This is really huge. People who are used to the old way are going to be resistant-- this is to be expected when you have a new product that has been demoed and we haven't even gotten to see the demo. We're all going on a few pictures and text snippets from live blogging.
The iMovie UI is fantastic, if you take an hour or two and play around with it and learn it. This UI is more professional and deeper-- that much is obvious from the screenshots. What I think people confuse for "simplicity" or "lack of depth" is really just good UI organization and usability.
I think Adobe's video editing just died. It isn't really used in the industry and the architecture is ancient and the usability is on the floor. I think Avid is just barely coming back from bankruptcy. I don't think Apple will kill them, but it isn't like they are in the dominant position in the industry. (I think Adobe fans and Avid fans talk like they are dominant, but the numbers really don't support it.. it is just wishful thinking.)
Nobody is making use of these core OS X capabilities-- such as grand central dispatch. They have been shipping for awhile, but why would Avid (or Adobe) rewrite their product that is a decade old? Too many people will complain about he features that are missing in the rewrite.
Only Apple has the guts to do a complete rewrite like this. And because of this, now Only Final Cut is a modern video editor.
All the competition just became obsolete and is going to get increasingly further an further behind FCP in terms of usability.
There's nothing special about broadcast editing. Editing is editing. IF it outputs in the format you need then you can use it... if it is a better editor then it is a better Broadcast TV editor.
And this is a redesigned editor, made to be really efficient for editing.
That's really fantastic news.
I'm sure there are some beloved features that will have to be reimplemented and will be missing for awhile.... but the end result is an immediate productivity boost.
No, they do use GCD but they specified 8 cores max at the event.
That sentence doesn't make sense. GCD doesn't let you pick how many cores, and there's no reason that any code that works with GCD would be limited in the number of cores. That's the point of GCD, it scales up and down with cores and GPUs.
I believe they gave an example saying "it will use all 8 of your cores now"... which is assuming a MacPro with 8 cores, not a limitation.
It would be quite a hack to make GCD limit to 8 cores, and there's no benefit to doing so.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum
I got the impression from in and out audio of the demo thah Randy did there was Color and Motion in the product -- whether those are in-app purchases is another thing.
Seems like they are integrated into the product. There's a titling button in the UI so, livetype is integrated as well.
Quote:
No mention of plugins, I have a few expensive ones -- but they may be obviated by built-in capabilities.
Probably because plugins are not yet supported, but they are going to make the announcements for this at WWDC when they can have sessions and training for plugin authors. No point in mentioning them until they are ready to release an SDK, and WWDC is a good time to do it. Apple just has to ship the App supporting the plugins, and the SDK and plugins can come later....
Quote:
Originally Posted by tfg
Rant --
Looks like the slickest interface ever ... for a mouse-driven editor.
They mentioned that you can do everything with the keyboard.
Quote:
It plays catch-up to most of the rendering/64bit stuff to Adobe,
I just googled adobe premiere mac, and it seems their last version was released in 2002. (Maybe google led me astray.) 64 bit on windows is nothing compared to a real modern Mac OS X application (64 bit or not.) I think Adobe was behind before and is now not even in the same ballpark.
Quote:
I use FCP about 10 hours every day. I am currently cutting 3 different TV shows on it.
What are the shows?
There may be features you've been wanting for year but this is a ground up rewrite. The "missing features" may well be no irrelevant, or made pointless by the new way things are done.
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.metcalf
Oh silly me.
I think this is the replacement for Studio. I think all the features of studio are built in, though they may not be as complete as they were in Studio (though they will get there over time.) Except Soundtrack, though having not yet seen the demo, maybe essentially all of that is in there now as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog
Like super fast RAIDs that will be needed to handle the big multi-k formats.
Yes. We use Final Cut and Compressor mostly. Sometimes we use Color, but since we have a Lustre that doesn't happen much. Everything else is never used. I mean never.
I think Apple's answer is that they've built in Color and Compressor, they are now part of the apps workflow, and that if you want to use Lustre, eventually Lustre will be able to integrate with the FCPX workflow as a plugin.
Maybe it won't be appropriate for you to upgrade right away, but I don't think it will be too long. (I hope I'm not wrong about the plugin architecture, if they drop the ball there, that's the biggest risk to me.)
