Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

I'm neutral but another interesting take on the whole fiasco.

Professional Video Editors Weigh In on Final Cut Pro X - NYTimes.com


Credit: New York Times

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

The Quarrel Over Final Cut Continues - NYTimes.com

But then he comes back the very next day and says "Apple blew it.." He says... "But — and let me be clear on this point — I think Apple blew it."

This guy is not a video editor,,he's a "high tech" columnist. He may have edited here and there,,but he mostly reviews consumer tech.

Scott Simmons over on Studio Daily and ProVideoCoalition is a working FCP and Avid editor in Nashville He makes his living as an video editor. I would go with his opinion first over Mr. Pogue. Pogue has waffled too much on this. Scott is giving us the good and bad and how to work with this new app.

Just my two cents.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

Yes, he wrote a new post, but don't quote "Apple blew it" and pretend that he by that agrees with all the people crying over this release.

This is the part that is most relevant imo:

"You know perfectly well how this is all going to play out. We’ve seen this movie before, when Apple dragged us from Mac OS 9 to Mac OS X, or from old iMovie to new iMovie. It always goes the same way: Apple writes a new, much more modern and capable platform that’s missing old features. Huge outcry follows. Time passes. The features eventually return, calm returns and pretty soon we forget all about the older software."

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

Pogue is definitely right about one thing: there's a ludicrous amount of misinformation flying around.

I have every sympathy for pro editors who are faced with working out how to (whether to..) change their whole way of working (full disclosure: I make a living out of running projects to put in new processes - I know how hard it is for people and organisations to change).

Having said that, I'm shocked at how quickly people are jumping on some of the patently incorrect assertions about FCPX and propagating them. There are enough serious and real issues for a full-on pro shop, and they're the ones that users need Apple to focus on. You guys who need that stuff need to clarify what really IS missing or busted.

I'm even more shocked by how many self-defined pros jumped into installing this radical new system without taking time to evaluate or test. It's a total contradiction to, on the one hand, say that this is core to your business and you can't possible survive the issues and, on the other hand, say that you downloaded and installed it on day one and now you're screwed. Honestly (and I imagine I'll get flamed for this), that strikes me as anything BUT professional.

I don't mean to slam anyone - I can understand the attraction of the great new thing, and even more I can understand the sinking feeling that comes with knowing it's just not what you expected. FWIW, I think Apple has handled this very badly indeed. At the very least, FCS3/FCP7 should continue to be supported until FCPX is a complete pro video NLE system. I think Apple *WILL* lose many pro shops to Adobe and Avid (others too) whatever their shortcomings.

But the way through this is to focus on the actual issues with the product, not on the side issues.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

You just illustrated my point perfectl Henrik. The guy waffles. He blows with the wind. A column such as his doesn't help me. And tomorrow doesn't help me today, He wrote three articles in three days going three directions. It is like he was doing damage control for Apple on the second day after he saw all of the negative feedback day one and then backpedaled on the third day.

This guy below doesn't waffle. He's an editor and gives a more honest and realistic assessment.

ProVideo Coalition.com: the EDITBLOG on PVC by Scott Simmons

So is this guy:

Sanity in the FCP X Debacle | The Final Rewrite

Both lay out the straight scoop on how FCP X effects you and me.

I just feel like if your getting FCPX advice from the New York Times..then you're being mislead by a guy who comments on Android Phones one day and Blackberry pads the next. Not guys in the trenches everyday like Scott Simmons. They don't waffle. The can't because there is real consequences when deadlines are around the corner and real money is on the table.

Cheers.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

Take your advice from whoever you want. Everyone knows Pogue isn't an expert.

The thing here is that the is the only one so far that has gotten real info directly from Apple. That kind of makes what he has to say interesting, even if he may not understand everything he's conveying.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

Exactly. He's getting damage control information from the PR dept. at Apple. Come on ..a small number of guys are already drinking the Apple kool aid while a lot of you are trying to get the software to work with workarounds. Like Tim Dashwoord,,who is also in the trenches, I applaud the latter.

Cheers to the guys in the trenches making it happen,,,today.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

Indeed, I applaud the people making the best of this right now.

I for one stick to FCP 7 thus far. Not because I hate FCPX and feel insulted by Apple, but because I just realize that it's not ready yet. For me, it's nothing more than that - I have to wait to see whether it will become ready, or if I have to find something else the day FCP 7 no longer does the job for me.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

From Pogue's post:

"The Bottom Line: Apple has followed the typical Apple sequence: (1) throw out something that’s popular and comfortable but increasingly ancient, (2) replace it with something that’s slick and modern and forward-looking and incomplete, (3) spend another year finishing it up, restoring missing pieces.

Professional editors should (1) learn to tell what’s really missing from what’s just been moved around, (2) recognize that there’s no obligation to switch from the old program yet, (3) monitor the progress of FCP X and its ecosystem, and especially (4) be willing to consider that a radical new design may be unfamiliar, but may, in the long term, actually be better."

