[Chris Kenny]

[Russell Lasson] “Media Management and Organization!
“

Article summary: Author tries to make FCP X’s organization features work like FCP 7’s, gets frustrated that this doesn’t work well (because the entire approach to clip organization has changed), declares this makes FCP X bad.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Chris Kenny]

[Dan Stewart] “..from APPLE’S OWN PRESS RELEASE ARCHIVE! So either they were horribly, cynically insincere then, or they were doubly so at the Supermeet when they decided to put up the garden wall..”

Or they’ve always intended to offer a way for third parties to access sequence data in FCP X, and it just isn’t ready yet. Which it seems is pretty clearly the case, based on what they told Philip Hodgetts:

However, during my direct briefing, the Apple folk made it abundantly clear that the ecosystem was very important to them, and that there will be a new, and much improved, replacement for the current XML workflow. That’s entirely consistent with what I’d heard pre-release that there would be a new form of XML and that it would be accessed by some sort of SDK (Software Developer Kit).

(Emphasis mine.)

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Chris Kenny]

[Jordan Wilson] “So to me, that says I can install it on both my iMac and MBP, since I own both. “

This is my understanding as well.

[Jordan Wilson] “Am I right to assume that? Also, can anyone give me info on how to install on both machines? I’m thinking I just have to have the same App Store account on both of my machines? Do I download it twice or will it sync somehow? “

You should log into your iTunes account and download it onto each machine. I initially tried just copying the app from desktop to laptop to save the download, but while the app worked and the App Store recognized it as being installed, it claimed it hadn’t been installed via the App Store (true enough), which would have meant I wouldn’t have been able to install updates via the App Store in the future.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Chris Kenny]

[Joe Moya] “This wait and see how the dust settles over then next year or so…makes NO sense.”

I think we’ll see a significant update much sooner than 12 months from now, and perhaps some more specific information about future plans.

[Joe Moya] “I’ve seen third world junta overthrows organized better than this Apple marketing debacle. FCPX could be the best thing since sliced bread… but, if it needs time to bake…then, bring it out when it’s done…but not in it’s current state of development.”

FCP X is useful to a decent number of people today, so Apple shipped it. It’s that simple. This doesn’t mean they don’t care about the FCP 7 users who it’s not useful to today.

They could have avoided most of this firestorm by communicating better about future plans, instead of waiting for people to get pissed and then releasing info via David Pogue, etc. But they’re Apple; communicating about future plans is not something they do often, and consequently not something they thought through very well here.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Chris Kenny]

[Ken Zukin] “I think Apple is choosing a path here that is seriously misguided. Alienating the post production community is penny-wise and pound-foolish. Even if the real money is selling to prosumers, it’s in Apple’s best interest to at least foster an image of FCP being a professional application.”

I think it’s misguided to judge Apple’s intent from an initial release, given Apple’s history with this sort of thing. For instance, the first iPhone, with no Exchange support or third-party app support, didn’t look like much of a threat to RIM and Palm. But it was a serious mistake to believe Apple wasn’t interested in the enterprise market or in building an applications platform.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Chris Kenny]

[Joe Moya] “….Thank You Note from Adobe and AVID?”

FCP X seems like a great thing for Avid and Adobe this week. But Apple plays a long game. Yes, there are significant features missing from the first release of FCP X and people are claiming they feel betrayed. But once the more glaring feature gaps are filled, and everyone has calmed down a little (both of which are inevitable), there’s not a lot for Adobe and Avid to be happy about here.

Why was FCP so successful in the first place? I’d argue a huge part of it is that it was much more approachable — in terms of both price and UI — to students and other new editors, who later moved into the marketplace and brought along the tools they were comfortable with.

FCP X, with its lower price point and new UI, is even more approachable.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Chris Kenny]

[David Roth Weiss] “Holy projection Batman!!! Now that’s a subject you do know about Chris. I’ve called you on it so many times I’m hoarse. “

No, you’ve merely tried to encourage unreasonable levels of doubt with respect to Apple’s statements to the media.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Chris Kenny]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “yeah chris, that’s the upper left of FCPX and iMovie, it doesn’t cover tracks, or the viewer – firstcut refers to event area more or less – the decisions randy took when crafting iMovie 08 – a single track of video in a trackless space, a single viewer, there were decisions made necessary because he was preparing a video application for the casual consumer, so therefore he had to remove complexity – he did – iMovie is far less complicated than FCP7 – with me so far?”

No. The tool built rough edits. That implies a timeline.

[Aindreas Gallagher] ”
Good. Because here comes the tricky bit – I want you to boot up FCPX if you have it to hand, then I want you to boot up iMovie if you have it installed,
then I want you to tab cycle between the applications – (maybe best to arrange iMovie as the kid in the video has) just keep tabbing between them. One is a free install consumer app for hobbyists, the other one is the intended replacement for a mainstay professional powerhouse editing application. “

Your argument basically runs “FCP X has similarities with iMovie, iMovie is a consumer app, therefore FCP X is a consumer app”. But this is logically invalid on its face.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Chris Kenny]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “no no that’s all wrong: firstcut only referred to the tagging and organisational aspects of the skimmer

That’s not what the article says:

So Randy starting writing an app: “First Cut”, a professional-level “feeder” app for Final Cut Pro. You would launch First Cut, import all your raw footage, then quickly skim through, keywording, organizing, marking as good or rejecting, and finally building a rough edit.

Then you would “Export to Final Cut Pro”, and import the rough cut XML into Final Cut Pro to fine-tune edits, color grade, add titles and effects, composite, key, mix sound and do your final mastering.

[Aindreas Gallagher] “These are decisions Randy took when crafting consumer software for a consumer market”

This whole line of argument makes no sense. There are some things that are good ideas for both consumer and professional video editing applications. As a consequence, iMovie and FCP X behaving the same way in some particular respect is not by itself sufficient justification to conclude FCP X is not intended to be a pro app. This is logically equivalent to saying cars must not be a serious transportation mechanism because they share the ‘wheel’ feature in common with tricycles.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.

[Chris Kenny]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “the first application they show is FCPX (but nothing has names) then they show you FCP and iMovie, then they ask you to guess which of them is the previous version of the application.”

OK, but so what? We now know FCP X and iMovie ’08 and later were both derived from the editing paradigm Ubillos cooked up for ‘First Cut’. I’m not sure what this is supposed to say about how ‘professional’ anything is, especially since First Cut was written as a companion to a professional editing app. And even aside from that, a fair bit of the reason iMovie and FCP X look more similar is just that they were designed in the same century, and for the same operating system, whereas FCP 7’s UI is mostly unchanged from classic Mac OS.

—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.