So is the complaint really that to be PRO you might have to spend some PRO dollars again after making do on the cheap for a decade.
No I don't think that is it. The problem is that FCP created the concept of cheap, quality editing. And now that idea has rippled (ooh edit pun!) through the industry to the point that clients more and more don't want to pay fair rates for much of anything. The agency clients all have cost consultants who basically dictate what can be paid for a job. The agency gets less, the production company gets less and the editorial shop gets less. All because some bean counter doof thinks he knows what everything costs. And let me tell you, they don't. GSD&M voluntarily resigned BMW because the BMW cost consultants made it very difficult for the agency to make a decent profit. We had a hell of a time bidding jobs for BMW because they absolutely, under no circumstances would allow overages. If a job went south and ran over - too bad, you have to eat it. Even if it was BMW who made the last minute changes.
So after ten years of editing on the cheap, things have really started to unravel. Doesn't matter how much your edit software/hardware costs. People don't want to pay fair rates. And that is why no one really want to change edit horses midstream.
I cannot believe that Apple put all this effort into what some call iMovie Pro and walk away from their hard won FCS "Pro" clients.
This is good stuff!
DA,
Honestly I hadn't thought about the component aspect and that's intriguing because it does mirror what Avid has been doing with their warez. And you're right; Apple aren't stupid, but it would be stupid if they built a gimped shell around the engine you describe. Thanks for the info and sorry I edited you post for brevity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4fx
With the axe of the Xserve, Xserve RAID (to a lesser degree) and Shake and no mention of Final Cut Server or Color, this actually concerns me greatly.
When you say it like that! LOL
it is a little concerning, but I have a thought below...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
Considering that FCP X can import iMovie projects but not Final Cut Pro 7 projects, the "iMovie Pro" designation seems somewhat appropriate.
That is peculiar, but it also is beginning to make sense.
Let's assume it's "obvious" that the new FCPX is really a rebuild of iMove and that perhaps (can anyone confirm) iMovie was Apple's own effort at an NLE. Anyway, they went the consumer route with iMovie.) FCP was built upon Macromedia DNA.
Is it possible that the big disagreement (the FCP firings) was because they decided to ditch the "hacked together" (only imagining how it would be described worst case) Macromedia DNA in favor of Apple's iMovie engine? or I guess more accurately Apple's "skunkworks" iMovie engine?
In other words; could they have been so impressed with a new iMovie engine (their own engine with everything tuned to the OS with GCD, OCL OGL etc) that the questioned why would they not use it in FCP?
FCP was going to need a rewrite if it was going to ever be a very efficient program. We all knew that, And I could see two teams setting out to improve their products. One product was tuned for efficiency (consumer machines are notoriously underpowered) and had no constraints because it was a consumer product after-all, efficiency was easily more important that legacy or industry conventions and the other was about extensibility of features, but because of the architecture limited to what it could do as an engine. When the results came in, the team leader said "ya know what? our code (the iMovie code) is so much better, why aren't we using it in our pro App. F_K the old code". Of course the legacy team freaks out and leaves.
Does anyone have any clues to support or oppose my thoughts?
There is absolutely no defense for this product other than it's for the consumer market. Which means it really should be an upgrade for iMovie.
Apple for a while now has chosen the consumer path...it was painfully obvious when they stopped offering matte displays.
The door is now open for another company to step up.
For $400 for the Suite you know it's not going to be Avid stepping up and Adobe probably doesn't want to deliver a comparable or superior product for the same money.
I have one small question: how do you replace (update) footage in FCX ?
Right now I'm working on a small CG clip and I make the edit in FCX. As often is the case I did the edit using an early version of the footage. Now I have all the footage updated (small things that don't matter to the course of the action) but I can't find a way to replace the clips in FCX and keep all the edit work. I even tried to replace the footage on HDD same name and even same length but FCX doesn't recognize the new footage.
No I don't think that is it. The problem is that FCP created the concept of cheap, quality editing. And now that idea has rippled (ooh edit pun!) through the industry to the point that clients more and more don't want to pay fair rates for much of anything. The agency clients all have cost consultants who basically dictate what can be paid for a job. The agency gets less, the production company gets less and the editorial shop gets less. All because some bean counter doof thinks he knows what everything costs. And let me tell you, they don't. GSD&M voluntarily resigned BMW because the BMW cost consultants made it very difficult for the agency to make a decent profit. We had a hell of a time bidding jobs for BMW because they absolutely, under no circumstances would allow overages. If a job went south and ran over - too bad, you have to eat it. Even if it was BMW who made the last minute changes.
So after ten years of editing on the cheap, things have really started to unravel. Doesn't matter how much your edit software/hardware costs. People don't want to pay fair rates. And that is why no one really want to change edit horses midstream.
Unfortunately... welcome to the party
I've been living through this unraveling for the last 10 years in the print and publishing end of the ad industry. My previous posts to this thread have said as much, with some suggestions. None of which truly alleviates the painful transition, second-guessing, re-defining, frustration, and assorted other ill effects of realizing that your professional career is taking a turn for the worse, and you may have difficulties surviving.
In hindsight, my initial posts (yesterday) pointing out the need to change and evolve with the market and tech advances, were probably a personal attempt to allay my own personal fears of where the professional creative market is going (has gone?), regardless of the area of expertise.
