Herb Sevush
22
COW Coins
20
Premiere Pro Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
As always Chris, most of your reply is insightful and interesting, but then you just can’t help yourself I guess …
“They’re still in the NLE market, despite having to rewrite their NLE from scratch to remain competitive.”
They were more than competitive at the time, they didn’t have to rewrite their code from scratch. They chose to, and that choice is open to various interpretations. Yours is one, but not the only one, and not the only thoughtful one.
“FCP X has “pro” in the name, was introduced at an event for pros, and is portrayed by Apple by Apple has a pro product.”
Oh, come on now, do I really have to go research and list the number of misleading names by major corporations, the only point of which is to increase sales. The rest of that paragraph was fine, but this is foolish.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
Steve –
My apologies, my first test with PPro was strictly dv. So yes, it does sound familiar, at least in terms of limited IO.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
If Apple had come out with FCPX, a total immediate improvement over FCP7, but with new hardware requirements, you wouldn’t be seeing so many companies jumping ship. Upgrades in software often require upgrades in hardware. That isn’t the problem here.
The issue with the FCPX rollout was that Apple killed an older program without providing anything suitable to replace it. The fact that FCPX “might” in a year, or two, or three (or never,) be capable of replacing FCP7 is not sufficient. This was not the case with Adobe.
Yes, Adobe EOL’d Premiere when they brought out PPro. The difference was that it was worth it. If you had invested in PPro version 1, your workflow would have been improved over Premiere 6.5 on the day you took off the shrink wrap.
So no, it doesn’t sound familiar at all.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“Well it wasn’t difficult to improve on Premiere was it?”
You were the one choosing to make an analogy with PPro, complaining about it now seems a little silly.
“It may shock you to know that some of us think FCPX IS an improvement over FCP7 in some respects at least.”
It may shock you to know that I think FCPX is an improvement over FCP7 in many respects — most of them having to do with the 64 bit engine. I’d like to be working with auditions, might occasionally use the compound clip feature, like the ability to use color match — just wish I could actually use X to cut shows with. But I can’t.
You made a bad analogy between FCPX and PPro. PPro was an upgrade, buggy or not. If you were making money using Premiere, you could make more money using PPro, even on day 1. In no way was it a step backward.
FCPX is, for now, a large step back in useability, which holds the promise of future advances. Which is why there are so many complaints. Most editors can’t make money today with promises of enhancements tomorrow, our clients won’t wait. If Apple had kept FCP up to date, while nurturing this new approach, we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“why are you wasting your valuable time on here?”
To annoy people who ask that question.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“Premiere Pro, which is being eulogised on this forum was also a piece of crap at version 1.0.”
PPro might have been “a piece of crap” compared to Avid or FCP, but it was also a HUGE improvement over Premiere, the program it replaced, even on the first day it was released. The same cannot be said of FCPX.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“You can still have FCP7 if you need to open a legacy project.”
The problem is I’m greedy. I want one piece of software that can handle both the old and the new, old projects, old tape formats, plus the ability to handle new formats and tapeless workflows. Apple’s new offering gives me only one way to work, Avid and Adobe offer me both, right now, with multi-cam thrown in.
“Did you blame Sony when U-Matic got outdated in flavor to Betacam SP, and later with DigiBeta? Was Sony fault that you need to have the old recorder and the new one because Betacam SP decks didn’t load U-Matic tapes? ”
Sony didn’t stop supporting U-Matic when BetaCam came out. They not only continued to sell it, they kept improving the features on their U-Matic decks for years after they introduced BetaCam.
“It’s not an Apple problem. It’s the constantly evolving technology.”
Sony did not EOL U-matic on the first day they started selling BetaCam. It is an Apple problem, this is not the standard way of doing business, even in fields of evolving technology.
“What if because the workflow of FCPX in a near future is really faster to edit a project on FCPX than in Premiere or Avid.”
I would switch to FCPX. Like I said, this is business. So far I see no evidence of that happening. FCPX’s chief design benefits seems to be ease of learning for new editors and ease of use with simple projects. I am both old and complicated, so it doesn’t seem to be aimed at me.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“That’s why some people complains the lack of tape I/O of FCPX. They need to maintain their old workflow in order to pay off their equipment.”
My tape decks were payed off years ago. I need tape IO because PBS still demands it, as do most broadcasters.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“And just one thing, why the hell you want to import old finished project ever”
For just one reason … money.
I have clients that sometimes revisit old projects and pay me to revise them. They pay me with money and I do the work, that’s what they mean by the word professional. If I can’t open those files they will find someone else and pay them, not me. That’s called running a business. With FCPX I loose business — but I guess your in this for the glory.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions -
“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”
Always wanted to quote the last line from the Great Gatsby; the opportunity might not come again.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions