Saturday, September 8, 2012

[Avid-L2] Re: MC 6.5

 

What is the issue with Ethernet connected? Is this the ama scanning for volumes issue? If it is that sounds like something that might be helped with the new auto mount choice.

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Mike Chapman" <michael.b.chapman@...> wrote:
>
> I might think it was a steal (instead of stealing) if I could launch it without unplugging my Ethernet...if Title Tool was something useful instead of Antidiluvian code...if workflow with AMA clips had been thought out...
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, David Dodson <davidadodson@> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Well, I don't know, I'm sure I'm being naive here, but we're talking about a piece of software around which many of us make our very livelihoods. If Avid software is so far and away not a value for the money that Avid is asking, then I'm sure all the people who are upset about their pricing plans will have no problem switching to the NLE that IS an appropriate value for the money AND will support their professional livelihoods.
> >
> > As for me, I think it's really kind of a steal. Honestly, I have no emotional investment in Avid. I'll happily cut on whatever tool best does the job. But for the kind of work I do, there is no better tool than Avid, and I'm happy to pay a premium price if it helps Avid improve quality and stick around longer. I mean, really. People in other professions often spend a whole helluva lot more on their kits. Our software investments are a lot smaller than some others.
> >
> > DD
> >
> >
> > On Sep 8, 2012, at 6:00 PM, Mike Chapman wrote:
> >
> > > Oh, please. Poor Avid! Let's all pledge to spend nearly twice the academic price of Media Composer per year to keep QA engineers in India employed.
> > >
> > > Gotta go cut a piece on FCP X, so y'all excuse me.
> > >
> > > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Terence Curren" <tcurren@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I would hardly call $495 twice a year gouging. I'm not sure how you folks think Avid is supposed to run a company, employ engineers, support personnel, quality control, etc. if they don't charge for the product.
> > > >
> > > > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Shirley Gutierrez <guanacaa@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > I concur, Roger. Avid is living up to its old, bad reputation for gouging, and I still think they need to think more about being competitive than they are.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Shirley
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > > From: Roger <rogershuff@>
> > > > > To: Avid-L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > > Sent: Sat, Sep 8, 2012 10:52 am
> > > > > Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] MC 6.5
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > All sounds good and genuinely useful but my point remains - I wish Avid would
> > > > > recognise the loyalty of those users who had paid out for v6 recently. Some kind
> > > > > of deal like the free upgrade for those purchase since August. If it was $199
> > > > > for v6 owners until September 30th then reverted to the posted prices - that
> > > > > kind of thing would sugar the pill and bring in some revenue and cut down on the
> > > > > many moans on this list.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On 8 Sep 2012, at 18:43, electropura212 wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Daniel Frome posted this on the Cow...anyone else using it care to comment?
> > > > > > You would think Avid would be shouting about some of the under the hood
> > > > > > stuff...
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Here is a shortlist of the main additions/changes:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > New codecs:
> > > > > > 1) DNx80 and DNx100 for DSLR or other 4:2:0 sources or whatever you want
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 2) jpeg2000 (aka j2k): 10bit 4:2:2 visually lossless at any broadcast
> > > > > > resolution. 30-50Mbits for SD. 90-150Mbits for HD. This is a favourite
> > > > > > codec for me: since very often 1080p/23.98 material hovers around the
> > > > > > 100Mbits data rate and it is better than ProResHQ in terms of quality
> > > > > > (which is twice the bitrate).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Under the hood improvement:
> > > > > > - way faster AMA-->transcode processes. Transcoding will now often smother
> > > > > > your CPU usage, especially if using the new J2K codec -- flatlines even 12
> > > > > > core workstations - and transcodes multitudes faster than real-time (on
> > > > > > multicore systems). In general, a quad core i7 will still see slightly
> > > > > > faster transcodes into DnxHD than j2k, where as 8 and 12 core machines will
> > > > > > see dramatic speed increases in favour of j2k.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - improved quicktime h264 cpu/speed: H264 exporting now uses 4 to 5 cores
> > > > > > on average - often finishes 1080p/23.98 renders at about 80% of real-time
> > > > > > (single pass, quality-based exports). Also far less crashes when exporting
> > > > > > long sequences.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - improved performance with most 3rd party video IO devices, especially
> > > > > > blackmagic devices.
> > > > > > overall much snappier response on the timeline, more similar to v5.5
> > > > > > snappiness (there is 1 known bug with 'fast scrub' that is being addressed
> > > > > > in a 6.5.1 patch, but it is not major).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > UI/Workflow additions:
> > > > > > - Avid can now "search and find" batches of AMA clips and automatically
> > > > > > relink them, similar to how FCP does this.
> > > > > > - You can now select multiple non-adjacent clips and move them around as a
> > > > > > unit, without needing to select the filler between them.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - The Relink window now offers more options for relinking to files of
> > > > > > different of metadata.
> > > > > > - You can now turn off automatic AMA volume mounting (but still have AMA
> > > > > > enabled).
> > > > > > - You can still use classic XDCAM and P2 import functions while AMA is on.
> > > > > > - full Redcolor 3 and Redgamma 3 support
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Saturday, September 8, 2012, Benjamin Hershleder wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > **
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have to agree with Roger on this one.
> > > > > > > To borrow a word being used a lot right now in the US due to the
> > > > > > > campaigning,
> > > > > > > there's something to be said for "optics."
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > B
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Benjamin Hershleder
> > > > > > > http://ContactBen.com
> > > > > > > http://Hershleder.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Wear It In Post!
> > > > > > > Fun T-shirts, mousepads, mugs & more
> > > > > > > for Post Production Professionals
> > > > > > > http://www.WearItInPost.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Sep 8, 2012, at 1:15 AM, Roger wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Fair point but once again Avid are penalising those who have bought
> > > > > > > previous upgrades. $499 from v6 but only an extra $100 ($599) from earlier
> > > > > > > versions. How about $249 from v6 and $599 from earlier versions? That might
> > > > > > > repay all of us who have been effectively beta-testing (gamma-testing?) 6.0
> > > > > > > and feeding back bug reports to Avid.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On 7 Sep 2012, at 17:42, Terence Curren wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> Well, based on the past few years I would say we are going to see two
> > > > > > > updates per year. You don't have to buy every one. If the new features
> > > > > > > aren't worth the upgrade price to you, then skip it. Bug fixes get applied
> > > > > > > to the previous version also.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> -RECENT ACTIVITY: New Members 2
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Visit Your Group
> > > > > > > >> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > > > > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > > > >> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest  Unsubscribe  Terms of Use
> > > > > > > >> .
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > With best wishes,
> > > > > > > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > > > > > > +44 7973 543 660
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > > > > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > With best wishes,
> > > > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > > > +44 7973 543 660
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > David Dodson
> > davidadodson@
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:   http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Re: MC 6.5

