What Did We Learn?

I want to start a thread that does NOT debate anything. But analyze what we can get out of the LAFCPUG meeting.

I read things on Twitter, and am asking anyone who was there, or has direct access to somewhere who was there, to help out.

Here's what I heard that I want to clarify.

Intelligent Assistance said either Xto7 or 7toX was going to support XML export for ProTools, specifically. What was that about?

Atomos was said to now support FCPXML. What was that about?

I read several folks who said Leverage and that German show on the "In Action" web site are having difficulties making FCP X work for them. My impression was this was said from the stage. Was it? Or was this just BS someone threw in for BS sake?

What was actually said that we can get some legitimate information from? No rumors, no second hand hearsay, just what was actually said?

Hey Ben,

I was there, so let me see if I can shed some light here, based on how I heard things.

Intelligent Assistance's Xto7 has an option to now only export the audio data into an FCP7 XML. That option is in the current version of 1.1.11. Maybe something else is being added, I don't know. All Larry Jordan said was that a new version will let you take that XML directly into Adobe Audition. I haven't tried it yet myself, so maybe this is different than what's there now, but I doubt it.

I don't remember hearing them mention Atomos and FCPXML, just talk about it recording ProRes and the metadata created by the device transferring to FCPX. I don't really remember exactly on this one, so take what I say with a grain of salt.

The big one you have here is the "problems" with Leverage and the German show. This was people not listening. Nothing was mentioned that isn't on the In Action page. I think this is a case of people complaining about the RED workflow, which is done on Leverage exactly as Apple published in the white paper. I guess transcoding is consider a problem now? I dunno, I can't explain these comments. From what I heard, this is all BS for BS sake.

This could have been posted in the original thread... :huh:

BenB wrote:
I read several folks who said Leverage and that German show on the "In Action" web site are having difficulties making FCP X work for them. My impression was this was said from the stage. Was it? Or was this just BS someone threw in for BS sake?

What was actually said that we can get some legitimate information from? No rumors, no second hand hearsay, just what was actually said?

I though you could give us more information on this:

BenB wrote: In the Twitter feed several folks mentioned that the German show and Leverage were using FCP X, but it wasn't a really smooth experience. I don't put too much stock into what strangers say, but two of the folks tweeting are respected industry leaders I personally know and trust. That's all.

Maybe post the tweets here or /and confirm with the your connections.
It would interring to now what they have to say. Since right now I only read positive things from the individuals that have worked on the shows.

I just got off the phone with the FCPX Apple Marketing team who explained that they are trying to hard to get back into the community and apologized for the presentation not being quite what people had hoped. But (and he's right) there were a lot of people there who were really interested and for them, this presentation was probably a very good thing. Thinking about it, we can't get mad at Apple for trying to spread the word. Isn't this outreach to us professionals what we wanted?

I have to say I'm really impressed. I emailed Tim Cook when BenB suggested and told them my thoughts and a day later I'm talking to the marketing team and it felt very productive. We chatted a lot about workflow and features I'd like to see. It really felt like they were listening and they do have a long list of stuff they are actively working on and they are doing it for the professional user base. That was why they want to get out at the FCPUG. I think they need to hear not just about "I want it this way and that way and this feature and that feature", but they want to hear how it's being used.

Just wanted to put that out there.

That's cool that they called

It's good to know they're trying to figure out where they stand. I wonder what was the targeted demographics originally for FCP X? Do they think it's going to be used differently than 7? That's just odd. But at least they're trying.

I personally don't believe that the target demographic for X is any different than 7. There's a circular logic that seems to be going around (and around) that in order for a program to be professional, it has to work just like every other professional program (track & bins). But those things are just a means to an end. Not an end unto themselves.

I remember a back and forth on Creative Cow where someone was saying FCPX was like Apple was trying to needlessly redesign the hammer into a "Hammer X". It was then that I pointed out the invention of the nail gun.

My concern it, the dev team was dead on target with legacy FCP for a decade (more actually). So why do they have to relearn their uses from scratch now?

In my FCP X classes I go through the history of NLEs. The first one (not Avid) was rejected by editors cause it worked digitally. So the developers retooled it to work like negative cutting, the way those editors were used to working. The editors started to adopt it more easily.

So they took a digital workflow, and basically "slowed it down" to work the way physical negative cutting worked. Similar workflow, similar terminology, etc. Seriously, they are "folders", not a physical "bin"!

Apple decided that now, over a decade later, now that no one manufactures feature film movie cameras anymore, and the overwhelming majority of production houses are shooting digital, we need to abandon the "physical negative cutting, EDL" paradigm, and create a new "digital acquisition, processing, delivery" paradigm.

They all get it, they all love it. With XML, things like EDL and OMF are pretty much outdated, limited, and are more difficult to adapt to a fully digital workflow than XML is.

So that's where we stand with FCP X.

