-
Why the urgency to jump to Avid/Adobe RIGHT NOW?
-
For me the urgency is that FCP8 has been so long in coming, and we have had to put up with 32 bit editor with a pathetic keyframe editor for a very long time, and now that it is clear apple want to dumb down their software for a mass market, the urge to jump is immediate. FCP7 works fine, true, but I have wanted something better for years, and now I am very pleased to have found it in Adobe Premiere Pro CS 5.5.
See my report on the final cut PRO forum.
Tx
Mark. -
Yes, I’m jumping’ right now. It’s not FCP 7 that I leave behind – it’s the whole once familiar workflow. I’ll have to reinvent it for me and familiarize myself with it so I’ll be totally free to do what I was capable of doing with FCS. Either it’s to be Avid (my bet on it) or Adobe some changes will be necessary. It takes time. In order to be ready to pick up project on Avid in a year I need to start planing my life and heading in that direction right now. I’m phasing out FCP. Though it doesn’t mean I’m uninstalling it this very moment.
Sony PMW-EX3, Canon Mark II 5D, FCS3 in Moscow
http://www.mokaeff.com -
[Gareth Randall] “The articles and other comments I’ve read have implied very strongly that the writers have made up their minds and are making the move right now, not at some undefined point in the future.
“Gareth, I don’t think we are quite clicking here. I’d say I’ve moved. I’ve purchased a new copy of Media Composer, I’ve returned my copy of FCP X. I’m slowly taking tutorials on Media Composer. I’ve started rough cutting with MC, producing EDLs and bringing it in to FCP 7 to work on. BUT, I will continue to work on FCP 7, as well. Eventually, as clients and co-workers change, I won’t be on FCP 7 any more. Every once in a while, dissolves really do work better than cuts, and just because I’m in the middle of a dissolve doesn’t mean I haven’t already made up my mind that I need to end up on a different shot.
-
[Gareth Randall] “That might be a dumb question, but it’s a genuine one – why?”
Usually people have been quite vocal as to “why”…
I’ve been waiting for years to get something “like” Adobe CS5’s Premiere Pro out of Apple. So why wait when they are no longer offering something as flexible and fast? Why wait for something that should have been everything Abode is offering but better…?
Just imagine if they *added* the organizational aspects of X and 64bit into Final Cut Studio, kept Color and worked on the kinks…
There wouldn’t be a backlash as loud, there wouldn’t be people jumping ship, the praise would out-shout any real criticisms. Instead of this WTF
Personally, it was a matter of two things. 1) FCx wasn’t flexible, I can’t even save-as or import custom aspect ratios. /eyeroll 2) There are much better products on the market and while they may change course, right now, they are offering products everything FCx should have been and more…so the question is, why wait? Especially for those of us that have tried it out and gave it an F-
And seriously, even if it had everything else I need moving forward, that timeline doesn’t lend itself to being more creative, it’s assembly line junk. I spelled out pretty much everything that drove me to FC7 in a post once, detailing how the flexibility allowed me to work as I choose to work, a process that gave me the ability to mine material as I saw fit and has been instrumental in my creative workflow…that was the revolution…flexibility
The response…“now you can do it faster and go out for a few beers with your friends”…completely missing the point of *the process* not just the result…
In the end, the redeeming qualities of X are a microcosm to the relationship between an editor and his timeline. A timeline should be a “canvas” not a constrained super-locomotive on magnetic rails. THAT is what Apple just doesn’t get…the sad part is, they once did….
-
I have a friend in LA who’s a keyboard technician that tours with a lot of the MAJOR music acts – the shows that pack stadiums.
A lot of artists at that level have keyboard players. Often, those keyboard players (who are VERY good at what they do) play either concert or baby GRAND PIANOS on stage. Clearly lugging a huge wooden baby or concert grand on and off trucks for a touring show is a significant hassle. But they do it because it’s part of the “expectation” of the audience.
Old proven tech right? Well, maybe not.
A significant part of his job is to physically REMOVE the keyboard mechanism from the shell of the grand piano and in it’s place BOLT IN a modern electronic keyboard.
Turns out the old tech (pianos with strings) are terrible to tour with. The underlying old-school design means constant tuning and re-tuning. And worse, if something breaks, the show stops. A piano SHELL with an electronic keyboard bolted in – means if you have a failure, the techs just pull another keyboard off the parts truck, pull out the screwdrivers and – 15 minutes later the show goes on.
What I’m saying is that at some point in time, the old way of doing things – as successful and revered as it might have been – can be counter-productive to on-going progress.
I’m BORED with the “this won’t work for me because it’s NOT the way I do things now – so I’m changing to something that makes me feel less scared.” voices.
I absolutely get what you’re saying. You are absolutely RIGHT for you and those like you that value safety over experimentation – or who simply can’t risk on-going work on something untested.. Go ahead and change to something more comfortable. It’s a PERFECTLY rational move.
Tour with your piano as LONG as you like – NOBODY is stopping you. It will have ALL the capabilities that pro pianos deliver to allow you to do what you want to do. If the company that makes your current brand of piano stops making them – by all means chose another brand of traditional piano and continue to play what you like.
