-
Version 1.0 is the new 0.9 – CNet Article
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “It’s just a prosumer app FCPX – it’s never going to be anything else, it’s performing well as a prosumer app, aimed at regular iMovie users. That’s all this thing is. It doesn’t, in a certain sense, really have much to do with us.
It wasn’t intended to be a professional application – it’s a more advanced hobbyist tool grown out of iMovie. That’s all it is. It’s not going to stop being that.
“In your embittered but sometimes incredibly humorous opinion perhaps.
“My Name is Steve and I’m an FCPX user”
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “It’s just a prosumer app FCPX – it’s never going to be anything else,”
Not if you know anything about some of the features and others on the way. Sorry you’re flatly wrong on this. I’m not going to rehash the features it already has that have nothing to do with the “prosumer” market.
-
Oh absolutely, opinion she be.
http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics -
[Aindreas Gallagher] “The vast majority of FCP license holders were editors or post houses, but there is No Way that the majority of FCPX users aren’t graduating from iMovie.”
I’m not so sure about this and would be hard to prove. Almost every DP, PA and Producer I know has a copy of FCP. It wasn’t just for editors and post houses.
[Aindreas Gallagher] “have a read of this again:
https://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/imovie-to-finalcutpro/“
Yeah, I’ve read it. Notice no mention of FCPXML in there at all, but yet, it’s in there. Although, there’s not much to talk about yet. If Apple is using “consumers” to immediately pay for the R&D that went in to FCPX, then so be it. This, of course, is predicated on the fact that Apple will continue to build on the software to be pro worthy.
I could care less if “consumer” editors use FCPX or not. It was already happening with FCP/FCE. It’s not a big deal to me.
[Aindreas Gallagher] “I’m not being mean, but the deliberate grim insistence on avoiding the screamingly obvious with this software verges on Stockholm Syndrome.”
I’m a big fan of skimming, and I don’t mind the magnetic timeline. I just wish there was more control of certain aspects of it.
[Aindreas Gallagher] “he idea that one application can be simultaneously successful as a consumer/prosumer hand holding environment and a full featured, open, deep professional software environment is a lie. Sophistication and options engender necessary complexity. The primary market for this software – iMovie users, will not benefit from those kinds of changes and they are, inarguably, the primary market.”
And you don’t think FCP7 fit in to a prosumer category? or FCExpress? Was FCP7 that complicated/complex? Not really, it had a mature XML language that allowed other application to speak with it. FCPX isn’t there yet for XML, but once it is there, then all we are getting down to is UI. There are many things that solve completely stupid problems of FCP7. Log and Transfer, as well as media management being a few. If FCPXML matures, then we can get some of the control back.
I don’t mean to over simplify this, FCPX is certainly not ready for our shop yet.
[Aindreas Gallagher] “And that, children, is the story of how Apple completely destroyed FCP.”
You crack me up.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “And you don’t think FCP7 fit in to a prosumer category? or FCExpress?”
Come on Jeremy, FCP7/Studio was enterprise-class. Do you really think BBC/CNN/Disney and all the other Fortune 500 level users were running FCExpress?
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
In the end, the lingering question is…
What possible “features” can be added (down the line, of course) that will make this a compelling piece of software?
Given the fact that ANY possible innovation that MIGHT be in this software will surely be mimicked by the competition by that time.
I keep returning to this dead horse again and again, with less and less frequency hoping SOMETHING good might come of all this. Sadly, nothing has appeared, nor does it seem likely too. I will certainly check back in Q1 2012, but don’t have much hope to see more than the same jokewarez with an extra bell or whistle tacked on. For me, the debate is over… FCPX is the lamest “upgrade” ever. A fail on too many levels to count.
Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username – vidmarv -
[Marvin Holdman] “ANY possible innovation that MIGHT be in this software will surely be mimicked by the competition”
Apple has a cone of silence for a reason. Others may mimic but they can’t do that until after the features are out and then the implementation time for the competitors might be long.
-
[David Lawrence] “Come on Jeremy, FCP7/Studio was enterprise-class. “
Was it, though? Or did they just make it work because it was cheaper than a Unity system?
FCP itself, is not extremely “enterprise class” although it did allow you to move the media around through XML to connect to other “enterprise class” software.
The media management is shotty, project sharing is a chore, native format support is dismal, rs422 is a crap shoot, interlaced pulldown issues abound, renders could come up missing, moving shots in and out of bins via XML is non existent, the plugin well is goofy, real time performance is crap, multi format timelines are a joke, file searching – laborious.
Don’t oversell FCP7. The underlying frameworks were crusty.
[David Lawrence] “Do you really think BBC/CNN/Disney and all the other Fortune 500 level users were running FCExpress?”
I have no idea. Probably not. If they could, I bet they would.
My point is that FCP7 was used by Pros AND Prosumers, or pros in other areas of production that aren’t editors. FCP7 was not “Pro Only”, it was too cheap.
Just because CNN uses it doesn’t mean a prosumer can’t. CNN is sourced by consumers anyway, didn’t you hear? https://filmmakeriq.com/2011/11/cnn-fires-editors-photojournalists-because-amateurs-will-work-for-free/
I am not saying that FCP7 wasn’t ubiquitous and extensible, or used by top notch establishments. It certainly was, and a lot of that was due to the mature XML language and nothing else. But it wasn’t the holy grail of technology that it seems to be made up to be.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “You crack me up.”
Absolutely – and I’d like to be the first to nominate Aindreas as my Man of the Year 2011. Unquestionably the best thing about the last twelve months!
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “I’d like to be the first to nominate Aindreas as my Man of the Year 2011. Unquestionably the best thing about the last twelve months!
“Agreed.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up