Herb Sevush
22
COW Coins
20
Premiere Pro Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
What you seem to fail to realize is that it isn’t computers. or NLEs that are hard to master, that require thousands of hours of training and apprenticeship – it’s editing that is hard, the way playing a violin is hard, the way sculpting marble is difficult, the way you have to spend years to attain a black belt – and no computer ever made would have helped Davinci paint any better. The most time consuming function for an editor is thinking – this was as true in DW Griffith’s time as it is today.
On this forum we argue about functionality and paradigms, but a lot of this discussion is about the technical in’s and out’s of file creation. Most of the editors here can create good work with anything from a scissors to a Discreet smoke, given a minimum of training. But, sadly for you it seems, all of them spent years learning how.
There’s no free rides, even on an Ipad.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“When Alban posted elsewhere features that he liked that are unique to FCPX, some people brushed them off as not important.”
Since I am that “some people” I think I ought to clarify the context. Scott Sheriff posted the following in response to a question.
“3. I hear that FCPX is missing a lot of features real editors would be loathe to give up.”
You heard right. No tape I/O, no XML, no OMF, no multi-cam, no ability to open legacy projects, no way to share a project with another editor due to file structure, no way to assign tracks. There’s more, but that should give you an idea.”
Alban then responded by listing all the new features of FCPX that he valued. My response was mainly meant to distinguish between essential industry standard functionality and the given properties of an individual program.
Essential industry functions are those things common to all NLEs – if a facility was going out shopping for a new NLE what are the basic features it would have to have. (I’m talking here about a high end facility that has to accommodate various different clients and workflows.) Scott’s list is full of those.
Alban responded by saying in effect “so what, FCPX has all this …” – and listed a bunch of program specific functions – skimmers, smart collections, etc.
I was trying to point out they are not the same. The industry standard functions are used by every major NLE without exception.
In addition each individual NLE has their own program specific functions that give them their individuality and appeal – Avid’s trimmer and media management, PPro’s integration with AE & Photoshop and the mercury playback engine.
Different people will have different opinions of the program specific functions – some may love the skimmer, some may not.
Facilities don’t have opinions about Multi-Cam and OMF export – either you have them, or don’t bother showing up.
My previous post was trying, badly, to say these 2 types of feature sets are not comparable. You can love the auditions in FCPX all you want, but if you can’t monitor properly, no high end facility will use it.
Obviously all this changes when FCPX gets updated, but for now Scott’s original response was correct, and Alban’s was off the mark.
“In the meantime I too make do with “hybrid” workflows but the time savings I get in FCPX on projects that don’t need the missing features are incredible.”
A description of a project and how long it might have taken you before vs taking you now with X would be helpful, and where in the process you think the time savings are happening.(this is a real question, really would like to learn, not baiting you here.)
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“It does not mean FCPX is a “consumer” app because the masses don’t have a great need for many of the features and average folk don’t spend $2k+ on MBPs.”
I have never said or intimated that FCPX is a consumer ap.
I do believe however that many types of complex work will not be done on Imacs, Ipads or MBPs.
For my work I need multiple monitors, specialized keyboards, access to an ever changing array of video cards, memory chips, external storage, and I/O. I don’t believe a single thunderbolt port is up to the task. I still believe that for the next few years hermetically sealed devices will not be as productive as open work stations for complex work flows. And it is exactly this type of work that I believe, without substantiation, that Apple has said good-bye to.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
I left out Media 100.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
Alban –
AS of June 21 FCP is dead, and every editor has to migrate somewhere. The correct comparison is between FCPX, PPro, Media composer, Edius, Vegas and Lightworks, if it ever gets out of Beta.
Most of those other programs can actually export an OMF without having to use FCP7, they even have multi-cam and the ability to monitor on a calibrated screen. Some of them can handle h.264 without background rendering, they just handle it natively, might save you some time some day. You should look into one of them when you want to work on a high end system again.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“I’m looking at this from a business perspective and not as an editor.”
To me it always seemed fairly simple – Apple sells Final Cut to sell high margin workstations, many of which routinely carry Apple Care, among other things, and there is nothing so profitable as extended warranties. Apple has already learned what happens if you leave it up to Adobe and Avid to push your boxes. I think FCPX points to the fact that Apple is now much less interested in selling work stations and therefore was looking for a product to help sell more Ipads, Imacs, & MB Pros.
Disclaimer:
This is just my interpretation, I have nothing but observation to go on, and I have a generations long family history of ineptitude when it comes to business.Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
I agree with you up to this point.
“Apple may have felt that FCS legacy had little room for profit growth (rightly or wrongly).”
Everyone realizes that FCS legacy needed to be re-written. It would have been much simpler to do that while maintaining their “complex-workflow” market by upgrading FCS legacy to 64 bit. It is the “legacy” of appealing to the high-end of the market that Apple apparently thinks has little room for profit growth.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
Andy –
All my work is multi-cam, I have no intention of giving Apple any more of my money until there is at least a chance that X (or XI) will be useful to me; at the moment it isn’t.
As for the skimmer, all I said in my original post is “I don’t care”, as in, this is not a feature that would make me either embrace or reject any NLE. When I was told I was missing something essential I merely relayed a differing opinion from someone else who had tried it, to show there was not unanimity on the subject. I have no opinion on it one way or the other.
I’m sure there are many things in FCPX that I would probably like if I tried it. But not all the skimmers and smart bins in the world will make up for the lack of functionality that now exists. And the overall “trackless magnetic timeline” seems totally incongruous with my work flow.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
I don’t think FCPX is dead, I do think there will be enhancements, I haven’t the lightest idea what they will be, I question, but don’t refute, Apple’s stated intentions.
I do however treat Apple’s past and present actions with more weight than I do with those same stated intentions. You take Apple on faith and give scant weight to what has actually happened; I see things in exactly the opposite manner.
I said I would believe it when I see it and that is exactly what I meant, nothing more nor less.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
When I see it, I’ll believe it.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions