And then there's this little bite off the Apple...
mtntvguy
wrote on 5/19/2010, 11:40 PM
Comments
Coursedesign
wrote on 5/20/2010, 7:34 AM
You shouldn't believe everything just because the claimant has "Apple" in the name:
CNET report on Appleinsider claim
Because of Apple's lack of information about future releases, people are desperate for something to talk about. especially if they make living from creating link bait.
Recently however, Apple has at least responded to major expressions of great fear with official statements from both Steve Jobs and the named spokesman quoted by CNET, confirming that they were going full tilt on a new version that is going to be "awesome."
The facts (as opposed to the speculation) are that Apple hired additional high level developers for Final Cut Studio a year ago, they laid off 40 remote support people in L.A. and Austin (mostly contractors), and the glimpse of the new GUI that the kid got indicated that they had put some features from iMovie '09 into the user interface of Final Cut 8, as had been requested at several FCP User Group meetings.
Good analysis by Philip Hodgetts (and a vivid discussion in the comments):
Why Apple Insider couldn’t be more wrong
CNET report on Appleinsider claim
Because of Apple's lack of information about future releases, people are desperate for something to talk about. especially if they make living from creating link bait.
Recently however, Apple has at least responded to major expressions of great fear with official statements from both Steve Jobs and the named spokesman quoted by CNET, confirming that they were going full tilt on a new version that is going to be "awesome."
The facts (as opposed to the speculation) are that Apple hired additional high level developers for Final Cut Studio a year ago, they laid off 40 remote support people in L.A. and Austin (mostly contractors), and the glimpse of the new GUI that the kid got indicated that they had put some features from iMovie '09 into the user interface of Final Cut 8, as had been requested at several FCP User Group meetings.
Good analysis by Philip Hodgetts (and a vivid discussion in the comments):
Why Apple Insider couldn’t be more wrong
deusx
wrote on 5/20/2010, 8:13 AM
What's there to scale down? Final cut pro has always been a consumer to barely prosumer level app. It's crap. That's why it has always needed another 15 apps thrown into a suite with it to justify what they charge.
mtntvguy
wrote on 5/20/2010, 8:21 AM
Actually, it's not crap. But it is klunky. There are much faster ways to do things than FCP does. I own it and use it when I have to because I have some clients insist that if I'm not using it, I'm not a professional editor.
An Apple Genius Bar representative told me the other day that FCP has become the industry standard for NLE. He also told me he'd never used PP, Vegas, Avid or any others. Some genius.
An Apple Genius Bar representative told me the other day that FCP has become the industry standard for NLE. He also told me he'd never used PP, Vegas, Avid or any others. Some genius.
Coursedesign
wrote on 5/20/2010, 8:49 AM
I agree that FCP can be clunky, especially if you come from Vegas.
But it can do many things that Vegas cannot. If you don't need any of those things, then you're home free with Vegas.
The Genius Bar guy meant that Apple has 1.5 million FCP users, and Avid and Adobe don't.
It was just a question of quoting numbers, for which no genius is needed.
But it can do many things that Vegas cannot. If you don't need any of those things, then you're home free with Vegas.
The Genius Bar guy meant that Apple has 1.5 million FCP users, and Avid and Adobe don't.
It was just a question of quoting numbers, for which no genius is needed.
mtntvguy
wrote on 5/20/2010, 9:31 AM
I learned to fly in a Cessna, and I've flown many Pipers. So I think I can speak intelligently about their performance, pros and cons, etc.
I've never flown a Beechcraft or a Mooney. So it wouldn't be very smart of me, much less genius of me, to proclaim Cessna or Piper makes better airplanes than Beechcraft or Mooney, despite the fact Cessna and Piper sell many times over more airplanes than the latter two.
My point is sometimes it gets annoying when the fanboys plant a flag in the ground and proclaim FCP is "Da Man" and everything else is doo-doo, when those same fanboys have never actually used anything else.
