Forum Replies Created

Page 33 of 41
  • Daniel Frome

    November 20, 2011 at 5:24 pm in reply to: From Apple Insider today…

    [Herb Sevush] “leader and trend setter. Time will tell if that applies to FCPX.”

    hah. I’m sitting here with my macbook pro, mac pro, and an iphone beside me… but even I cannot buy this one.

  • Daniel Frome

    November 17, 2011 at 10:15 pm in reply to: Interesting announcement from Black Magic

    C’mon ’twas a joke. No wonder they us avid people are a little slow :p

  • Daniel Frome

    November 17, 2011 at 7:47 pm in reply to: Interesting announcement from Black Magic

    Oh…and if they ever DID say “give me that MXF!” I would gladly welcome them to search the schmorgasboard of my Avid Mediafiles/MXF folder! hah…good luck finding it! ;P

  • Daniel Frome

    November 17, 2011 at 7:44 pm in reply to: Interesting announcement from Black Magic

    I would honestly call it a small inconvenience, not an issue.

    I’ll admit that the idea that my “avid files” are not directly readable by quicktime weirded me out when switching from FCP. But… it actually hasn’t been an issue to this point.

    Just realize that the MXF wrapped files are never, ever, handed off unless you are strictly handling avid-to-avid stuff. Otherwise it’s taken for granted that you want a DNxHD quicktime. I think you’re forcing the perspective a bit too much here..noone says “give me that MXF!”

  • Daniel Frome

    November 17, 2011 at 7:31 pm in reply to: Interesting announcement from Black Magic

    Fair points Jeremy.

    Yes, truth is that we should separating the talk of DNxHD and MXF — as they don’t always exist as 1 whole unit.

    Avid’s preferred codec is DNxHD. Avid’s wrapper is MXF.

    When passing around Avid files (DNxHD encoded files) it is often going to be necessary to send them in the quicktime (MOV) wrapper so that they can be viewed and worked with outside the Avid application. While working Avid those files are often going to be wrapped in MXF.

    So… what you’re pointing out is really a file wrapper issue more than a ‘format’ issue if you get me… totally valid nonetheless.

  • This is like deja vu from FCPX’s first round beta.

    I think FCPX team ought to give their testers a healthy dose of beta blockers. Maybe they’ll quiet down and get some work done this time around.

  • Daniel Frome

    November 17, 2011 at 5:16 pm in reply to: Quick Poll. So what’s your decision?

    I don’t use Edius because I’m a mac guy (now), but Edius is a beast. I never learned to edit so fast on a foreign editing software as I did with Edius. It’s so fast it literally feels like I am working with analog tape. Never waited for my computer to catch up…and that was with an older Core 2 Quad processor. I can only imagine what it would be like with a modern machine.

    Edius is actually what delayed me adopting Premiere Pro for a long time.

  • Daniel Frome

    November 15, 2011 at 1:30 pm in reply to: If FCPX isn’t really for Pros, who is it for?

    We will never know the real decision making process here. I saw a funny conspiracy theory on the macrumors website that Ubillos is secretly planning to move back to Adobe and released FCPX as a final “screw you” to Apple for not giving him the funding he deserved, heh.

    Personally I just think that they over estimated their influence in the broadcast market.

  • Daniel Frome

    November 15, 2011 at 1:14 pm in reply to: If FCPX isn’t really for Pros, who is it for?

    The term “professional” is a little too broad here. Plenty of ‘pros’ are using it… at least, that’s what I’m guessing, since I’ve never actually met someone who is using it. I’ve met two professionals (both do weddings/corporate) who bought and then returned it.

    That being said, the “broadcast” industry is the primary group that has rejected FCPX.

    I think Apple aimed FCPX at all professionals, but simply failed to consider the real needs of the broadcast sector, which caused all this backlash.

  • Daniel Frome

    November 11, 2011 at 2:03 pm in reply to: AVID Cross Platform work environment

    I would say that Avid is “half” there, in terms of truly being cross compatible. The real quirk for Avid is this: your mac version can only consolidate to mac formatted drives. Your PC version will only be able to consolidate on PC formatted drives. Doesn’t matter if you install 3rd party driver to allow your mac to read/write NTFS (or vise versa) – Avid will still crash on performing a consolidate.

    Example: I work at a PC-based Avid facility. I do a lot of work from home on my mac. I have a portable NTFS drive that I shuttle between work and home. I have tuxera NTFS installed on my mac, allowing me to read/write to NTFS. However…List of quirks:

    – The media (MXF files) can sit comfortably on the NTFS drive, but the project and bins cannot. They must be run from an OSX drive.
    – consolidating must be done to the OSX drive, then copied to the NTFS disk. Same goes for importing media.

    Make sense? And before someone chimes in with the exFAT formatted drives (which are supposed to work both on mac and windows) — No, avid doesn’t consolidate to exFAT either.

Page 33 of 41

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy