Given its success, P2 is hardly some disparate codec. But try playing h264 HD off a canon camera in FCP7 vs PPro5.5 and has to be transcoded to ProRes using a utility like Grinder, to play properly on FCP. In PP you copy it over and edit without having to transcode (which can bring in generational loss) is a huge time saver.
Yes, there are a long list of codecs that were very popular at one point in time and became less so, because something else better came along. That is only inevitable.
I agree being able to play the codec without transcoding is much faster. At the same time I can see that Apple does not want FCP code base to forever be laden with a bunch of codecs.
Quote:
ProRes does well for editing and archiving but it is not an acquisition codec and no current cameras that I know of use it (though I could be wrong on this) for this purpose.
Yes, there are a long list of codecs that were very popular at one point in time and became less so, because something else better came along. That is only inevitable.
I agree being able to play the codec without transcoding is much faster. At the same time I can see that Apple does not want FCP code base to forever be laden with a bunch of codecs.
This camera shoots native Pro Res. Many of the television shows you will see this upcoming Fall were shot with it.
Thanks! Good call. I have actually seen some footage shot by the ALEXA but did not think about the codec it was shot on. It looked beautiful as does the picture of the camera!
Yes, there are a long list of codecs that were very popular at one point in time and became less so, because something else better came along. That is only inevitable.
I agree being able to play the codec without transcoding is much faster. At the same time I can see that Apple does not want FCP code base to forever be laden with a bunch of codecs.
Compared with the number of normal, every-day consumers, pretty much nobody uses equipment like that.
Apple will go for the consumer sweet spot in every market. They don't care about niche markets.
I think you grabbed the wrong end of that stick. FCP X is (obviously) fine with ProRes (up to 4K and 4444). Native editing in quite a few formats too, including h264 from so-called prosumer DSLR (painful with old Final Cut).
Compared with the number of normal, every-day consumers, pretty much nobody uses equipment like that.
Apple will go for the consumer sweet spot in every market. They don't care about niche markets.
Niche markets attract niche companies .... Apple is not a niche company ... but that does not, in any way, preclude it from developing a service/product that would also be attractive to a niche market. FCP X may/may not fall into that category. I think we'll have to wait awhile to see how this sorts itself out. As always the marketplace will be "the decider".
The consumer space is especially terrible about codecs. Camera manufacturers come up with all types of random codecs for consumer cameras and then abandons them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe
Compared with the number of normal, every-day consumers, pretty much nobody uses equipment like that.
I agree... and what consumer video maker ever aspires to be just a consumer? Very few... and those that do will be satisfied by iMovie. Every consumer that aspires to be a Pro one day will be recommended Premiere or Avid over FCPX now.
Every film school is going to stop teaching FCP because it's now being considered a dead end for students who one day want a place in the industry.
There is some real genius in FCPX but it has been poorly branded, poorly marketed and Apple has given very little communication to it's established customers about what direction it is taking FCP.
What total bullshit! FCP X is in fact an entirely new paradigm in video editing with extremely powerful and innovative features, and as a v1 iteration has an extremely bright future. The "missing" features will quickly be added. Yes, Apple did a poor job of launching this new product, but the industry still has the old version to use while waiting for the right features in the new one. Further, the biggest single complaint is that it is not backwards compatible. Wake up! You still have the old version to revive and edit your old work / archives. Not a big deal really. Like most of what Apple does, this product is actually going to revolutionize the industry and the non-believers will come around quickly. As to Adobe, they suck just as much as ever. They are a money pit that continuously extorts more money out of their users with overpriced bloatware, and forces their users into expensive upgrades as their older versions can't open docs from newer versions. Meanwhile, Apple will continue to innovate and move the ball forward.
Oops! I guess Adobe does do some things better than Apple. Good. The market speaks, a know-it-all corporation responds. Chalk this up as a tiny win for consumer demand / capitalism.
Nice to see Adobe, who only really exist thanks to Apple in the early days, finally come back and pay serious attention to Macs. It says a lot about Apple's market presence.
I agree 100%. Look back on the history of Apple. We have seen this story many times before .... remember the laughter when iPod was introduced, or Macbook Air (with no optical drive) or the transition from Appleworks to iWorks, iMovie HD to the current iMovie, iPhone, iPad. This is what happens when a company like Apple sees where the industry is going rather than only seeing where the industry is. I was one of the most vocal critics of Apple in the past over some of the things they did .... but their record of being smarter than me, in knowing what was "best for me" .... even before I knew it, has made me have a lot more patience with new Apple decisions .... while I wait for my thinking process to "catch up with Apple".
At least until FCP X gets up to speed and Apple drinks their whole milkshake.