I've never flown a Beechcraft or a Mooney. So it wouldn't be very smart of me, much less genius of me, to proclaim Cessna or Piper makes better airplanes than Beechcraft or Mooney, despite the fact Cessna and Piper sell many times over more airplanes than the latter two.
My point is sometimes it gets annoying when the fanboys plant a flag in the ground and proclaim FCP is "Da Man" and everything else is doo-doo, when those same fanboys have never actually used anything else.
deusx
wrote on 5/20/2010, 9:34 AM
>>>It was just a question of quoting numbers, for which no genius is needed<<<
Sooooooo....... Windows Movie maker is the industry standard then?
Sooooooo....... Windows Movie maker is the industry standard then?
Coursedesign
wrote on 5/20/2010, 9:51 AM
You quoted him as having said, "FCP has become the industry standard for NLE."
That doesn't say there is any agreement on what's the best NLE, just that more people bought FCP for a variety of reasons (including potentially suboptimal ones).
And Windows Moviemaker is definitely the #1 industry standard in its industry (home users running Windows).
Cessna vs. Piper, now that's the same debate of virtue and vice.
The basket between the front seats in a Cessna is there to store the bits that fall off the instrument panel. Piper bits don't fall off.
Pipers are low wing, so they look more like "real planes."
OTOH, Cessnas are better for aerial photography, because the wing is above.
Pipers use Lycoming engines, while Cessna use Continental, etc. (mostly).
And Beechcraft and Mooney focus on "high performance" aircraft that need extra certification. You go a lot faster, and so does your money.
It never ends...
That doesn't say there is any agreement on what's the best NLE, just that more people bought FCP for a variety of reasons (including potentially suboptimal ones).
And Windows Moviemaker is definitely the #1 industry standard in its industry (home users running Windows).
Cessna vs. Piper, now that's the same debate of virtue and vice.
The basket between the front seats in a Cessna is there to store the bits that fall off the instrument panel. Piper bits don't fall off.
Pipers are low wing, so they look more like "real planes."
OTOH, Cessnas are better for aerial photography, because the wing is above.
Pipers use Lycoming engines, while Cessna use Continental, etc. (mostly).
And Beechcraft and Mooney focus on "high performance" aircraft that need extra certification. You go a lot faster, and so does your money.
It never ends...
ddm
wrote on 5/20/2010, 10:38 AM
Industry standard, though? Those numbers don't have anything to do with standards. Which industry? Wedding videos? Industrials? Indie Films? Certainly not broadcast television and mainstream motion pictures. Avid is still the industry standard in that arena, by far. Final Cut has made inroads, but Avid is still the only industry standard out there, if by "industry" you mean US broadcast TV, features and commercials. Of course, they used to be the Only game in town and that certainly has changed.
Coursedesign
wrote on 5/20/2010, 3:53 PM
Certainly not broadcast television and mainstream motion pictures.
Comment from a working editor in yesterday's Studio Daily:
Turner, ABC and Fox all made huge investments in multiple FCP systems and [FCP] is a major player in the ever slow to change Hollywood market.
Avid has clawed back a few TV shows thanks to far superior shared storage though.
Comment from a working editor in yesterday's Studio Daily:
Turner, ABC and Fox all made huge investments in multiple FCP systems and [FCP] is a major player in the ever slow to change Hollywood market.
Avid has clawed back a few TV shows thanks to far superior shared storage though.
mtntvguy
wrote on 5/20/2010, 4:09 PM
Pipers look like real airplanes? I suppose they do.
But have you ever seen a bird with its wings on its belly?
Your turn :)
But have you ever seen a bird with its wings on its belly?