Get ready for this, and it's not pretty: those in the film industry will start to get projects that were "created" by some kid in marketing, or the secretary, or even the sales dude... and you'll be responsible for trying to make it "professional".
The pain comes when the "rep" handing over the job says, "we did all of the work for you, so I expect a really good and solid quote for the finished project". So you do that.
You realize after opening the data, that you practically have to rebuild the whole thing... and then once you get past this mess... "Project dude" calls with changes... not once, but half a dozen times.
You faithfully let him/her know after the 3rd time, this is running into some serious over-charges, where you're promptly put into place, with the retort, "We agreed on a price... I consider this value-added service, and if you don't want to continue, hand the files over and we'll take it somewhere else". At which time you reconsider, because the repercussions within your tight industry could be even more fatal than taking a loss on a single project.
Sad to say... the above scenario repeats itself daily, until it IS your daily business.
I'm an optimist, or try to be. I'm interested in this thread and topic because the repercussions involve all of us "pros" no matter what we do. We've hung our hats proudly on the stand where we slapped those free Apple stickers, and Apple has gained immensely from our personal marketing clout and word-of-mouth propaganda, as in, "You do know that your favorite show/movie/magazine is all produced on Macs, don't you?" It would be truly, TRULY, sad to have to go back to a Winbox (no free stickers even!) so that we could have PRO-grade software.... or even a workstation, if the rumors are true that this MacPro update will be the last.
My personal optimism and belief that Apple knows what they're doing... and most of all... where they are going with all of this, keeps me from going into hysterics as some of the other posters have done here and across the blogosphere. Yup. Apple-Fan #1
@Dick Applebaum -- as always, some great posts and info. Kudos to ya for "Diggin' in the Dirt"... as some detractors would call FCPX.
I'm thinking better than the current "plug-in" architecture for pro-apps, is finally, "modular" and truly scriptable software.
This was a promise way back when (late 90's?) by assorted developers across the creative software industry. Could be that Apple is doing this, or similar starting with FCPX as the base.
PS. I think that the pros should have been a little bit more suspicious when the final price for all "pro" apps was only $400.
The day CS5 is only $400,- full-license, not upgrade... means:
a) they are dead, or dying slowly and having Flash attacks (serves 'em right!),
b) it's not what we think it is, and they left out features and software (hopefully Flash, but i think they rebuilt Photoshop using AIR and Flex....grrrr!)
c) Apple bought them, and since FCPX is successful after the initial fallout, they do the same for other creative software.
d) I'm delusional, dreaming, and having "flash-back" problems of my own
"The Bottom Line: Apple has followed the typical Apple sequence: (1) throw out something that’s popular and comfortable but increasingly ancient, (2) replace it with something that’s slick and modern and forward-looking and incomplete, (3) spend another year finishing it up, restoring missing pieces."
Sure, Apple does this from time-to-time in the consumer space, but by no means is it a pattern of what they do. When they went Intel they made sure Rosetta was there. When they went 64-bit they made sure there was 32-bit backward compatibility. When they threw out the optical drive from the MacBook Air there was Remote Install through WiFi from a PC even, on top of there being an external optical drive. The iPhone and iPad are perhaps examples of what he talks about but these were re-imaginings of entire product categories.
To think that Pogue's "Bottom Line" will be Apple's modus operandi for pro offerings in the future... is scary.
2 years for professional software that's "incomplete by design" with another year to "finish up and restore missing pieces" sounds like something from Google, not Apple.
Finally, Pogue's listing of responses from Apple seem to mostly be "Don't worry, we're working on that..." or "Yeah, we will restore that" or "Buy this $200 to upgrade plug-in". Sounds suspiciously like PR damage control.
Of course, in a year perhaps most of the issues will be sorted out and we'll look back on this thread and chuckle. But for now, it is what it is.
... Im really excited about some of the new features in FCPX. Secondary color correction looks great for when you just dont have time to do a round trip to Color, as does the new text features that will negate the need to use Motion for small items, saving significant time. Im just really apprehensive about some of the features that are missing and essential to a typical workflow.
Your arguments seems reasonable, your not 'all negative' and I understand your concern because the tool is essential for your work.
I am a software guy myself and edit only occasionally because my wife needs special things for the short movies she makes so my focus is a little different. But from a software development view it's clear to me that FCPX is a radical redesign from the ground up, and like OS X (compared to OS 9) completely unrelated to the previous product.
At the start a lot of OS 9 users didn't see 'the big picture' and complained about almost everything. But look at OS X now, it took a few iterations but it's by far the best OS to use and gaining traction while I write.
Apple is very good at writing new software and I am sure FCPX has the same sort of future OS X has.
But that doesn't mean that info from users in the field isn't essential in building a better product. I have noticed recently that Apple really does listen because some issues I had with iMovie were solved quickly and had almost the same description I entered in my feedback report.
You should do the same. I am sure they listen, but of course a positive reasonable argument works better ' than an Apple let me down' all negative tone.
I have nothing to do with video editing, but I just have to say this sounds like a disaster, and all the people defending Apple are coming across as "love is blind" sheep.
Come on, if MicroSoft released a new version of Excel that didn't open previous versions of Excel, would anyone defend them? No way! There would be massive criticism. So why would anyone defend Apple doing similar.