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips
Nice to see Adobe, who only really exist thanks to Apple in the early days, finally come back and pay serious attention to Macs. It says a lot about Apple's market presence.
Hey, Apple -- this would be a really good month to provide the 1st FCPX update -- and get off that .0 release level. (One of the promises of FCPX is that it will be easier to upgrade it more frequently).
Yeah that WOULD be nice. Has anyone heard of any third parties releasing any significant plug-ins or add ons to expand FCPXs capabilities? Seems like there were a number of things promised at it's release, but I haven't seen anything yet.
What total bullshit! FCP X is in fact an entirely new paradigm in video editing with extremely powerful and innovative features, and as a v1 iteration has an extremely bright future. The "missing" features will quickly be added.
I can't tell if you're joking or if you're Larry Jordan in cognito...
This camera shoots native Pro Res. Many of the television shows you will see this upcoming Fall were shot with it.
It also can create ArriRAW files at 3.5k. The ProRes will get the job done for most, but the other file types put it squarely in the high end camp as well.
What total bullshit! FCP X is in fact an entirely new paradigm in video editing with extremely powerful and innovative features, and as a v1 iteration has an extremely bright future.
How does that matter? This is what I said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by theguycalledtom
There is some real genius in FCPX but it has been poorly branded, poorly marketed and Apple has given very little communication to it's established customers about what direction it is taking FCP.
The Apple Newton was revolutionary at the time but Apple poorly communicated the direction it was taking the product and it died on the back of the reputation of its v1.0 product even though later revisions were far superior.
I for one love the new FCPX interface and I'm angry that this product may die because Apple totally stuffed up it's launch. It's getting terrible reviews and according to this article it is possibly flushing market share down the toilet. Apple has a new CEO and he's going to be looking for his own Newton to kill.
How does that matter? This is what I said: There is some real genius in FCPX but it has been poorly branded, poorly marketed and Apple has given very little communication to it's established customers about what direction it is taking FCP.
I can agree with this part.
Quote:
I for one love the new FCPX interface and I'm angry that this product may die because Apple totally stuffed up it's launch. It's getting terrible reviews and according to this article it is possibly flushing market share down the toilet. Apple has a new CEO and he's going to be looking for his own Newton to kill.
This is the part where you get over hyperbolic.
You do notice that Adobe did not post actual sales numbers. Which means that sales of Premiere are nothing to brag about. This could mean they told 95 copies instead of last years 50 copies. I doubt it really means anything.
I'd guarantee that FCP X has far outsold Premiere in this quarter.
It's not ready for everyone yet, but I see the problems of FCPX as more of a mismanagement of customer expectations than a technical one. There's too much great stuff going on in this program for it to be considered a failure by any reasonable person.
Yes but the whingers seem to be anything but reasonable people.
All I can say to the switchers is good riddance and don't let the door slam you on the butt on your way out.
If they want to waste their time on old ways of doing so let them remain dinosaurs... what happened to them again? Oh right they power our cars.
I won't deny FCPX's shortcomings, and people are going to continue to enjoy ragging on it in the near term, but every time I use it I find more really smart thinking at the core of the program.
It's not ready for everyone yet, but I see the problems of FCPX as more of a mismanagement of customer expectations than a technical one. There's too much great stuff going on in this program for it to be considered a failure by any reasonable person.
People will laugh now, but I'm not sure they'll be laughing so hard in a year or two.
Exactly my thoughts. How many of the critics has actually even tried to understand why Apple changed what thy did with FCPX? Final cut is an EDITING app. And EDITING is really efficient, fast and even enjoyable in FCPX. I think they did a remarkable job. Looking forward to seeing it mature.
Adobe basically says: "You're conventional. Let your tools be too."
Apple says: "Conventional editing isn't efficient enough. Let us show you the future."
The shake story though is sad. "Let's buy and kill the cheap amazing post comp app and create a conventional sort of real time messy after effects."
Why did they even buy shake in the first place? No wonder nuke became the natural successor.
I think Apple is afraid of UI's that BENEFIT from being a little complex.
Yeah I know a couple of professional colour graders who have pitched themselves as Color specialists [and used it since it was FinalTouch ] who are pretty bummed that Color seems to have just been dumped.
I think Apple has to come back next NAB with a pretty clear product roadmap, beyond what an FAQ on their website conveys.
Comments
Given its success, P2 is hardly some disparate codec. But try playing h264 HD off a canon camera in FCP7 vs PPro5.5 and has to be transcoded to ProRes using a utility like Grinder, to play properly on FCP. In PP you copy it over and edit without having to transcode (which can bring in generational loss) is a huge time saver.