 

right.

Owen

On Sep 8, 2012, at 4:28 AM, "Job ter Burg (L2B)" <Job_L2@terburg.com> wrote:

>
> The message that sends is: if you need or want this upgrade, and can justify the 500 dollars, buy it now. If there's nothing in there you need, save your dough and wait for the next upgrade. No guarantees, but it has been like this for a while. It seems to me that their strategy is that who wants to be on the latest and greatest version will need to cough up most dough for the new stuff, as they will likely be more tied in to the product (or the more heavy users). Yet they don't alienate owners of previous versions, as they allow them re-entry at any point, for a relatively small premium (20% in the case of 6.5).
>
> On 8 sep. 2012, at 10:15, Roger wrote:
>
> > Fair point but once again Avid are penalising those who have bought previous upgrades. $499 from v6 but only an extra $100 ($599) from earlier versions.
>
>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:   http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] Re: MC 6.5

 

I might think it was a steal (instead of stealing) if I could launch it without unplugging my Ethernet...if Title Tool was something useful instead of Antidiluvian code...if workflow with AMA clips had been thought out...

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, David Dodson <davidadodson@...> wrote:
>
>
> Well, I don't know, I'm sure I'm being naive here, but we're talking about a piece of software around which many of us make our very livelihoods. If Avid software is so far and away not a value for the money that Avid is asking, then I'm sure all the people who are upset about their pricing plans will have no problem switching to the NLE that IS an appropriate value for the money AND will support their professional livelihoods.
>
> As for me, I think it's really kind of a steal. Honestly, I have no emotional investment in Avid. I'll happily cut on whatever tool best does the job. But for the kind of work I do, there is no better tool than Avid, and I'm happy to pay a premium price if it helps Avid improve quality and stick around longer. I mean, really. People in other professions often spend a whole helluva lot more on their kits. Our software investments are a lot smaller than some others.
>
> DD
>
>
> On Sep 8, 2012, at 6:00 PM, Mike Chapman wrote:
>
> > Oh, please. Poor Avid! Let's all pledge to spend nearly twice the academic price of Media Composer per year to keep QA engineers in India employed.
> >
> > Gotta go cut a piece on FCP X, so y'all excuse me.
> >
> > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Terence Curren" <tcurren@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I would hardly call $495 twice a year gouging. I'm not sure how you folks think Avid is supposed to run a company, employ engineers, support personnel, quality control, etc. if they don't charge for the product.
> > >
> > > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Shirley Gutierrez <guanacaa@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I concur, Roger. Avid is living up to its old, bad reputation for gouging, and I still think they need to think more about being competitive than they are.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Shirley
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Roger <rogershuff@>
> > > > To: Avid-L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Sent: Sat, Sep 8, 2012 10:52 am
> > > > Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] MC 6.5
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > All sounds good and genuinely useful but my point remains - I wish Avid would
> > > > recognise the loyalty of those users who had paid out for v6 recently. Some kind
> > > > of deal like the free upgrade for those purchase since August. If it was $199
> > > > for v6 owners until September 30th then reverted to the posted prices - that
> > > > kind of thing would sugar the pill and bring in some revenue and cut down on the
> > > > many moans on this list.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 8 Sep 2012, at 18:43, electropura212 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Daniel Frome posted this on the Cow...anyone else using it care to comment?
> > > > > You would think Avid would be shouting about some of the under the hood
> > > > > stuff...
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is a shortlist of the main additions/changes:
> > > > >
> > > > > New codecs:
> > > > > 1) DNx80 and DNx100 for DSLR or other 4:2:0 sources or whatever you want
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) jpeg2000 (aka j2k): 10bit 4:2:2 visually lossless at any broadcast
> > > > > resolution. 30-50Mbits for SD. 90-150Mbits for HD. This is a favourite