Ditto that. FCX has been left behind, but with the new FCP-X at only $300, they'd be hard pressed to keep FCX in any form....
Dunno - with Aperture going for under $100 on the App Store, it's possible FCX will stick around at a similar price point.
I suspect the other posts suggesting it's only Pro (not Studio) being offered at this price. Can you imagine the download for Studio? To say nothing of the upgrades if the process for XCode is any indication (the latest 4.0.1 patch required a full 4+GB download).
Its called Premiere Pro now. It has been completely rewritten to take advantage of 64 bit on a Mac. But it does not use Core API's, Open CL, or GCD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessi
I just googled adobe premiere mac, and it seems their last version was released in 2002. (Maybe google led me astray.) 64 bit on windows is nothing compared to a real modern Mac OS X application (64 bit or not.) I think Adobe was behind before and is now not even in the same ballpark.
I know this isn't a big deal, but this is definitely an unusual way for apple to announce a big product. As I write this, there isn't a peep on the Apple site about Final Cut Pro X.
We can all come up with a bunch of reasons why this is so, but you have to admit, this is different.
I know; I get it:
- FCP X is just for pros and pros are hardcore
- FCP X is not released yet and not really ready yet
- The venue was exactly the Moscone Center
- They don't want to discourage sales of existing version or FC Express
BUT STILL, I think everyone on this thread knows that when Apple normally announce an upcoming operating system set to be released months or years away, they always have a web page dedicated to the new upcoming release in addition to their many pages dedicated to the existing version that they are still selling.
The apple site usually goes live with the new materials almost instantly after the keynote.
Is this sloppiness or calculated? Is this a symptom of Apple working without Steve Jobs?
I know this isn't a big deal, but this is definitely an unusual way for apple to announce a big product. As I write this, there isn't a peep on the Apple site about Final Cut Pro X.
We can all come up with a bunch of reasons why this is so, but you have to admit, this is different.
I know; I get it:
- FCP X is just for pros and pros are hardcore
- FCP X is not released yet and not really ready yet
- The venue was exactly the Moscone Center
- They don't want to discourage sales of existing version or FC Express
BUT STILL, I think everyone on this thread knows that when Apple normally announce an upcoming operating system set to be released months or years away, they always have a web page dedicated to the new upcoming release in addition to their many pages dedicated to the existing version that they are still selling.
The apple site usually goes live with the new materials almost instantly after the keynote.
Is this sloppiness or calculated? Is this a symptom of Apple working without Steve Jobs?
It's weird.
It's probably because it's night time and the Web Team are at home with their families.
I know this isn't a big deal, but this is definitely an unusual way for apple to announce a big product. As I write this, there isn't a peep on the Apple site about Final Cut Pro X.
We can all come up with a bunch of reasons why this is so, but you have to admit, this is different.
I know; I get it:
- FCP X is just for pros and pros are hardcore
- FCP X is not released yet and not really ready yet
- The venue was exactly the Moscone Center
- They don't want to discourage sales of existing version or FC Express
.
The place was in Las Vegas, this was an event that goes along with NAB that is the worlds largest broadcast show.
Then maybe you didn't noticed that for at least the last year Apple is trying to go away from stablished dates to release products or introduce them. Some we had to wait longer and others sooner. They axed completely macworld since everyone was waiting for the traditional event and the new stuff unveiled there.
Presenting FCP X at the Supermeet it doesn't only makes sense.. in my opinion pays tribute to those that used the software and supported the platform for all these years. It is a good thing, this FCPX is for them.
I know this isn't a big deal, but this is definitely an unusual way for apple to announce a big product. As I write this, there isn't a peep on the Apple site about Final Cut Pro X.
It's weird.
I'm with you. I'd expect something to be online immediately or soon to coincide with the release for all of us who can't be there. I hope they put up a video soon, I want to see the presentation. The liveblogging, summaries and photos are just making it worse!
There's a titling button in the UI so, livetype is integrated as well.
I so hope this is true. Final Cut has always sucked for adding even the simplest type. At the very least, we should FINALLY have access to all of our fonts and styles, I would hope.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessi
I think this is the replacement for Studio. I think all the features of studio are built in, though they may not be as complete as they were in Studio (though they will get there over time.) Except Soundtrack, though having not yet seen the demo, maybe essentially all of that is in there now as well.