Yes, there are a long list of codecs that were very popular at one point in time and became less so, because something else better came along. That is only inevitable.
I agree being able to play the codec without transcoding is much faster. At the same time I can see that Apple does not want FCP code base to forever be laden with a bunch of codecs.
ProRes does well for editing and archiving but it is not an acquisition codec and no current cameras that I know of use it (though I could be wrong on this) for this purpose.
Arriflex ALEXA
This camera shoots native Pro Res. Many of the television shows you will see this upcoming Fall were shot with it.
Yes, there are a long list of codecs that were very popular at one point in time and became less so, because something else better came along. That is only inevitable.
I agree being able to play the codec without transcoding is much faster. At the same time I can see that Apple does not want FCP code base to forever be laden with a bunch of codecs.
Arriflex ALEXA
This camera shoots native Pro Res. Many of the television shows you will see this upcoming Fall were shot with it.
Thanks! Good call. I have actually seen some footage shot by the ALEXA but did not think about the codec it was shot on. It looked beautiful as does the picture of the camera!
Yes, there are a long list of codecs that were very popular at one point in time and became less so, because something else better came along. That is only inevitable.
I agree being able to play the codec without transcoding is much faster. At the same time I can see that Apple does not want FCP code base to forever be laden with a bunch of codecs.
Arriflex ALEXA
This camera shoots native Pro Res. Many of the television shows you will see this upcoming Fall were shot with it.
Compared with the number of normal, every-day consumers, pretty much nobody uses equipment like that.
Apple will go for the consumer sweet spot in every market. They don't care about niche markets.
Compared with the number of normal, every-day consumers, pretty much nobody uses equipment like that.
Apple will go for the consumer sweet spot in every market. They don't care about niche markets.
I think you grabbed the wrong end of that stick. FCP X is (obviously) fine with ProRes (up to 4K and 4444). Native editing in quite a few formats too, including h264 from so-called prosumer DSLR (painful with old Final Cut).
Compared with the number of normal, every-day consumers, pretty much nobody uses equipment like that.
Apple will go for the consumer sweet spot in every market. They don't care about niche markets.
Niche markets attract niche companies .... Apple is not a niche company ... but that does not, in any way, preclude it from developing a service/product that would also be attractive to a niche market. FCP X may/may not fall into that category. I think we'll have to wait awhile to see how this sorts itself out. As always the marketplace will be "the decider".
Compared with the number of normal, every-day consumers, pretty much nobody uses equipment like that.
I agree... and what consumer video maker ever aspires to be just a consumer? Very few... and those that do will be satisfied by iMovie. Every consumer that aspires to be a Pro one day will be recommended Premiere or Avid over FCPX now.
Every film school is going to stop teaching FCP because it's now being considered a dead end for students who one day want a place in the industry.
There is some real genius in FCPX but it has been poorly branded, poorly marketed and Apple has given very little communication to it's established customers about what direction it is taking FCP.
What total bullshit! FCP X is in fact an entirely new paradigm in video editing with extremely powerful and innovative features, and as a v1 iteration has an extremely bright future. The "missing" features will quickly be added. Yes, Apple did a poor job of launching this new product, but the industry still has the old version to use while waiting for the right features in the new one. Further, the biggest single complaint is that it is not backwards compatible. Wake up! You still have the old version to revive and edit your old work / archives. Not a big deal really. Like most of what Apple does, this product is actually going to revolutionize the industry and the non-believers will come around quickly. As to Adobe, they suck just as much as ever. They are a money pit that continuously extorts more money out of their users with overpriced bloatware, and forces their users into expensive upgrades as their older versions can't open docs from newer versions. Meanwhile, Apple will continue to innovate and move the ball forward.
Oops! I guess Adobe does do some things better than Apple. Good. The market speaks, a know-it-all corporation responds. Chalk this up as a tiny win for consumer demand / capitalism.
Nice to see Adobe, who only really exist thanks to Apple in the early days, finally come back and pay serious attention to Macs. It says a lot about Apple's market presence.
I agree 100%. Look back on the history of Apple. We have seen this story many times before .... remember the laughter when iPod was introduced, or Macbook Air (with no optical drive) or the transition from Appleworks to iWorks, iMovie HD to the current iMovie, iPhone, iPad. This is what happens when a company like Apple sees where the industry is going rather than only seeing where the industry is. I was one of the most vocal critics of Apple in the past over some of the things they did .... but their record of being smarter than me, in knowing what was "best for me" .... even before I knew it, has made me have a lot more patience with new Apple decisions .... while I wait for my thinking process to "catch up with Apple".
Brilliantly said! Well done!
Nice to see Adobe, who only really exist thanks to Apple in the early days, finally come back and pay serious attention to Macs. It says a lot about Apple's market presence.