And the people saying it is a 1.0 release, you're just playing semantics. Yes the application has been written anew from the ground up, but that is an under the hood thing. The final product is meant to be an update to previous functionality.
If you write something from scratch and the final functionality doesn't resemble the functionality of a previous application, you give the new thing a totally new name. Again, if MicroSoft released a brand new set of code called Excel Amplify and it couldn't do pivot tables, sum columns or open Excel files, people would justifiably ask what was going on.
I also don't like the sound of the trouble the professionals are having when it comes to storing their work on remote drives. It seems a symptom of the whole "demoting the mac" thing. I keep hearing Jobs saying "it's in the App".
I like controlling my files and folders, but it sounds like Apple is moving towards an approach where you wont get to do that at all, even in something that is supposed to support professional video editing!
I reckon the Apple leadership should take a 6 week holiday from the world of iOS, iDevice, iCloud, and get back into the headspace of the tinkering teenager building their own machine from a kit. There is much advantage to be found keeping that side of things part of the ethos.
Apple defenders: step back from the tree you are hugging and have a look at the forest!
I reckon the Apple leadership should take a 6 week holiday from the world of iOS, iDevice, iCloud, and get back into the headspace of the tinkering teenager building their own machine from a kit. There is much advantage to be found keeping that side of things part of the ethos.
Gotta prove that as a company on the bottom line, sorry to say. iOS is Apple's present and future... again, sorry to say. As an Apple fan, you still can't get around the sorry fact that with all of the "pro" advantages that Apple has brought to the table over the years, they haven't broken 15% in the desktop/workstation market for a couple of decades.
On the other hand... iOS, it's devices, and it's eco-system is like printing money. In fact, they may have enough in a couple of years from iOS alone to BUY GREECE! Think about that.
Quote:
Apple defenders: step back from the tree you are hugging and have a look at the forest!
I'm an unashamed APPL stock holder... and I'm still hugging the tree AND looking around that huge trunk, at the forest. What do I see? Creative pros in all industries, yelling, screaming, tearing their hair out... when the writing has been on the wall for some time. More importantly, the money is IN THE BANK! Apple's own bank, which they add to by obscene amounts daily, without touching what's already there.... and most importantly to them, "creative pro purchases" add up to taxi change and marketing bullet-points at best.
Having pro-grade software and hardware, catering to the techies, adding specs, has gotten Apple NOWHERE!
Serving 3 square iOS meals (iPod, iPhone, iPad) with all of the accoutrements, has made Apple in 4 short years King of the Tech Kitchen. OK. So it's consumer... or even Pro-sumer. You think they're freaking over that? No. They're happy to be showing the world the recipe to success. (Period). And "pros" be damned.
Now go catch that Avid or Adobe train. It's SO much nicer.... NOT! Truth is that ALL creative pro software has been in the toilet for the last 5 years, and I don't see anyone with the money, balls, or both to change that sad fact.
PS. How funny that Macromedia initially created FCP, as well as FreeHand, which got killed by Adobe, and Flash, which will die at Adobe's hands. Must have been quite a few geniuses at that old company, never to be repeated again. Or were their coding practices so horrible, that no one can truly update the stuff, and it all needs rewrites? Just Curious
If it isn't obvious yet, "traditional" anything is over in this Post-PC world some of you are being dragged kicking and screaming into.
Printing was the first to go, with the music industry on it's heels.
Up next:
Publishing
Cable
Network TV
Movie
Game console
When I say go.. I mean transitioning from "traditional", to flexible and social networked created "channels" of interest.
Anybody else catch the fact that the iPhone 4 became the most popular camera on Flickr? iPhone5 will pick up where that left off. Hows Nikon and it's "pro" users feel about that?
Newspapers and mags? Flipbook and Travlr have a much more future-proof system. Reeder too. How do all those Journalist majors see their future?
YouTube anyone? Most popular "channel" on the planet. With at the moment, a hell of a lot of grainy, P-poor videos. Can iDevices do better... today? You bet. Export rough cut from iPhone, to iPad, then to FCPX, then to YouYube, CNN, FaceBook... or the iCloud. Uh oh. What could happen next?
See where I'm going with this?
Post-PC and putting the pieces together is what Apple is focused on with the next generation of users. You guys/gals with mice, keyboards, collaborative "work-flows" (please!), "trucks"... pack it up. Move over. The New kids are coming down the street on a jet-packed skateboard, and yes, even I feel like an old fart some days, and have to move over. Or not.
Maybe join them and show them some neat tricks from the Ol' Days... have fun!
<<<<<ding!>>>>> Oh I'm back. Hey! That was a nasty trick Dick A.!... but I'm with ya
***************
PS. regarding changing industries comment above: Music. I read a nice piece at the NYT after the David Pogue article, about how the music business has changed... and continues to do so. Hats off to "old school" artists like Bork, that are embracing and facilitating change. I'm not so much a fan of her music, but her creativity is tops, and how she's reinventing her music to match the times, by including an App for each song, is pretty down-right cool. She gets it! Transition or be left behind. That's what "creative" and artistic people are supposed to do, rather than moan about the past.
As I am not a video pro I may be talking out of turn here but I never really understood why beyond the year 2000 Macs had a reputation as a pro video system...PCs always had more powerful tools than FCP like Avid (which is also on the Mac) and always had better hardware specs than a MacPro/PowerMac of the same cost...
