Final Cut Pro X

Can we not derail this thread...

mark133 wrote:

Well, now at least I know where you stand, ProMaxed...i.e. where you don't stand.

RIGHT! I am one of the BIG PEOPLE.... moooooo ahhh ahhh ahhh, Ve vill hunt you down, ve vill find out who you are! mooooo ahhha ahhhh ahhhh! Levinwort aye...... loooook outside your vindow now little man !!! moooo ahhh ahhhh ahhhh!

For everybody else... here is a perfect case and point... don't let your children eat paint chips...

Speaking of derailing this thread, I tried to drill into this thread through the discussions home page, no go. I think the entire thread has been separated from the "Final Cut Pro X" master page. I could be wrong, but I tried to find it without logging in and couldn't. Somebody else try. Let us know if you can. It would be VERY interesting if this thread has been sidelined and hidden from the general discussions...

this page is where it has always been - on the Final Cut Studio thread & not FCP X.

Interestingly enough, ProMaxed, though you're a madman, your mentality is about what must have made its way into the apple exec boardrooms in order to promote, likely with some sordid kind of joy, the discontinuation of a product without warning to loyal customers dependent on the product for their livelihood.

Personally, Premier still just doesn't cut it for me, I can see me sticking with FCP7 for some time yet.

In the not too distant future though, I'd personally be very interested to see exactly how The Foundry's 'Storm' develops. It's incredibly early days yet, but it already has the foundations of what could be a phenomenal NLE.

http://www.thefoundry.co.uk/products/storm/

Personally, I think this could be a game changer, if The Foundry decide to develop it into a fully fledged NLE!! Only time will tell I guess . . . .

I am one of those loyal customers, for 10 years. And a business owner. My issue was with your previous post:

mark133 wrote:

"I think what's ironic about the professional editing take on these apps is that, if the worst suspicions are true (which I still rightly hold in doubt), then it is big companies staking a claim on media production technology, striving to keep the real stuff out of the hands of the little people. Yet most of you argue that you're not little people while opposing what you suspect is a move to isolate true professionals from the little people."

I mean what's with the "little people" classification? Are those the iMovie people? The FCE people? And where in this entire post did you see anyone lay reference to Apple's actions being an intentional act to divide social classes of people? This isn't about social justice or technological redistribution, thereby enabling iMovie users to cut the next Matrix or Transformers, and upload it to youtube for free public viewing. That'll never happen.

The natural boundaries that divide iMovie users from professional editors is capacity (intelligence) to acquire a set of skills that enable one to master a difficult, highly technical and dynamic profession; formal education and/or years of on the job experience; dedication and perseverance. Those boundaries can be overcome by lots of hard work, but not by dumbing down the technologies.

Apple screwed us, it's that simple. And I, one of many, don't follow the logic that they are going to restore FCPx to a pro app. If they do... I'll HAPPILY eat crow while I'm dishing out my $300 for a $1500 pro editing application. I'll even come on here and publicly admit my error. All with a 32 tooth grin from ear to ear.

But on the top of the page is the text "Branched to a new discussion."

And for the record, selecting "don't receive emails from this discussion" isn't working for me, not that I am most entertained and educated.

I thought the part about the final cut 7 big rig being much bigger than my final cut pro x little rig especially hilarious.

I seem to remember Tom Wolsky writing that by the end of 2012 FCPX will be the most used video editor on the planet...but I couldn't find it to directly quote him.

I really am trying to shut up and leave this all to those who know...but after a few days of reading some of the posts, I had to chime in. Hope it didn't mess up anyone's afternoon.

Hugh

Yes, Mr. Wolsky is very correct, FCP-X will be the most widely used editor on the planet, but that does not the address the quality or usefulness of the product.

If popularity is the metric by which you judge software, you should be running on Windows XP -

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp

but is that what you want to do?

MtD

On the Apple platform, popularity is very much an indicator of usefulness and quality. The stuff that doesn't quite work well just isn't popular.

I have a dslr and a camcorder, and FCPX syncs them in seconds. If it revolves around what I want, then I want the new X.

If I were thirty years younger and ambitious I would probably be as suspicious of this change as you are.

I don't suppose folks here might consider letting this thread go? As I said, I doubt I am alone in the fact that clicking the section that goes "stop email notifications" is not working, and I am not emotionally mature enough to just ignore challenging threads. But if this thread is useful, I don't want to be selfish.

Hugh

Yes, Mr. Wolsky is very correct, FCP-X will be the most widely used editor on the planet, but that does not the address the quality or usefulness of the product.

If popularity is the metric by which you judge software, you should be running on Windows XP -

http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_os.asp

but is that what you want to do?

MtD

I think we have to accept the fact that film is going the way of print, ie. the desktop publishing revolution decades ago. iPublishers of today use Pages or Word, and ProPublishers use InDesign. The world is a big place and there is room for all. FCPX has a market, and Avid Media Composer/PPro has another. No big deal. Can we go back to work now?

Can we go back to work now?

Not with this we can't. 😉

The way the London bank social ordering usually works is that some part of control of an industry has to be gained. The industry itself selects the intelligent and skilled, but the banks, by reducing entry into some form of major financial requirement, maintain control of both the industry and the best of the best that dominate it. Way back when, after the printing press seized power from the Church in most of Europe by putting a Bible into the hands of everyman, initiatives to own the presses became requirements to publish on them. It is still a requirement that most of our academic printing presses are financed by London, and the cost of entry is a career of academic organization and endless accumulation of personal debt. Only the best of the best make it, but when they do, they are sure to be bound to London.

From what I've heard it's possible, but not necessary, that the same sense of social structure is engineering a division, basically between the big screen and the internet producers, but once they start in without resistance, who knows where they will choose to make the division between the 'upper', or credit-worthy class and the under-privileged. The state exists today, as without my perfect credit I would in no way have been purchasing this iMac. I expect the price threshold to fall or stay the same, because I believe in the interest of the common man.

You make your argument that high-level editing can not be achieved by changing the software, and mostly, I agree. But to open the door of limitless media production possibility to everyman you have no objection? Or do you object if such opportunity is artificially constructed so as to be tied to a certain threshold of personal debt requirement? Or do you simply find it objectionable to open that possibility to everyman?

Tom Wolsky wrote:

Can we go back to work now?

Not with this we can't. 😉

...badum...tsch

mark133 wrote:

some stuff

But what about the East India Tea Company? I blame them for the release of FCPX. Well, them and the Rosicrucians.