> > > > > codec for me: since very often 1080p/23.98 material hovers around the
> > > > > 100Mbits data rate and it is better than ProResHQ in terms of quality
> > > > > (which is twice the bitrate).
> > > > >
> > > > > Under the hood improvement:
> > > > > - way faster AMA-->transcode processes. Transcoding will now often smother
> > > > > your CPU usage, especially if using the new J2K codec -- flatlines even 12
> > > > > core workstations - and transcodes multitudes faster than real-time (on
> > > > > multicore systems). In general, a quad core i7 will still see slightly
> > > > > faster transcodes into DnxHD than j2k, where as 8 and 12 core machines will
> > > > > see dramatic speed increases in favour of j2k.
> > > > >
> > > > > - improved quicktime h264 cpu/speed: H264 exporting now uses 4 to 5 cores
> > > > > on average - often finishes 1080p/23.98 renders at about 80% of real-time
> > > > > (single pass, quality-based exports). Also far less crashes when exporting
> > > > > long sequences.
> > > > >
> > > > > - improved performance with most 3rd party video IO devices, especially
> > > > > blackmagic devices.
> > > > > overall much snappier response on the timeline, more similar to v5.5
> > > > > snappiness (there is 1 known bug with 'fast scrub' that is being addressed
> > > > > in a 6.5.1 patch, but it is not major).
> > > > >
> > > > > UI/Workflow additions:
> > > > > - Avid can now "search and find" batches of AMA clips and automatically
> > > > > relink them, similar to how FCP does this.
> > > > > - You can now select multiple non-adjacent clips and move them around as a
> > > > > unit, without needing to select the filler between them.
> > > > >
> > > > > - The Relink window now offers more options for relinking to files of
> > > > > different of metadata.
> > > > > - You can now turn off automatic AMA volume mounting (but still have AMA
> > > > > enabled).
> > > > > - You can still use classic XDCAM and P2 import functions while AMA is on.
> > > > > - full Redcolor 3 and Redgamma 3 support
> > > > >
> > > > > On Saturday, September 8, 2012, Benjamin Hershleder wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > **
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have to agree with Roger on this one.
> > > > > > To borrow a word being used a lot right now in the US due to the
> > > > > > campaigning,
> > > > > > there's something to be said for "optics."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > B
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Benjamin Hershleder
> > > > > > http://ContactBen.com
> > > > > > http://Hershleder.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wear It In Post!
> > > > > > Fun T-shirts, mousepads, mugs & more
> > > > > > for Post Production Professionals
> > > > > > http://www.WearItInPost.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sep 8, 2012, at 1:15 AM, Roger wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Fair point but once again Avid are penalising those who have bought
> > > > > > previous upgrades. $499 from v6 but only an extra $100 ($599) from earlier
> > > > > > versions. How about $249 from v6 and $599 from earlier versions? That might
> > > > > > repay all of us who have been effectively beta-testing (gamma-testing?) 6.0
> > > > > > and feeding back bug reports to Avid.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 7 Sep 2012, at 17:42, Terence Curren wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Well, based on the past few years I would say we are going to see two
> > > > > > updates per year. You don't have to buy every one. If the new features
> > > > > > aren't worth the upgrade price to you, then skip it. Bug fixes get applied
> > > > > > to the previous version also.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> -RECENT ACTIVITY: New Members 2
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Visit Your Group
> > > > > > >> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > > > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > > >> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest  Unsubscribe  Terms of Use
> > > > > > >> .
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > With best wishes,
> > > > > > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > > > > > +44 7973 543 660
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > > > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > With best wishes,
> > > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > > +44 7973 543 660
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> David Dodson
> davidadodson@...
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:   http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
.

__,_._,___

[Avid-L2] Re: MC 6.5

 


"lLike"

