[Marcus Moore]

WWDC certainly seems like a logical launch platform.

[Marcus Moore]

I agree with you completely. Since we’ll never know, there’ little point in arguing what the FCPX dev team might or might not have had up on a whiteboard in 2010.

And I’m entirely comfortable with the idea that some of the concepts FCPX proposes may ultimately not work and have to be reversed. There’s enough that’s different about some of the ideas in FCPX that it would have been impossible to tell what problems could arise once it got out into the wild. In some cases that may be things like the tilde key, augmenting or improving functionality, or we may see them reverse course on something somewhere down the line.

I personally don’t think they’re completely off-base with anything they’ve done. Especially at this stage when it’s obvious some ideas haven’t been fully implemented yet (Roles).

I think the real indicator of where FCPX HAS struck paydirt in a new concept or operation is where we see that functionality adopted by the other players, like the skimmable thumbnails in Premier.

[Marcus Moore]

So if it had been there from the start, would the concept still be seen as flawed?

I don’t think there’s ANY operation to which there aren’t exceptions.

Unfortunately, we’ll never know which added features fall into the category of “improvements” or simply “not done when launched”.

Considering that some estimates have them starting to put together FCPX only about a year before that first professional preview in February of 2011- I find it amazing they were able to get done what they did.

[Marcus Moore]

[Jim Giberti] “This simple change, like the tilde key, begs the question: was the initial concept so good to begin with?”

The tilde key isn’t any indication that the concept was flawed, but simply one that has cases where it needs to be overridden.

With it’s connected clip structure, FCPX basically inverts what is considered “normal” behaviour. In FCP7 clips were islands until themselves, and you’d often be drawing out ranges to grab numerous clips stacked on top of one another to move them all in unison. Now, FCPX assumes that connected clips want a common behaviour, and you use the tilde key to override that behaviour. It’s just coming at the problem from 2 different directions, and I personally find I need to override the assumed behaviour LESS often now than I did in FCP7.

I’d like to see the connected nature of clips expanded in the future, so that you cold attach “behaviours” to connected clips. So that if you add 10 frames to the primary storyline clip, any connected audio or video clips also add 10 frames as well. And again here you’d want an override key for special circumstances where that behaviour wasn’t wanted.

[Marcus Moore]

I think the model of keeping shot footage separate from edits holds some merit, especially in situations where footage is reused on multiple jobs. Why clog up the Event with edits from multiple editors spanning several jobs?

And if I want to send an edit I’ve been working on here at my office to another editor, I don’t need to send the entire Event, just the project file. I used to do this all the time with FCP7, where I’d take a complicated project and strip everything out but the sequence in question, and email that to the other editor.

While I think for self contained jobs, the compound clip project-in-event model can work quite well. So I think there are reasons to do both, depending on your situation.

[Marcus Moore]

I know we’ve covered this ground before, but how do you see them pulling PCIe from this machine? Thunderbolt expansion isn’t ready for the heavier lifting yet.

[Marcus Moore]

There will be a case change, of that I’m pretty darn sure.

I think by “major” I mean a change in the philosophy of the design. I still see a box of given dimensions with PCIe card slots, internal storage options, and upgradable RAM. The box could be smaller, shorter, oriented differently… but it won’t be a radical new configuration.

[Marcus Moore]

Agreed. The more time that goes on, and the more that I think about it- the less I think Apple has any radical new concept in mind, but rather that the delay was simply a matter of timing and proper components for a useful update.

Larry Jordan’s blog post on the MacPro from a few days ago included some info I think most people had forgotten about- that Apple PR had clarified and confirmed the content of Tim Cook’s email with NYT reporter David Pogue. Apple PR basically told Pogue – a new MacPro in 2013.

I expect the form factor will change a bit- but I’m no longer expecting earth-shattering- it will still be a tower of some description. And it will still be called the MacPro. Because that name makes sense with the rest of the lineup. MacBookAir/MacBookPro. iMac/MacMini/MacPro.

[Marcus Moore]

One point- While adjustment layers don’t come built in with X, you don’t need to buy a 3rd party plug-in for them. You can either build it yourself, or there are several free versions for download. Colour Grading Central’s free looks pack comes with both an adjustment layer AND a pre-built broadcast safe one as well.

And yes, adjustment layers are great and Apple should definitely include one in the future.

As for the cost of plug-ins as add-ons. I think there’s really only 3 or 4 which cover functionality which could be considered “core” to PPro or FCP7– a VAST majority are look, image manipulation, transition, and other specialty effects that would be 3rd party on ANY platform. And those are specific to an editors taste and skill level.

[Marcus Moore]

I’ve definitely found myself less interested in movies like this in the last decade that I ever imagined I would. Maybe that speaks to me, or maybe to the movies themselves. I don’t know.