Speaking of which, if there is a full Final Cut Studio X being released, I hope Apple offers the ability to upgrade the full studio for $299 and not have to pay a fresh price for every piece of the package, which would end up making the full studio a costlier upgrade than the current version.
I know this isn't a big deal, but this is definitely an unusual way for apple to announce a big product. As I write this, there isn't a peep on the Apple site about Final Cut Pro X.
We can all come up with a bunch of reasons why this is so, but you have to admit, this is different.
A little different than their consumer focused product launches, but it isn't all that different than some NAB announcements.
The very first version of Final Cut Pro was announced at NAB in 1999. And actually, before FCP was announced, it was showcased in private demos at NAB in 1998.
If anything, announcing it at Supermeet was sort of sentimental. It was born at NAB and now reborn. On top of that, they get to introduce a whole new version to a highly concentrated group of professionals and they'll all spread the word.
Macromedia created Final Cut and presented it at NAB before Apple bought it from them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by foad
The very first version of Final Cut Pro was announced at NAB in 1999. And actually, before FCP was announced, it was showcased in private demos at NAB in 1998.
Great for prosumers and some pros, perhaps. I already have FCP and will surely upgrade at a nice price point. But for elite work? I'll use AE and Premiere. Then again, I'm more a short format guy.
I'm actually relieved. I know now I will continue to trounce the competition with my current workflow.
That sentence doesn't make sense. GCD doesn't let you pick how many cores, and there's no reason that any code that works with GCD would be limited in the number of cores. That's the point of GCD, it scales up and down with cores and GPUs.
I believe they gave an example saying "it will use all 8 of your cores now"... which is assuming a MacPro with 8 cores, not a limitation.
It would be quite a hack to make GCD limit to 8 cores, and there's no benefit to doing so.
Jessi,
You're probably correct in that they haven't limited concurrency to max 8 cores.
However GCD does in fact offer mechanisms to limit queues when it is important to do so. And let me assure you, it is important to do so for resource management especially when contending for disk I/O and memory. Whether or not that becomes an issue at 8 or 16 cores is a very complex question and depends on the app and host system configuration.
Now I've watched compressor go-to-town on disk I/O and with only a handful of jobs it can create such a frenzy of seeks so as to make (eg.) 4 jobs concurrently take much longer than 2 jobs, stop, 2 jobs stop.
This is why GCD makes it fairly straightforward (and hardly a hack) to do things like limit the number of items in a dispatch queue.
I'd expect a lot will be rewritten/recompiled for 64-bit and compatibility so there may be upgrade fees but I'd expect support.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neruda
I have to say that I'm not digging the iMovie 10-11 looking UI.
I think the old UI looked very old-fashioned. It's perhaps because it now resembles the UI of a consumer app that makes it seem worse but to me that setup is much better. Having the panels together in a single window makes better use of the space.
Concerning content packs, I think it would be best for Apple to offer these as separate downloads whenever you need them and they can maintain an online library. So you'd just download FCP from the App Store and there could be an online asset browser and you can preview audio samples etc and just click to download which you want.
They can do that with every part of the current suite like DVD templates.
I personally hope they have integrated a lot of the apps into one. Soundtrack Pro doesn't really do enough on its own to be separate and people can get Logic for more advanced sound editing. Having non-destructive color-correction built-in seems like a better idea than running Color separate.
Motion will probably still be separate as well as Compressor, although Compressor is just a background app that will be bundled with FCP and hopefully integrated better.
I'd expect DVDSP to be separate too but tbh, it would actually be ok to have this in FCP for things like titling and menu setups. It could mean you don't have to re-export the whole edit if you change a small part for authoring. It will be interesting to see the authoring capability they have in store and if full Blu-Ray image authoring is coming. I still don't think they should go for Blu-Ray hardware support internally in their machines but the movie industry is backing Blu-Ray so people need to author the discs.
Can't believe there's no video presentation and demo of this thing in action. I want to see how this thing moves. Did they just cancel all the sponsors in order to look good on the show? I thought they did it to use it for long demo sessions.
Also, no official word on h.264 support as an editing format or did I miss something? I expect no transcoding is needed, but it would be nice to know for sure.
Comments
Single icon containing ALL of the files used by the application, including libraries and support files.
