Scott Witthaus
2
Apple Final Cut Pro X Coins
3
COW Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
[Simon Ubsdell] “One of the workflows where I think AVID were well ahead of the curve was in stereoscopic. “
Perhaps they spent too much time on 3D, which really didn’t work out so well. Would you agree?
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
Man, I am not sure why this thread was even started, unless Oliver was bored. 😉
I have known Oliver for a while now and respect the hell out of him. But of course, being the PITA I have been called every now and again, I have a couple alternative viewpoints!
[Oliver Peters] “1. There is nothing that says FCP X or Media Composer or Premiere Pro are any more innovative, superior or advanced than the other tools.”
I don’t understand this. If you are saying they all are the same except for the tools, then the product with the best tools for a workflow is superior. For example, I find X data management, organization and effects handling (to name a few) far superior to MC. Therefore X is the superior product for me. You have to have some criteria to judge a product on. It’s like saying “if you take away the engine, systems, and drivetrain, there is no difference between a Ferarri and a Yugo. They are pretty much the same”. For others MC and Premiere are superior based on their particular criteria. Don’t get me wrong, I have made a ton of money cutting on MC, XpressPro, DS, Symphony and such but for me, right now, X is a superior product based on my criteria.
[Oliver Peters] “2. Many “film” editors that you guys like to malign – who are heavy Avid users – also use other software when not at work.”
Yes, but they would rather not, unless you are talking about hobby and home stuff. Having lived through the transition of Softimage|DS to Avid|DS the superior product (see # 1 above), DS, was much maligned by Avid editors because “it wasn’t like an MC and they didn’t want to learn it”. Trust me, I saw it first hand. Suits at Avid picked up on that and let DS wander and die a slow death. Times have changed, for sure, and Avid editors MUST know other platforms (it’s easier that they are all so cheap or free), but the reputation of Avid editors being smug in their comfort zone has some validity (I was one of those “smug” editors and turned my nose up at FCP when it first came out).
Until FCP5 came out, or there about, Avid as a company carried itself with a certain amount of corporate arrogance that translated down to upgrades, pricing and customer service. IMO (which I have stated directly to Avid folks), they felt that they were the only game in town, had Hollywood and you had to pay them to play with them. Whoops, my my, have times changed. Even when X was released (while Avid was losing money quarter after quarter) they went back to “well, if you’re a professional you have to work with us” attitude. Obviously Avid’s definition of professional is limited to their base. If you ignore history it’s bound to repeat itself.
[Oliver Peters] “4. The experience of folks in major markets (like LA or NY) at least, is that jobs where Media Composer is used often paid more than jobs where FCP “legacy” was used. So that would tend to reinforce why someone should stay with Media Composer skills”
If you want to live and work in those markets, which could be considered “niche” when looking at the entire visual storytelling landscape. For example, I would cut my ear off rather than cut reality TV in a major market. That’s just my choice.
[Oliver Peters] “5. Media Composer continues to be dominant in film and TV work because many contracts require Media Composer project files as a deliverable. This includes all working versions and not just the final sequence. So it’s not merely a matter of converting the final sequence and delivering that.”
See above.
[Oliver Peters] “6. FCP X is not easier for young folks nor harder for old folks to pick up on. In the circle of folks I know, it’s more graybeards who are running FCP X than young folks. I see just as many young folks gravitate to Premiere Pro as I do to FCP X. This includes younger editors and college students.”
I see the opposite with the 100 students I teach each year. New students, who have no previous editorial background, pick up X much faster than Legacy. I am two years into teaching X exclusively and it’s just amazing how X makes sense to them where Legacy seemed not to. However, I don’t think it has to do with age, rather the fact that there are no old habits to break. And I see more students breaking towards X versus PP when given the choice, which we do (I do only teach X in the lab, however).
[Oliver Peters] “Speed as an editor is a valued asset by clients. Speed comes in part when the software gets out of the way. This comes through muscle memory and intuitive knowledge of the software. That also makes you a more creative editor. If you are strong at Media Composer – or FCP 7 and Premiere is thus the easiest transition – why should you change to something else, unless it’s costing you business?”
