Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[Joseph W. Bourke] “”Apple has a system in place in which we can get what used to be major upgrades as free updates, faster and easier than ever before, that no competitor can yet match today. I just don’t see Avid or Adobe getting updates out this fast, this easy. But I bet you anything, very soon, you’ll see them start to make inroads to this new paradigm, as well as metadata, database centric organizational tools.”
AVID and Adobe don’t need to get updates out “this fast, this easy” because the updates work. They don’t then have to scramble pushing out bug fixes, or adding patches for features they took away, or broke.”
And it is more moronic blather, as well. How is going to the iTunes store any faster than downloading a patch? And what on earth does he mean by “what used to be major upgrades as free updates?” That is a crazy statement. Does he think Apple will never do an upgrade? Does he not know that incremental .fixes are almost always free from whoever is releasing them? FCP X University, indeed. Hot Air University, more like. With a major in Bellicosity.
-
[Jim Giberti] “[Alan Okey] “Editors who dislike and do not use FCP X are not necessarily old and inflexible. It’s not that they “just don’t get it,” or that they are dinosaurs; they just don’t like it, and choose not to use it. By the same token, editors who like and use FCP X are not necessarily any less “professional” if it fits their needs.”
Perhaps Cow could make this into a carved sign and hang it at the top of the forum.
“I’d sign it.
-
[Thomas Frank] “Nothing Is Professional & Industry Standards No Longer Exist”
Fanboi idiot blather. That is perhaps the stupidest statement I have read all month.
-
[Walter Soyka] “[Bill Davis] “And they seem to be a company who’s “vision” is precisely what’s propelled them to such amazing business success.”
True, but totally irrelevant. In this context, given that FCPX is a blip on Apple’s revenue radar, do we really care what their market cap is? Does success in mobile translate to success in editorial? Not automatically.
All any of us care about is how well their products fit our needs — which is part of why FCPX has been so divisive.
“I think it is only fair to point out that Jobs and/or Apple’s “vision” has also–at times–led to near catastrophe.
-
That’s pretty hip.
-
[Oliver Peters] “EDLs are preferred by the DI guys. I have a client who uses a top commercial colorist in LA for his grading work on spots. They have a Baselight system and the request is always for EDLs. Yep, a 40-year-old standard that still seems to be more versatile in this file-based world 😉
“I second that. I find EDLs extremely useful. If you have to interact with a lot of people, sooner or later, you are going to find one very useful. My uses vary from pulling selects across platform or from around the world to making legal reports on footage use for music and licensing. True, I haven’t on-lined anything from an edl in well over a decade, but that doesn’t mean that they are not useful.
I mean, its just a simple list of shots that can be read across platform and also be represented in a text file. I can see why a number of non-industrial users may never have to interact with timecode, let alone edls, but it stymies me that such a simple and useful thing is being treated like shed lizard skin.
-
[Bill Davis] “Just because I can’t resist – you do realize that there are lots and lots of exceptional chess players who are so good that they don’t even need a physical board?”
They may not NEED one to conceive a game in their head, but I don’t know anyone who doesn’t WANT one.
-
B, I suppose.
Tracks would make me happy. The source viewer would be good, but the Montage and Speed Razor were no source viewer or source viewer-lite, so I COULD get used to it. I’m pretty much at a point, though, that it is what it is.
-
[Walter Soyka] “I’m glad to see the pro features making their way back into FCPX, but 10.0.0’s missing functionality wasn’t the main thrust of my thinking, then or now. The question has become much larger than FCP/FCPX for me.”
I agree completely. I’ve never had any doubt that Apple would do the things they announced they would. The bright side today–for me–are the small things they have turned their attention to. But it also demonstrates to me that the notions I’ve held of X’s trajectory are pretty much on target, and that the decisions I’ve made to expand my personal toolset beyond what Apple has to offer were correct. I guess I’m even grateful for the motivation. And, as X opens up more, I’m sure I’ll find uses for it.
I was cutting a piece last night on FCP7, with several temporarily overlapping chunks of video, and 18 tracks of audio–some synced, some out of sync, and some not synced at all–and I became aware for a moment how much I was depending on the color-coded timecode overlay in the record monitor and all of the TC sync references on the timeline, and really, how much I regularly depend on them without even being aware that I am. And then today, as I read about the new fixes and enhancements, it just really struck me how far apart these tools are.
-
[Helmut Kobler] “1) I really want a new way to create alternate cuts of the same project, without having to duplicate the whole project.”
Yeah, this is still a biggie for me.