No installation of kernel extensions.
Any other rules for developers?
The iMovie UI is fantastic, if you take an hour or two and play around with it and learn it. This UI is more professional and deeper-- that much is obvious from the screenshots. What I think people confuse for "simplicity" or "lack of depth" is really just good UI organization and usability.
I think Adobe's video editing just died. It isn't really used in the industry and the architecture is ancient and the usability is on the floor. I think Avid is just barely coming back from bankruptcy. I don't think Apple will kill them, but it isn't like they are in the dominant position in the industry. (I think Adobe fans and Avid fans talk like they are dominant, but the numbers really don't support it.. it is just wishful thinking.)
Nobody is making use of these core OS X capabilities-- such as grand central dispatch. They have been shipping for awhile, but why would Avid (or Adobe) rewrite their product that is a decade old? Too many people will complain about he features that are missing in the rewrite.
Only Apple has the guts to do a complete rewrite like this. And because of this, now Only Final Cut is a modern video editor.
All the competition just became obsolete and is going to get increasingly further an further behind FCP in terms of usability.
There's nothing special about broadcast editing. Editing is editing. IF it outputs in the format you need then you can use it... if it is a better editor then it is a better Broadcast TV editor.
And this is a redesigned editor, made to be really efficient for editing.
That's really fantastic news.
I'm sure there are some beloved features that will have to be reimplemented and will be missing for awhile.... but the end result is an immediate productivity boost.
No, they do use GCD but they specified 8 cores max at the event.
That sentence doesn't make sense. GCD doesn't let you pick how many cores, and there's no reason that any code that works with GCD would be limited in the number of cores. That's the point of GCD, it scales up and down with cores and GPUs.
I believe they gave an example saying "it will use all 8 of your cores now"... which is assuming a MacPro with 8 cores, not a limitation.
It would be quite a hack to make GCD limit to 8 cores, and there's no benefit to doing so.
I got the impression from in and out audio of the demo thah Randy did there was Color and Motion in the product -- whether those are in-app purchases is another thing.
Seems like they are integrated into the product. There's a titling button in the UI so, livetype is integrated as well.
No mention of plugins, I have a few expensive ones -- but they may be obviated by built-in capabilities.
Probably because plugins are not yet supported, but they are going to make the announcements for this at WWDC when they can have sessions and training for plugin authors. No point in mentioning them until they are ready to release an SDK, and WWDC is a good time to do it. Apple just has to ship the App supporting the plugins, and the SDK and plugins can come later....
Rant --
Looks like the slickest interface ever ... for a mouse-driven editor.
They mentioned that you can do everything with the keyboard.
It plays catch-up to most of the rendering/64bit stuff to Adobe,
I just googled adobe premiere mac, and it seems their last version was released in 2002. (Maybe google led me astray.) 64 bit on windows is nothing compared to a real modern Mac OS X application (64 bit or not.) I think Adobe was behind before and is now not even in the same ballpark.
I use FCP about 10 hours every day. I am currently cutting 3 different TV shows on it.
What are the shows?
There may be features you've been wanting for year but this is a ground up rewrite. The "missing features" may well be no irrelevant, or made pointless by the new way things are done.
Oh silly me.
I think this is the replacement for Studio. I think all the features of studio are built in, though they may not be as complete as they were in Studio (though they will get there over time.) Except Soundtrack, though having not yet seen the demo, maybe essentially all of that is in there now as well.
Like super fast RAIDs that will be needed to handle the big multi-k formats.
Yes. We use Final Cut and Compressor mostly. Sometimes we use Color, but since we have a Lustre that doesn't happen much. Everything else is never used. I mean never.
I think Apple's answer is that they've built in Color and Compressor, they are now part of the apps workflow, and that if you want to use Lustre, eventually Lustre will be able to integrate with the FCPX workflow as a plugin.
Maybe it won't be appropriate for you to upgrade right away, but I don't think it will be too long. (I hope I'm not wrong about the plugin architecture, if they drop the ball there, that's the biggest risk to me.)
Ditto that. FCX has been left behind, but with the new FCP-X at only $300, they'd be hard pressed to keep FCX in any form....
Dunno - with Aperture going for under $100 on the App Store, it's possible FCX will stick around at a similar price point.