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Shirley Gutierrez <guanacaa@...> wrote:
>
> I happen to love Avid's basic editorial model, and it works quite well for me in many situations. I just don't think they're being competitive in today's market, and I'd like them to be competitive since I want them to stick around.
>
>
> Shirley
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Dodson <davidadodson@...>
> To: Avid-L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sat, Sep 8, 2012 6:09 pm
> Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Re: MC 6.5
>
>
>
> Well, I don't know, I'm sure I'm being naive here, but we're talking about a
> piece of software around which many of us make our very livelihoods. If Avid
> software is so far and away not a value for the money that Avid is asking, then
> I'm sure all the people who are upset about their pricing plans will have no
> problem switching to the NLE that IS an appropriate value for the money AND will
> support their professional livelihoods.
>
> As for me, I think it's really kind of a steal. Honestly, I have no emotional
> investment in Avid. I'll happily cut on whatever tool best does the job. But for
> the kind of work I do, there is no better tool than Avid, and I'm happy to pay a
> premium price if it helps Avid improve quality and stick around longer. I mean,
> really. People in other professions often spend a whole helluva lot more on
> their kits. Our software investments are a lot smaller than some others.
>
> DD
>
>
> On Sep 8, 2012, at 6:00 PM, Mike Chapman wrote:
>
> > Oh, please. Poor Avid! Let's all pledge to spend nearly twice the academic
> price of Media Composer per year to keep QA engineers in India employed.
> >
> > Gotta go cut a piece on FCP X, so y'all excuse me.
> >
> > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Terence Curren" <tcurren@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I would hardly call $495 twice a year gouging. I'm not sure how you folks
> think Avid is supposed to run a company, employ engineers, support personnel,
> quality control, etc. if they don't charge for the product.
> > >
> > > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Shirley Gutierrez <guanacaa@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I concur, Roger. Avid is living up to its old, bad reputation for gouging,
> and I still think they need to think more about being competitive than they are.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Shirley
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > From: Roger <rogershuff@>
> > > > To: Avid-L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> > > > Sent: Sat, Sep 8, 2012 10:52 am
> > > > Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] MC 6.5
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > All sounds good and genuinely useful but my point remains - I wish Avid
> would
> > > > recognise the loyalty of those users who had paid out for v6 recently.
> Some kind
> > > > of deal like the free upgrade for those purchase since August. If it was
> $199
> > > > for v6 owners until September 30th then reverted to the posted prices -
> that
> > > > kind of thing would sugar the pill and bring in some revenue and cut down
> on the
> > > > many moans on this list.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 8 Sep 2012, at 18:43, electropura212 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Daniel Frome posted this on the Cow...anyone else using it care to
> comment?
> > > > > You would think Avid would be shouting about some of the under the hood
> > > > > stuff...
> > > > >
> > > > > Here is a shortlist of the main additions/changes:
> > > > >
> > > > > New codecs:
> > > > > 1) DNx80 and DNx100 for DSLR or other 4:2:0 sources or whatever you want
> > > > >
> > > > > 2) jpeg2000 (aka j2k): 10bit 4:2:2 visually lossless at any broadcast
> > > > > resolution. 30-50Mbits for SD. 90-150Mbits for HD. This is a favourite
> > > > > codec for me: since very often 1080p/23.98 material hovers around the
> > > > > 100Mbits data rate and it is better than ProResHQ in terms of quality
> > > > > (which is twice the bitrate).
> > > > >
> > > > > Under the hood improvement:
> > > > > - way faster AMA-->transcode processes. Transcoding will now often
> smother
> > > > > your CPU usage, especially if using the new J2K codec -- flatlines even
