Andrew Kimery
Forum Replies Created
-
[andy patterson] “The Essential Graphics Panel was probably released 14 -15 months to soon…”
Releasing something too soon is the very definition of half baked.
Of course sometimes there is a fine line between half baked and feature-limited. For example, when Search Bins first appeared in PPro they were pretty limited, but more functionality was added in a later update. I don’t think I would call their initial release half baked, just not fleshed out.
-
I’m not yet convinced that Resolve’s uber-app approach is going to pay off for BM.
Step one is to convince editors that Resolve is a better NLE than their current one. Step two is to convince editors that the benefits of learning the Color page and the Fairlight page far outweigh the time/energy it takes to learn both pages (assuming we are talking about generalists/solo practitioners). The trend to date w/NLEs has been to make them NLEs first and then add ‘good enough’ audio, GFX, coloring, etc., functions to them and if more powerful tools were needed then go out of the NLE to ProTools or AE or whatever tool was needed. We still see this today with things like the Essentials panels in PPro and Apple not cramming all the functionality of Color into FCP X.
If we are talking about teams of specialists then the hurdle is to get all the specialists to use Resolve, and that’s has always been a big problem for suites of apps because odds are that not each app in the suite will be best in breed. How many rerecording mixers would choose to use Audition just because their editor is using PPro or how many GFX or VFX artists would choose to use Motion just because the editor is using FCP X? First thing first though is to get editors to choose Resolve to be their new NLE.
Maybe BM will be able to pull off a ‘super app’ that takes the industry by storm. Success in certain areas? Of course, but broader I think is going to be a much tougher row to hoe (especially since Apple, Adobe and Avid have had a lot of time to re-stake their territory in the last 5-6yrs). Time will tell though.
-
[Charlie Austin] “APFS will only work on SSD’s for now. Unless you installed an early beta on your spinning drive, it won’t change. https://beta.apple.com/sp/betaprogram/apfsfusion“
Crisis averted… for now. 😉
-
[Steve Connor] “I also think it would be fine to rename this forum “NLE Debates” or something similar to more accurately reflect what it is, but Tim’s “da man” on this one and he’s made his thoughts clear on the subject ☺
“Try not to quote myself, but i’m too lazy to type it out again… ????
[Andrew Kimery] “This forum, though, is dedicated to a debate about how Apple’s ‘re-imagined’ NLE experience compares/contrasts to the ‘traditional’ NLE approach used by MC, PPro, Resolve, Vegas, FCP Legend, Lightworks, etc.,.
Some others think that this place is a just general round-robin, NLE beat’em up forum, and want to given it a generic name that doesn’t involve FCP X, but I think that ignores the unique philosophical underpinnings of X which are at the heart of the debate. Tim doesn’t keep FCP X in the forum title as cheap way to swindle clicks from passersby, he keeps it in the forum title because this place is about how X’s new philosophy compares to the pre-existing philosophy that almost all other NLEs use some variation of. “
https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/97473
[Shane Ross] “Those posts do not show up in google searches. “
Agreed. The search-ability of social media typically sucks (especially with social sites constantly tweaking with how messages are displayed in each users’ feed). This definitely erodes the amount of communal knowledge that is available.
-
Call internal cuts “Internal_Cut” or “Internal_RC” and use “Rough_Cut” only things that go out of house? I like keeping dates in file names too because sometimes people don’t remember which version it is, but they’ll remember the last time they touched it was the previous Tuesday or what not.
-Andrew
-
Peter Wiggins wrote an article about a dev called Arctic Whiteness that made an app to help smooth over some FCP X collaborative pain points called, Final Cut Library Opener (with help from Mike Matzdorff ). Curious as to what others think (it mainly seems to automate a process that otherwise has to be done by hand).
Almost interesting to mention that in the article Peter calls collaborative workflows “… the killer feature for NLEs in the ever expanding video production business.” and says that, “… Apple has built the necessary project architecture that will allow collaborative workflow in the future.” so maybe there is enough interest in the FCP X community for Apple to finally pull the trigger on collaborative editing in X?
-
[Neil Goodman] “You said “there’s hostility here”. I don’t go on other FCPX or editing forums except a FB group here and there And no I don’t feel that way.
Do people that do, yes most of peers. What can yo do?”
Invite 100’s (if not10’s of thousands of people) to participate in an online discussion and there are bound to be some people that are jerks. It’s just the nature of the beast. The weird idea some users have that X has somehow been singled out is baffling to me. In forums, Twitter, FB, etc., I follow FCP, Adobe and Avid and each user community has it’s share of helpful and less-than-helpful users.
Go outside of editing and you see the same thing. Mac/PC, Chevy/Ford, Gibson/Fender, iOS/Android, Xbox/Playstation, Craftsman/Snap-on, Coke/Pepsi, etc.,. Post-purchase rationalization… it’s a thing, and the relative safety and anonymity of communicating online empowers some people to be hostile in a way that they wouldn’t be if communication face to face or over the phone.
-
[Charlie Austin] “FWIW, it’s my understanding that spinning drives won’t be formatted to APFS so this won’t make any difference. if you’re exchanging SSD’s then it’s a consideration… “
From what I read users can opt-out of using APFS on spinning drives, but if the default is APFS then I bet most will users will end up using APFS.
-
I can envision this being a potential headache for any scenario where drives are being sent around (either between you and the client or you and other members of your team). For example, I recently did some work on a doc as an AE and the producer provided both a master and backup drive as well as a handful of ‘travel’ drives for shutting small amounts of material around. The drives got repeatedly passed between the editor, the producer, the colorist, the rerecording mixer, a post house and myself. All of us live/work in Los Angeles, but we were never in the same room together (aside from the producer who doubled as the drive shuttler).
-
[greg janza] “The downfall of Avid is all related to the company not being forward thinking. They stubbornly stuck with the proprietary architecture for far too long and by the time they realized their mistake it was too late. “
I’ll add also that the price remained too high for too long and their customer service tanked during the Adrenaline days. The mid-2000s were not a fun time to be an Avid customer. The ire from that era still exists today even though we are 10-15yrs removed from it.
[greg janza] ” It needs to be emphasized that the shared edit environment is incredibly efficient. I no longer work on Avid at all but it’s design should be emulated.”
It’s also dead simple because an MC project is just an MC project. There is nothing you need to do to make it a multi-user project or to share your bins with others. You can even copy the whole project onto a laptop to work on it out of the office then copy it back to the shared storage when you return and it all just works. All you have to remember is that a locked bin means you have read-only access so if you make changes you’ll need to do a Save As if you want to save those changes.
Now, what Resolve is doing by letting users work on the same timeline concurrently is a type of collaboration that Avid doesn’t offer and understandably requires a bit more work by users to coordinate things, but on a basic level I think making collaborative features as straightforward as they are in MC should be the goal of the competition.
[Steve Connor] “Good point, I hope that’s true and that their onward development doesn’t start to exclude what is clearly their core user base in single-user environments in a grab for the smaller, higher end of the market.”
Out of curiosity, aside from multi-user collaboration (which is just a single feature), what other features do you think would be of no use in a single-user environment and/or of no use in the lower end of the market (which itself is composed of both single-user and multi-user environments)?
This kinda continues a reoccurring a riff about software in that people in general want software be tailored to the needs of their niche in the industry and any feature not tailored to their niche is a waste, but one man’s steak is another man’s cardboard so it’s impossible for one application to be all things to all people w/o anyone pointing to features they think are useless bloat.
Many times we make broad delineations between high-end and low end (typically this is based on budget), but from a practical perspective I think workflow is a more meaningful guide to go by than budget since high and low budget projects will often have similar workflow hurdles. For example, the people making the fan film “Star Trek: Axanar” are going to run into a lot of the same problems that J.J. Abrams ran into making “Star Trek” (just probably on a smaller scale) so a tool that helps Hollywood make movies can also help YouTubers make movies. And it doesn’t have to be movies. Corporate videos, weddings, game shows, etc., can all have similar workflows needs even if one is high budget and the other is low budget.
Or take multicam as another example. At one point in time multicam was a niche feature because having multiple cams could get really expensive really fast. Now video cameras are a dime a dozen so even no-budget projects can have half a dozen cameras w/o breaking the budget, so multicam isn’t considered a high end feature anymore but a staple of any good NLE.