Hey, Apple -- this would be a really good month to provide the 1st FCPX update -- and get off that .0 release level. (One of the promises of FCPX is that it will be easier to upgrade it more frequently).
Yeah that WOULD be nice. Has anyone heard of any third parties releasing any significant plug-ins or add ons to expand FCPXs capabilities? Seems like there were a number of things promised at it's release, but I haven't seen anything yet.
What total bullshit! FCP X is in fact an entirely new paradigm in video editing with extremely powerful and innovative features, and as a v1 iteration has an extremely bright future. The "missing" features will quickly be added.
I can't tell if you're joking or if you're Larry Jordan in cognito...
This camera shoots native Pro Res. Many of the television shows you will see this upcoming Fall were shot with it.
It also can create ArriRAW files at 3.5k. The ProRes will get the job done for most, but the other file types put it squarely in the high end camp as well.
What total bullshit! FCP X is in fact an entirely new paradigm in video editing with extremely powerful and innovative features, and as a v1 iteration has an extremely bright future.
How does that matter? This is what I said:
There is some real genius in FCPX but it has been poorly branded, poorly marketed and Apple has given very little communication to it's established customers about what direction it is taking FCP.
The Apple Newton was revolutionary at the time but Apple poorly communicated the direction it was taking the product and it died on the back of the reputation of its v1.0 product even though later revisions were far superior.
I for one love the new FCPX interface and I'm angry that this product may die because Apple totally stuffed up it's launch. It's getting terrible reviews and according to this article it is possibly flushing market share down the toilet. Apple has a new CEO and he's going to be looking for his own Newton to kill.
How does that matter? This is what I said: There is some real genius in FCPX but it has been poorly branded, poorly marketed and Apple has given very little communication to it's established customers about what direction it is taking FCP.
I can agree with this part.
I for one love the new FCPX interface and I'm angry that this product may die because Apple totally stuffed up it's launch. It's getting terrible reviews and according to this article it is possibly flushing market share down the toilet. Apple has a new CEO and he's going to be looking for his own Newton to kill.
This is the part where you get over hyperbolic.
You do notice that Adobe did not post actual sales numbers. Which means that sales of Premiere are nothing to brag about. This could mean they told 95 copies instead of last years 50 copies. I doubt it really means anything.
I'd guarantee that FCP X has far outsold Premiere in this quarter.
It's not ready for everyone yet, but I see the problems of FCPX as more of a mismanagement of customer expectations than a technical one. There's too much great stuff going on in this program for it to be considered a failure by any reasonable person.
Yes but the whingers seem to be anything but reasonable people.
All I can say to the switchers is good riddance and don't let the door slam you on the butt on your way out.
If they want to waste their time on old ways of doing so let them remain dinosaurs... what happened to them again? Oh right they power our cars.
I won't deny FCPX's shortcomings, and people are going to continue to enjoy ragging on it in the near term, but every time I use it I find more really smart thinking at the core of the program.
It's not ready for everyone yet, but I see the problems of FCPX as more of a mismanagement of customer expectations than a technical one. There's too much great stuff going on in this program for it to be considered a failure by any reasonable person.
People will laugh now, but I'm not sure they'll be laughing so hard in a year or two.
Exactly my thoughts. How many of the critics has actually even tried to understand why Apple changed what thy did with FCPX? Final cut is an EDITING app. And EDITING is really efficient, fast and even enjoyable in FCPX. I think they did a remarkable job. Looking forward to seeing it mature.
Adobe basically says: "You're conventional. Let your tools be too."
Apple says: "Conventional editing isn't efficient enough. Let us show you the future."
At least until FCP X gets up to speed and Apple drinks their whole milkshake.
I'm OK with that, it was not meant as a compliment to Adobe
That's what people said about Shake - Apple was coming up with something great (called Phenomenon if memory serves me right).
The shake story though is sad. "Let's buy and kill the cheap amazing post comp app and create a conventional sort of real time messy after effects."
Why did they even buy shake in the first place? No wonder nuke became the natural successor.
I think Apple is afraid of UI's that BENEFIT from being a little complex.
The shake story though is sad. "Let's buy and kill the cheap amazing post comp app and create a conventional sort of real time messy after effects."
Why did they even buy shake in the first place? No wonder nuke became the natural successor.
I think Apple is afraid of UI's that BENEFIT from being a little complex.
Yeah I know a couple of professional colour graders who have pitched themselves as Color specialists [and used it since it was FinalTouch ] who are pretty bummed that Color seems to have just been dumped.
I think Apple has to come back next NAB with a pretty clear product roadmap, beyond what an FAQ on their website conveys.