Just stop trying to convince everyone else that the new-fangled electronic keyboard is “INFERIOR” to a Steinway. You WIN. Okay?
I’ll say it here publically, so we can put it to rest. FCP-X is INFERIOR to all the other editing software out there. I’ve said it. You’ve won. Your view rules.
Now, if you don’t mind, I’d like to spend more time playing with my new keyboard. I understand that it’s merely a toy and absolutely worthy of your ire and dismissal – however, just on the odd chance that this first implementation of a new way of approaching editing actually IS a significant directional change and might someday add flexibility and portability and new capabilities that the editing industry hasn’t had up to this point, I’d like to explore it.
Good luck with YOUR choice to stick with the tried and true. I honestly hope it works GREAT for you.
But come on. I make my living as an editor just like a lot of you. And I’ve got to tell you that I’m just barely getting my brain around this change. The one thing I’m absolutely CONVINCED about is that making any career changing decisions (to abandon OR to fully embrace) something this different can ONLY be made once someone understands the subject.
The IM/instant chat/blog world is one where spin often trumps common sense. And great swaths of the public (video editors myself absolutely included) are as susceptible to heard instinct as the people PT Barnum used to extract money from with the big “This way to the EGRESS” sign.
Today, I know VASTLY more than I did a week ago about FCP-X because finally, the smart “non-knee-jerk” voices are having a bit of time to look beyond the instant “it doesn’t do X so it MUST be crap” thinking.
Please just let this continue.
Library rules would be nice.
Quiet study is what will make us all smarter here. Not more voices telling anyone else to ignore the new thing because the old thing is all they’ll ever need to do “truly professional” work.
Only time will tell whether the new electronic method (keyboard) in FCP-x will eventually be bolted into some, few, or ALL of the touring pianos of tomorrow.
And that’s the only FACT that we can all rely on.
My 2 cents for today.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Conner
-
spot on Gareth!
Apple fcp7 was build on years of our feedback. Now the designers thought they could change the editing world alone and come up with something like this. imovie+
The problem is they are software designers,not editors. You can see now that we built fcp7 through our years of feedback.i think they got overconfident.they threw away 10 jears of lerning.
“FCP X Build from the ground up for profesional editors” by software designers who think they built fcp7 without our feedback and now know what we need…NOT! -
[Bill Davis] “Quiet study is what will make us all smarter here. Not more voices telling anyone else to ignore the new thing because the old thing is all they’ll ever need to do “truly professional” work.”
I don’t understand. Is this more of a “we’re not getting it” slight just repackaged? Studying it more isn’t going to change the fact some of us are miffed at this and like coming to a place to punch a pillow…but honestly, no one is saying – ignore it…I think the majority of the “hater whiner complainer Luddites” are saying, it is what it is, use it, go crazy, jump on the super locomotive with magnetic rails and go nuts…I think the more people that use this thing (not training to be editors of course) will hit the wall quite quickly…if you want more atheists, teach religion in school 😉
-
[Gareth Randall] “Why not simply stay with FCP7 and see what happens to FCPX over the next year or so”
The problem is, many of them have already been waiting about FOUR YEARS or so for Apple to deliver a serious upgrade to Final Cut. FCP7 is still 32 bit. It can only use 2 processor cores, even if the computer it’s running on has two CPUs with six cores each. And it can’t use more than 4 gigs of ram. On top of that, everything has to be converted to ProRes before any editing can take place. Because of this there was a great desire among FCP users for Apple to modernize FCP with a 64-bit version that would take better advantage of their expensive hardware. Their patience really dwindled over the past year because Adobe showed them what their Mac Pros were really capable of with a new 64-bit, GPU-accelerated Premiere Pro CS5. Many people became upset that on Apple’s own hardware, another company’s NLE was performing much better than FCP. Many people saw that and thought the results SHOULD be reversed, considering with FCP everything was being made by the same company.
Even before the FCPX release many were saying that it was sink or swim time for FCP. They wanted Apple to send in a heavy hitter who could really knock one out of the park- and instead they got a little leaguer with “tremendous potential for the future”. That combined with the feeling of being disenfranchised by the EOL of FCP7 and the inability of FCPX to open their old projects is what lead to the current situation. FCPX may have potential for later on, but here in the present there are deadlines to be met and big projects to be edited that may require more FCP licenses. Many people are already tired of waiting for FCP7 to get upgraded and don’t want to wait for Junior to grow up. And the other NLEs meet their needs much better, RIGHT NOW.
I’m not too familiar with Avid (i’ve used it but it’s been a while), but I know two major reasons why Premiere Pro in particular is making headlines right now, aside from better performance:
1. Many FCP users already have it, since they used Photoshop, After Effects, and Illustrator with FCP and bought the Adobe production bundle to get a better price on all of them- and with the bundle they got Premiere Pro as well. So they’ve been able to try it without having to pay for it or download it or anything. I’ve seen several accounts of people who “clicked on that purple square that’s been on their desktop this whole time”.
