-
Steve Kanter: What FCPX CAN Do
-
Looking for a meaningful distinction in the word “pro” seems to me to be a rather frustrating exercise. “Professional” refers to anyone who makes a living in a specific field. FCP-X is certainly going to be adequate for many who fit the bill. It won’t for others who work at the higher end of the industry and whose needs are greater than its capabilities. Therefore I always prefer the term “high end” to “pro”. It’s loose but for this discussion it’s more specific.
David
AllinOneFilms.com -
[Andree Franks]So you have some inside knowledge or programming. Know how that this can be done?
I used to be a programmer (BASIC, C++, PHP) so I know what is and what isn’t possible in a general sense. This is far from being impossible.
I don’t! But your statement clearly states that it is possible to import Final Cut Pro 7 and lower into Final Cut Pro X but the Final Cut Pro team was to lazy to provide there customers with this option?They weren’t “lazy.” It wouldn’t be easy, and it is a huge pain to import something and translate into such a paradigm shift, but Apple could have done it if they wanted to. They had the resources to contribute to such a function, they just didn’t want to.
-
[Gary Huff] “This statement is completely ignorant of the software coding process. You can’t open legacy FCP6/7 projects in FCPX because Apple didn’t want to spend time developing that. Period. No matter whatever fancy doodads you put in the UI, the end result is still clips, transitions, effects, ect. and there is no technical reason why there cannot be a FCP project import feature.”
I think the “It’s impossible” vs. “Apple just didn’t want to” debate misses the point. Apple has a notorious perfectionist streak. They are perfectly willing to leave out a feature rather than implement it in a way that doesn’t meet their standards. A classic example is the lack of copy and paste on the original iPhone. Cut and paste was an expected feature, one that was featured on many competing platforms and Apple got a lot of grief for not supporting it until version 3.0, two years later. It would have been much easier for them to implement some version of cut and paste and improve on it later, but they were willing to take the heat (and deprive deprive their users of copy and paste functionality) until it met their standards.
You may recall that when FCPX came out some folks digging around in its guts found references to an import function and took this as evidence that import functionality would be coming in the future. Since then Apple has said fairly definitively that it’s not. My guess (and I am speculating here) is that during development, Apple worked on an FCP7 import feature, decided the results weren’t good enough, and ripped it out. What the folks digging around in the released software found was probably the results of that experiment. Again, this is merely speculation, but it fits with the way Apple is known to do things.
-
[Andree Franks]Not really a “Pro” or professional is someone that makes money “Cash” “bling bling” with what they do. 🙂
But again you have you volunteers hmmm might havebto rethink that one.Why would having volunteers require you to re-think that? If your editing experience consists solely of volunteer jobs, then you are not a pro, in my opinion.
If your primary (or a significant source of) income is derived from editing, then you are a pro, regardless of how often you volunteer your time.
-
[Liam Hall] “it is you that should receive an apology from David Roth Weiss for his rude and personal attack on you.”
Liam,
I specifically asked Geoff what qualifies him to know anything about the “pro” editors he was psychoanalyzing in his original post. Geoff told me to Google his name, which I did at his request.
So, point me toward a single thing I said that is untrue and I will gladly apologize to Geoff.
I’m standing by at the ready and waiting.
[Liam Hall] “Some of the comments, plus the amount of time and energy certain COW members are spending denigrating this software points to other motivations. “Me thinks they doth protest too much”.”
You don’t actually get it Liam. You see. it’s perfectly acceptable to denigrate the software. What’s not acceptable is denigrating people who may not agree with you. By attaching various pejoratives and motivations to their personal likes and dislikes, as Geoff Dills did that serves only to try to invalidate them. You’ve just done it again in the line above, and you don’t even realize it.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.comDon’t miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.
-
[Craig Seeman] “Far too many FCPX features are not geared towards “average consumer.””
The problem Craig, is when those great features makes miserable the life of the “average consumer”.[Craig Seeman] “Like any business, he can chose to support another NLE. Despite the similar name FCP7 is not FCPX so there’s no inherent “transfer” of knowledge or base beyond that they have both been from Apple.”
So lets tags those videos as marketing.
COW video editing forums had feed in the experience of professional that burn their asses in a chair dealing with real life problems., not in sellers.
Yesterday somebody wrote about another FCPX video just released:
“Excellent presentation, Andrew. I think you have explained the philosophical benefits of the storyline concept better than anything else I have seen”.
Vomitive.Should be clear who is selling and who is forming and informing.
I have to recognize that many times I’ve got annoyed when I saw Adobe people (like Dennis for example) in FCPs forums, but was very clear who they worked for.[Andreas Kiel] “It also showed that the old Apple slogan ‘Think different’ is back aga”
No, now is not “Think different”.
Now is “Think iApple”.
Rafael -
[David Roth Weiss] “You don’t actually get it Liam. You see. it’s perfectly acceptable to denigrate the software. What’s not acceptable is denigrating people who may not agree with you. By attaching various pejoratives and motivations to their personal likes and dislikes, as Geoff Dills did that serves only to try to invalidate them. You’ve just done it again in the line above, and you don’t even realize it.”
David,
I do get it, note my use of the word some , so please don’t patronise me and please keep this debate professional.
Regards,
Liam.
Liam Hall
Director/DoP/Editor
http://www.liamhall.net -
Denis,
Thank you. And I must say I agree with everything you say.
Apple has decided incremental change was not going to move the bar far enough forward.
So not only did they ‘scrape’ but they decided to build what they see as a “house of the future.”
Often, these fail. But when they succeed, they change everything.
Whether, in the long run this is moving from the horse to the car (transformative) – the steam car to the gasoline car (evolutionary)- or from the gasoline car to the electric car (arguably too disruptive regardless of any potential benefits) – is precisely what remains to be seen.
“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’Conner
-
[Andree Franks] “So you have some inside knowledge or programming. Know how that this can be done?
I don’t! But your statement clearly states that it is possible to import Final Cut Pro 7 and lower into Final Cut Pro X but the Final Cut Pro team was to lazy to provide there customers with this option?
That is a pretty ballsy statement… especially since many none Apple humans stated the opposite even here on the Cow!
Then there should be no worries a 3rd party will provide us with this tool to make a extra buck! ;)”It’s not ballsy at all, it’s common sense. You don’t need any inside knowledge to know this is possible. Or at least it’s possible to import the basic structure of a timeline. It is still in-points, out-points, timecode, etc.., Saying you can’t concert that is like saying you can’t convert inches to centimeters because they are on a completely differently based number system. Pure hogwash.
The only problems with converting previous projects is that FCPX lacks functionality that FCP7 did (i.e., how could you convert a multiclip sequence). This is what makes Apple’s claim about “FCPX being too complicated” laughable. It is the FCP7 project that would be too complicated.
Professor, Producer, Editor
and former Apple Employee -
[Liam Hall] “so please don’t patronise me”
Let’s see, by pointing out that you too are guilty of invalidating the concerns and motivations of those who disagree with you, I’m being patronizing? Not sure how that follows… It’s like the opposite of patronizing where I come from.
And, I asked you to be specific and to point to what I said about Geoff Dills that was false, but you didn’t or couldn’t give me an answer. Just put up and I’ll apologize to him post haste.
But, more importantly Liam, what do you think actually qualifies Geoff Dills to analyze the motivations of professional editors? That’s the point I raised with him, and I still want to know the answer. Raising that question hardly qualifies as an attack.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.comDon’t miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up