Your turn :)
DGates
wrote on 5/20/2010, 4:53 PM
Desux, what are you, 9 years old?
ddm
wrote on 5/20/2010, 5:24 PM
Final Cut is certainly present in broadcast, I did not deny that, but I have worked here in Los Angeles for 30 years and I work with primarily in multicamera sitcoms and all shows I work on, and I interact with post as a normal part of my job, only use avid, final cut is used on reality shows, which are very low budget, and for lots of in house smaller projects, for which it is well suited. But for most of the daily grind of 1 hour drama and 1/2 hour sitcoms, avid is the only solution to the quick turn around that everyone is used to. Same with big features, anyone can cut a film on final cut, you could cut a feature on vegas, too, still avid is everywhere, still tons of avid system rental houses. The multicamera show I'm working on right now just bought their own Nitris, there was never a discussion about using final cut, not an option with the kind of deadline they're on. I always ask the editors I work with about this because I'm curious if anyone is actually using final cut, and they all have a story or two about one show where they used final cut and it was fine and all, but it's always a low budget show for nickelodeon or something similar.
I do know that CBS TV bought a bunch of fcp stations for news editing and I don't doubt that, studios might be buying final cut systems but I don't know who's using them. Every production I've ever been on gets their own system, and editor, the studio never provides it, it comes from an outside rental facility. Promo departments, news and reality shows are nothing to sneeze at but the only standard that I can see fcp owning has "low budget" somewhere in the mix. Not like that's a bad thing, either, it's a real market and let's face it, final cut is cheaper.
I do know that CBS TV bought a bunch of fcp stations for news editing and I don't doubt that, studios might be buying final cut systems but I don't know who's using them. Every production I've ever been on gets their own system, and editor, the studio never provides it, it comes from an outside rental facility. Promo departments, news and reality shows are nothing to sneeze at but the only standard that I can see fcp owning has "low budget" somewhere in the mix. Not like that's a bad thing, either, it's a real market and let's face it, final cut is cheaper.
Coursedesign
wrote on 5/20/2010, 10:19 PM
For episodic TV drama where you have many people editing simultaneously, it's a no-brainer to use Avid, because it is easier to set it up so everything works safely (minimizing the risk of screw-ups).
For other TV work, FCP has taken a lot of Avid seats.
The Nitris is very nice, has been good value for certain uses, although at this time I'd have to ask if it wouldn't make more sense to spend $15K on a Smack (Smoke on a Mac).
And many feature films have been edited on FCP, including every film edited by Walter Murch over the last 9 years (except one last fall where he took over a feature project that was already set up on MC 2.7, and thought his Avid muscle memory was still intact). He told me he still preferred FCP though.
For other TV work, FCP has taken a lot of Avid seats.
The Nitris is very nice, has been good value for certain uses, although at this time I'd have to ask if it wouldn't make more sense to spend $15K on a Smack (Smoke on a Mac).
And many feature films have been edited on FCP, including every film edited by Walter Murch over the last 9 years (except one last fall where he took over a feature project that was already set up on MC 2.7, and thought his Avid muscle memory was still intact). He told me he still preferred FCP though.
farss
wrote on 5/21/2010, 5:13 AM
deusx
wrote on 5/21/2010, 5:21 AM
>>>Desux, what are you, 9 years old?<<
You must have confused your IQ with my age.
>>>And many feature films have been edited on FCP, including every film edited by Walter Murch over the last 9 years (except one last fall where he took over a feature project that was already set up on MC 2.7, and thought his Avid muscle memory was still intact). He told me he still preferred FCP though.<<<
I've already explained this to you. If a caterer on some movie uses a mac with FCP to edit his home made movie Apple lists it as "movie edited on FCP"
It's mostly bull$hit. They do some quick edits out there on some set, when it's time to get real after all filming is done and edit the real thing they use Avid. Yes, some movies were actually edited on Avid, but less than 10% of what Apple would have you believe.
You must have confused your IQ with my age.