Pogue may not be a professional editor, but his bottom line seems to me a fairly reasonable assessment of the situation.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

Nothing against Pogue, but many of his points are not correct:

My Response to David Pogue?s* ?Professional Video Editors Weigh In on Final Cut Pro X? *Updated* | Apple, Video, DSLR Video, Business, Personal | RichardHarringtonBlog

And add to that, that Jim Jannard and Jarred from the RED Team have already confirmed that the information about Apple and RED working together for a RED plugin isn't correct.

Why everyone is so painfully wrong about FCPX

Why everyone is so painfully wrong about FCPX

http://reduser.net/forum/showthread....l=1#post782729

I do think that his article is good and gives some good tips, but it's clearly not written by a a professional editor - which he also freely admits.

That being said, I already bought FCPX and I'm not returning it, because it seems to have some impressive performance. But I don't like how it handles media, and if Apple doesn't make a statement or bring back essential features, than indeed many people will jump ship.
Everyone knew this rewrite wouldn't have all the features. We know not every plugin will work, not every effect will be there, etc.
But seriously, no in and out points on a sequence? No multiple sequences? No EDL, XML? No multicam? Very limited monitor support? No Save As?
But you do have Export to Facebook...

In all fairness: a lot of things that distanced FCP from FC Express (support for professional workflows) is gone in this version. So I think the iMovie Pro stance is correct at this point in time - again, at this point in time.
Apple has already said to work on a better version of XML and multicam, so I'm hopeful. But I do think that they had better waited a bit and released the software a bit later with some of these essentials in there. Because this launch was a mess, considering they ask pro's to adopt a whole new paradigm, promised them that this would be pro, and then making the program unusable in a professional workflow.
Jim Jannard said it correctly: they just have to communicate, and do it fast.

Untill then I'll watch some tutorials and try to get to know the program. I'm sure it has a lot of potential under the hood.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

"Professional editors should (1) learn to tell what’s really missing from what’s just been moved around...
...4. and be willing to consider that a radical design may be unfamiliar but may be better...

Yes he is not a professional editor and yet he is clearly advising professional editors. And it seems like obvious common sense on the surface. But professional editors tend to only listen to other pros. Because, they have a realistic view of what is required to meet their own needs. They don't need Mr. Pogue advising them on anything. In the end, each market will decide on its own what is useful or not based on its own needs. I have seen this before with Avid and we had to really kick them in the behind to get on the ball.

It is not Apple's, Avid's, or Adobe's..or Mr Pogues market. It's your market Quit drinking the kool aid guys. Get into the trenches!! Make Apple give you want u really need.

Trust other editors like Scott Simmons.

We shouldn't care what Apples typical play is here. We should DEMAND what we want in the software that we make a living with. QUICKLY!

I know you guys are getting tired of this so..I won't comment anymore.

Cheers.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

From a pro, or even enthusiast perspective, Apple seem to have got this whole thing very wrong. They obviously felt compelled to release something to make up some ground on premiere pro and other NLE's that have moved well ahead of FCP7, but in a competitive market you are surely only as good as your last release.

It's interesting because adobe seem to have learned that delivering a solid, stable and comprehensive release is more important that rushing something out that is going to cause users headaches. PP CS4 was a stability nightmare, (I don't think any FCP7 users were ever considering switching to CS4). I think this was one of the reasons that by the time adobe got around to releasing CS5 it was already a stable, comprehensive and all-round pleasurable user experience. I'm just guessing but I would bet that, having read the reviews, many FCP7 users have already switched to PP CS5.5 and by the looks of things this release is going to do nothing to stop the exodus.

In terms of corporate strategy surely it makes more sense to release something solid rather than patch it up as you go.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

Lots of backlash, interesting points from both sides. I grabbed a copy and will now play around with it to see what all the fuss is about.

Full disclosure: I'm not a pro nor am I a newb, so I'm on the unbiased fence.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

Some of the comments I've seen on NYT/Pogue's articles are bewildering, and some are outrageous. Mob mentality is what I chalk it up to. I just want to try it out and form my own opinion, but I'm more apt to listen to someone who has sat down and tried using it, vs. someone going off blog posts of seething hate and anger. And by using it, I don't mean buy it, download it, try it for 10 minutes and quit out, then ask for a refund.

Good comments here, everyone.

heath

ps-I don't think Pogue is backtracking so much as saying that Apple could've done better.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

The heart of the issue is FCPX is not FCP it's iMovie and its disingenuous to represent it as such. If I made a thread before Apple's release, saying that if you wanted to look to the future and improve your process that FCP users should "upgrade" to iMovie I would be a laughing stock, but when Apple says it, they are geniuses. At the end of the day we all have our own opinion on FCPX based on what we need to use it for but it still doesn't change the fact they have discontinued FCP and replaced it with iMovie. Why don't you think it won't import FCP and yet it can import iMovie projects? Could it be that it is iMovie? I don't need an expert or reviewer to explain something that I can see for myself. Don't get me wrong FCP could have used a face lift years ago and had its interface modernized to make it more efficient. Instead of overhauling it they lead users down a dead end.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

It does look a bit like iMovie, but iMovie doesn't have a lot of the features this one does. It really goes back to Randy U's First Cut which somehow became iMovie '08 (which angered a lot of people, I remember back in 07):

DVcreators.net | Blog | What does the guy who led the original Final Cut Pro revolution think of the Final Cut Pro X release?