Sure its not the sexy apple software but who cares, Avid would kick FCP X all over the place on the high end and arguably Premeire + after effects + Photoshop in the cs5 looks like a reasonable deal compared to FCPX+Motiom+Comressor+Photoshop on the mid market level.
There is absolutely no defense for this product other than it's for the consumer market. Which means it really should be an upgrade for iMovie.
Apple for a while now has chosen the consumer path...it was painfully obvious when they stopped offering matte displays.
The door is now open for another company to step up.
Prediction: now that we have Thunderbolt, Apple will claim that that is all the expandability that is needed...Todays Mac Pro Models are Apples last towers...they are gonna sell laptops imacs and iphones here on out.
Windows has always been an option. I cannot think of many people who suddenly want to go to Windows simply because of FCP X.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
With Premiere and Avid also being available for Windows, some of these guys now face the question of whether they stay on the Mac at all. Especially if they are not the ones making the purchasing decisions.
But that's our point. Yes you are correct it is obviously a V1 program, but who would have expected One to have followed Seven?
No one expected it, but here we stand. In that reality you have to do what you have to do.
Quote:
BTW it's not moral outrage either. I think some of us are just disappointed by the apparent misdirection on behalf of Apple. No other software manufacturer would ever attempt this sort of thing so "arrogantly". Although I don't want to imply any wrong doing by Apple here either.
It was unexpected but why are people so surprised. Has Apple not demonstrated over and over again a fearlessness of suddenly killing a successful product because they feel they have something even better.
Apple does not have a history of making slow transitions to something new. They outright kill and stop supporting something to force everyone to move over to the new thing.
Quote:
Honestly it's the industries fault for falling in love with a consumer company. And sure most of us will happily return to using Avid again.
I think only "old" people would look forward to moving back to Avid.
Honestly I think Avid is looking at all of this with nervous curiosity. They know the people running Apple are not stupid. I guarantee you Avid is extremely curious about what is about to come next.
Quote:
It's not MY personal computer, it's a workstation and it WORKS every bit as good (if not better at some things; including 3D) than the equivalent mac.
Just out of curiosity what about Windows is inherently better at 3D?
Quote:
The remaining question is how long will Apple "freeze" FCP with the current features.
Apple has already said that updates for FCP will be more frequent than in the past.
Quote:
The only thing that has me convinced it's a prosumer app is the $300 price tag. That doesn't jive well with a "feature rich and robust application. So I'm seeing a murky Avid in the distant horizon.
Are you saying their has to be a price limit to be a Pro app?
I came to FCP from Avid Media Composer. While I still prefer Avid, I am getting used to FCP and all its foibles. Now comes this weird FCP-X which looks like a hybrid of consumer and pro interfaces. The fact that it cannot interface with 3rd party hardware and spit out EDL/OMF files is a serious matter. We import tape footage and digital files. This is important to any pro facility and should have been the number one feature in this new FCP product. The melding of professional and consumer software is not a good idea. Professional editors need solid tools and a fast, accurate interface. That is why I might go for the Avid 5.5 Media Composer. At least Avid remains dedicated to the professional editor.
Now I KNOW you've got to be pulling our legs... right...?
Since when has Apple - IN IT'S HISTORY - EVER showed "all" of the features of an app, OS or hardware...???
At every World Wide Developer Conference. The point of these software introductions is to show software developers what to support when new software becomes available. Its rare that Apple previews the major features of new software then suddenly has a new surprise feature when the software launches. The point of the software preview is to show what it does and what to support.
Quote:
I watched that NAB thing and they were showing "HIGHLIGHTS" of what was to come... it was a "SNEAK PREVIEW"... not an all-encompassing list.
And as it turns out what they showed at NAB is exactly what FCP X is. What a surprise!
You assumed it would do more than what Apple previewed. Apple never explicitly said it did anymore than what they showed. So now you are disappointed that your assumption of what Apple never said has not been met.
What type of logic is that?
Quote:
I now realize that you are set in your mentality, and that's fine. After that statement, I realize I will have better luck teaching my dog to change a transmission than I will getting you to understand what "all the fuss is about"... so never mind. You win. We're wrong... we should drink whatever Kool-Ade is doled out to us. Done!
I feel like my statement is saying that I don't make assumptions based on what I want. I'm living in the reality of what exists. You are right - you will do better at training your dog to live in its own reality of assumptions than you can train me.
Yes of course there is a lot more to the story of what is going on in the development of FCP X.
It'll be interesting to see the reactions once Apple reveals its larger plan. I imagine some will back pedal others will take credit for forcing Apple to improve FCP X.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog
I read on another forum the suggestion that FCP X might in essence be a development tool. In that, people looked at the underpinnings and saw not only hooks for XML but also for Python scripting. This could make it very enticing for third parties to build plug-ins and companion apps that integrate really well. Not only offering missing features, but new ones as well..
Remember when the iPhone first came out. People complained about what it could not do. Did Apple scramble to add those features simply because people complained. Or has Apple been systematically and methodically adding features over time?
People complained about MMS and copy/paste from the beginning. Apple did not add those features until two years after the launch of the original iPhone. Was that because of people complaining or was that because Apple felt they those features were ready?