I suspect the other posts suggesting it's only Pro (not Studio) being offered at this price. Can you imagine the download for Studio? To say nothing of the upgrades if the process for XCode is any indication (the latest 4.0.1 patch required a full 4+GB download).
I just googled adobe premiere mac, and it seems their last version was released in 2002. (Maybe google led me astray.) 64 bit on windows is nothing compared to a real modern Mac OS X application (64 bit or not.) I think Adobe was behind before and is now not even in the same ballpark.
Dunno - with Aperture going for under $100 on the App Store, it's possible FCX will stick around at a similar price point.
They said it in the Keynote:
There is no Express. FCPX is it. You either pay the $299 for Final Cut Pro X or you use iMovie.
We can all come up with a bunch of reasons why this is so, but you have to admit, this is different.
I know; I get it:
- FCP X is just for pros and pros are hardcore
- FCP X is not released yet and not really ready yet
- The venue was exactly the Moscone Center
- They don't want to discourage sales of existing version or FC Express
BUT STILL, I think everyone on this thread knows that when Apple normally announce an upcoming operating system set to be released months or years away, they always have a web page dedicated to the new upcoming release in addition to their many pages dedicated to the existing version that they are still selling.
The apple site usually goes live with the new materials almost instantly after the keynote.
Is this sloppiness or calculated? Is this a symptom of Apple working without Steve Jobs?
It's weird.
I know this isn't a big deal, but this is definitely an unusual way for apple to announce a big product. As I write this, there isn't a peep on the Apple site about Final Cut Pro X.
We can all come up with a bunch of reasons why this is so, but you have to admit, this is different.
I know; I get it:
- FCP X is just for pros and pros are hardcore
- FCP X is not released yet and not really ready yet
- The venue was exactly the Moscone Center
- They don't want to discourage sales of existing version or FC Express
BUT STILL, I think everyone on this thread knows that when Apple normally announce an upcoming operating system set to be released months or years away, they always have a web page dedicated to the new upcoming release in addition to their many pages dedicated to the existing version that they are still selling.
The apple site usually goes live with the new materials almost instantly after the keynote.
Is this sloppiness or calculated? Is this a symptom of Apple working without Steve Jobs?
It's weird.
It's probably because it's night time and the Web Team are at home with their families.
I know this isn't a big deal, but this is definitely an unusual way for apple to announce a big product. As I write this, there isn't a peep on the Apple site about Final Cut Pro X.
We can all come up with a bunch of reasons why this is so, but you have to admit, this is different.
I know; I get it:
- FCP X is just for pros and pros are hardcore
- FCP X is not released yet and not really ready yet
- The venue was exactly the Moscone Center
- They don't want to discourage sales of existing version or FC Express
.
The place was in Las Vegas, this was an event that goes along with NAB that is the worlds largest broadcast show.
http://www.supermeet.com/
Then maybe you didn't noticed that for at least the last year Apple is trying to go away from stablished dates to release products or introduce them. Some we had to wait longer and others sooner. They axed completely macworld since everyone was waiting for the traditional event and the new stuff unveiled there.
Presenting FCP X at the Supermeet it doesn't only makes sense.. in my opinion pays tribute to those that used the software and supported the platform for all these years. It is a good thing, this FCPX is for them.
I know this isn't a big deal, but this is definitely an unusual way for apple to announce a big product. As I write this, there isn't a peep on the Apple site about Final Cut Pro X.
It's weird.
I'm with you. I'd expect something to be online immediately or soon to coincide with the release for all of us who can't be there. I hope they put up a video soon, I want to see the presentation. The liveblogging, summaries and photos are just making it worse!
There's a titling button in the UI so, livetype is integrated as well.
I so hope this is true. Final Cut has always sucked for adding even the simplest type. At the very least, we should FINALLY have access to all of our fonts and styles, I would hope.
I think this is the replacement for Studio. I think all the features of studio are built in, though they may not be as complete as they were in Studio (though they will get there over time.) Except Soundtrack, though having not yet seen the demo, maybe essentially all of that is in there now as well.
I was thinking this as well, although The Loop claims to have a different word from Apple on this: http://www.loopinsight.com/2011/04/1...t-studio-apps/
Speaking of which, if there is a full Final Cut Studio X being released, I hope Apple offers the ability to upgrade the full studio for $299 and not have to pay a fresh price for every piece of the package, which would end up making the full studio a costlier upgrade than the current version.
