While I agree that graphics and editing are separate disciplines, clients demand that we know both. This is the new reality. Cheap post-production trumps mastery. When I bought my first Avid, it was $75,000 for one seat. You had to be a serious pro to afford that investment. Clients were willing to pay us for our talent and investment in tech and demanded we had the latest-greatest equipment. Now, for $299 plus a Mac and monitor, you, too, can be a "pro" editor. The barrier of entry is so low, a caveman can do it. Now, asking corporate clients for a wage that is more or less equal to a plumber's hourly wage, we are told, is too much. They hire the kid in the mail room who has iMovie on his laptop. Which reminds me of a joke: A plumber hands his bill to the homeowner. The homeowners says "Geez, my doctor doesn't even charge this much". The plumber replies, "yeah, I know, I used to be a doctor".
^^^GREAT post^^^ This reminds me of the "desktop publishing" era, and what the graphic design business has become since then. Walmart Wednesday PC-special + torrent CS5 and/or CorelDraw... and, "you too can make logos, corporate ID's, signage, etc. etc... and become a Millionaire in just 1 year!"
Becoming a millionaire is just as likely as those folks every creating a "professional" logo or CI.... but they'll still call themselves a "professional graphic designer". And sadly, clients will hold up their work and prices, against a trained and seasoned professional, "look what we got for just 50.- bucks!".
Turn around... walk out... take a deep breath... and consider digging water wells in the Sahara as an alternative to dealing with this crap! :
No, they do use GCD but they specified 8 cores max at the event.
This is not correct. Listen to the presentation -- they said ALL cores. Why would they have an arbitrary limit when they are starting the code from scratch?
Anyone know if any mention was made of the ability to open - or somehow work with projects done in the current version of FCP?
I've got a rather huge project that I'm expected to start in about 2 weeks. If I knew I could continue working on it with the new version I'd jump right in, but if not I think I'd just as well wait. Trouble with that is I'd worry about missing deadlines!
Anyone know if any mention was made of the ability to open - or somehow work with projects done in the current version of FCP?
I've got a rather huge project that I'm expected to start in about 2 weeks. If I knew I could continue working on it with the new version I'd jump right in, but if not I think I'd just as well wait. Trouble with that is I'd worry about missing deadlines!
Well I bet like me you will make a clone of the current work and try to see what happens but make damn sure you have everything still running in 7
This is not correct. Listen to the presentation -- they said ALL cores. Why would they have an arbitrary limit when they are starting the code from scratch?
I think it was an older edit of this story that said eight. I don't know why they would do that either, the idea didn't sound right.
Anyone know if any mention was made of the ability to open - or somehow work with projects done in the current version of FCP?
I've got a rather huge project that I'm expected to start in about 2 weeks. If I knew I could continue working on it with the new version I'd jump right in, but if not I think I'd just as well wait. Trouble with that is I'd worry about missing deadlines!
Sounds VERY sketchy to rely on anything that has not been thoroughly tried and tested with a huge project. If the new version requires different work flow procedures you could be up shit creek even if it was available today and you chose to dive in. Nothing worse than being stuck mid project with incomprehensible technical problems.
Personally I would go with tried and tested until you can check that box against the new software. There are too many unknowns.
But once you get the new software installed you can always do what digitalclips suggested if you have the time. Probably too tempting not to do so.
3. This release of FCP will most likely drive most professional high end users back to Avid. That's just my opinion but it's also the buzz here at NAB.
I tend to agree that this might be a possibility. Some people will use FCP no matter what Apple does or does not do to it (few have a problem with replacing the timeline with an iMovie like filmstrip, seriously? Is it just me? Hope some semblance of a timeline is still in there). I for one, have access to the latest Premiere, Avid Media Composer, and FCP (we have all three on our editing labs and roll out updates regularly) and will not use FCP if the UI is in fact anything like iMovie's (I hate that freaking that filmstrip, HATE IT). I personally don't like Premiere so I guess that would just leave Avid or sticking with FCP 7 as long as I can.
I'll try it, try to learn it, and then see. Of course, this also depends on what Apple does with Compressor and Color (which I use as much as FCP).
Sounds VERY sketchy to rely on anything that has not been thoroughly tried and tested with a huge project. If the new version requires different work flow procedures you could be up shit creek even if it was available today and you chose to dive in. Nothing worse than being stuck mid project with incomprehensible technical problems.
Personally I would go with tried and tested until you can check that box against the new software. There are too many unknowns.
But once you get the new software installed you can always do what digitalclips suggested if you have the time. Probably too tempting not to do so.
This is what I was thinking. It's probably not a good idea to upgrade software mid-project unless you have a specific reason to do so. With a significant update like this, it's probably a good idea to start a small project to familiarize with the changes.
While I agree that graphics and editing are separate disciplines, clients demand that we know both. This is the new reality. Cheap post-production trumps mastery. When I bought my first Avid, it was $75,000 for one seat. You had to be a serious pro to afford that investment. Clients were willing to pay us for our talent and investment in tech and demanded we had the latest-greatest equipment. Now, for $299 plus a Mac and monitor, you, too, can be a "pro" editor. The barrier of entry is so low, a caveman can do it. Now, asking corporate clients for a wage that is more or less equal to a plumber's hourly wage, we are told, is too much. They hire the kid in the mail room who has iMovie on his laptop. Which reminds me of a joke: A plumber hands his bill to the homeowner. The homeowners says "Geez, my doctor doesn't even charge this much". The plumber replies, "yeah, I know, I used to be a doctor".
The digitization of everything means wages flatten because previously high-cost functions migrate to the lowest cost supplier. This means "farms" of editors will spring up in India, China, Philippines, or anyplace with a low cost professional workforce.
Additionally, in the near future when A.I. "pro" systems are common to the desktop, you can expect everything ranging from artificially intelligent editing systems, medical advice systems, design advice, investment advice, etc. ... every highly paid profession that can be boiled down to their elements will move in that direction.
Larry Jordan offers his unique perspective in his blog from last night, "The Sound of 1,700 Jaws Dropping," which one person on Twitter said was, "A great, detailed review of the "sneak peek" of Final Cut Pro." http://www.larryjordan.biz/goodies/blog.html
Larry Jordan offers his unique perspective in his blog from last night, "The Sound of 1,700 Jaws Dropping," which one person on Twitter said was, "A great, detailed review of the "sneak peek" of Final Cut Pro." http://www.larryjordan.biz/goodies/blog.html
Currently the only thing worth reading about FCPX IMO.
The digitization of everything means wages flatten because previously high-cost functions migrate to the lowest cost supplier. This means "farms" of editors will spring up in India, China, Philippines, or anyplace with a low cost professional workforce.
Additionally, in the near future when A.I. "pro" systems are common to the desktop, you can expect everything ranging from artificially intelligent editing systems, medical advice systems, design advice, investment advice, etc. ... every highly paid profession that can be boiled down to their elements will move in that direction.
In the past, I liked to be able to concentrate on the edit, the story, the flow of the cut. I did not want to start thinking about titles flying in or animating text or background crap. I enjoyed turning that work over to a Flame artist or a really good After Effects artist. I did not have the time to sit down and learn a rather complex, new program. I also liked collaborating with another talent, who could bring another perspective to the project. I still do, but budgets are so reduced, that only larger, commercial or ad agency clients want to spend the money it takes for high quality results. I did learn Apple Motion. It is not as powerful as After Effects, but does certain things well. It lacks the plug-ins for AE. It is like an iPhone vs. Android. The iPhone has 100,000 apps available, while Android may have 5,000.
Anyway, I might take up the Avid $995 offer. It is like wearing a pair of comfortable, old shoes. FCP has always felt like I was editing with mittens on my hands.
According to the reports I've read they made no mention of Final Cut Express. Did they actually say it or are you making that assumption? I suspect you may be right but I would like to hear it from Apple.
They actually said it. He said something along the lines of "In the past you've had Express and Studio..." and then "now we're making it easy for you, Final Cut Pro X, $299, in the App Store"
They actually said it. He said something along the lines of "In the past you've had Express and Studio..." and then "now we're making it easy for you, Final Cut Pro X, $299, in the App Store"
I'm paraphrasing, but he said it.
Yup, just watched it myself. He specifically said they were "doing away with all of that" and "greatly simplifying the pricing structure." It's at 25:30 in this video: http://www.vimeo.com/22341718
That video, by the way, is a great quality video (compared to everything else I've found) of almost the entire demo. Check it out, it looks amazing. Yes, there are still some unanswered questions, but the stuff in that video looks like it is going to be at least somewhat game-changing.
Have any of the people complaining about this unreleased FCP X watched the presentation?
The timeline is there... better than ever.
It's visual, intuitive and powerful.
I've always hated iMovie from day 1.
THIS IS NO IMOVIE.
I agree. I understand that some people worry about change but its a little premature to dismiss the thing. Even if FCPX borrows a thing or two from iMovie (not saying it does, OK) it doesn't make it iMovie.
Comments
The reason why Apple is willing to sell FCP at $299. That and the fact that Apple actually makes its money on hardware not software.
While I agree that graphics and editing are separate disciplines, clients demand that we know both.
