Re: [Frameworks] FInal Cut Pro X

From: Cari Machet <>
Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2011 02:57:07 -0400

Cari Machet
NYC 646-436-7795
AIM carismachet
Skype carimachet - 646-652-6434
Syria +963-099 277 3243
Amman +962 077 636 9407
Twitter: _at_carimachet <>

On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 2:29 AM, David Tetzlaff <> wrote:

> > Yes I have been a daily user of FCP since FCP 1, and although the
> interface of FCP X does sort of, in some ways resemble iMovie, why is it no
> longer a professional application?
> As of now, now ability to open project files from previous versions. No XML
> import/export of any kind. No recognition of Photoshop layers. Some of the
> other complaints about missing features appear to be in error, as the
> features have been moved, renamed, hidden and undocumented, or replaced with
> similar functionalities that have been misunderstood. However, the list of
> things acknowledged by Apple and FCPX's defenders remains significant.
> > If you own FCP Studio3 why the need to upgrade right now?
> None. But that's not the issue. As of the introduction of FCPX, FC Studio 3
> is no longer available. Apple killed it. They will be dropping support for
> it. It cannot be installed on Lion, so if you buy a new Mac now, you won't
> be able to get FC 7 running without some kind of hack. It's 32 bit only,
> which limits it's utility in an increasingly 64 bit world.
> > Seeing how Apple owns the code for FCP 7, why would one not expect them
> to further incorporate the professional features presently not available
> back into the program in future releases?
> Because the code-base for FCPX is totally different from FCP 7. The legacy
> FCP code is now essentially useless. Everything added to FCPX will have to
> be rebuilt from the ground up. There are two issues here: 1) Apple is trying
> to push users into a new paradigm, and as such there are some things they
> have no intention of adding. 2) They put FCPX on the market and killed FC
> Studio 7 without completing the features they DO intend to add to the app.
> Furthermore they did not issue a 'roadmap' for development, indicating what
> they plan to add and when. Bloggers and print journalists have been able to
> find some of these things out by contacting Apple as part of their coverage
> of the FCPX controversy/"disaster". But you have to search to find these
> reports, there are no timetables, no promises regarding the costs of
> updates, etc.
> > This petition is surprising.
> Not really. Apple has replaced an app that many people use to make their
> living with something those people find completely alien. That's going to
> get people agitated in the short run anyway, whether or not the changes
> prove to be 'better' in the long run. This is a bigger change than Kodak
> dropping Kodachrome after killing all the other Tungsten reversal stocks,
> and telling everybody 'You should use 100D Ektachrome.' And yeah there was
> still Kodachrome in the pipeline and Dwayne's kept processing it for a
> decent time, but the writing was on the wall and there were petitions then.
> Since I go back not only to cutting super-8 with a Minette, but to
> assemble-only editing on U-Matic machines, and VHS systems with +/-4 frame
> accuracy, and doing sound-editing for video on 1/4 tape with a razor blade
> and a splicing block, if all that existed was FCP 2 running on a G4 I'd be
> pretty darn happy, and FCP 3 and above are just icing on the cake. But I
> don't work in 'the industry' which does make certain demands of certain
> people.
> ----
> The one thing I have not seen mentioned in any of the FCPX coverage and
> commentary is how this is going to effect education (mainly 'the education
> market' but that has some pedagogical consequences, too.) And it seems to me
> that Apple has seriously shot itself in the foot here. Few schools are in a
> position to make large changes in technology, since students will be working
> on things that cross semester and school year boundaries, and it's really a
> major hassle if the old projects can no longer be opened, or if doing so
> requires a lot of complicated gymnastics. So if you start with Avid or FCP,
> you stay with them, even if the other leaps ahead, because its too hard to
> change. Every once in a blue moon, there's some coincidence of timing and
> events that makes a major changeover possible, but usually folks stay with
> what they have until they're forced out of it because the manufacturer drops
> it or goes belly-up. (There are places where you can still feel the angst at
> schools th
> at invested in Betamax ED).

SUPER HILARIOUS!!!!!!!!!! "...still feel the angst..." i love it

> But a school may not have the option to just keep running FCP 7. Their old
> macs may all be dying, and the school policy may prohibit them from buying
> anything used, so the IT department can only provide them with new machines
> that run LIon only. Or a growing program may need to add more stations to
> it's editing lab: sorry FCP 7 licenses are no longer available.
> In 1999 I was hired to start a production program at a small college. They
> had no equipment so there were no compatibility/inertia issues. I took a
> gamble and committed the school to FCP, which had not actually been released
> at the time, on the basis of getting to examine a late beta. That turned out
> to be the right move, and in retrospect a kind of no-brainer. The expensive
> proprietary hardware based M-JPEG systems (Media 100 etc.) were clearly on
> the way out, Premiere sucked, and the other DV players (remember Radius
> Edit?) were too small to survive. Avid hadn't announced their DV system (MC
> Xpress) at the time. And even if it had been available, the Avid interface
> is way too idiosyncratic for use with a general liberal arts student
> population, while FCP is pretty intuitive to anyone who has used any other
> timeline based editing system; audio or video. So my small situation was a
> synecdoche of a larger window of opportunity for Apple.
> Now things are very different. Very few schools are starting anew, or
> reaching the point where their old technology has become so obsolete that
> it's about to follow the Steenbecks out the door. Instead, FCP is thoroughly
> entrenched in colleges. There are Avid shops, and FCP shops, and that's
> basically it. And now all those FCP shops, where the faculty have been
> taking crap for 11 years because they're not using the 'industry standard'
> Avid, (as if that had anything to do with learning how to MAKE FILMS), are
> staring at an oncoming train. Unless some third party vendors like Automatic
> Duck rescue Apple from the compatibility issues and soon, schools are going
> to be saying, 'Well if we have to start all over, do we go with this new
> thing that isn't all there yet or switch to Avid or maybe just sign yet
> another contract with Adobe.' I think the vendor room at UFVA this year
> should be REALLY interesting, especially at the Avid table and Avid
> sponsored panels, and I'm wondering ho
> w FCP stalwarts like Charlie Roberts and Bart Weiss are seeing things...
> But I still think Avid is too intimidating for all but the MFA/BFA programs,
> so the real opportunity would go to Premiere, if Adobe went after it, though
> I suspect they're too big to have production education customers as blips on
> their radar... Interesting times for the geeks, one way or another...
> _______________________________________________
> FrameWorks mailing list

FrameWorks mailing list
Received on Mon Jun 27 2011 - 23:57:38 CDT