People have been complaining about pop up notifications for years. Apple is just now providing a better notifications UI four years after the launch of the first iPhone. Is this simply because people complained. Or because Apple feels the feature is ready?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar
First people say "Send feedback because Apple listens." But when Apple provides features that people have been demanding, it's because "Apple was planning to do it anyway." So which is it?
I feel like my statement is saying that I don't make assumptions based on what I want. I'm living in the reality of what exists. You are right - you will do better at training your dog to live in its own reality of assumptions than you can train me.
FYI - My apologies... I know my comment was a bit immature and sarcastic. I do not wish to resort to negativity like that.
Comments
So is the complaint really that to be PRO you might have to spend some PRO dollars again after making do on the cheap for a decade.
No I don't think that is it. The problem is that FCP created the concept of cheap, quality editing. And now that idea has rippled (ooh edit pun!) through the industry to the point that clients more and more don't want to pay fair rates for much of anything. The agency clients all have cost consultants who basically dictate what can be paid for a job. The agency gets less, the production company gets less and the editorial shop gets less. All because some bean counter doof thinks he knows what everything costs. And let me tell you, they don't. GSD&M voluntarily resigned BMW because the BMW cost consultants made it very difficult for the agency to make a decent profit. We had a hell of a time bidding jobs for BMW because they absolutely, under no circumstances would allow overages. If a job went south and ran over - too bad, you have to eat it. Even if it was BMW who made the last minute changes.
So after ten years of editing on the cheap, things have really started to unravel. Doesn't matter how much your edit software/hardware costs. People don't want to pay fair rates. And that is why no one really want to change edit horses midstream.
I cannot believe that Apple put all this effort into what some call iMovie Pro and walk away from their hard won FCS "Pro" clients.
This is good stuff!
DA,
Honestly I hadn't thought about the component aspect and that's intriguing because it does mirror what Avid has been doing with their warez. And you're right; Apple aren't stupid, but it would be stupid if they built a gimped shell around the engine you describe. Thanks for the info and sorry I edited you post for brevity.
With the axe of the Xserve, Xserve RAID (to a lesser degree) and Shake and no mention of Final Cut Server or Color, this actually concerns me greatly.
When you say it like that!
it is a little concerning, but I have a thought below...
Considering that FCP X can import iMovie projects but not Final Cut Pro 7 projects, the "iMovie Pro" designation seems somewhat appropriate.
That is peculiar, but it also is beginning to make sense.
Let's assume it's "obvious" that the new FCPX is really a rebuild of iMove and that perhaps (can anyone confirm) iMovie was Apple's own effort at an NLE. Anyway, they went the consumer route with iMovie.) FCP was built upon Macromedia DNA.
Is it possible that the big disagreement (the FCP firings) was because they decided to ditch the "hacked together" (only imagining how it would be described worst case) Macromedia DNA in favor of Apple's iMovie engine? or I guess more accurately Apple's "skunkworks" iMovie engine?
In other words; could they have been so impressed with a new iMovie engine (their own engine with everything tuned to the OS with GCD, OCL OGL etc) that the questioned why would they not use it in FCP?
FCP was going to need a rewrite if it was going to ever be a very efficient program. We all knew that, And I could see two teams setting out to improve their products. One product was tuned for efficiency (consumer machines are notoriously underpowered) and had no constraints because it was a consumer product after-all, efficiency was easily more important that legacy or industry conventions and the other was about extensibility of features, but because of the architecture limited to what it could do as an engine. When the results came in, the team leader said "ya know what? our code (the iMovie code) is so much better, why aren't we using it in our pro App. F_K the old code". Of course the legacy team freaks out and leaves.
Does anyone have any clues to support or oppose my thoughts?
There is absolutely no defense for this product other than it's for the consumer market. Which means it really should be an upgrade for iMovie.
Apple for a while now has chosen the consumer path...it was painfully obvious when they stopped offering matte displays.
The door is now open for another company to step up.
For $400 for the Suite you know it's not going to be Avid stepping up and Adobe probably doesn't want to deliver a comparable or superior product for the same money.
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/specs/
4K resolution support
23.976-60 fps support
5.1 surround
bunch of codec support
4:4:4 ProRes
You and I both know this isn't for consumers. Matte are no indication of Professional status.
Right now I'm working on a small CG clip and I make the edit in FCX. As often is the case I did the edit using an early version of the footage. Now I have all the footage updated (small things that don't matter to the course of the action) but I can't find a way to replace the clips in FCX and keep all the edit work. I even tried to replace the footage on HDD same name and even same length but FCX doesn't recognize the new footage.
Any idea?
Thanks
No I don't think that is it. The problem is that FCP created the concept of cheap, quality editing. And now that idea has rippled (ooh edit pun!) through the industry to the point that clients more and more don't want to pay fair rates for much of anything. The agency clients all have cost consultants who basically dictate what can be paid for a job. The agency gets less, the production company gets less and the editorial shop gets less. All because some bean counter doof thinks he knows what everything costs. And let me tell you, they don't. GSD&M voluntarily resigned BMW because the BMW cost consultants made it very difficult for the agency to make a decent profit. We had a hell of a time bidding jobs for BMW because they absolutely, under no circumstances would allow overages. If a job went south and ran over - too bad, you have to eat it. Even if it was BMW who made the last minute changes.
