[David Battistella]

Gary

That’s a very fair and balanced opinion.

Thanks for posting.

David.

______________________________
The shortest answer is doing.
Lord Herbert
https://vimeo.com/battistella

[David Battistella]

Steve,

You are describing one pipeline for calibrating. One.

Many people could calibrate their suite in this way qith FCP-X (for now).

-Use a properly calibrated second monitor and have fullscreen playback all the time ( i remember when AVID’s did this too!)

-Use the internal scopes of FCP X
-Test it, try it.
-Output an FCP X show to a file.
-Import the file to whatever NLE is in your pipeline (or use AJA TV to view the file in your pipeline.
-Play the file through your existing pipeline and check it against that.

It’s not that complicated to see if the colors are out of whack and a secondary monitor can be calibrated to match your definition of broadcast very easily.

David

______________________________
The shortest answer is doing.
Lord Herbert
https://vimeo.com/battistella

[David Battistella]

[Oliver Peters] “I would tend to agree that the added eye candy and animations have chewed up a lot of the power of its 64-bit horsepower and OpenCL capabilities.”

Oliver.

I agree with you on this. I’d like to see something that pushes all of the processing power to the timeline to keep up with keystrokes. I can feel as I get faster in the software, the timeline can feel sluggish.

Freaky timeline zooming needs to be fixed.

David

______________________________
The shortest answer is doing.
Lord Herbert
https://vimeo.com/battistella

[David Battistella]

Thanks for sharing with the community.

I find that everything you stated is pretty much right on and to be expect. Cheers for taking the plunge and getting the stuff out the door.

David

______________________________
The shortest answer is doing.
Lord Herbert
https://vimeo.com/battistella

[David Battistella]

You can not run both applications at the same time.

David

______________________________
The shortest answer is doing.
Lord Herbert
https://vimeo.com/battistella

[David Battistella]

Oliver,

I completely appreciate that story and your feelings on the subject. I’d be pissed if that was my facility. I wonder if when the investment was made how long they saw themselves in that setup? 1.5 years no? I’m sure they were hoping for 3-5 years on that investment as a minimum to offset costs.

Id say that possibly even on lion that environment will still be a healthy editing situation for 1.5 to 3 more years.

Enterprise operations can’t be as nimble as individual users. The big problem is that this is not a transition, it’s a “cut the cord” situation and that makes those places feel ripped off and in limbo.

I have felt burnt on a lot of software or electronics purchases before. Apple never telegraphs when they are going to cancel anything. That is the company they are and those are the risks we all take.

Switching is very much based on comfort level. Adobe Premiere has evolved into a tool that looks and feels like what we are used to with small performance enhancements. Many users might have been happy with a version 8. Apple just moved in what many feel is an arrogant and agressive new direction.

That’s the same direction that let many of us set up editing shops that were cost prohibitive in the years prior. Just three months before FCP was released I was a day away from a 125k loan on an AVID system. I imagine I might have felt somewhat like that facility, with expensive hardware on my hands with a whole new way of doing things available.

It’s not a perfect analogy but the point is someone always gets caught in the crossfire.

Thanks for this healthy and civilized exchange. I appreciate the high level discussion.

______________________________
The shortest answer is doing.
Lord Herbert
https://vimeo.com/battistella

[David Battistella]

Perfect.

I totally respect and understand that position. I’d maybe be making similar choices if I had similar circumstances.

David

______________________________
The shortest answer is doing.
Lord Herbert
https://vimeo.com/battistella

[David Battistella]

I’m just thinking in terms if a new tool and what it “could” or “couldn’t” do, rather than try to wedge it into working in an existing workflow methodology.

I’ve resolved myself to the fact that it is a new approach and I’m exploring what the thinking is behind that approach.

Avid, lightworks, FCP 7 and premiere are all available to work in a defined method (a well defined method for certain).

Rather than judging to soon or too harshly my inital approach is to embrace. I’m interested in trying to deconstruct the tool before I condemn it.

So far I am finding a lot that I like.

Bin sifting in AVID was good, buy not really comparable to what FCPX is offering.

If itoves toward “check in check out files” like you would on FCP server, then I think it’s a bit better than existing San setups because it’s managing that stuff for you. Freeing you to edit.

______________________________
The shortest answer is doing.
Lord Herbert
https://vimeo.com/battistella

[David Battistella]

What is really very interesting is that what they built into the software in terms of media management is not geared to the individual user but to the largest possible facilities working in the largest environments.

News is a great example.

Features is another.

With the ability to customize a database a feature editor with his or her assistants could easily construct a database language for any film.

That means using keywords, actor, scene number, any criterial you want. That can be much more efficient than sorting in bins (which is what we are used to).

Tagging vfx shots is another example. Tracking all the stuff that happens over months can be done in the software.

Really the only missing link is a way to reconform.

I might be wrong about what I said about cutting features in FCP x. Audition is a great way to see multiple takes within the sequence an timeline without having to hunt. You cut have six takes of a line in audition an very quickly see how those choices could work within a scene.

That is something that can have me focusing on creativity instead of data management.

One external monitor and XML and this software on a San in lion could be a very powerful tool to edit a feature with.

______________________________
The shortest answer is doing.
Lord Herbert
https://vimeo.com/battistella

[David Battistella]

This is a great and thoughtful article.

I think what is most fascinating is this betrayal people feel.

I agree that many people stake tier livelihood on their tools. But we forget so quickly what the landscape might be like right now had FCP never been released.

Professional Editors brought FCP to maturity and many did not jump over until version four or five.

Maybe FCP X will never work for the “high end professional” that is very possible. If I was cutting a feature tomorrow FCPX would not be the software (but not because of it’s interface or language) but because those jobs require a powerful offline editing/editorial tool that does one thing perfectly.

This is more of a media authoring tool that does many things really well.

I’m using the “skate to where the puck is” analogy a lot these days. Media models are crumbling. I do not think this software was built with a narrow audience in mind. But I think it will evolve to eventually suit that audience, very much the same way FCP evolved into a suite of apps.

Apple FCP was a dv editor. Everyone reacted the same way. It was full of problems.

Now they’ve released a DSLR editor. I think the pro stuff will come. They just tailored it to a wider audience first.

David.

______________________________
The shortest answer is doing.
Lord Herbert
https://vimeo.com/battistella