While I agree that graphics and editing are separate disciplines, clients demand that we know both. This is the new reality. Cheap post-production trumps mastery. When I bought my first Avid, it was $75,000 for one seat. You had to be a serious pro to afford that investment. Clients were willing to pay us for our talent and investment in tech and demanded we had the latest-greatest equipment. Now, for $299 plus a Mac and monitor, you, too, can be a "pro" editor. The barrier of entry is so low, a caveman can do it. Now, asking corporate clients for a wage that is more or less equal to a plumber's hourly wage, we are told, is too much. They hire the kid in the mail room who has iMovie on his laptop. Which reminds me of a joke: A plumber hands his bill to the homeowner. The homeowners says "Geez, my doctor doesn't even charge this much". The plumber replies, "yeah, I know, I used to be a doctor".
^^^GREAT post^^^ This reminds me of the "desktop publishing" era, and what the graphic design business has become since then. Walmart Wednesday PC-special + torrent CS5 and/or CorelDraw... and, "you too can make logos, corporate ID's, signage, etc. etc... and become a Millionaire in just 1 year!"
Becoming a millionaire is just as likely as those folks every creating a "professional" logo or CI.... but they'll still call themselves a "professional graphic designer". And sadly, clients will hold up their work and prices, against a trained and seasoned professional, "look what we got for just 50.- bucks!".
Turn around... walk out... take a deep breath... and consider digging water wells in the Sahara as an alternative to dealing with this crap! :
No, they do use GCD but they specified 8 cores max at the event.
This is not correct. Listen to the presentation -- they said ALL cores. Why would they have an arbitrary limit when they are starting the code from scratch?
I've got a rather huge project that I'm expected to start in about 2 weeks. If I knew I could continue working on it with the new version I'd jump right in, but if not I think I'd just as well wait. Trouble with that is I'd worry about missing deadlines!
No Vids - I presume you saw Larry Jordan's Blog?
No I hadn't. Thanks for the link.
Anyone know if any mention was made of the ability to open - or somehow work with projects done in the current version of FCP?
I've got a rather huge project that I'm expected to start in about 2 weeks. If I knew I could continue working on it with the new version I'd jump right in, but if not I think I'd just as well wait. Trouble with that is I'd worry about missing deadlines!
Well I bet like me you will make a clone of the current work and try to see what happens but make damn sure you have everything still running in 7
This is not correct. Listen to the presentation -- they said ALL cores. Why would they have an arbitrary limit when they are starting the code from scratch?
I think it was an older edit of this story that said eight. I don't know why they would do that either, the idea didn't sound right.
Anyone know if any mention was made of the ability to open - or somehow work with projects done in the current version of FCP?
I've got a rather huge project that I'm expected to start in about 2 weeks. If I knew I could continue working on it with the new version I'd jump right in, but if not I think I'd just as well wait. Trouble with that is I'd worry about missing deadlines!
Sounds VERY sketchy to rely on anything that has not been thoroughly tried and tested with a huge project. If the new version requires different work flow procedures you could be up shit creek even if it was available today and you chose to dive in. Nothing worse than being stuck mid project with incomprehensible technical problems.
Personally I would go with tried and tested until you can check that box against the new software. There are too many unknowns.
But once you get the new software installed you can always do what digitalclips suggested if you have the time. Probably too tempting not to do so.
3. This release of FCP will most likely drive most professional high end users back to Avid. That's just my opinion but it's also the buzz here at NAB.
I tend to agree that this might be a possibility. Some people will use FCP no matter what Apple does or does not do to it (few have a problem with replacing the timeline with an iMovie like filmstrip, seriously? Is it just me? Hope some semblance of a timeline is still in there). I for one, have access to the latest Premiere, Avid Media Composer, and FCP (we have all three on our editing labs and roll out updates regularly) and will not use FCP if the UI is in fact anything like iMovie's (I hate that freaking that filmstrip, HATE IT). I personally don't like Premiere so I guess that would just leave Avid or sticking with FCP 7 as long as I can.
I'll try it, try to learn it, and then see. Of course, this also depends on what Apple does with Compressor and Color (which I use as much as FCP).
Video:
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/13/...now-available/
Sounds VERY sketchy to rely on anything that has not been thoroughly tried and tested with a huge project. If the new version requires different work flow procedures you could be up shit creek even if it was available today and you chose to dive in. Nothing worse than being stuck mid project with incomprehensible technical problems.
Personally I would go with tried and tested until you can check that box against the new software. There are too many unknowns.
But once you get the new software installed you can always do what digitalclips suggested if you have the time. Probably too tempting not to do so.
This is what I was thinking. It's probably not a good idea to upgrade software mid-project unless you have a specific reason to do so. With a significant update like this, it's probably a good idea to start a small project to familiarize with the changes.