Heath

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

That's because they added new features to iMovie instead of FCP.

Without going through that article and having a full history of iMovie at my disposal, I remember a few years back Apple pulling features from a newer version iMovie. Apple never came out and said it and by the way they never would, that they didn't like that iMovie was competing against FCP instead of acting as stepping stone to FCP, but it turned out people were using it for more than home amateur movies and were content to stay with iMovie. Apple decision to cut features from iMovie to encourage people to buy FCP Express back fired, iMovie users were furious and didn't like FCP interface. They tried pushing iMovie users to FCP and that didn't work so now they've decided it would be easier to push FCP users to iMovie.

Apple is spinning it to put the best possible face on it but at the end of the day it serves their interest first. There has always been the tension between iMovie and FCP. They've never been able to easily graduate iMovie users to FCP and FCPX is their answer.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

I don't quite understand your logic here... having not used any version of iMovie, I can't really say that Apple created it to push people to FCP. In fact that seems a little bit odd. Back in 1999/2000, Jobs said the Mac will be the digital hub, and I think iPhoto, iMovie, iTunes, Garageband, etc., was born out of that. It's an easy way for people to create their own digital content.

I think iMovie 08 was a new, completely re-designed version of the software that angered a lot of people.

I'm not denying that iMovie and FCP X look alike, because they do, but I also don't think FCP X is iMovie Pro, either. At least right now I don't, because I haven't used it yet and don't want to judge the book by its cover. I don't understand the logic behind the UI, but I get why Apple is going with a new paradigm. In fact, my Vegas Pro friends having been cutting different for years.

I think FCE was a way to get people to use Final Cut (it's darn near identical to FCP 6) cheaply, and the Final Cut user base grew.

heath

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

From the sound of complaints I have heard, and methods of resolving matters, I think think Heath is right on the point. This is a new way of editing. About six years ago, on the PC side I was using Premiere Pro. I also had friends editing in FCP, Frankly, with their rather similar looks and the feels I got from the FCP users, and my experience with Premiere, I thought the two had a very similar feeling. About that time, I started messing with Vegas. It was kind of loose feeling. You could do same thing two or three different ways. I could never get settled with what was the right way to do it. Premieire always seems to have a one right way to do something. I couldn't handle the uncertainty of the new Vegas Gui. I went back to Premiere. Then the big upgrade push and new high costs came along, and I went back Vegas. I learned to accept the freer environment in Vegas, and at this point, I think it is a great NLE.

I think we are seeing this more open GUi emerge in FCP X. The fixes and new methods described are so Vegas like, and I am thinking that FCP users will gradually learn to love the new methods.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

Give it time, and maybe FCP X will win many of us over. They'll add support and new (and old) features in, and we'll adjust to a new paradigm. I'm optimistic!

Heath

ps-Premiere Pro borrowed its UI heavily from Avid, and Randy U. left Adobe to develop KeyGrip for Macromedia before they changed the name, demo'd it on both Windows and Mac at NAB 1998 and Apple bought it. And the rest is history.

pss-I talked to Randy on the phone a few years ago, and he's a really nice and very smart guy.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

I guess I don't understand the basis of your opinions if you haven't used iMovie before then how can you say you don't think it's iMovie. I have used both and taught classes in iMovie. How do you explain that FCPX looks like iMovie, acts like iMovie, and imports iMoive projects but it won't import FCP?

Its also a common business practice to offer a free version with limited features to attract users and then encourage them to upgrade to a paid version that has more features.

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

Well, I've used FCP for 12 years and never felt the need to use iMovie; no disrespect to the NLE, because I have a lot of friends who are talented editors that cut their teeth on it. iMovie and FCP are built upon the same foundation (First Cut), which is my guess why you can't open FCP 7 projects. And that's frustrating to me, too.

Answer me this... can iMovie control meta data like FCP X can? What about auditions, background rendering, chroma keying, advanced color correcting, etc.?

Heath

Re: Point/Counter Point from the NYT - David Pogue
 

FCP1 was acquired from Macromedia. iMovie was developed separately by Apple and doesn't use FCP code base. So when FCPX is compatible with only iMovie...

I'm not implying I'm superior to you or that you should use iMovie, I'm saying since I have used both I'm a better position to support the opinion that FCPX is more similar to iMovie.

So are you saying if those features were added to iMovie and that it would no longer be iMovie because the previous versions didn't have them?