2. Without any 3rd-party plugins, it can open FCP7 projects via XML (Something FCPX can’t even do), and it works very well from what I’ve seen.
This whole thing would have gone much better if Apple had modernized FCP7 before they started down the new paradigm road. Then there would have been a much smoother transition. FCPX would have gotten a much better reception if there was a 64-bit FCP 8 for people to use while they get used to Apple’s new approach.
______________________________________________
“THAT’S our fail-safe point. Up until here, we still have enough track to stop the locomotive before it plunges into the ravine… But after this windmill it’s the future or bust.” -
For me, the term switch is a gradual thing. It starts today but takes time to transition. I can’t stop editing in FCP7 today and begin editing on AVID/Adobe tomorrow. The learning process is about a year for me to be truly proficient. In a professional setting such as mine, I have to look at the companies that I rely on and find out where they are heading (which is why I visit NAB yearly). If I see a company that is not serving its customers well or is heading in the wrong direction or is not communicating its strategic plan, I have to assume that they are not going to be there for me when I need them. I can’t afford to wait and see what apple is going to do. By then it will be too late. FCPX may rock the NLE world in a few years, but as a business person I need to be prepared with plan B, and starting the transition now is part of that plan.
Kevin Hedin
Digital One, Inc.
Anchorage, AK -
I’ve been in the business since 1970’s and have edited on moviolas, flatbeds, CMX, Convergence, Media 100, AVID and FCP. I am still active in the business and in the last two years have cut projects on both AVID and FCP.
In our department we try to plan our upgrade purchases to line up with new releases of software and hardware because our department philosophy is to be on the edge of the wave while trying to keep abreast of “bleeding edge” technology that may or may not revolutionize the industry. Most calls we have for editors are first, Final Cut Pro, second, AVID and never Premiere. If a student or graduate has FCP and AVID on their resume, we find AVID gives them credibility in the business, even if the job is for a FCP editor. As a result FCP has been our core editing system. We do offer AVID classes from time to time for upper division students who want to develop AVID skills.
This last year we made plans to either upgrade to the new version of FCP that everyone knew was coming. When FCP X was finally announced during NAB we decided to wait to switch till we could found out if it was really going to fit the needs of our student.
Our program is a Digital Cinema program that needs native support for Sony and Panasonic products, native 4K raw file support for high end Digital Cinema workflow and support for high end motion picture post production workflow. Unfortunately FCP X falls short in meeting these standards right now. The big problem is the wrench FCP throws in post production sound workflow. In the high end business the locked cut is turned over to sound designers and sound editors who specialize in that area of production. They use Pro Tools or other post sound tools for this workflow. In the “one man band” business, sound editing and mixing takes place in the editing system itself. Unfortunately most of the projects coming out of that workflow sound like they were short changed on that step; they may pass the muster for a local low budget client, but when it comes to quality national work it does not make the grade. Unfortunately FCP X seems to encourage this type of mediocre workflow.
How does this impact students? Since America now has about 10,000 film school graduates each year entering a small job market it means a lot; only the best of the best can expect to earn a living. If they don’t have skills sets meant for the high end motion picture business, they are not going to compete for even lower end production jobs. So the question is, what business does FCP X prepare students for? Hopefully for FCP users looking for some major changes in FCP X, that question has not been answered yet.
One issue is the magnetic timeline. This has great promise. I love tying a sound an event in a clip. I love moving things around without crashing into other clips on the track. Remember that picture and production sound are handled by separate departments in production and are always tied together at the beginning of post production. Since the days of optical sound, they have been a real pain to keep in sync. Apple just gave us a way to tie all the sounds in a clip directly to the clip. We can add any sound we want and keep it sync and keep it from crashing into another clip on the track. However Apple did not take it far enough. They did not include of way of identifying and categorizing the sound. Production sound, foley, SFX and music in a project all need to be grouped together so when we get to the mix they can organized and mixed properly. This suggests that the Apple team did not recognize or clearly think out real motion picture workflow of sending the locked cut to the sound department for foley, ADR, SFX music editing and re-recording. That omission is incredibly telling of Apple’s roadmap. Without warning or consulting, Apple told the sound department that they are now going to do foley, ADR, SFX, a music editing and mixing all in FCP X without giving them the tools and workflow; they are not longer going to work in sound categories, sound is now just generic sound. That is akin to telling someone that they are going to get to race in the Indy 500 with this incredible new car only to find out on the day of the race the engine is missing a supercharger.
Can post sound workflow be done in a NLE editor? Only if the sounds can be grouped in categories and the interface is as easy to use and as powerful as something like Pro Tools HD.
Another issue. University departments all have advisory boards and adjuncts who are all work in the business. It was not long after FCP X came out that I began getting emails from them urging us NOT to put FCP X in our labs. That certainly got my attention so I started calling post houses and asking them what they think. Hmmm… FCP X is not ready for prime time, don’t upgrade.
So we haven’t jumped ship yet, but we are first in line for the life boat if Apple does not have a roadmap that will take FCP X into the high end post production business.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up