Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[Craig Seeman] “If they want to focus on price and volume they need to focus on that. “
But, Craig, I don’t think that’s what they are focusing on. To my mind, the crossgrade was an investment on their part to re-establish primacy at the upper end of the market. Even if they don’t make much off of the small users like myself, I become part of a pool of available talent for the larger users, and part of a culture that supports its existence at the high end. I don’t think its an ongoing strategy as much as a one-time event that they felt they needed to act upon. And, I think it was the smart move.
-
[Walter Soyka] “Avid has restructured. Isn’t that the difference between their GAAP losses and non-GAAP gains?
Avid is also marketing a value-added product line — it’s just that almost none of us here are their target audience. MC is really only a fraction of what Avid does. Why should they bend over backwards to chase Apple and Adobe for low-margin, lone-gunman desktop editorial when they can practically own both the hardware and software sides of collaborative editorial?
“True all that. Advantage Soyka.
-
Actually, tape is still valuable for archiving, having a long shelf life. Of course, you can only hope there will still be machines to play them down the road.
-
What’s tape?
-
[Tim Wilson] “‘m just saying that they’ll keep differentiation as long as the can make money from it, and as long as there’s unique brand equity in the names Symphony and Media Composer. “
Symphony could become a “their hardware only” thing, and MC could add secondairies, up its price a tiny bit, and be software only with the option of adding hardware.
-
[Craig Seeman] ” don’t see enough differentiation between MC and Symphony (obviously just my opinion).
Given the competitive marked (Adobe now and maybe FCPX in the future), I see MC falling behind whereas Symphony would be much better competitively given the feature set.
“If we are talking software only, the only difference is secondaries and a nice set of third party plugins. True, using their hardware adds a nice export conforming component, but I totally agree with you that the difference between the two is marginal. I think that to be competitive with Pr on a Software-only level, Symphony needs to be the new MC. I’m sure they know that too.
-
Alban, I apologize for not getting your sarcasm, and I’m happy that you are delighted by FCPX. My main contention was with your statement about the J/L cuts, which lead me to believe that you were not fully familiar with FCPL. Forgive me for not picking up on your tone.
[alban egger] “Once you are in the timeline FCP7 is powerful also, sure. But editing nowadays is more than the timeline. It is system-management, media-management, clip/bin-management, editing and output in various formats and versions. The overall experience of FCP7 vs. FCPX in the complete workflow is what makes FCPX more fluid to me.”
IMHO, editing has always been more than the timeline, and while I respect many of the new media management features of FCPX, it is my belief–and I DO recognize that I am less than a novice in regards to FCPX usage–that their value is somewhat over-stated, and that the downside of some of the media management tools–the lack of a manual save or the ability to easily save a range of backups, for example–is that they have the potential to be downright crippling. I also think that some of the media management tools of other NLEs (including FCPL) are too easily dismissed by some few X users whose enthusiasm borders on zealotry.
I’m not dissing FCP X; I’ve read enough comments over the last year to know that it is an extremely enabling tool for quite a few people. There are a number of enviable features, and I can certainly envision using it seriously at some point. Its just that FCPL has been so useful to me, and still has–despite all of the new competition–one of the widest tool sets available on any NLE, that I don’t like to see it so easily dismissed.
-
[alban egger] “Ahem….in FCP7 and I believe other NLEs I need a modifier to drag audio-disconnected from the video for a J-/L-cut. “
Just so completely not true. You CAN create that condition for yourself, if you wish, but a single click or button push makes that condition go away until you want it back. I’ve worked for years without clips linked.
[alban egger] “When did they think about J-/l-cuts? Long after most of the app design was in place. What does it mean? The have no idea about editing.”
This doesn’t make any sense.
[alban egger] “How does a modifier bother you? FCP7 was full of modifiers. FCPX understands in many occasions what you want to do without telling it. In FCP7 you need a lot more keystrokes or clicks to achieve the same results.”
I’m thinking you don’t have a lot of experience with FCP 7 or you never bothered to learn aspects of it beyond the way you were using it.
[alban egger] ” And in FCP7 I had to press “ssss” and “rr”. In FCPX one stoke is enough or often not even needed.”
Again, FCP is a lot more fluid than you seem to think it is.
-
[Shawn Miller] “Crazy!! I wonder what professional previz artists think about this. For low budget and microfilmmakers, this could be huge.
Thanks for posting, Andy.
Shawn”
Five or six years ago, we were doing pre-viz using Second Life. That was a trip.
-
[Charlie Austin] “FWIW, cheating dialog is really easy in X, mainly because you can freely move audio clips in subframe increments. Picture can still only move a frame at a time, for obvious reasons, but you can move audio clips however you want, not just the keyframes. Something I really miss when I’m in FCP 7…
“Yeah, I think that’s a terrific thing. What I was saying above was in response to Bill’s notion of futzing with the audio later, and I was simply agreeing with Franz that audio and video editing are–for what I do–inseparable.