[Bill Davis]

[Andrew Kimery] “I don’t use FCPX because it doesn’t meet my needs. There’s no fear or anger or denial entering the equation. I need something that does X, Y and Z and FCPX currently does not at this time so therefore I don’t use it. If that changes I’ll take another look at it.”

Andrew,

While I find nothing wrong with that statement at all – I do think we’re entering a new era where looking at software exclusively as a “features” or even “workflow” construct might turn out to be vexingly limiting in the long run.

The small problem is that while FCP-X does a subset of X, Y, and Z that currently does not meet your feature set – it’s also driven some innovation by a elevating some concepts and strategies from outside the regular XYZ feature set and bolted them directly into it’s design.

What concerns me is that more than a few editors will keep focused on the “core skills” of editing – which should never be dismissed or belittled – and miss the fact that in order to truly benefit from the directional change that FCP-X has signaled – there is much new learning that has to be done.

X is not something that can be mastered overnight. Or even over-a few months. It’s significantly deep code with a lot of new capabilities and processes that honestly take quite a bit of learning to get used to.

I’ve spent as much time over the past four months, for example, considering taxonomy (the field of intelligent naming and labeling) and export modes (versioning and persistent connection verses “save as” and “orphan document” creation.) as I have concentrating on the traditional skills of scene pacing or titling. My use of X on a near daily basis has literally changed much of my thinking about what it means to be an “editor” in the modern sense.

Yes, the core is telling the story. But to get that done, I’ve been given whole new arrays of tools that can help me tremendously if I can learn them. But they’re not easy nor trivial to learn.

But it’s precisely those new skills that are making me feel like I’m moving forward in my career, rather than continuing just to do the same stuff I did five years (or even six months!) ago.

I now not only edit, but I have a new appreciation for the role of metadata, search, clip relationships, and even in-application publishing of content for a connected world.

I simply don’t think my brain would have gone to those places without having X in my toolkit.

I’m also simply not convinced that without getting past the “features” level of the program to honestly learn the overall data flow (both program content and metadata) any editor can fairly figure out if X is something they may be able to benefit from or not.

So I appreciate that at least you’re keeping your eye on it.

If it does continue to evolve at it’s current pace. At some point, I believe that most editors will likely have to contend with it’s concepts. Because merging editing with search, and bolting those onto connected output concepts IS going to be where editing goes in an overall sense, IMO.

It has to in a world where every content creator pretty much has to rely on those same principals (search and agile creative output deployment via on-line publishing) as increasingly key drivers of modern content workflows.

If I’m correct, the other large scale editing programs will simply have to start adding even more of these capabilities to the ones they all ready have in place.

But Apple has now become arguably the first NLE to elevate content management and metadata tracking to completely equal status with fundamental editing tools – putting BOTH right up front in the user interface design.

It will be fascinating to see how many of the other major editing programs adopt that model over the next few years.

These aren’t the typical letters that

“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’Connor

[Bill Davis]

The Pinterest lawyers had to back off and revise.

Be interesting to see if these folks have to do the same.

We’re entering the era where once you post anything, it’s instantly available to everyone – and the issues of who “creates” every part of every post creates a monstrous legal minefield that nobody has come even close to figuring out yet.

We’re dealing with 21st century behavior using rules created largely with 19th century legal thinking.

I don’t have a clue about the “right way” to handle all of this. But it’s going to be a constant and on-going hassle until society comes to grips with whatever IP is going to become in a future that is increasingly totally connected and instantaneously accessible.

“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’Connor

[Bill Davis]

[Jim Giberti] “OK Joseph, you’ve inspired my analogy of the day.

I wasn’t looking for a new girlfriend, just the opposite, I was really happy with the way things were going – especially knowing that we were always working to make a better relationship.

Then I woke up one day and she dressed and acted completely different than she had in our ten year relationship…just so she could sleep with all the young guys with Macbooks. To make things worse, she tried to convince me that this change was best for both of us.

So here’s this cute Adobe. I’ve known her since I was a kid (I produced some of the earliest non-linear projects on PP1.0), but I’ve never thought of her “in that way”.