So after ten years of editing on the cheap, things have really started to unravel. Doesn't matter how much your edit software/hardware costs. People don't want to pay fair rates. And that is why no one really want to change edit horses midstream.
Unfortunately... welcome to the party
I've been living through this unraveling for the last 10 years in the print and publishing end of the ad industry. My previous posts to this thread have said as much, with some suggestions. None of which truly alleviates the painful transition, second-guessing, re-defining, frustration, and assorted other ill effects of realizing that your professional career is taking a turn for the worse, and you may have difficulties surviving.
In hindsight, my initial posts (yesterday) pointing out the need to change and evolve with the market and tech advances, were probably a personal attempt to allay my own personal fears of where the professional creative market is going (has gone?), regardless of the area of expertise.
Get ready for this, and it's not pretty: those in the film industry will start to get projects that were "created" by some kid in marketing, or the secretary, or even the sales dude... and you'll be responsible for trying to make it "professional".
The pain comes when the "rep" handing over the job says, "we did all of the work for you, so I expect a really good and solid quote for the finished project". So you do that.
You realize after opening the data, that you practically have to rebuild the whole thing... and then once you get past this mess... "Project dude" calls with changes... not once, but half a dozen times.
You faithfully let him/her know after the 3rd time, this is running into some serious over-charges, where you're promptly put into place, with the retort, "We agreed on a price... I consider this value-added service, and if you don't want to continue, hand the files over and we'll take it somewhere else". At which time you reconsider, because the repercussions within your tight industry could be even more fatal than taking a loss on a single project.
Sad to say... the above scenario repeats itself daily, until it IS your daily business.
I'm an optimist, or try to be. I'm interested in this thread and topic because the repercussions involve all of us "pros" no matter what we do. We've hung our hats proudly on the stand where we slapped those free Apple stickers, and Apple has gained immensely from our personal marketing clout and word-of-mouth propaganda, as in, "You do know that your favorite show/movie/magazine is all produced on Macs, don't you?" It would be truly, TRULY, sad to have to go back to a Winbox (no free stickers even!) so that we could have PRO-grade software.... or even a workstation, if the rumors are true that this MacPro update will be the last.
My personal optimism and belief that Apple knows what they're doing... and most of all... where they are going with all of this, keeps me from going into hysterics as some of the other posters have done here and across the blogosphere. Yup. Apple-Fan #1
@Dick Applebaum -- as always, some great posts and info. Kudos to ya for "Diggin' in the Dirt"... as some detractors would call FCPX.
@TenoBell -- hmurchison -- and a couple of others
I'm thinking better than the current "plug-in" architecture for pro-apps, is finally, "modular" and truly scriptable software.
This was a promise way back when (late 90's?) by assorted developers across the creative software industry. Could be that Apple is doing this, or similar starting with FCPX as the base.
PS. I think that the pros should have been a little bit more suspicious when the final price for all "pro" apps was only $400.
The day CS5 is only $400,- full-license, not upgrade... means:
a) they are dead, or dying slowly and having Flash attacks (serves 'em right!),
b) it's not what we think it is, and they left out features and software (hopefully Flash, but i think they rebuilt Photoshop using AIR and Flex....grrrr!)
c) Apple bought them, and since FCPX is successful after the initial fallout, they do the same for other creative software.
d) I'm delusional, dreaming, and having "flash-back" problems of my own
http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/...nal-cut-pro-x/
"The Bottom Line: Apple has followed the typical Apple sequence: (1) throw out something that’s popular and comfortable but increasingly ancient, (2) replace it with something that’s slick and modern and forward-looking and incomplete, (3) spend another year finishing it up, restoring missing pieces."
Sure, Apple does this from time-to-time in the consumer space, but by no means is it a pattern of what they do. When they went Intel they made sure Rosetta was there. When they went 64-bit they made sure there was 32-bit backward compatibility. When they threw out the optical drive from the MacBook Air there was Remote Install through WiFi from a PC even, on top of there being an external optical drive. The iPhone and iPad are perhaps examples of what he talks about but these were re-imaginings of entire product categories.
To think that Pogue's "Bottom Line" will be Apple's modus operandi for pro offerings in the future... is scary.
2 years for professional software that's "incomplete by design" with another year to "finish up and restore missing pieces" sounds like something from Google, not Apple.
Finally, Pogue's listing of responses from Apple seem to mostly be "Don't worry, we're working on that..." or "Yeah, we will restore that" or "Buy this $200 to upgrade plug-in". Sounds suspiciously like PR damage control.
Of course, in a year perhaps most of the issues will be sorted out and we'll look back on this thread and chuckle. But for now, it is what it is.
... Im really excited about some of the new features in FCPX. Secondary color correction looks great for when you just dont have time to do a round trip to Color, as does the new text features that will negate the need to use Motion for small items, saving significant time. Im just really apprehensive about some of the features that are missing and essential to a typical workflow.
Your arguments seems reasonable, your not 'all negative' and I understand your concern because the tool is essential for your work.
I am a software guy myself and edit only occasionally because my wife needs special things for the short movies she makes so my focus is a little different. But from a software development view it's clear to me that FCPX is a radical redesign from the ground up, and like OS X (compared to OS 9) completely unrelated to the previous product.
At the start a lot of OS 9 users didn't see 'the big picture' and complained about almost everything. But look at OS X now, it took a few iterations but it's by far the best OS to use and gaining traction while I write.
