Understand Life and Final Cut Pro X/ Comprendre le vie et Final Cut Pro X

[Mark Raudonis]

Fascinating article. Can’t say as I disagree with it.

My favorite quote: (Remember this is a google translation from French)

“This software will not mount on your behalf, nor does it make you a genius if you are a tench.”

What’s a “tench”? Well, my high school French is a bit rusty, but with the help of Google, I learned a tench is a fish. It’s also one of those idioms that loosely translates to, “an idiot!”.

Now if we can only get Aindreas to rant en Francais, then this forum will get interesting!

[Chris Harlan]

Tench! I got me a new word. Now I just have to find a place to use it.

[Rafael Amador]

All that blah-blah-blah may impress people that never heard about Darwin.
FCPX is the evolution of nothing. In fact, FCPX is probably a very bad example on what is EVOLUTION.
Charles Darwin said “The function develops the organ”. And so, only the lack of function may lead an organ to disappear.
FCPX has new organs, but lost some which functions are still needed.
When birds developed their wings to fly didn’t lose their leg to run or their mouth to eat.
rafael
PS: You can design animal without mouth so you don’t have to feed, but..

[Bernhard G.]

In understanding what FCP-X means in terms of technological development,
I prefer to explain it as Disruptive Innovation,
following the Innovator’s Dilemma by Clayton M. Christensen.
One of Steve Job’s favorite books.

Best regards,
Bernhard

[Aindreas Gallagher]

https://images.wikia.com/creepypasta/images/e/ea/Manticore.jpg

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

[Joseph Owens]

I saw a bumper sticker on a car parked in a Student parking lot of the University of Alberta (I walk through it on the way to the LRT station) that read: “Evolution is a Theory, Creation is a Fact.”

Too bad they don’t know the difference between “belief” and “knowledge”.

And consequently wonder what the H— they are doing at a University?
Especially one whose motto is “Quaecumque Vera” (Whatsoever Things are True).

And so there it is… filostafee, the way Zappa would see it, ie. RU effing kidding me?

Really, this debate is a waste of two years — the fact that there is a debate indicates quid pro quo that the experiment is a failure.

jPo

“I always pass on free advice — its never of any use to me” Oscar Wilde.

[Craig Seeman]

I don’t think an app that’s regularly the 2nd or 3rd highest grossing app in Mac’s App Store is a “failure”
Regardless of whether one thinks “pros” are using it, it’s appears to be selling quite well. When you consider the number of posts by people buying iMacs so it can run better, it may well be doing its job selling computers for Apple.

Maybe your definition of “failure” is the same used by Android supporters who tout market share, while Apple makes a fortune selling iOS devices and Google makes a fortune from iOS ad revenue.

[Steve Connor]

[Joseph Owens] “the fact that there is a debate indicates quid pro quo that the experiment is a failure.”

The experiment has shaken up the NLE market in a very large way and is very far from a failure

Steve Connor

There’s nothing we can’t argue about on the FCPX COW Forum

[Clint Wardlow]

[Steve Connor] “The experiment has shaken up the NLE market in a very large way and is very far from a failure”

I think the only ones shaken up were FCP Legacy users. AVID users still use AVID, Premiere Pro users still use PPRO (though I am curious how they feel about changes to their NLE in the wake of FCPX). Vegas users still use Vegas. It was really the FCP user that was left wondering which way to jump.

As to whether it is a failure, that is subjective.

From a money aspect, it is very successful. I also think in terms of pulling in folks that never seriously looked at video editing (whether for price or complexity) it is a success. As to being viable for large scale productions, that remains to be seen; although adoption in such circles seems lacking.

As to keeping thee hardcore FCP users of the past on board, there it is pretty much a failure. I mean there are those that have enthusiastically adopted X as their main NLE. Many are also grasping onto FCP Studio until the wheels fall off. However, many have jumped ship and even a lot who still use FCPX see it as only one tool that needs other NLEs to complete the package.

The long-term viability of FCPX is still up in the air as I see it. However, I don’t see it going away anytime soon.

[Laurent Lindebrings]

I really like the way the author of this text use evolution theory to explain FCP X. That’s really original.
By the way the fish’s name is “TANCHE” and not “Tench” and yes it is a slang term for idiot.
As we saw with FCP 5_7 a lot of functions of FCP X are implemented in some others NLE (like the skimmer in PPCS6) and certainly more to come.
As an editor on FCP for 10 years now (I am certified by Apple on 7, X & Motion), I quit FCS to use FCP X.
I really enjoy to edit with this software. Once you understand the way it behaves you are faster than ever you did on FCS.
I really regret that Apple did not wait and test it’s software before relasing it.
X.0 to X.4 were really not up to the task. Worst, the methodology for using it was not ready and confused a lot of people.
Since 0.4 then the software is stable and for most of its functions, is far better than FCP7.
Because of this terrible launch, most of the editors have a bad idea of what FCP X is capable of doing while the software and it’s ecosystem evolved really well.
I really hope that pros will have second look at FCP X with the right guide (it’s really different).
Some professionals tell that FCP X does not have the right tools for their job.
For most of us FCP X is really enough as a core for editing but it is true that everything is not include. This depends of your own ecosystem. FCP X is a kind of iOS for editing. You pay for the core of your editing system and add apps for your specific tasks.
Is it a problem ? Maybe for some, not for me.
As Apple did before with computers it jumps. 7 to X, is it clear ?
The problem is not the jump itself but how they did jump (communication, brutality)