BTW, I just got an email touting the BRAND NEW RELEASE OF EDIUS! The "NEW" features they list are things all other NLE's have done for years (especially FCP 7), AND actually introduce some FCP X features. The interface is so complicated, out dated, and unintuitive, it's not funny. They have too many things in too many windows unnecessarily, it's just pathetic. Edius is going to die in the next few years, IMHO.

Nice to read about the phone call.

Question: there was something said that the memo of Tim Cook was not about a Mac Pro, but about something new for pro's... ? Does anyone have more information about that or can confirm? Does anyone have an idea if they mean that the new Mac Pro won't be anything like the old one, or that it's just gone (well... not on Apple's program anymore)

Apple decided that now, over a decade later, now that no one manufactures feature film movie cameras anymore, and the overwhelming majority of production houses are shooting digital, we need to abandon the "physical negative cutting, EDL" paradigm, and create a new "digital acquisition, processing, delivery" paradigm.

Ben, I agree with you completely. I see this from my photography teaching. Them young ones wouldn't know what I'm talking about if I used terms from the film days. What version was it again when iPhoto lost its Film Roll?

Hi Ben,

i am the editor of the "german project". I enjoyed editing with FCPX so much, that i used it for the feature length TV-Movie i edit at he moment. I am not planning on using anything else on the next projects i will be working on. ( Two more Tv-Movies this year.)

Best, Knut

Yup. There's a lot of FUD floating around (from people that have an axe to grind) saying that many of the editors profiled on Apple's site are secretly miserable working with FCPX.

Unless one of those editors says it themselves, I give no credence to it whatsoever.

knurrrrrrt wrote: Hi Ben,

i am the editor of the "german project". I enjoyed editing with FCPX so much, that i used it for the feature length TV-Movie i edit at he moment. I am not planning on using anything else on the next projects i will be working on. ( Two more Tv-Movies this year.)

Best, Knut

Happy Birthday Knurt! If need any assistant in Germany let me know! No plans leaving here back to the States at the moment...

Cheers

P.S. what is the feature you working on? I hope it's not for ARD or ZDF :silly:

Hi Ben. Very nice analysis

I think its funny that the editors at lafcpug that were either holdouts or were practically screaming at the Project Manager about the changes made in FCPX had grey or white hair. Move over grandpa, a new generation is in town and we embrace the changes to your ancient, broken workflow.

installationspace, you really have no clue, do you? You really think it's only the old seasoned pros who are unhappy and don't embrace it?

I teach all over the country, and in my experience, it's the opposite.

You need to get your facts straight, and find out who's here on this board helping you out before you go shooting your young inexperienced mouth off.

The new generation ain't doing anything different or new, kid.

LOL! You always make me laugh BenB, always so serious. I teach FCP too, so what? It's merely a difference of opinion I suppose. After all, I am just merely offering my analysis.

I'm not saying everyone in a certain age group is acting a certain way. I just made an observation. There were also older pros embracing the new editing paradigm for sure. I didn't see anyone younger complaining to the presenter, except to report a bug.

A college freshman this coming fall will most likely be born after 1993. Pretty soon college freshman in the U.S. will not be able to understand what a film camera is because the industry has shifted completely to digital. Film distribution is already digital. Film is dead. It will only take another decade or so before it is completely obsolete and filmmakers still using it will be considered dinosaurs. Colleges and industry pros still embrace old workflows because its what they know, there is security in that.

NLEs don't need to mimic film or even track based workflows any longer. We live in a digital world that is about selecting the information we need to work with with fast and efficiently. The interface that can do this the most efficiently and for the lowest cost will eventually win.

There are more college graduates going into creative professions than ever before. The younger generations know digital, they understand how it works. There is no real point in teaching them a history lesson, but to teach them how they can always stay ahead of the learning curve with new technologies.

There isn't security in change. But technology is ever changing, it is up to the professional to keep changing with trends in the market. The market will never yield to the professional entirely. We can always wish for that next feature, but it may not come true.

Adapt or die.

From what I understand if you read the letter carefully it didn't say new mac pro, it said there's something new coming for pros in 2013. Everything is speculation regarding this.

It would probably be ok to go out and buy an iMac when they are refreshed or the new Retina Macbook Pro and still have a viable workstation for a few years. The whole idea that an editor requires a tower isn't in line with Apple's current (or probably future) product line or even trends in consumer electronics at this point. Base your judgement on buying new hardware on performance tests of existing hardware, not the promise of new hardware.

"I'm not saying everyone in a certain age group is acting a certain way."

As a matter of fact, you did;
"...had grey or white hair. Move over grandpa..."

The shorter version:

Apple thinks in terms of the future
Professionals often think in terms of the past
The next generation of professionals already understand the "future"
FCPX provides the most efficient and cost effective solution for professionals
Professionals must adapt, b/c in the end the most efficient and lowest cost NLE will win