Edit: xanthohappy beat me to it!
I know this isn't a big deal, but this is definitely an unusual way for apple to announce a big product. As I write this, there isn't a peep on the Apple site about Final Cut Pro X.
We can all come up with a bunch of reasons why this is so, but you have to admit, this is different.
A little different than their consumer focused product launches, but it isn't all that different than some NAB announcements.
The very first version of Final Cut Pro was announced at NAB in 1999. And actually, before FCP was announced, it was showcased in private demos at NAB in 1998.
If anything, announcing it at Supermeet was sort of sentimental. It was born at NAB and now reborn. On top of that, they get to introduce a whole new version to a highly concentrated group of professionals and they'll all spread the word.
The very first version of Final Cut Pro was announced at NAB in 1999. And actually, before FCP was announced, it was showcased in private demos at NAB in 1998.
Great for prosumers and some pros, perhaps. I already have FCP and will surely upgrade at a nice price point. But for elite work? I'll use AE and Premiere. Then again, I'm more a short format guy.
I'm actually relieved. I know now I will continue to trounce the competition with my current workflow.
Macromedia created Final Cut and presented it at NAB before Apple bought it from them.
Yup. I was merely pointing out that FCP has history at NAB, so Apple announcing it there isn't that much of a surprise.
That sentence doesn't make sense. GCD doesn't let you pick how many cores, and there's no reason that any code that works with GCD would be limited in the number of cores. That's the point of GCD, it scales up and down with cores and GPUs.
I believe they gave an example saying "it will use all 8 of your cores now"... which is assuming a MacPro with 8 cores, not a limitation.
It would be quite a hack to make GCD limit to 8 cores, and there's no benefit to doing so.
Jessi,
You're probably correct in that they haven't limited concurrency to max 8 cores.
However GCD does in fact offer mechanisms to limit queues when it is important to do so. And let me assure you, it is important to do so for resource management especially when contending for disk I/O and memory. Whether or not that becomes an issue at 8 or 16 cores is a very complex question and depends on the app and host system configuration.
Now I've watched compressor go-to-town on disk I/O and with only a handful of jobs it can create such a frenzy of seeks so as to make (eg.) 4 jobs concurrently take much longer than 2 jobs, stop, 2 jobs stop.
This is why GCD makes it fairly straightforward (and hardly a hack) to do things like limit the number of items in a dispatch queue.
No mention of plugins, I have a few expensive ones -- but they may be obviated by built-in capabilities.
FXPlug should still be supported. DigiEffects brought out some new plugins using GPU acceleration:
http://fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/300...-final-cut-pro
I'd expect a lot will be rewritten/recompiled for 64-bit and compatibility so there may be upgrade fees but I'd expect support.
I have to say that I'm not digging the iMovie 10-11 looking UI.
I think the old UI looked very old-fashioned. It's perhaps because it now resembles the UI of a consumer app that makes it seem worse but to me that setup is much better. Having the panels together in a single window makes better use of the space.
Concerning content packs, I think it would be best for Apple to offer these as separate downloads whenever you need them and they can maintain an online library. So you'd just download FCP from the App Store and there could be an online asset browser and you can preview audio samples etc and just click to download which you want.
They can do that with every part of the current suite like DVD templates.
I personally hope they have integrated a lot of the apps into one. Soundtrack Pro doesn't really do enough on its own to be separate and people can get Logic for more advanced sound editing. Having non-destructive color-correction built-in seems like a better idea than running Color separate.
Motion will probably still be separate as well as Compressor, although Compressor is just a background app that will be bundled with FCP and hopefully integrated better.
I'd expect DVDSP to be separate too but tbh, it would actually be ok to have this in FCP for things like titling and menu setups. It could mean you don't have to re-export the whole edit if you change a small part for authoring. It will be interesting to see the authoring capability they have in store and if full Blu-Ray image authoring is coming. I still don't think they should go for Blu-Ray hardware support internally in their machines but the movie industry is backing Blu-Ray so people need to author the discs.
Also, no official word on h.264 support as an editing format or did I miss something? I expect no transcoding is needed, but it would be nice to know for sure.