You really can’t use the idea that FCP X isn’t a useful tool as a starting premise in an argument in a forum where many people believe it is.”
Your correct, my remark is badly stated. Permit me to rephrase – I would rather Apple spend their programming time working on making X more useful to more people than worrying about the look of the time code clock.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Andrew Kimery] “(stills imported as video”
WOW does it still do that?Steve Connor
There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum
-
[Andrew Kimery] “You can also open Avid, create a bin, drag & drop the media files from the desktop into the bin or use the File->import command and your files will import into Avid (it automatically creates the folder structure it needs). Material already in an Avid codec that matches the project settings will be rewarpped into MXF, not transcoded. “
I’m aware of these methods, but they still don’t really match the expected behavior (since they always generate new media and might in some instances cause transcoding). And they still don’t address my points about MC basically having two ways of referencing and managing media, one being the original ‘native’ way, and a second way, that works totally differently, that was grafted on to support file-based workflows better.
[Andrew Kimery] “Though is that really worse than users tossing in every format under the sun, wondering why performance sucks and eventually transcoding into a less CPU/GPU dependent codec?”
FCP X manages these problems in significantly more comprehensible way with its ability to automatically generate optimized and proxy versions of imported clips.
[Andrew Kimery] “From an asset management perspective having everything given a unique alpha numeric file name and kept in a centralized place is great especially in multiuser, shared storage environments. Sure, it forces some aspects of asset management on the user but I don’t really see that as a bad thing in the long run. I’ve worked in places where you could import whatever you wanted from wherever you wanted and it’s an operational nightmare.”
While Apple isn’t presently making use of this to enable multiuser functions, FCP X also has a much more straightforward and flexible way of handling this as well. It can optionally copy imported media to a folder structure it manages (either at import time or at any later time). And that folder is named for the event the footage is imported into, rather than having an arbitrary, non-descriptive number. It can also store footage in any format it supports in this folder. As well as, optionally, optimized and/or proxy transcodes of that footage — and you can switch between editing with original/optimized/proxy media with one click at any time.
Contrast with MC, which basically forces you to let the app centrally manage your native MXF media, doesn’t provide an option to have the app manage your non-native (i.e. AMA) media, and requires you to manually move media around in the Finder and relink sequences to move between original and proxy representations of the same clips.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up