Apple is very good at writing new software and I am sure FCPX has the same sort of future OS X has.
But that doesn't mean that info from users in the field isn't essential in building a better product. I have noticed recently that Apple really does listen because some issues I had with iMovie were solved quickly and had almost the same description I entered in my feedback report.
You should do the same. I am sure they listen, but of course a positive reasonable argument works better ' than an Apple let me down' all negative tone.
J.
Come on, if MicroSoft released a new version of Excel that didn't open previous versions of Excel, would anyone defend them? No way! There would be massive criticism. So why would anyone defend Apple doing similar.
And the people saying it is a 1.0 release, you're just playing semantics. Yes the application has been written anew from the ground up, but that is an under the hood thing. The final product is meant to be an update to previous functionality.
If you write something from scratch and the final functionality doesn't resemble the functionality of a previous application, you give the new thing a totally new name. Again, if MicroSoft released a brand new set of code called Excel Amplify and it couldn't do pivot tables, sum columns or open Excel files, people would justifiably ask what was going on.
I also don't like the sound of the trouble the professionals are having when it comes to storing their work on remote drives. It seems a symptom of the whole "demoting the mac" thing. I keep hearing Jobs saying "it's in the App".
I like controlling my files and folders, but it sounds like Apple is moving towards an approach where you wont get to do that at all, even in something that is supposed to support professional video editing!
I reckon the Apple leadership should take a 6 week holiday from the world of iOS, iDevice, iCloud, and get back into the headspace of the tinkering teenager building their own machine from a kit. There is much advantage to be found keeping that side of things part of the ethos.
Apple defenders: step back from the tree you are hugging and have a look at the forest!
<clip>
I reckon the Apple leadership should take a 6 week holiday from the world of iOS, iDevice, iCloud, and get back into the headspace of the tinkering teenager building their own machine from a kit. There is much advantage to be found keeping that side of things part of the ethos.
Gotta prove that as a company on the bottom line, sorry to say. iOS is Apple's present and future... again, sorry to say. As an Apple fan, you still can't get around the sorry fact that with all of the "pro" advantages that Apple has brought to the table over the years, they haven't broken 15% in the desktop/workstation market for a couple of decades.
On the other hand... iOS, it's devices, and it's eco-system is like printing money. In fact, they may have enough in a couple of years from iOS alone to BUY GREECE! Think about that.
Apple defenders: step back from the tree you are hugging and have a look at the forest!
I'm an unashamed APPL stock holder... and I'm still hugging the tree AND looking around that huge trunk, at the forest. What do I see? Creative pros in all industries, yelling, screaming, tearing their hair out... when the writing has been on the wall for some time. More importantly, the money is IN THE BANK! Apple's own bank, which they add to by obscene amounts daily, without touching what's already there.... and most importantly to them, "creative pro purchases" add up to taxi change and marketing bullet-points at best.
Having pro-grade software and hardware, catering to the techies, adding specs, has gotten Apple NOWHERE!
Serving 3 square iOS meals (iPod, iPhone, iPad) with all of the accoutrements, has made Apple in 4 short years King of the Tech Kitchen. OK. So it's consumer... or even Pro-sumer. You think they're freaking over that? No. They're happy to be showing the world the recipe to success. (Period). And "pros" be damned.
Now go catch that Avid or Adobe train. It's SO much nicer.... NOT! Truth is that ALL creative pro software has been in the toilet for the last 5 years, and I don't see anyone with the money, balls, or both to change that sad fact.
PS. How funny that Macromedia initially created FCP, as well as FreeHand, which got killed by Adobe, and Flash, which will die at Adobe's hands. Must have been quite a few geniuses at that old company, never to be repeated again. Or were their coding practices so horrible, that no one can truly update the stuff, and it all needs rewrites? Just Curious
If it isn't obvious yet, "traditional" anything is over in this Post-PC world some of you are being dragged kicking and screaming into.
Printing was the first to go, with the music industry on it's heels.
Up next:
Publishing
Cable
Network TV
Movie
Game console
When I say go.. I mean transitioning from "traditional", to flexible and social networked created "channels" of interest.
Anybody else catch the fact that the iPhone 4 became the most popular camera on Flickr? iPhone5 will pick up where that left off. Hows Nikon and it's "pro" users feel about that?
Newspapers and mags? Flipbook and Travlr have a much more future-proof system. Reeder too. How do all those Journalist majors see their future?
YouTube anyone? Most popular "channel" on the planet. With at the moment, a hell of a lot of grainy, P-poor videos. Can iDevices do better... today? You bet. Export rough cut from iPhone, to iPad, then to FCPX, then to YouYube, CNN, FaceBook... or the iCloud. Uh oh. What could happen next?
See where I'm going with this?
Post-PC and putting the pieces together is what Apple is focused on with the next generation of users. You guys/gals with mice, keyboards, collaborative "work-flows" (please!), "trucks"... pack it up. Move over. The New kids are coming down the street on a jet-packed skateboard, and yes, even I feel like an old fart some days, and have to move over. Or not.
Maybe join them and show them some neat tricks from the Ol' Days... have fun!