> 12
> > > > > core workstations - and transcodes multitudes faster than real-time (on
> > > > > multicore systems). In general, a quad core i7 will still see slightly
> > > > > faster transcodes into DnxHD than j2k, where as 8 and 12 core machines
> will
> > > > > see dramatic speed increases in favour of j2k.
> > > > >
> > > > > - improved quicktime h264 cpu/speed: H264 exporting now uses 4 to 5
> cores
> > > > > on average - often finishes 1080p/23.98 renders at about 80% of
> real-time
> > > > > (single pass, quality-based exports). Also far less crashes when
> exporting
> > > > > long sequences.
> > > > >
> > > > > - improved performance with most 3rd party video IO devices, especially
> > > > > blackmagic devices.
> > > > > overall much snappier response on the timeline, more similar to v5.5
> > > > > snappiness (there is 1 known bug with 'fast scrub' that is being
> addressed
> > > > > in a 6.5.1 patch, but it is not major).
> > > > >
> > > > > UI/Workflow additions:
> > > > > - Avid can now "search and find" batches of AMA clips and automatically
> > > > > relink them, similar to how FCP does this.
> > > > > - You can now select multiple non-adjacent clips and move them around as
> a
> > > > > unit, without needing to select the filler between them.
> > > > >
> > > > > - The Relink window now offers more options for relinking to files of
> > > > > different of metadata.
> > > > > - You can now turn off automatic AMA volume mounting (but still have AMA
> > > > > enabled).
> > > > > - You can still use classic XDCAM and P2 import functions while AMA is
> on.
> > > > > - full Redcolor 3 and Redgamma 3 support
> > > > >
> > > > > On Saturday, September 8, 2012, Benjamin Hershleder wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > **
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have to agree with Roger on this one.
> > > > > > To borrow a word being used a lot right now in the US due to the
> > > > > > campaigning,
> > > > > > there's something to be said for "optics."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > B
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Benjamin Hershleder
> > > > > > http://ContactBen.com
> > > > > > http://Hershleder.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Wear It In Post!
> > > > > > Fun T-shirts, mousepads, mugs & more
> > > > > > for Post Production Professionals
> > > > > > http://www.WearItInPost.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Sep 8, 2012, at 1:15 AM, Roger wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Fair point but once again Avid are penalising those who have bought
> > > > > > previous upgrades. $499 from v6 but only an extra $100 ($599) from
> earlier
> > > > > > versions. How about $249 from v6 and $599 from earlier versions? That
> might
> > > > > > repay all of us who have been effectively beta-testing
> (gamma-testing?) 6.0
> > > > > > and feeding back bug reports to Avid.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 7 Sep 2012, at 17:42, Terence Curren wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Well, based on the past few years I would say we are going to see
> two
> > > > > > updates per year. You don't have to buy every one. If the new features
> > > > > > aren't worth the upgrade price to you, then skip it. Bug fixes get
> applied
> > > > > > to the previous version also.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> -RECENT ACTIVITY: New Members 2
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Visit Your Group
> > > > > > >> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > > > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > > >> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest  Unsubscribe  Terms of Use
> > > > > > >> .
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > With best wishes,
> > > > > > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > > > > > +44 7973 543 660
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > > > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > With best wishes,
> > > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > > +44 7973 543 660
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> David Dodson
> davidadodson@...
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:   http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Re: MC 6.5