While I agree that graphics and editing are separate disciplines, clients demand that we know both. This is the new reality. Cheap post-production trumps mastery. When I bought my first Avid, it was $75,000 for one seat. You had to be a serious pro to afford that investment. Clients were willing to pay us for our talent and investment in tech and demanded we had the latest-greatest equipment. Now, for $299 plus a Mac and monitor, you, too, can be a "pro" editor. The barrier of entry is so low, a caveman can do it. Now, asking corporate clients for a wage that is more or less equal to a plumber's hourly wage, we are told, is too much. They hire the kid in the mail room who has iMovie on his laptop. Which reminds me of a joke: A plumber hands his bill to the homeowner. The homeowners says "Geez, my doctor doesn't even charge this much". The plumber replies, "yeah, I know, I used to be a doctor".
The digitization of everything means wages flatten because previously high-cost functions migrate to the lowest cost supplier. This means "farms" of editors will spring up in India, China, Philippines, or anyplace with a low cost professional workforce.
Additionally, in the near future when A.I. "pro" systems are common to the desktop, you can expect everything ranging from artificially intelligent editing systems, medical advice systems, design advice, investment advice, etc. ... every highly paid profession that can be boiled down to their elements will move in that direction.
Larry Jordan offers his unique perspective in his blog from last night, "The Sound of 1,700 Jaws Dropping," which one person on Twitter said was, "A great, detailed review of the "sneak peek" of Final Cut Pro." http://www.larryjordan.biz/goodies/blog.html
Currently the only thing worth reading about FCPX IMO.
The digitization of everything means wages flatten because previously high-cost functions migrate to the lowest cost supplier. This means "farms" of editors will spring up in India, China, Philippines, or anyplace with a low cost professional workforce.
Additionally, in the near future when A.I. "pro" systems are common to the desktop, you can expect everything ranging from artificially intelligent editing systems, medical advice systems, design advice, investment advice, etc. ... every highly paid profession that can be boiled down to their elements will move in that direction.
In the past, I liked to be able to concentrate on the edit, the story, the flow of the cut. I did not want to start thinking about titles flying in or animating text or background crap. I enjoyed turning that work over to a Flame artist or a really good After Effects artist. I did not have the time to sit down and learn a rather complex, new program. I also liked collaborating with another talent, who could bring another perspective to the project. I still do, but budgets are so reduced, that only larger, commercial or ad agency clients want to spend the money it takes for high quality results. I did learn Apple Motion. It is not as powerful as After Effects, but does certain things well. It lacks the plug-ins for AE. It is like an iPhone vs. Android. The iPhone has 100,000 apps available, while Android may have 5,000.
Anyway, I might take up the Avid $995 offer. It is like wearing a pair of comfortable, old shoes. FCP has always felt like I was editing with mittens on my hands.
Part 1 of the presentation is here: http://www.vimeo.com/22329493
and you can find part 2 in his vids on the sidebar.
No, they do use GCD but they specified 8 cores max at the event.
That could very well change in an update
Have any of the people complaining about this unreleased FCP X watched the presentation?
The timeline is there... better than ever.
It's visual, intuitive and powerful.
I've always hated iMovie from day 1.
THIS IS NO IMOVIE.
According to the reports I've read they made no mention of Final Cut Express. Did they actually say it or are you making that assumption? I suspect you may be right but I would like to hear it from Apple.
They actually said it. He said something along the lines of "In the past you've had Express and Studio..." and then "now we're making it easy for you, Final Cut Pro X, $299, in the App Store"
I'm paraphrasing, but he said it.
They actually said it. He said something along the lines of "In the past you've had Express and Studio..." and then "now we're making it easy for you, Final Cut Pro X, $299, in the App Store"
I'm paraphrasing, but he said it.
Yup, just watched it myself. He specifically said they were "doing away with all of that" and "greatly simplifying the pricing structure." It's at 25:30 in this video: http://www.vimeo.com/22341718
That video, by the way, is a great quality video (compared to everything else I've found) of almost the entire demo. Check it out, it looks amazing. Yes, there are still some unanswered questions, but the stuff in that video looks like it is going to be at least somewhat game-changing.
I just dont get what all the bitching is about.
Have any of the people complaining about this unreleased FCP X watched the presentation?
The timeline is there... better than ever.
It's visual, intuitive and powerful.
I've always hated iMovie from day 1.
THIS IS NO IMOVIE.
I agree. I understand that some people worry about change but its a little premature to dismiss the thing. Even if FCPX borrows a thing or two from iMovie (not saying it does, OK) it doesn't make it iMovie.