Bill Davis
Forum Replies Created
-
[Michael Gissing] “Everything this article touts is already available but only used by VFX and collaborative workflows. “
Uh, it’s not an “article” actually. It’s a public description of a white paper with links to the same. At this point it’s university researchers publishing the results of development and testing – as a stage in the peer review process.
That’s kinda how REAL progress in technology is supposed to happen.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Michael Gissing] “Where it makes absolute sense. The speed advantages that the article Bill linked will certainly help. I don’t see how it applies to basic editing though.
“I think that analysts missed the point.
The key process is removing FRICTION from a needed workflow.
When iTunes made its debut, it really did nothing that Napster and other digital song distribution models couldn’t already do – but it removed all sorts of friction from the processSuddenly l, instead of finding the site, downloading a file, translating it into your computer or early pocket player, and having to dig into folders and launch programs to listen to tunes – there was a SIMPLE all in one solution that put the hardware, software and a content access service together.
It feels to me that this could be the same type of thing.
Indexing a 2-hour pool of footage to identify all the frames containing each character is one thing if it takes 30 minutes and costs $50 bucks.
If it takes 1 minute and it costs $2 – that’s an entirely different kettle of fish.
It moves from considered purchase to no-brainer “impulse buy.”
And if that massive parallel engine that’s already crunching your frames adds maybe transcription and who knows, intelligent audio and video noise reduction, normalization, and a base grade — suddenly a huge amount of “fix and prep” drudgery falls away.
I’m all for that.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Oliver Peters] “Does a new Mac Mini (optioned out with all the bells & whistles) – plus one of the BMD eGPU and TB storage – become a good FCPX option in the opinion of this group?”
I’m guessing in the next 5 years – what we conceive of as an editing system is pretty much ALL going to change.
I saw a twitter link yesterday about some new technology coming out of my local San Diego State Computer Science Program that has kinda blown my mind.
https://jacobsschool.ucsd.edu/news/news_releases/release.sfe?id=2654
Read this and tell me that the way we edit right might not be changing in the not too distant future.
If, as the article implies, anyone with a fast connection can upload entire edits into a cloud array, have that array virtually instantly express all sorts of AI manipulations against the footage – DIRT CHEAPLY. and then relay the new material down to the end user – might the type of “all in a box” computer systems we mostly rely upon today end up looking a bit like Model T Fords.
You just KNOW AI, Machine Learning and Cloud Computing is in the infant stages of targeting lots of aspects of the digital streams we all create.
Sure, a brain expressing artistic intent against the material will always be necessary, but what’s the purpose of a HONKING box sucking down power under your desk for 20 minutes to do the exact same job that a massively parallel cloud service can distribute out and do in SECONDS – and for Pennies?
The eGPU external box is a product solution right now, but it’s also, in my mind a SIGN. It’s a wake up that we may be moving away from a monolithic box, to more distributed processing.
Say these GPU boxes scale so that they’re the price of hard drives today – will we eventually have as many GPUs under our desks as we have hard drives? All connected to a fat internet pipe loop into the cloud for a circuit to do the REALLY tough stuff?
In that scenario – a MacMini peripherals hub or Laptop might become everything an editor would really need.
We’ll see.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Well, if I get a “full stop.” Does that mean others here without advanced CS degrees also get the same?
Just curious.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Oliver Peters] “Since you really don’t know, you are just being flip and rhetorical. ☺”
But Oliver, on this topic, that’s all I’m actually qualified to be!
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Oliver Peters] “Define “long in the tooth”.”
I don’t know. I’m a programming moron. But I might say something like:
Code that can’t efficiently leverage the advances in computer science from the most recent half-decade?
Just off the top of my head.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Neil Goodman] “Its code base was built ontop of premiere pro according to others in this thread.”
On top, doesn’t mean “on top of the entire PPro code base” tho.
Oliver posted the hardware and software restrictions that RUSH requires you to meet. And they are a pretty clear indication that the program relies on technology that does NOT try to maintain the type of backwards compatibility that professional desktop users (notoriously slow to upgrade things) prize in order to run their older generation applications.
I can’t think of a starker division in how Adobe sees Rush.
It’s a lighter, cleaner, fresh, approach, that uses what it can from the old program — and I’m SURE attempts to maintain as much overall compatibility as possible — but also DOES NOT try to keep doing the same things the same way their old software does things.
If RUSH is just a interface re-work on the same code, there would be no reason it’s requirements would be different from those of it’s parent.
But they are.
So SOMETHING under the hood has obviously been eliminated or changed which the old approach needed, but that the new approach does not.
That seems kinda obvious to me. Not to you?
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Another clear way of saying “We’re building this for a hardware FUTURE. And in order to do so, are willing to cut some ties with the Hardware Past.
Again, good for Adobe.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Craig Seeman] “And a lot of changes can take place… over time. Look how long it took even for FCPX to fill many of the holes.
If, as others have indicated, it’s built on Premiere Pro, it’s possible that years down the road it may be an alternate (not even necessarily a replacement) GUI for editors that grow up with it.”Bingo.
A way to ween the next generation off aspects of the existing program that are long in the tooth, while preserving what’s more modern. While adding in some of the best new interface and operational ideas.
Which is a pretty decent top level analysis of what Apple did with X verses Legacy.
Rethink. Cut away the cruft. Don’t try to deliver everything right out of the gate. Test and develop over time. And keep things tight, fast and agile: unlike what you might be working with if you try to keep the ENTIRE construct that you’re flagship program represents.
Seems kinda smart to me.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Neil Goodman] “That winky face indicates that Im making a joke, but thanks for that little bit of apple history that IVE never heard before. ????
“How clever of you to address the form, but not the substance of what I wrote. ????
Which was that if Rush becomes a fresh code base upon which a new Adobe Editorial platform might someday develop (in EXACTLY the same way the iMove re-built code base became the initial digital scaffolding upon which FCP X was constructed) that might bode well for Adobe editors.
Or not. Nobody knows.
THAT was my point. Not what was “jokey” enough to be taken seriously or not.
????Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.