<<<<<ding!>>>>> Oh I'm back. Hey! That was a nasty trick Dick A.!... but I'm with ya
***************
PS. regarding changing industries comment above: Music. I read a nice piece at the NYT after the David Pogue article, about how the music business has changed... and continues to do so. Hats off to "old school" artists like Bork, that are embracing and facilitating change. I'm not so much a fan of her music, but her creativity is tops, and how she's reinventing her music to match the times, by including an App for each song, is pretty down-right cool. She gets it! Transition or be left behind. That's what "creative" and artistic people are supposed to do, rather than moan about the past.
Sure its not the sexy apple software but who cares, Avid would kick FCP X all over the place on the high end and arguably Premeire + after effects + Photoshop in the cs5 looks like a reasonable deal compared to FCPX+Motiom+Comressor+Photoshop on the mid market level.
There is absolutely no defense for this product other than it's for the consumer market. Which means it really should be an upgrade for iMovie.
Apple for a while now has chosen the consumer path...it was painfully obvious when they stopped offering matte displays.
The door is now open for another company to step up.
Prediction: now that we have Thunderbolt, Apple will claim that that is all the expandability that is needed...Todays Mac Pro Models are Apples last towers...they are gonna sell laptops imacs and iphones here on out.
Even the writers on Conan's show are irritated with it:
http://youtu.be/sRzLP0FJ82I
Awesome.
With Premiere and Avid also being available for Windows, some of these guys now face the question of whether they stay on the Mac at all. Especially if they are not the ones making the purchasing decisions.
But that's our point. Yes you are correct it is obviously a V1 program, but who would have expected One to have followed Seven?
No one expected it, but here we stand. In that reality you have to do what you have to do.
BTW it's not moral outrage either. I think some of us are just disappointed by the apparent misdirection on behalf of Apple. No other software manufacturer would ever attempt this sort of thing so "arrogantly". Although I don't want to imply any wrong doing by Apple here either.
It was unexpected but why are people so surprised. Has Apple not demonstrated over and over again a fearlessness of suddenly killing a successful product because they feel they have something even better.
Apple does not have a history of making slow transitions to something new. They outright kill and stop supporting something to force everyone to move over to the new thing.
Honestly it's the industries fault for falling in love with a consumer company. And sure most of us will happily return to using Avid again.
I think only "old" people would look forward to moving back to Avid.
Honestly I think Avid is looking at all of this with nervous curiosity. They know the people running Apple are not stupid. I guarantee you Avid is extremely curious about what is about to come next.
It's not MY personal computer, it's a workstation and it WORKS every bit as good (if not better at some things; including 3D) than the equivalent mac.
Just out of curiosity what about Windows is inherently better at 3D?
The remaining question is how long will Apple "freeze" FCP with the current features.
Apple has already said that updates for FCP will be more frequent than in the past.
The only thing that has me convinced it's a prosumer app is the $300 price tag. That doesn't jive well with a "feature rich and robust application. So I'm seeing a murky Avid in the distant horizon.
Are you saying their has to be a price limit to be a Pro app?
Now I KNOW you've got to be pulling our legs... right...?
Since when has Apple - IN IT'S HISTORY - EVER showed "all" of the features of an app, OS or hardware...???
At every World Wide Developer Conference. The point of these software introductions is to show software developers what to support when new software becomes available. Its rare that Apple previews the major features of new software then suddenly has a new surprise feature when the software launches. The point of the software preview is to show what it does and what to support.
I watched that NAB thing and they were showing "HIGHLIGHTS" of what was to come... it was a "SNEAK PREVIEW"... not an all-encompassing list.
And as it turns out what they showed at NAB is exactly what FCP X is. What a surprise!
You assumed it would do more than what Apple previewed. Apple never explicitly said it did anymore than what they showed. So now you are disappointed that your assumption of what Apple never said has not been met.
What type of logic is that?
I now realize that you are set in your mentality, and that's fine. After that statement, I realize I will have better luck teaching my dog to change a transmission than I will getting you to understand what "all the fuss is about"... so never mind. You win. We're wrong... we should drink whatever Kool-Ade is doled out to us. Done!
I feel like my statement is saying that I don't make assumptions based on what I want. I'm living in the reality of what exists. You are right - you will do better at training your dog to live in its own reality of assumptions than you can train me.
It'll be interesting to see the reactions once Apple reveals its larger plan. I imagine some will back pedal others will take credit for forcing Apple to improve FCP X.
I read on another forum the suggestion that FCP X might in essence be a development tool. In that, people looked at the underpinnings and saw not only hooks for XML but also for Python scripting. This could make it very enticing for third parties to build plug-ins and companion apps that integrate really well. Not only offering missing features, but new ones as well..
People complained about MMS and copy/paste from the beginning. Apple did not add those features until two years after the launch of the original iPhone. Was that because of people complaining or was that because Apple felt they those features were ready?
People have been complaining about pop up notifications for years. Apple is just now providing a better notifications UI four years after the launch of the first iPhone. Is this simply because people complained. Or because Apple feels the feature is ready?
First people say "Send feedback because Apple listens." But when Apple provides features that people have been demanding, it's because "Apple was planning to do it anyway." So which is it?
I feel like my statement is saying that I don't make assumptions based on what I want. I'm living in the reality of what exists. You are right - you will do better at training your dog to live in its own reality of assumptions than you can train me.
FYI - My apologies... I know my comment was a bit immature and sarcastic. I do not wish to resort to negativity like that.