 

I happen to love Avid's basic editorial model, and it works quite well for me in many situations. I just don't think they're being competitive in today's market, and I'd like them to be competitive since I want them to stick around.

Shirley

-----Original Message-----
From: David Dodson <davidadodson@sbcglobal.net>
To: Avid-L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Sep 8, 2012 6:09 pm
Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] Re: MC 6.5

Well, I don't know, I'm sure I'm being naive here, but we're talking about a
piece of software around which many of us make our very livelihoods. If Avid
software is so far and away not a value for the money that Avid is asking, then
I'm sure all the people who are upset about their pricing plans will have no
problem switching to the NLE that IS an appropriate value for the money AND will
support their professional livelihoods.

As for me, I think it's really kind of a steal. Honestly, I have no emotional
investment in Avid. I'll happily cut on whatever tool best does the job. But for
the kind of work I do, there is no better tool than Avid, and I'm happy to pay a
premium price if it helps Avid improve quality and stick around longer. I mean,
really. People in other professions often spend a whole helluva lot more on
their kits. Our software investments are a lot smaller than some others.

DD

On Sep 8, 2012, at 6:00 PM, Mike Chapman wrote:

> Oh, please. Poor Avid! Let's all pledge to spend nearly twice the academic
price of Media Composer per year to keep QA engineers in India employed.
>
> Gotta go cut a piece on FCP X, so y'all excuse me.
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Terence Curren" <tcurren@...> wrote:
> >
> > I would hardly call $495 twice a year gouging. I'm not sure how you folks
think Avid is supposed to run a company, employ engineers, support personnel,
quality control, etc. if they don't charge for the product.
> >
> > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Shirley Gutierrez <guanacaa@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I concur, Roger. Avid is living up to its old, bad reputation for gouging,
and I still think they need to think more about being competitive than they are.
> > >
> > >
> > > Shirley
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Roger <rogershuff@>
> > > To: Avid-L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Sat, Sep 8, 2012 10:52 am
> > > Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] MC 6.5
> > >
> > >
> > > All sounds good and genuinely useful but my point remains - I wish Avid
would
> > > recognise the loyalty of those users who had paid out for v6 recently.
Some kind
> > > of deal like the free upgrade for those purchase since August. If it was
$199
> > > for v6 owners until September 30th then reverted to the posted prices -
that
> > > kind of thing would sugar the pill and bring in some revenue and cut down
on the
> > > many moans on this list.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8 Sep 2012, at 18:43, electropura212 wrote:
> > >
> > > > Daniel Frome posted this on the Cow...anyone else using it care to
comment?
> > > > You would think Avid would be shouting about some of the under the hood
> > > > stuff...
> > > >
> > > > Here is a shortlist of the main additions/changes:
> > > >
> > > > New codecs:
> > > > 1) DNx80 and DNx100 for DSLR or other 4:2:0 sources or whatever you want
> > > >
> > > > 2) jpeg2000 (aka j2k): 10bit 4:2:2 visually lossless at any broadcast
> > > > resolution. 30-50Mbits for SD. 90-150Mbits for HD. This is a favourite
> > > > codec for me: since very often 1080p/23.98 material hovers around the
> > > > 100Mbits data rate and it is better than ProResHQ in terms of quality
> > > > (which is twice the bitrate).
> > > >
> > > > Under the hood improvement:
> > > > - way faster AMA-->transcode processes. Transcoding will now often
smother
> > > > your CPU usage, especially if using the new J2K codec -- flatlines even
12
> > > > core workstations - and transcodes multitudes faster than real-time (on
> > > > multicore systems). In general, a quad core i7 will still see slightly
> > > > faster transcodes into DnxHD than j2k, where as 8 and 12 core machines
will
> > > > see dramatic speed increases in favour of j2k.
> > > >
> > > > - improved quicktime h264 cpu/speed: H264 exporting now uses 4 to 5
cores
> > > > on average - often finishes 1080p/23.98 renders at about 80% of
real-time
> > > > (single pass, quality-based exports). Also far less crashes when
exporting
> > > > long sequences.
> > > >
> > > > - improved performance with most 3rd party video IO devices, especially
> > > > blackmagic devices.
> > > > overall much snappier response on the timeline, more similar to v5.5
> > > > snappiness (there is 1 known bug with 'fast scrub' that is being
addressed
> > > > in a 6.5.1 patch, but it is not major).
> > > >
> > > > UI/Workflow additions:
> > > > - Avid can now "search and find" batches of AMA clips and automatically
> > > > relink them, similar to how FCP does this.
> > > > - You can now select multiple non-adjacent clips and move them around as
a
> > > > unit, without needing to select the filler between them.
> > > >
> > > > - The Relink window now offers more options for relinking to files of
> > > > different of metadata.
> > > > - You can now turn off automatic AMA volume mounting (but still have AMA
> > > > enabled).
> > > > - You can still use classic XDCAM and P2 import functions while AMA is
on.
> > > > - full Redcolor 3 and Redgamma 3 support
> > > >
> > > > On Saturday, September 8, 2012, Benjamin Hershleder wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > **
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I have to agree with Roger on this one.
> > > > > To borrow a word being used a lot right now in the US due to the
> > > > > campaigning,
> > > > > there's something to be said for "optics."
> > > > >
> > > > > B
> > > > >
> > > > > Benjamin Hershleder
> > > > > http://ContactBen.com
> > > > > http://Hershleder.com
> > > > >
> > > > > Wear It In Post!
> > > > > Fun T-shirts, mousepads, mugs & more
> > > > > for Post Production Professionals
> > > > > http://www.WearItInPost.com
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sep 8, 2012, at 1:15 AM, Roger wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Fair point but once again Avid are penalising those who have bought
> > > > > previous upgrades. $499 from v6 but only an extra $100 ($599) from
earlier
> > > > > versions. How about $249 from v6 and $599 from earlier versions? That
might
> > > > > repay all of us who have been effectively beta-testing
(gamma-testing?) 6.0
> > > > > and feeding back bug reports to Avid.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 7 Sep 2012, at 17:42, Terence Curren wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Well, based on the past few years I would say we are going to see
two
> > > > > updates per year. You don't have to buy every one. If the new features
> > > > > aren't worth the upgrade price to you, then skip it. Bug fixes get
applied
> > > > > to the previous version also.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -RECENT ACTIVITY: New Members 2
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Visit Your Group
> > > > > >> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > >> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest  Unsubscribe  Terms of Use
> > > > > >> .
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With best wishes,
> > > > > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > > > > +44 7973 543 660
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > With best wishes,
> > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > +44 7973 543 660
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>
>

