the verge explains apple photos, nilay whispers FCPX is the other shoe about to drop and die.

[Charlie Austin]

The idea that Apple is gonna kill FCP X anytime soon is ludicrous. It’s good to have Aindreas back though. 🙂

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Tony West]

Excellent points jim, but I thought the new
Photos app was going to have organization
Plus editing capabilities with the added kicker
Of an option for 3rd parties to offer plugins.

To me one of the things I like about X is the
3rd party deal making it even stronger.

Could you end up with a much stronger app
Than you have now if that happens and what
Are your thoughts on the affinity app?

[Mitch Ives]

[Charlie Austin] “And remember, everyone who has access to Photos is using a beta. The *first* beta. The rest of us are only speculating based on seeing pictures/demos and using the iOS version. I’ll go out on a limb and say that it will have a lot more going on after it’s been out for a while. “

Exactly… the thing isn’t even out yet and already it’s being hammered. I’m taking a wait and see attitude. What if it’s like FCP X… pretty good but missing some stuff initially, but gets filled in later?

I do understand the whole DAM thing, but given that FCP X is at its core a database, why wouldn’t Photos have something similar?

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

“Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.” – Winston Churchill

[Marcus Moore]

I don’t want to be dismissive of Aperture users who waited all this time for Aperture X and now are finding themselves with “iPhoto Pro”.

Of course, these were the knee-jerk reactions to FCP X when it was first released (and still exist in some circles). But Final Cut and iMove remained 2 separate and distinct apps- regardless of any surface UI or functional similarities. So they could each develop on separate paths to cater to different user bases.

For now, Apple is presenting a single application that is supposed to meet the needs of two distinct markets. I always figured this would be a very hard concept to square. And for now at least it seems Photos is certainly more aimed at the consumer and hobbyist vs the working professional. Some of this stuff could certainly be reintegrated in future updates, but I think the concept of organization (where it seems Photos is most lacking vs Aperture) might be difficult to implement as a Extension or plug-in.

Or perhaps Apple does have an pro-oriented Aperture successor in the works, and it’s simply not ready yet. That’s impossible to say.

On the other hand, I remember a lot of flack about the lack of traditional “Bins” when FCPX was first released, before people realized just how powerful and flexible the metadata tagging and search tools could be. If these same concepts existed in Photos, wouldn’t it also be an equally, if not more powerful organizational tool than Aperture’s legacy sorting concepts? But it’s just that it’s so open and different that people don’t see how powerful it is?

This is a straight up question, because I have not clue about what Photos metadata tools are like.

[Richard Herd]

[Charlie Austin] “Final Cut Pro and iMovie. Same app, different skin.”

After I read that sentence, I opened up iMovie 10.0.2 and it could not import the MXF I just received nor the AVCHD camera archive.

What do you mean by “same app.”

[Charlie Austin]

[Richard Herd] “What do you mean by “same app.””

It is the exact same code base. iMovie has, obviously, a different UI bolted on, and a different feature set enabled/disabled as you discovered. They are the same app though.

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[Oliver Peters] “Who’s to say that Apple doesn’t keep FCP X as the main video tool and dump iMovie?”

yes. Its just when you look at the new photos its mad – it’s the same software view as on iOS – the experience is really similar and they’re both showing shared views of cloud based material. It’s not impossible to think that apple would want to tie video into the same framework? photos isn’t at all like iphoto – its a way of seeing your stuff with the same attached editing tools that sync across both platforms. it doesn’t feel like a big mad clunky discrete desktop app like iphoto did.

benedict evans, who’s a super duper smart dude, wrote this thing in his latest newsletter: Apple is clearly going to do something in music (replacing iTunes just as it has replaced iPhoto with a great new cloud photo service)

he thinks itunes is going to go. And If itunes is finally going to be broken up as a monolithic heavy app as iphoto was – then you get a really light, iOS shared cloud based music app on OSX that reveals the same media as on your iphone. and if that happens you’d think they might want to do something with all the video being generated on iOS? to give it a software view on OSX? then it could be imovie that gets radically simplified into a clean media catalog with some attached editing functions tied into your cloud/local based video archive?

Spitballing like – just thought tacking the demise of imminent demise of FCPX onto it would be worth it for cat pigeon reasons…

but if music is going into the new iOS/OSX light and fast shared app architecture like photos – if music gets broken out into a clean easy fast app (and please God it does) – then they’ve got to parcel out the other bits of the itunes chicken carcass some way – and that’s mostly video stuff – user generated and commercial?

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Charlie Austin]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “hen it could be imovie that gets radically simplified into a clean media catalog with some attached editing functions tied into your cloud/local based video archive?

Spitballing like – just thought tacking the demise of imminent demise of FCPX onto it would be worth it for cat pigeon reasons…”

You’re looking at it the wrong way. iMove and FCP X are already the same app. IF they redo iMovie iOS so that content created in it can be opened in iMovie, which can then be opened in FCP X… It already works for Garage Band. iOS GB to Mac OS GB to Logic X compatibility…

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Richard Herd]

[Charlie Austin] “It is the exact same code base. “

Isn’t that a bit of wonky taxonomy though? I mean, we are all made up of the same amino acids. The structure of a thing (including code) is more important than it’s parts arranged in mere proximate order. Easier said: the things you can do in one app and the things you can do in another app are different make them not-the-same.

[Aindreas Gallagher]

Maybe – and photos are different to moving video – but the shift is to the content as opposed to a large multi-function app that sits over it asking you to import or select things.
iphoto was highly complex in comparsion to photos. Photo’s function is to expose on OSX shared content you know is already there.

ipad/iphone iphoto on iOS failed because it was an attempt to bring a full bore image editing app in. you’d think that was randy ubillos’s last hurrah.
Apple decided to strip the app away to sit in preference to media discovery with a bit of editing on the side.

apple will have have their own usage metrics to answer it, but the question is how people want to view their material – in the context of a complex full menu system heavy software app like old iphoto and imovie – or like apple photos, and the soon to be apple music.

basically – as consumers, their primary paradigm – are people supposed to boot up a video editing system and bring in their video, or do they call up their cloud based material in an extremely clean app that exposes it, and then decide to do a certain amount of an editing function. If it’s the latter – imovie as we know it is as done as likely is itunes.

photos is that app, and you’d think music is about to be as well. it’s a question whether apple keep with an extremely discreet heavy tasked based app like imovie for video, particularly if they really are about to explode the itunes bucket of everything paradigm.

then user generated and commercial video needs its own light, clean, software based expression on iOS and OSX. like say ‘Movies’ or something. to go with ‘Photos’ and ‘Music’.

It’s hard to see them tying that form of clean media sync view into something as complex as iMovie.

*edit* also it’s interesting that they’ve largely moved the old (horrible) OSX itunes to iOS app specific file transfer function out into the finder in yosemite – I’d really be shocked if that wasn’t preparation for largely breaking up itunes into smaller nimbler parts.

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics