-
Why does Panic and Paranoia Rule some “Pros”?
-
I just want to repeat what I just posted in another thread, but still applies here:
Wow. You can cut through the fan-boyism in this room with a box cutter.
It’s just like those May 21 doomsday followers. And when the end didn’t come on the said date, they still blindly believed the same guy when he said that the end will come in October.
-
Olof, I am a bit perplexed as well.
“There is nothing more frightening than active ignorance.” -Goethe
-
[Steven Gonzales] “If a feature means a long form piece, yeah someone will do it.
A feature means originating on film (still predominant) and finishing sound elsewhere, and conforming a DI or cutting a negative, is some future unknown time.
Film Logic worked with FCP1 because it took an EDL, and FCP gave an EDL. Sound worked because tracks were assignable and could be exported to ProTools.
Sure, this could happen some day. I just wouldn’t plan on it for at least a year.”
Again (I’m going to keep repeating this until people quit making statements that don’t take it into account), XML export is coming in “a few weeks”. Someone will figure out how to get sequences into Resolve, etc. via that route (processing FCP X XML into FCP 7 XML or EDL files) fairly quickly once that’s available. I’ll do it myself, if nobody else does is quickly enough for my liking.
Tagging audio clips to assign them to tracks on export is coming “this summer”.
This is right out of Apple’s FAQ. I really don’t understand why people keep throwing around time frames like “a year or two”. Multicam might take a year. These workflow features won’t.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Herb Sevush] “No, it turns out they were totally correct. Apple didn’t re-write FCP, they created, as you have rightly been calling it, an entirely new ap and stuck FCP’s name on it.”
You’re simply playing word games here. A rewrite is “an entirely new app”.
[Herb Sevush] “Of course, as even you have agreed on previous posts, this was totally within Apple’s control. If they wanted to create an Ap that was upgradeable they would have. This is proof of their re-targeting. They knew this was important to their facilities base but they didn’t care enough to incorporate it into their new design.”
They could have created an app that was more compatible… by declining to implement what they believed was an extremely compelling new approach to handling sequences. This is not evidence of Apple ‘retargeting’, it’s evidence of Apple being willing to take a short-term hit to have what they believe is a more compelling product in the long run.
This is not especially unheard of for Apple. For instance, there’s OS X’s Quartz graphics engine, which was, frankly, fairly sluggish on the hardware OS X shipped on for the first couple of years. But Apple was willing to put up with that tradeoff, to have a more capable, future-proof graphics engine.
[Herb Sevush] “Then why did they EOL FCP7? How does that make it easier to continue working along side FCPX. This is the part you really REFUSE to look at. “
There’s information out of last night’s London briefing to the effect that there were legal reasons behind this. My guess is FCS3 requires third-party licensing that Apple doesn’t want to continue paying.
[Herb Sevush] “I’ve seen elsewhere your repeating the nonsense about running FCP7 on Lion. There has never been a single operating system upgrade from Apple that didn’t result in multiple bugs and editing problems over time; they all had to be addressed by a dot point upgrade, but now with Lion everything is going to be perfect right off the bat? “
Huh? No. I haven’t said that at all. I simply think that, having promised that FCP 7 will work on Lion, Apple will fix any such issues, and that it’s essentially FUD-mongering to claim otherwise. Having made this representation in the FAQ, Apple could now be sued for failing to deliver on it.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Herb Sevush] “it’s the poor stepchild to AE and Photoshop,”
I’d rather call it their younger, impressive, brother. That wasn’t true until 5.0, when it was the poor stepchild, but now, with the MPE and CUDA it’s been welcomed as an un and coming equal at the table. I’m totally guessing but I have a hunch that with CS6 the suite will take another quantum leap in integration. Some of the technology in PrPro must be highly attractive to the other Production apps.
David
AllinOneFilms.com -
[Dave LaRonde] “Apple could have continued FCP 7 sales and it could have kept FCP 7 support on the web site, while steadily filling FCP X’s vast gaps in utility… now that’s a transition period!”
I agree that Apple should have done this, but, again, I believe people are seriously overstating the real-world consequences of Apple having chosen not to. Particularly if Apple restores the ability for volume license customers to add seats; it’s large institutional customers were were most impacted by this. Smaller more flexible shops can always go to eBay.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
My guess is at least half of the people who own PP don’t even use it, it’s just a throw in to them when they get Creative Suite for Photoshop & AE.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
[Christian Kinnard] “After playing around on a test project for 2 weeks what stands out to me is a lack of preciseness. When I’m moving through dailies, I want to move quickly. As far as I’m concerned, all the bells and whistles of background rendering, 64bit, etc are coming to every system. But if it lacks a precision, I want nothing to do with it. I started on M100, learned FCP and Avid at about the same time, also jumped on to Premiere for a little. The argument that I’m just not used to it yet, it’s that revolutionary, is asinine.”
People keep making statements like this without providing specifics. How is FCP X imprecise? Yes, dragging ranges is not the most precise way to mark in and out points. But scrubbing is a really fast way to find something in a pile of footage, and J/K/L and I/O still work when you need precision. There are quite a few commands for trimming in the timeline with similar accuracy, including some FCP 7 lacked.
I really not trying to be a jerk here, but having used the app, I have no literally idea what you’re referring to with this criticism.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
[Dave LaRonde] “You mean you’ve never had a system drive go south on you for no reason? Boy, are you lucky! I hope your luck holds.”
I’m pretty sure Apple has not actually sent goons around to collect everyone’s installer discs. If you’re worried about those going bad, image them.
[Dave LaRonde] “Take off those rose-colored glasses. About three weeks ago, Apple kicked approximately two million of its customers right in the nether regions, and no amount of rationalizing is going to change it.
“This is, again, vast overstatement. People are projecting their own requirements onto two million other individuals. The truth is, most of the features missing from the first release of FCP X are probably not used by 80% of FCP users. Certainly this is true of things like EDL and OMF export.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
“You’re simply playing word games here. A rewrite is “an entirely new app”.”
I’m not playing word games I’m simply using words precisely. Adobe did a total 64 bit re-write on Premiere Pro and it was most definitely NOT “an entirely new ap.” When Avid does it’s re-write I will bet your bottom dollar that it will not be “an entirely new app.” 2 years ago when editors were worried that Apple was deserting them they had this exact scenario in mind – that FCP was going to be EOL’d. Well it has absolutely come true. And this is irrespective of whether or not FCPX proves to be the greatest editing ap of all. There is no practical difference to me between migrating to Avid or FCPX – (other than it’s probably a little easier to bring up legacy files in Avid.)
They could have created an app that was more compatible… by declining to implement what they believed was an extremely compelling new approach to handling sequences
And again you show your lack of appreciation for backward compatibility. The fact that Apple doesn’t see the value of it is what troubles me.
My guess is FCS3 requires third-party licensing that Apple doesn’t want to continue paying.
Yes, so screw ’em.
I simply think that, having promised that FCP 7 will work on Lion, Apple will fix any such issues
How? They’ve EOL’d all support for FCP7. Who’s left to work on it? I didn’t hear them guaranteeing to fix anything – they simply said that FCP& will “work” on Lion. If it crashes more often, if something like the screwed up “gap” command happens – that doesn’t mean it’s not “working.” It’s just not working well. I also haven’t heard AJA or Blackmagic say they’re making drivers for an EOL’d system, have you. I don’t think Apple’s too worried about law suits here.
They were worried when they announced that they would continue to sell FCP7 licenses to facilities that already had volume licenses though. You could see the lawyers handwriting all over that one. Of course that doesn’t mean they’re willing to sell a license to someone like me, that would show actual concern, and they don’t have to worry about lawyers in my case, so screw ’em.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up