Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[David Roth Weiss] “[Chris Harlan] “Of course there is also the notion that the internal gravitational powers of iThings was just so great that it mutated the product into something that is neither here or there. That’s pretty much what I, in my total ignorance of actual facts, subscribe to.”
I almost agree with you Chris. Except, I think they just mutated the product into something that’s neither here nor there by sheer arrogance alone. I don’t think X is iWorthy of influence by any iThings.”
Oh, I agree. My scenario is not arrogance-free. I’m just guessing that the internal power shift was so dynamic that it totally re-arranged who got to say what about FCP, mid-development. That would explain the buried artifacts and the rather bizarre inconsistencies in FCP X’s power and limitations.
-
[Daniel Rutledge] “If you don’t like Fcp x and you only care about the next three weeks, then there’s really nothing to discuss. “
I believe you are misquoting me. The timeframe I mentioned was substantially larger. The point is that ten years out is numerous investment cycles away, and that trying to determine what might be usable then doesn’t in any way help me make a living now. Trying to look forward two and three years in regards to equipment and platforms is useful.
I don’t dislike FCP X; in fact, there are elements that I find quite intriguing. It is entirely possible that in the next three years I will find some uses for it. It seems to me that there is plenty to discuss.
[Daniel Rutledge] “I’m glad that you like your current setup.
“I would be happier with an FCP 8, but I’m adjusting nicely.
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “Apple’s reaction to this fact will be dictated by what we don’t know: what they actually intended this software to do for them.”
That’s the current debate in a nutshell. Was it a miss or was it a hit. Only Apple knows what they were shooting at. Of course there is also the notion that the internal gravitational powers of iThings was just so great that it mutated the product into something that is neither here or there. That’s pretty much what I, in my total ignorance of actual facts, subscribe to.
-
[Michael Gissing] “No video but here’s Bruce singing from his Myspace page.
https://www.myspace.com/brucewatsonmusic/music/songs/the-rules-of-english-68...
“
That is staggeringly terrific! Do you know how I can get a copy of his album here in the states?
-
[Daniel Rutledge] “I feel like on these forums people often just see parts of a post and zero in on statements in isolation, ignoring context.”
Dude, I’m sorry you feel that way. You might want to rethink that, though. My guess is that it is generally the result of people responding to the items they have something to respond to. In other cases it might have to do with vague or mixed statements on the part of the original poster.
[Daniel Rutledge] “The Wacom Cintiq already does a lot of these things.”
Yeah, I’ve been using a Cintiq for about four years now. Its okay. Not quite as handy as I thought it would be, but I get use out of it.
[Daniel Rutledge] “My point is, things used to be one way and they changed, then they changed again and again. “
Yeah, most of us who have been doing this for a living for a long time are well aware of that. Most of us work on multiple NLE’s and, for many of us FCP was our 3rd or 4th NLE. We’re pretty used to change. Some of us even thrive on it. Doesn’t mean that we have to accept it blindly, however.
[Daniel Rutledge] “I’m not trying to talk anyone into liking FCP X, I’m just saying that you shouldn’t be close minded about it and try to talk other people into not liking it.”
Who exactly am I trying to talk into not liking it? I think that one’s in your head. I can imagine a lot of things it would be useful for. I’m always interested in hearing stories about how it works for people. But I do like specifics and not vagaries. When I talk about reasons that it doesn’t work for me, I try to be very specific. I like that same specificity in reports of well it works for folks. In general, the people who debate things on this forum are neither pro nor con, but are, instead, engaged in a lengthy discussion of editorial process.
[Daniel Rutledge] “FCP X isn’t just looking at next year. It is designed as a foundation for the next ten years, just like FCP 1 was. “
I’m really not interested in ten years from now, and won’t be for another six. My window is from next week to maybe three years out. For me, the rest is pretty much armchair piffle. Also, personally, I believe you attribute too much power to the Professional Apps division within Apple. It drove the company–or at least had shotgun–for a number of years, but is now in the trunk.
[Daniel Rutledge] “I wasn’t being facetious when I asked if you thought that editors would be working just as we have been for the last 20 years, 100 years from now. I really want to know what you think.”
Sorry, mate. That–to me–is an absurd question, other than to say “of course not.”
[Daniel Rutledge] “You said “never” in reference to changing interface design. I was assuming that your “never” was figurative, and I was asking what you really thought.”
I have no idea what you are talking about. I’ve scanned my above posts and can not find any usage of “never.” Nor can I find any reference to changing interface design. The only thing that remotely fits in that area at all is my mentioning that I didn’t believe that the consumer App that Avid just released will be developed much beyond what it is now. To go from that to “You said “never” in reference to changing interface design” is a bit of a stretch, so perhaps you meant something else.
-
Well, Daniel those are certainly some well-defined beliefs. I don’t share many of them, but I do agree that there’s a strong possibility that FCP X might have been designed with a touchscreen in mind. And, once upon a time, I probably believed that a touchscreen was an inevitable evolutionary development for NLEs. Spending a few years with one has convinced me that it isn’t–at least not for me.
As to the Avid App, I don’t think that’s meant to be anything more than a consumer plaything. I’ve enjoyed messing around with it a bit, but I sincerely doubt it will ever be anything more than a fun little App.
As to being trapped in my box–I don’t feel it. Good for you that you like X so much; do me a favor, though, and try not to judge those of us who have our qualms about it quite so harshly. We may be jokers without much foresight, but its not for lack of trying. Right now X just doesn’t work for some of us.
-
[Michael Hancock] “Avid isn’t going to port Media Composer or their other professional grade NLEs to an all touch interface anytime soon (I wager – never). Touch interfaces could be useful for very specific tasks, but I’d wager again that they will never replace a keyboard/mouse/wacom combination.
“Yeah, I find that a no go, myself. I Do like rotating between mouse, track pad, and tablet to keep my fingers fresh, and just because my mood changes from day to day, but, after spending a couple of years with a tablet, I find it far more more constraining than I had initially imagined. My iPad is a great media device, and occasionally doubles as an interesting controller, but I have no real desire to edit with it. That my fingers get in the way is part of it, but precision is the big thing. Using an external device that acts as an analog to the mouse cursor on the screen allows me to get into much smaller areas then when I’m actually touching the glass with my fingers.
-
There once was a poet sublime
Who critiqued this thread as a crime.
He feared we’d an allergy
To any kind of analogy
And so, lambasted us all in rhyme. -
Haalloo Bruce! Oh, Rene Descarte was a drunken…..
……I drink, therefore I am.
-
[Andrew Richards] “Maybe the iPad 3 isn’t the only new hotness coming out of Cupertino next week.
“Dude! That would be good news.