David Dodson
davidadodson@sbcglobal.net

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

------------------------------------

Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:   http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Re: MC 6.5

 

One way to pay all those people is to expand your customer base by being competitive and innovative, and by marketing well. Does anything else really need to be said about Avid's missed opportunities in all those departments? Or about its superannuated effects model? Or about the arbitrarily structured product line?

Avid has taken the other fork in the road, the one marked "Charge Your User Base $500 Bucks Every Few Months." I have trouble characterizing that as good business.

Shirley

-----Original Message-----
From: Terence Curren <tcurren@aol.com>
To: Avid-L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sat, Sep 8, 2012 1:55 pm
Subject: [Avid-L2] Re: MC 6.5

I would hardly call $495 twice a year gouging. I'm not sure how you folks think
Avid is supposed to run a company, employ engineers, support personnel, quality
control, etc. if they don't charge for the product.

--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Shirley Gutierrez <guanacaa@...> wrote:
>
> I concur, Roger. Avid is living up to its old, bad reputation for gouging, and
I still think they need to think more about being competitive than they are.
>
>
> Shirley
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Roger <rogershuff@...>
> To: Avid-L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Sat, Sep 8, 2012 10:52 am
> Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] MC 6.5
>
>
> All sounds good and genuinely useful but my point remains - I wish Avid would
> recognise the loyalty of those users who had paid out for v6 recently. Some
kind
> of deal like the free upgrade for those purchase since August. If it was $199
> for v6 owners until September 30th then reverted to the posted prices - that
> kind of thing would sugar the pill and bring in some revenue and cut down on
the
> many moans on this list.
>
>
> On 8 Sep 2012, at 18:43, electropura212 wrote:
>
> > Daniel Frome posted this on the Cow...anyone else using it care to comment?
> > You would think Avid would be shouting about some of the under the hood
> > stuff...
> >
> > Here is a shortlist of the main additions/changes:
> >
> > New codecs:
> > 1) DNx80 and DNx100 for DSLR or other 4:2:0 sources or whatever you want
> >
> > 2) jpeg2000 (aka j2k): 10bit 4:2:2 visually lossless at any broadcast
> > resolution. 30-50Mbits for SD. 90-150Mbits for HD. This is a favourite
> > codec for me: since very often 1080p/23.98 material hovers around the
> > 100Mbits data rate and it is better than ProResHQ in terms of quality
> > (which is twice the bitrate).
> >
> > Under the hood improvement:
> > - way faster AMA-->transcode processes. Transcoding will now often smother
> > your CPU usage, especially if using the new J2K codec -- flatlines even 12
> > core workstations - and transcodes multitudes faster than real-time (on
> > multicore systems). In general, a quad core i7 will still see slightly
> > faster transcodes into DnxHD than j2k, where as 8 and 12 core machines will
> > see dramatic speed increases in favour of j2k.
> >
> > - improved quicktime h264 cpu/speed: H264 exporting now uses 4 to 5 cores
> > on average - often finishes 1080p/23.98 renders at about 80% of real-time
> > (single pass, quality-based exports). Also far less crashes when exporting
> > long sequences.
> >
> > - improved performance with most 3rd party video IO devices, especially
> > blackmagic devices.
> > overall much snappier response on the timeline, more similar to v5.5
> > snappiness (there is 1 known bug with 'fast scrub' that is being addressed
> > in a 6.5.1 patch, but it is not major).
> >
> > UI/Workflow additions:
> > - Avid can now "search and find" batches of AMA clips and automatically
> > relink them, similar to how FCP does this.
> > - You can now select multiple non-adjacent clips and move them around as a
> > unit, without needing to select the filler between them.
> >
> > - The Relink window now offers more options for relinking to files of
> > different of metadata.
> > - You can now turn off automatic AMA volume mounting (but still have AMA
> > enabled).
> > - You can still use classic XDCAM and P2 import functions while AMA is on.
> > - full Redcolor 3 and Redgamma 3 support
> >
> > On Saturday, September 8, 2012, Benjamin Hershleder wrote:
> >
> > > **
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I have to agree with Roger on this one.
> > > To borrow a word being used a lot right now in the US due to the
> > > campaigning,
> > > there's something to be said for "optics."
> > >
> > > B
> > >
> > > Benjamin Hershleder
> > > http://ContactBen.com
> > > http://Hershleder.com
> > >
> > > Wear It In Post!
> > > Fun T-shirts, mousepads, mugs & more
> > > for Post Production Professionals
> > > http://www.WearItInPost.com
> > >
> > > On Sep 8, 2012, at 1:15 AM, Roger wrote:
> > >
> > > > Fair point but once again Avid are penalising those who have bought
> > > previous upgrades. $499 from v6 but only an extra $100 ($599) from earlier
> > > versions. How about $249 from v6 and $599 from earlier versions? That
might
> > > repay all of us who have been effectively beta-testing (gamma-testing?)
6.0
> > > and feeding back bug reports to Avid.
> > > >
> > > > On 7 Sep 2012, at 17:42, Terence Curren wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Well, based on the past few years I would say we are going to see two
> > > updates per year. You don't have to buy every one. If the new features
> > > aren't worth the upgrade price to you, then skip it. Bug fixes get applied
> > > to the previous version also.
> > > >>
> > > >> -RECENT ACTIVITY: New Members 2
> > > >>
> > > >> Visit Your Group
> > > >> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > >> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest  Unsubscribe  Terms of Use
> > > >> .
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > With best wishes,
> > > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > > +44 7973 543 660
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
> With best wishes,
> Roger Shufflebottom
> +44 7973 543 660
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

------------------------------------

Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
Yahoo! Groups Links

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

__._,_.___
Recent Activity:
Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:   http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
.

__,_._,___

Re: [Avid-L2] Re: MC 6.5

Well, I don't know, I'm sure I'm being naive here, but we're talking about a piece of software around which many of us make our very livelihoods. If Avid software is so far and away not a value for the money that Avid is asking, then I'm sure all the people who are upset about their pricing plans will have no problem switching to the NLE that IS an appropriate value for the money AND will support their professional livelihoods.

As for me, I think it's really kind of a steal. Honestly, I have no emotional investment in Avid. I'll happily cut on whatever tool best does the job. But for the kind of work I do, there is no better tool than Avid, and I'm happy to pay a premium price if it helps Avid improve quality and stick around longer. I mean, really. People in other professions often spend a whole helluva lot more on their kits. Our software investments are a lot smaller than some others.

DD


On Sep 8, 2012, at 6:00 PM, Mike Chapman wrote:

