Oliver Peters on NAB and NLEs including FCPX

digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2013/04/13/nab-2013-distilled/

I think he does a good job capturing the situation with the NLE market. He's one of the few professional editors using FCPX and writing about his experience (both the good and the bad).

While I may be redundant given my other posts, I really wish Apple would get its marketing game together.

thanks for that

there is another similar article here

digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/editing-in-2013/

makes sense what he is saying

Good article, but he misses a few marks. BMD was very clearly stating up front that Resolve was not to be an NLE, but a finishing app, period. So its editing tools will be limited. He missed that Resolve 10 is a huge game changer in that it can ingest projects from just about any NLE, combine them into one featured output (even using EasyDCP), or output each segment back out to any of the NLEs it works with (about all), to have major re-edits done, then back to Resolve. That means you can have a team of editors, they can each use whatever the hell NLE they personally like best, and it all comes together in the finishing process inside Resolve. What could be more simple?

BMD and Apple were both very clearly stating up front they are on the same page, thus working closely together. They both are working to produce top level professional products, that also break down the barriers to adoption by everyone, democratization of media production.

Yes, Resolve looks a lot like FCP X, only because the main UI designer is a huge fan of the FCP X interface. They actually have to pull in his leash from time to time so Resolve is not an FCP X UI clone. LOL!

But in the long run, FCP X with Resolve and Cantemo will be the dominant combo, IMHO. Nothing else on the market today matches that power, or the low price, or the ease of learning and use. And no one else seems to be going in that direction.

Also consider Adobe spent more than half of their pres briefing time bashing FCP X, rather than talking about the merits of their own products. They spoke so little of their own products, it left me wondering if they really have anything to offer. What are they so afraid of? Don't they know that no one is using FCP X? Or do they actually know that more folks are switching to FCP X than they want "you" to know about?

I'll tell you from the Apple briefings, well, I already wrote it up here .

There was more FCP X at NAB this year than most folks want to acknowledge. The resistance from not wanting to use it is over, the resistance is in those using it not wanting to be too loud for fear of bashing from Adobe users.

Adobe is promoting and instilling a very deep and pure hatred of FCP X in their users. Their press briefing at NAB was pretty pathetic, very childish, and very ugly. "Professionalism" was 100% absent with Adobe this year at NAB. Very sad to see a company steep so low. My feeling is that negativity and bashing for the sake of pure sadistic hatred, will seriously backfire on them.

It's almost as if there were two different NAB shows.
Oliver states clearly.
"FCP X was well-represented as part of other displays all over the floor"
and adds
"An interesting metric I noticed, was that all press covering the show on video, were cutting their reports on laptops using FCP X. "

And yet I get a newsletter like this pointing to Oliver's blog
NAB2013 Distilled - Oliver Peters offers his synthesis of what he saw on the show floor. I enjoy his perspective of the Avid vs Premiere vs FCPx horse race in his conclusion - which I agree with. Sidenote: I saw Adobe and the Tangent Element everywhere. FCPx? No one was showing or talking about it unless you asked. (DigitalFilms.Wordpress.com)

There's several more post and tweets which insist FCPX was a rare siting. Could this be a case of psychological blindness? (rhetorical question).

Although I'm not aware of anywhere in the social media world where people are saying Adobe attacked FCPX. I'm not sure what form it tacked or whether others perceived it as an attach beyond "product comparison."

Personally my main concern is Apple's approach to marketing. Somehow it seems they believe FCPX will sell itself on its own merits and while it certainly does seem to be selling, the attacks against it outside of Adobe is fierce and continuous.

Resolve 10 is a huge game changer in that it can ingest projects from just about any NLE, combine them into one featured output

This is interesting I'll be looking out for how that's going.

Here's something that crossed my mind recently. Imagine/dream that round tripping was possible between FCPX and AE, nothing fancy just like dynamic link is just now or legacy FCP was before.

It would have great benefits for FCPX editors, even those that don't use AE. It would create a more acceptable workflow for many who are keeping away from FCPX for reasons other than it's stand alone workings. It would create options and work for FCPX editors.

For those that do use AE, they know how easy Motion 5 is to pick up from there, the full C4D integration and AE's flexibility could be tapped nicely into FCPX.

This isn't to rule out Motion, far from it. If Motion could have more advanced round tripping capabilities offering a real time, both directions, round trip. I'm sure many long term AE users would get curious enough to pay a relative few pounds to check it out and add it to their tool box.

Suddenly it seems time for some mass Motion updating. I think it would be good for all, maybe not Adobe, but if Apple really are in this for the long haul then this quick boost in interest probably isn't going to be of too much interest.

Glad everyone liked the article. Regarding Adobe, I'm not sure where this idea of "FCPX bashing" is coming from. I spent several hours with their managers across the course of the show and never heard any Apple-bashing or FCPX-bashing. They are a classy group of folks who promote their products well. They are also quite clear to acknowledge when they've adopted features and ideas from other NLEs. They do point out that the market reacted to FCPX in a negative way and they are trying to provide users with features they wanted. That certainly isn't bashing. FWIW - Apple is more than happy to characterize anything that isn't FCPX as the "old way of working"

- Oliver

This video starts of not in English, but it soon changes after the intro, so don't switch off if you don't understand.

It shows pretty nicely where Resolve is going in v10.

I have a feeling that I saw more FCP X's running on various booths at NAB on the last day than on the first day.
My guess: some exhibitors felt bit skeptical to run FCP X on their screens at start, but after demand from the visitors during the show they put it on their screens. Who knows?