I was fast as hell on EMC too, but switched to Avid when it came along. Why not look outside the box that something that can perhaps make you faster? If you are using MC in a non-broadcast or major market and you don’t have to have certain deliverables (corporate, educational, web-based markets for example), why wouldn’t you look into something else? The attitude of “keep your head in the sand and keep telling yourself MC is better” is on that has been around for a long time and I just don’t get it.
[Oliver Peters] “In the end, it depends on what’s best for your business, your market, your clientele and your own style.”
Agree! This is all you had to say right up front! 🙂
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
[Helge Tjelta] “Still, windows only… we’ll just have to wait…”
Darn. Take those exclamation points of the post title then. 😉
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
[Oliver Peters] “This validates my point. If Avid released a hypothetical 7.0.4.1 update in order to be backwards compatible with some feature in 8.x, then you have benefited from that.”
No, what I am saying is that I want that R&D effort put towards 8.x and beyond, not backwards. Ultimately 8.x will benefit me and my purchase of 8.x will benefit Avid more. Avid’s (limited) backwards compatibility is nice, but when the company is updating software that is two versions back, it’s lacks good business sense.
Quite frankly, those type customers (holding old versions but wanting continuing (free) updates to those old versions) need to be forced to “pony-up” at some point or be left behind. Oh wait, that is what the subscription model will do! And I bet we will see subtle but definite changes to that “backward compatible” model from Avid going forward.
My main reason for “freezing” my Avid version is that there is no Avid work to be found in my region. There are no Avid suites to four-wall. Of course, we’re no LA….! As one contributor on the Avid-L called us; “the little guys”! 🙂
sw
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
Oliver, have you put your “Avid Customer Association Sales Hat” on? 😉
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
[Oliver Peters] “Completely untrue that this is just for big broadcasters.”
Sorry Oliver, but not “completely…” Every time I talk about this to users or to Avid folk, it’s the big installs that don’t want to change and want the (free) updates and patches to old versions. I include “big broadcast” in “big installs”. And Avid is most concerned about the big installs. Based on feedback, I would dare say Avid would love to not service out of date versions. But, big money talks…
If you have a version that works with your situation, you stay there until you are ready or have to upgrade. I personally don’t want Avid to be using valuable and scarce development resources on old versions. Once a new version comes out, the old version should be frozen.
The again, I voluntarily “froze” my Media Composer version at 7.0.4 via not doing the subscription update….and so it goes.
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
[Andrew Kimery] “Pretty much every company EOLs the old product once the new one comes out.”
Except Avid, which for some strange reason keeps supporting software up to two major versions prior to the new release. I know they have to keep the big broadcasters happy, but what a seemingly waste of time and resources to make someone happy with (mostly free) patches and updates who won’t upgrade to the new software. I gotta feeling this will change as the new subscription model takes hold.
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
[Simon Ubsdell] “that’s why my TKY SuperCrop effect (above) is so superior to Apple’s offering. Not to mention that you can crop using onscreen controls for each edge, etc. which is simply not catered for at all by Apple.”
Having played with it for a bit now, I agree. Far superior. Thanks again.
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
[Robin S. Kurz] ” If you can’t compete with them, then you’re simply using them as a scapegoat for being a BAD EDITOR and not staying up to speed on your profession.”
This is so correct. I heard this from linear editors when Avid came out and Avid editors when FCP came out. There is a simple answer: just be better. If you are a good editor, no NLE will put you out of business. Personally, I have yet to reduce my rate just because an NLE can be had for only $299. My clients really don’t care what I cut on or how much it costs. YMMV.
[Robin S. Kurz] “There are also a lot of other cities outside of L.A.. And L.A. is a yardstick for… L.A.… full stop. It only represents an extremely small segment of the industry. One that is completely irrelevant to an easy 95+% of the rest.”
Been saying this for years. Broadcast is a niche when looked in terms of the entire visual storytelling landscape. What the broadcast and film niche needs may not be anywhere near what the rest of the market wants or needs. Avid is smart: they recognized their main market and are pretty much doing everything for them.
[Robin S. Kurz] “Of all the big A’s Avid certainly is the company I would least consider investing even a single cent in at this point, if I had to pick one, if you want to talk “security”.”
Robin. The trick with Avid is to buy it about a month before NAB and sell it about a week after. You get 15%-20% and get out clean! 😉
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
That’s perfect, Simon. Thank you.
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter