But, in my experience, high end finishing does not necessarily mean smoke or flame. I have had all three at a shop I ran in the early 2000's and the delineation of finishing was clear: Effect heavy went to flame (EDL only), built in the box turnkey with effects meant smoke, offline conform and anything to do with adjusting the offline went to DS. All can be considered "finishing". Now, XML to smoke has made a difference (and DS has come a long way since then), but I still see DS as a high-end finishing box. Maybe not true 3D space, but that is not needed for all "Finish". I think I would be more comfortable in my investment in DS right now than Symphony. At least I am getting SOMETHING unique and extra for the investment...
sw
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "oliverpetersvidy" <oliverpeters@...> wrote:
>
> > Shirley Gutierrez wrote:
> > My reaction exactly! I've never even seen DS in action...
>
> A better DVE yes, but not in true 3D space as in Flame or Smoke. But that's neither here nor there. DS is the closest Avid has to a "finishing" system in the proper sense of the term and it still has many missing features compared with its competition.
>
> My point is that Avid simply doesn't do "finishing" well and doesn't really know how to promote it to the market segment that appreciates the benefits. Therefore, any R&D in that direction is a waste and would be better spent on improving the core product line.
>
> That's certainly not what DS owners would want to hear, but I'm sure they would like to have some idea of a roadmap as well.
>
> - Oliver
>
No comments:
Post a Comment