She may not be as sexy or fully compatible as my honey Seven was, but she’s so faithful, and she cares about me and listens to me, I’ll never have to worry about her dumping me for the young guy with the tight pants and tats.

In the movies, I always end up with Adobe.
“

Yeah, yeah, (; ) the “wise intergenerational advice from the grizzled sage” gambit. But it’s been done to death.

Even in the same mode, here’s an equally resonant alternative…

Girlfriend? Marriages?

You’re not even six months old!

As I see you sleeping in your crib ready for the next day of adventures, here’s what I want to let you know as you grow and mature.

Never be afraid to dream. There will be a time, later in your life when the mortgage, braces for the kids, and a week in a theme part will likely all be a part of a perfectly satisfying life for you.

But you’re not there yet.

You’re young. This is your time to dream big.

Maybe you’ll never live up to your dreams. And that’s OK. But you don’t want to look back some day and regret that when you were young and had the chance, all you could imagine was to have a little bit better version of the lives your mom and dad lived.

Now there’s nothing wrong with that. And I’d be very proud if you decided to follow a path like that. But while every parent thinks their kids are special – I really do see in you a capacity for amazing things that I just didn’t have when I was your age.

Your times are different than mine. Your choices broader. You live in a new, more connected world where information, mobility, and social connections are different than they were back in my day.

So there will be new opportunities that your mom and I never imagined.

So I think for you, the best advice is to go out – at least for a while – and take some chances. While you’re young. Before it’s too late.

At the right point in time, I hope you stay up too damn late. Even all night if you’re having a great time. Go places you’ve never been. Talk to people from different places, different worlds, different thinking. Test what you think you know – and even what your mom and I have taught you about the traditions of life – against what you see in the real world.

Maybe you won’t do anything that’s much different than what we did.

But maybe you will.

And maybe if you don’t constrain your thinking to the way it’s always been done – maybe, just maybe – you’ll change the world a little bit for the better.”

“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’Connor

[Bill Davis]

[Joseph W. Bourke] “I think you have it backwards, Daniel – the executives that are out of touch seem to be at Apple. Check out labs.adobe.com some time – they listen to their users, and they actually give us what they’re working on to see whether it works. With Adobe, it’s Design, Test, Ship – with Apple it’s Design, Ship, Test.
“

Yeah.

I guess the Apple model of executive behaviors is so rife with fundamentally flawed thinking it’s no wonder they can’t make any significant progress against their competitors.

“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’Connor

[Bill Davis]

[David Lawrence] “There are thousands of reasons why an editor might want to export a range as new asset. That’s all we’re talking about. Save a new piece of media. The idea that it’s “removed from further revision and refinement” is a completely meaningless statement.”

To your first line, yes there are. And you can do that within X. The process is different, but every bit as easy. Remember, it’s all metadata. So duping a Project is just copying metadata code. No media or anything large and unwieldy. So what’s the problem?

I don’t imagine you have a problem copying a resume or script to make revisions. So why the reluctance to copy the pointers represented by a project?

[David Lawrence] “Bill, with all due respect, you’re way over thinking this. Range export is a very very simple production need. It has nothing to with delivery or distribution.”

Maybe. But maybe not.

If you can’t see how you can do the same thing in a new way that’s actually no more complex than the old way – then there’s probably little I can do to convince you.

But remember this when you see a menu without “save as” and similarly can’t understand why not cutting a document off from it’s revision stream in a world moving toward cloud based storage might be a change in thinking worth considering.

Versioning in document creation is real and is being coded into al sorts of modern software. And it requires us to adjust our thinking.

Perhaps you’ll never want those particular benefits. But I can see the usefulness. So I want it.

And if the trivial process of learning to “duplicate” rather than “save as” is the price in document management, I’m fine with it.

Similarly if Duplicate Project gets me the same result as “range export” and keeps, as a simple example, my access to change and undo available in both versions – (impossible in Legacy’s export) then that’s something I might find useful even if you don’t.

“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’Connor

[Bill Davis]

[Walter Soyka] “For some programs like 0:30 spots or episodic TV which must have defined act lengths, cutting in absolute time instead of relative time may be easier to understand intuitively. This is not to say it can’t be done in FCPX — it just feels a lot different.”