I was there, I saw FCP X at many booths.

@ Ben

Is it possibly that you were very focused and hanging out in a predominately FCP friendly universe.
Like I buy a fire engine red bike and see nothing other than fire engine red bikes?

@ Soundwise

My guess: some exhibitors felt bit skeptical to run FCP X on their screens at start, but after demand from the visitors during the show they put it on their screens.

That is a very interesting postulation!

It is so sad that we end up being put into boxes according to the tools that we use. It is like when I tell a friend who is a Blender freak that many people have a problem with the pricing of FCP X, he just roles his eyes up to heaven!

@ NocoDave

Very cool video. Thanks.

I think its goofy more so than sad. A lame first world problem.

I think Louis CK said it best: vimeo.com/49841699

The sad thing is not making something with the tools that you've got. Everything else is just noise.

I was not FCP X fanboy-ing. I was there, as always, strictly on business. I had non-stop appointments with many vendors that were mostly not FCP X related. But there were in fact, not my biased perception, many vendors who's products were supporting and interfacing with FCP X. If you weren't there, you don't know. I was.

So I only saw FCP X friendly booths? Even if that were true, there were quite a few of them! How does that negate the number of there there actually were? I doesn't.

Unfortunately some of us are deeply impacted by the boxes we get put in. Like it or not being judged by the tools we use is important.

One can certainly argue creativity counts first and maybe it does if you're primarily an artist.

Those of us who make a living in this profession might be judged by potential clients on any number of counts whether its image resolution, contrast ratio, speed at which we turnaround a project.

If a potential client curls their nose when they ask what I edit with and I answer FCPX, the impact is financial. It's the roof over my head and the meal on my table.

I see far too many people apologizing for liking and using FCPX. They (we) feel we must because we are most certainly under attack. To many potential clients, the perception counts. One can wax philosophical about art and creativity but if you lose business because of your tools, the perception must be countered.

Those of us here can do our best but Apple has the greatest resources to deal with that perception. They really need to step up a marketing campaign. I/we are most certainly judged by the tools we use and the impact can be financial.... even if you think it's "unfair."

Just FYI, I've never once in the past 1+ decade of editing been asked by a client what I edit with. Only other editors have asked me, and they're not paying my bills. Just an observation...

When DaVinci Resolve 10 is released Q3 this year, paired with FCP X, they will make a very powerful duo. Not to mention with R10 is released, no one should care one iota what anyone edits on any more.

Ben, it's sad that if one notes significant visibility of FCPX one is accused of being a "fan boy."
The derision going on in the industry towards FCPX users is appalling.

Unfortunately I think it's in Apple's prevue to answer since I don't think any of use have the resources to change that dialogue.

Certainly Oliver saw FCPX as very much present as well. I've seen others posts stating the same. Some though, seem to be suffering a form of psychological blindness towards it. I have NEVER seen this in the industry before and I've been in professional post over 30 years.

BenB wrote: Just FYI, I've never once in the past 1+ decade of editing been asked by a client what I edit with. Only other editors have asked me, and they're not paying my bills. Just an observation...

When DaVinci Resolve 10 is released Q3 this year, paired with FCP X, they will make a very powerful duo. Not to mention with R10 is released, no one should care one iota what anyone edits on any more.

Same here!

I was never asked what i edit on. People hire me, because of my editing / narrative skills.

They don´t care what i edit on.

I've certainly been asked and sometimes by some fairly big clients. I have no idea why any care but it may be they're thinking about long term revisions. Stupid about being asked maybe but it has happened.

I've been asked as well. Plus since I freelance it's important that I know the supplied system. Lastly I pick up projects from others, so I often have to continue with what they started on.

I think everyone is putting a whole lot of stock into Resolve 10. Most editors are and will continue to be clueless as to how to run it. Smoke 2013 and Resolve 10 will have similar conform and editorial functions. I don't see a lot of folks actually tackling Smoke either - even the free trial.

Oliver

Resolve 9 became so much easier to learn and use. V.10 is taking that a huge leap forward. Learning/using it will be much, much easier than most other finishers.

If a client were to ever ask me what I use to edit, I'd probably just say, "A Mac, why?" Forces them into the defensive, they'll simply justify why they need to know, giving you the conversational high ground to respond favorably and win a job.

Salesmanship and business acumen are vital to any freelancer.

I will say one vendor did tell me to my face they're product didn't support FCP X (Mac Caption) because Apple "has gotten out of the business and doesn't make a professional NLE anyore." And yes, I put him in his place. Hey, I'm actually editing a feature on it, with a second feature coming my way in another 6 months. Another of their sales guys stepped in, corrected the guy I was talking to, took me to a workstation and showed me how they do work with any NLE on the market now. Geez, that was just stupid...

But that was the ONLY place, outside of Adobe's cult (yes, it was very cult like at Adobe), that I got any real negative remarks about FCP X.

"TV Station On A Mac" is a long time, established product, and it runs on FCP X just fine! Lots of products work with FCP X just fine, and vendors were very happy to admit that. But I'm sure if you were an Adobe cult-ist and started your rant to them, they'll say whatever you want to hear. They are at NAB to sell stuff, not entertain window shoppers.

I'm working right now on my fifth feature film(drama) edited on FCPX, will be doing two more this summer, and just finished a feature doc for TV. The feature doc gave me the most grief as everything was shot 24p but needed to be conformed exactly to 45min length 1080i59.97 dropped frame for output to HD CAM SR. The round trip from Resolve 9.1.2 worked very well with everything on one track, V10 looks killer.