>>>And many feature films have been edited on FCP, including every film edited by Walter Murch over the last 9 years (except one last fall where he took over a feature project that was already set up on MC 2.7, and thought his Avid muscle memory was still intact). He told me he still preferred FCP though.<<<
I've already explained this to you. If a caterer on some movie uses a mac with FCP to edit his home made movie Apple lists it as "movie edited on FCP"
It's mostly bull$hit. They do some quick edits out there on some set, when it's time to get real after all filming is done and edit the real thing they use Avid. Yes, some movies were actually edited on Avid, but less than 10% of what Apple would have you believe.
ddm
wrote on 5/21/2010, 8:04 AM
>>>$15K on a Smack
I have no doubt that the Smack on a mac is a good piece of equipment and that it sounds like a good deal, the point I was trying to make regarding the Nitris is that IT"S AN AVID, that's why they chose it, there are no real options because AVID is the standard in this environment. I'm not trying to win over any converts here, I'm just stating my experience. I don't enjoy using avid or final cut, that's why I'm here on the vegas forum.
I own Media Composer and FCS 3 because I need to stay current with what my clients are using. I've had Final Cut for several years because I've read that the industry is trending that way, but I just haven't seen it make a dent in the areas that I work in day to day. I mean, final cut is out there... When I delivered an HD movie master to Disney Sound so they could incorporate a 5.1 mix to generate an HDCAM Master tape that the distributor required, Disney Sound used a Final Cut system to output to tape, and Final Cut was able to read the (vegas generated) DNxHD quicktime and output it to HDCAM, which is great, but Disney Sound is not editing features or tv shows, but a final cut system is a great, inexpensive tool to do that kind of job.
A post production supervisor I worked with on an NBC multicam pilot last month, whom I hadn't seen for a few years, told me he'd been running a facility in North Hollywood that 2 women had started that had a couple hundred final cut bays, not insignificant. They were cranking out reality shows, working 24/7, young kids, non union etc etc. Makes sense, they're cheap and they do get the job done, nothing wrong with that.
It's like the RED camera, just because Dean Devlin and Steven Soderbergh shoot their stuff on red cameras (because they own them) would anyone claim the RED camera as the standard for film and tv production? And I am in no way trying to disparage the RED camera, but since pilot season just ended last week, I have spent 4 prep days over at Panavision Woodland Hills in the last six weeks and have seen boatloads of Genesis and 35mm cameras getting prepped, not one making news, because it ain't news, it's the norm.
I have no doubt that the Smack on a mac is a good piece of equipment and that it sounds like a good deal, the point I was trying to make regarding the Nitris is that IT"S AN AVID, that's why they chose it, there are no real options because AVID is the standard in this environment. I'm not trying to win over any converts here, I'm just stating my experience. I don't enjoy using avid or final cut, that's why I'm here on the vegas forum.
I own Media Composer and FCS 3 because I need to stay current with what my clients are using. I've had Final Cut for several years because I've read that the industry is trending that way, but I just haven't seen it make a dent in the areas that I work in day to day. I mean, final cut is out there... When I delivered an HD movie master to Disney Sound so they could incorporate a 5.1 mix to generate an HDCAM Master tape that the distributor required, Disney Sound used a Final Cut system to output to tape, and Final Cut was able to read the (vegas generated) DNxHD quicktime and output it to HDCAM, which is great, but Disney Sound is not editing features or tv shows, but a final cut system is a great, inexpensive tool to do that kind of job.
A post production supervisor I worked with on an NBC multicam pilot last month, whom I hadn't seen for a few years, told me he'd been running a facility in North Hollywood that 2 women had started that had a couple hundred final cut bays, not insignificant. They were cranking out reality shows, working 24/7, young kids, non union etc etc. Makes sense, they're cheap and they do get the job done, nothing wrong with that.
It's like the RED camera, just because Dean Devlin and Steven Soderbergh shoot their stuff on red cameras (because they own them) would anyone claim the RED camera as the standard for film and tv production? And I am in no way trying to disparage the RED camera, but since pilot season just ended last week, I have spent 4 prep days over at Panavision Woodland Hills in the last six weeks and have seen boatloads of Genesis and 35mm cameras getting prepped, not one making news, because it ain't news, it's the norm.