> Oh, please. Poor Avid! Let's all pledge to spend nearly twice the academic price of Media Composer per year to keep QA engineers in India employed.
>
> Gotta go cut a piece on FCP X, so y'all excuse me.
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Terence Curren" <tcurren@...> wrote:
> >
> > I would hardly call $495 twice a year gouging. I'm not sure how you folks think Avid is supposed to run a company, employ engineers, support personnel, quality control, etc. if they don't charge for the product.
> >
> > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, Shirley Gutierrez <guanacaa@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I concur, Roger. Avid is living up to its old, bad reputation for gouging, and I still think they need to think more about being competitive than they are.
> > >
> > >
> > > Shirley
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Roger <rogershuff@>
> > > To: Avid-L2 <Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Sat, Sep 8, 2012 10:52 am
> > > Subject: Re: [Avid-L2] MC 6.5
> > >
> > >
> > > All sounds good and genuinely useful but my point remains - I wish Avid would
> > > recognise the loyalty of those users who had paid out for v6 recently. Some kind
> > > of deal like the free upgrade for those purchase since August. If it was $199
> > > for v6 owners until September 30th then reverted to the posted prices - that
> > > kind of thing would sugar the pill and bring in some revenue and cut down on the
> > > many moans on this list.
> > >
> > >
> > > On 8 Sep 2012, at 18:43, electropura212 wrote:
> > >
> > > > Daniel Frome posted this on the Cow...anyone else using it care to comment?
> > > > You would think Avid would be shouting about some of the under the hood
> > > > stuff...
> > > >
> > > > Here is a shortlist of the main additions/changes:
> > > >
> > > > New codecs:
> > > > 1) DNx80 and DNx100 for DSLR or other 4:2:0 sources or whatever you want
> > > >
> > > > 2) jpeg2000 (aka j2k): 10bit 4:2:2 visually lossless at any broadcast
> > > > resolution. 30-50Mbits for SD. 90-150Mbits for HD. This is a favourite
> > > > codec for me: since very often 1080p/23.98 material hovers around the
> > > > 100Mbits data rate and it is better than ProResHQ in terms of quality
> > > > (which is twice the bitrate).
> > > >
> > > > Under the hood improvement:
> > > > - way faster AMA-->transcode processes. Transcoding will now often smother
> > > > your CPU usage, especially if using the new J2K codec -- flatlines even 12
> > > > core workstations - and transcodes multitudes faster than real-time (on
> > > > multicore systems). In general, a quad core i7 will still see slightly
> > > > faster transcodes into DnxHD than j2k, where as 8 and 12 core machines will
> > > > see dramatic speed increases in favour of j2k.
> > > >
> > > > - improved quicktime h264 cpu/speed: H264 exporting now uses 4 to 5 cores
> > > > on average - often finishes 1080p/23.98 renders at about 80% of real-time
> > > > (single pass, quality-based exports). Also far less crashes when exporting
> > > > long sequences.
> > > >
> > > > - improved performance with most 3rd party video IO devices, especially
> > > > blackmagic devices.
> > > > overall much snappier response on the timeline, more similar to v5.5
> > > > snappiness (there is 1 known bug with 'fast scrub' that is being addressed
> > > > in a 6.5.1 patch, but it is not major).
> > > >
> > > > UI/Workflow additions:
> > > > - Avid can now "search and find" batches of AMA clips and automatically
> > > > relink them, similar to how FCP does this.
> > > > - You can now select multiple non-adjacent clips and move them around as a
> > > > unit, without needing to select the filler between them.
> > > >
> > > > - The Relink window now offers more options for relinking to files of
> > > > different of metadata.
> > > > - You can now turn off automatic AMA volume mounting (but still have AMA
> > > > enabled).
> > > > - You can still use classic XDCAM and P2 import functions while AMA is on.
> > > > - full Redcolor 3 and Redgamma 3 support
> > > >
> > > > On Saturday, September 8, 2012, Benjamin Hershleder wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > **
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I have to agree with Roger on this one.
> > > > > To borrow a word being used a lot right now in the US due to the
> > > > > campaigning,
> > > > > there's something to be said for "optics."
> > > > >
> > > > > B
> > > > >
> > > > > Benjamin Hershleder
> > > > > http://ContactBen.com
> > > > > http://Hershleder.com
> > > > >
> > > > > Wear It In Post!
> > > > > Fun T-shirts, mousepads, mugs & more
> > > > > for Post Production Professionals
> > > > > http://www.WearItInPost.com
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sep 8, 2012, at 1:15 AM, Roger wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Fair point but once again Avid are penalising those who have bought
> > > > > previous upgrades. $499 from v6 but only an extra $100 ($599) from earlier
> > > > > versions. How about $249 from v6 and $599 from earlier versions? That might
> > > > > repay all of us who have been effectively beta-testing (gamma-testing?) 6.0
> > > > > and feeding back bug reports to Avid.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 7 Sep 2012, at 17:42, Terence Curren wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Well, based on the past few years I would say we are going to see two
> > > > > updates per year. You don't have to buy every one. If the new features
> > > > > aren't worth the upgrade price to you, then skip it. Bug fixes get applied
> > > > > to the previous version also.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> -RECENT ACTIVITY: New Members 2
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Visit Your Group
> > > > > >> Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > >> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest  Unsubscribe  Terms of Use
> > > > > >> .
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With best wishes,
> > > > > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > > > > +44 7973 543 660
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ------------------------------------
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at:
> > > > > http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > With best wishes,
> > > Roger Shufflebottom
> > > +44 7973 543 660
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> >
>
>

David Dodson
davidadodson@sbcglobal.net





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Search the official Complete Avid-L archives at: http://archives.bengrosser.com/avid/
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Avid-L2/

<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Avid-L2/join
(Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
Avid-L2-digest@yahoogroups.com
Avid-L2-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
Avid-L2-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
There was an error in this gadget