I think that once again, Walter nails it.

And if you don’t have the time or patience to dig into that “feels a lot different” thing – then X will likely frustrate you until you spend the time to get to the point where it’s functions are as natural as what you used before it.

Experienced editors who judge it purely in relation to their traditional toolset – and when it fails to perform like they expect, simply write it off as “not right” are missing a lot of the story here, IMO.

This is a new direction for an editing tool. Not a “tune up” of the traditional direction in one.

If you don’t need a new tool. No problem. That’s your call. Use a more traditional one.

But if you’re open to some new thinking as to where editing might be going. There’s only one product out there that lets you explore something very different right now.

Maybe it won’t transform how you edit. That’s fine.

But it has transformed how I do. And I simply have no interest in going back to the tools I used to have.

The don’t satisfy me any more. I’ve changed my thinking and resonate with the new processes a whole lot better.

That old thing about old dogs and new tricks? Totally and completely wrong.

Really.

“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’Connor

[Bill Davis]

[David Lawrence] “Not impressed. I’d gladly trade the “share” to Vimeo button for range export — a function which is far more useful and necessary on an everyday basis.”

We just disagree on this.

A single choice that only allows you to “chop off” a chunk of your video – removing it from further revision and refinement is, in my opinion an increasingly limited construct.

Duplicate the timeline in it’s current state, truncate it as you like, and simultaneously maintain all the source connectivity, control and ability to revise and amend – is, in my humble opinion, a vastly superior model that will meet the needs of many more types of editors as we increasingly move into a persistently connected future.

It’s a physical videotape or DVD, verses an app in the iTunes store or a movie on Netflix.

One stays as it is forever, frozen the moment you create the file – unchangeable. The other can be “refreshed” instantly by simply pushing out a new version – and the instant you do that, everyone coming to the purchase point has access to the new one rather than the old one.

In fact, think about the NetFlix example more closely. Remember those physical DVD rental movies in the old model? Remember how easy it was to rent a year old movie and be forced to scan through “coming soon” promos for films that were a year or two old?

In the modern “connected” NetFlix world? If they decide to push a promo at some point, its at least going to be a current promo. And will refresh as needed.

That’s the “connected” model in a nutshell.

I think that’s the correct trend in content consumption.

We’ll see.

“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’Connor

[Bill Davis]

Which sect was this clip actually referring to?

The Beef Vindalovians, the Chicken Vindaloovians, or the Lamb Vindaloovians?

“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’Connor

[Bill Davis]

[David Lawrence] “Range export, persistent in/out points, audio sync markers are about as “everyday” as you can possibly get.
“

And are worth jettisoning if the trade-off is eventually building something new that meets MORE needs than the former program did.

An hour ago I was able to update a corporate video for a national health care client with a single click using the “share” menu in X and Vimeo Pro. No creating a standalone file. No FTP, No YouSendit, No hassles.

I was able to “publish” a revision directly out of X for clients access – with full password protection – instantly accessible in all their offices around the country by any stakeholder I wanted to send the password to via email – all with just a couple of clicks.

Things are changing.

I still think the team behind FCP-X understands those changes better than the competition, thus far.

Time will tell.

“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’Connor

[Bill Davis]

[Dominic Deacon] “The revolution is in taking away the ability to turn it off.”

I accept that. And if the way you think about editing isn’t such that you can accept and thrive in a timeline with “always on” magnetism. Then you’re down to 3 major and a passle of minor choices – which is hardly a “make or break” situation.

If you, your work requirements and the habits you’ve developed over your editing career CAN adapt, then you have available an excellent new tool that you can explore and use very productively.

I acknowledge that some folks can’t do this. Their machines, their projects, their workflows, or merely their particular brains can’t successfully work with X.

My experience has proved to me that I can.

It’s all I edit on. And I haven’t missed a deadline yet. The checks keep arriving and I keep learning every week about the depth and fascinating architecture that I keep uncovering behind the new application.

That’s enough for me.

“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’Connor