-
Time for FCPX to step up – collaboration
-
[Joe Marler] “I’m sure Apple is considering the cost/benefit ratio of various FCPX collaboration schemes.”
Apple’s philosophy has been about empowering the individual. Given that, this feature may simply not fit their goals.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Oliver Peters] “Apple’s philosophy has been about empowering the individual. Given that, this feature may simply not fit their goals.”
I fully agree. I’d like to see some type of collaboration in FCPX, and Resolve and Premiere adding this creates some competitive pressure. However it’s just not in Apple’s DNA, historically speaking.
I would more readily expect some kind of greatly improved AI-type media analysis. That might include more advanced subject analysis, or maybe built in transcription. Various things like that would preserve the single-user focus. However those are also difficult to execute at a truly useful level. There’s a tendency for them to be like Siri on Mac – something used in marketing demos but which many users disable.
-
[Joe Marler] “Maybe there’s some middle ground which gives some truly useful collaboration but is extremely reliable and not so expensive to test and support. Google Sheets seems to work fairly well in multi-user collaboration, but Google has lots of experience doing that. I’m sure Apple is considering the cost/benefit ratio of various FCPX collaboration schemes.”
Apple”s document applications also have multiuser collaboration.
I know what you’re saying, it’s hard and I can appreciate that.
But it’s doesn’t seem like a crazy ask.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “But it’s doesn’t seem like a crazy ask.”
I would refer you to my blog interview with Steve Bayes about the product development process. ☺
https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2019/11/09/a-conversation-with-steve-bayes/
Apple is always balancing what features benefit the greatest number of its users against the R&D time. There’s another issue at foot, however. That is the OS itself, which has increasingly become more locked down. This in turn may affect what you can and can’t do with collaboration in FCPX. For example (spitballing now), what if the Pro Apps team knows that security will get even tighter in an upcoming version of the OS? In that case, it might be counter-productive to build in a collaborative feature now that might break at some point in the future.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Oliver Peters] “In that case, it might be counter-productive to build in a collaborative feature now that might break at some point in the future.
“Well sure, but then by that metric, might as well not build anything complicated at all.
Didn’t you call for them to “step up”? 🙂
-
Oliver I was going to post a thread called “Does this disturb you?” or something to that effect until I saw your post. The announcement of Adobe Productions does give me sincere concern. As much as I love FCP X, that Apple still hasn’t built in a robust multi-user workflow seems to be giving Adobe even more room to get further entrenched in the workplace. Granted I udders understand that technology over the years has gotten to the point where you don’t always need more than one editor and one person can do many things. Could it be that Adobe is going directly after AVID with this update and in one way or another ignoring FCP X and it’s potential. It still seems to be built around co-located teams with a NAS as Joe mentioned. This his is yet another thorn to deal with for us FCP X advocates. I don’t mind using Premiere Pro, but I don’t prefer it. We still have yet to see how it works in real practice, but that it’s available at all is great news for those who prefer PPro even with the persistent bugs it may have.
I read that announcement and for a brief moment saw the light dimming on FCP X, but it still lets me work more fluidly and faster than PPro and DaVinci for now. Apple has make great strides, but these incremental improvements aren’t enough to quell my angst about it’s survival at times.
I prefer not to go back to tracks…forcibly.
-
[Tangier Clarke] “Could it be that Adobe is going directly after AVID with this update and in one way or another ignoring FCP X and it’s potential. It still seems to be built around co-located teams with a NAS as Joe mentioned.”
I think the very simplistic answer is that Avid and Adobe are going after one type of customer and Apple after another. In super-simplistic terms, the “filmmaker” crowd versus the “YouTube” crowd. I don’t mean that literally, nor do I mean to imply professional versus non-professional.
There is certainly some overlap and I think Apple would be more than happy to have as many “pro” filmmakers on board as possible. But there are probably way more solo editor/preditor types and enthusiasts using FCPX than Media Composer or Premiere. That sets the agenda for ProApps development. Look at other comparisons: Logic versus ProTools, Motion versus After Effects. They each seem to carve out their own market sectors.
Since the launch of FCPX, the development has steered away from the direction of increasing complexity, which was the path of FCP “legacy.” Multi-editor collaboration on-prem is complicated and so, it might simply not benefit the marketing aims of Apple.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
Very good and thought provoking points Oliver. Thank thank you.
-
[Tangier Clarke] “Apple has make great strides, but these incremental improvements aren’t enough to quell my angst about it’s survival at times”
I think another thing to be on the lookout for is Resolve. Right now you can get a nearly full-featured version for free that’s good up to 4K UHD. For the one-man band shops, it will do just about everything. For $300, you get the full version, which is largely on par with a mix of FCPX, Motion, Compressor, and Logic Pro X. Plus it’s cross-platform.
For anyone without emotional attachments to any of the 3 “A” NLEs, Resolve is a no-brainer. Any working editor that I speak with, regardless of NLE, when asked, “Which other system are you interested in moving towards?” always points to Resolve. Even the biggest FCPX fans acknowledge BMD’s fast development pace compared with everyone else, especially Apple.
And if you hate tracks, there’s the Cut Page. Not quite as good for editing as FCPX, but it has some better features to compensate for its shortcomings. And you can start your rough cut there and then move to the Edit Page to finesse it.
Sundance now includes a couple of films creatively edited using Resolve. If you look at only finishing (i.e. “online editing”), then Resolve has a much bigger percentage. So they are clearly the “next big thing.”
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
Oliver I agree. I have been using Resolve to get more familiar with it. If I had to choose another NLE of choice of the ones available it’d be Resolve. However Resolve has always been that app that is feature rich, but does’t perform as fluidly nor as intuitively as FCP X. There’s really a stark difference between FCP X and other NLEs in my opinion. Often to get similar performance on other NLEs, I’d have to have a more robust computer than FCP X requires. I am sure others may have different results based on the media they’re working with and their workflows. I’ve also often felt that I wish Resolve and FCP X would just have a baby already and get it done. In my heart of hearts what I mean by that is I wish FCP X would incorporate many of Resolve’s features, not the other way around. I don’t know how many ways I can say it though. I loathe [now] a track-based NLE even though I still use it in Premiere Pro and Resolve. As great and as many features PPro and Resolve have, they just don’t get out of my way the way FCP X does. I even wonder sometimes how I got along with FCP legacy for so many years, but that’s just a matter of perspective of course; hindsight now.
I wish Apple was a little more transparent about the FCP X direction and if they’re just comfortable where they are. With every feature added to PPro and Resolve at their price points respectively (subscription included) i just can’t help but feel like the FCP X is getting strangled slowly. Yet, with all of the added features and capabilities of other NLEs that FCP X either doesn’t have or relies on 3rd party tools to achieve, I find that those capabilities have yet to be deal breakers for me to jump ship. At the end of the day FCP X just lets me work so fluidly that to date I haven’t gotten that experience on another NLE. I fully recognize though my perspective is correlated to the type of work I am doing or anyone is doing for that matter. My latest is an indie feature called Jezebel just released on Netflix (shameless plug). If I were working in teams more regularly and had to do more color work more often then of course I’d likely be in PPro (reluctantly) or Resolve because let’s face it – where are you going to find a studio running FCP X with PostLab and Color Finale 2 and a Jellyfish (at least)?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up