Think I better say something before speculation ramps up.
This is my opinion gleaned from combining information from a lot of different
comments and sources. Nothing explicit or very specific.
What I consider important may not matter or bother other users. Some of the
things on my hit list don't look like they are in line to be addressed in the
next big 6.0 release. This is just based on reading in between the lines from
various Avid information on other issues.
What others consider important may in fact be addressed.
You are correct. It is a huge task to re-code an application from the ground up.
My out-dated experience with creating software suggests that it is not necessary
to completely re-write every part of a program to address 64bit or new operating
systems. You certainly could benefit from completely starting from scratch but
you could also save a lot of grief by maintaining some architecture and routines
or at least the logic behind them. An application like Composer isn't a
monolithic set of code, it is really a collection of compartments.
Apple chose to bite the bullet and do a massive re-tooling. I have no idea if
Avid is doing the same. Although I think they need to. A lot of the application
is messy, dated and functionally restricted due to legacy processes. Fit and
finish is very very poor.
However, I think all Composer users would like Avid to stop short of
re-inventing the entire editing experience. Though personally I would like to
see some sort of fresh thinking and innovation rolled in beyond the licensing of
technology from other companies. A truly focused dedication to image quality,
improved flexible processes across the current spectrum of features and high
performance with new formats would also be nice.
Additionally there are new problems to solve as we dive deeper into data driven
distribution. Better hooks to encoding via NATIVE tools to assist file based
delivery would be welcome and will soon be as critical as "digital cut".
Hello? Anyone listening? Step away from your rotary phones!!!
All of the above is a very tall order. Not easy. But Avid has had more time to
do it as they will be the last major manufacturer to attempt such a feat. Dead
last, which I hear is where the best likes to debut. Lot of pressure being the
closer.
My comment is more cautionary to those so heavy with criticism for FCPX.
I share the view that Apple missed the mark on many items. FCPX doesn't seem
like a piece of software I could use. However, they have big balls for being
bold. There are some very interesting things in FCPX. Apple's response to the
initial version of FCPX is that "it is only version 1 and the software will
continue to grow quickly".
While I would be shocked if Avid pulled out key parts of Composer the broadcast
trades rely on, I would not be surprised to hear a similar refrain from the
company regarding their version 1.0 64bit effort. Something to the effect that
"it was a major effort to re-tool, there is a lot we wanted to get to but
couldn't and more improvements are to come as we march into the future on this
new foundation."
Which is a valid position for both Apple and Avid. So those screaming about
Apple's situation may need to save some air for later.
It may be 6 months, it may be a year, but whenever we start to pull back the
curtain on 6.x I wonder if we will be able to non-modally adjust audio levels or
perform other simple tasks as the timeline plays? I wonder if will we suffer
with the same limited track to track video behavior. I wonder if working with
and exchanging 10bit or greater media will still be like threading a needle? I
wonder if the effects interface and plug in architecture remain a barrier to 3rd
party developers. I wonder if the color corrector will grow up and have the
range to get the most from log-c, s-log, arri raw or other raw material? Will
finished visual quality of effected or processed material be better or more
controllable? Will there be a host of new bugs or issues greater than the mere
irritants of the initial 5.X release? Etc.
Any takers on wagers?
Heck XML import of FCP sequences would be a pretty amazing advantage to have
NOW! Premiere does it natively and well! Avid and FCPX don't. Maybe Avid can
just license it from Automatic Duck and bundle it.
In my opinion marketing solutions to drive sales pale in contrast to real
invention. It takes more than a good deal, cross-grades and blog posts to be a
good solution.
And that is where my opinion on Premiere started. It is more like FCP than
Composer.
If you are an Avid editor who switched to FCP and is now returning to Composer,
welcome back. You will be happy here.
If you are a life long FCP editor (OMG, what!!!) comfortable with its methods
and ways you will be much happier with the latest version of Premiere. More so
if you are a single seat project studio operator or don't have a lot of project
sharing going on.
Premiere is only something I use occasionally, it isn't my cup of tea but anyone
who hasn't seen it lately needs to find a friend running it on proper CUDA
hardware to give you a demo of it screaming through multiple streams of various
heavy lift formats and footage (including h264 from DSLRS and R3D. Pretty damn
impressive, very fresh and very 64bit.
Adobe develops real technology that solves new problems like CMOS rolling
shutter skew, warp stabilizer, DPX sequence linking with LUT like control, etc.
The have an uninterrupted committed tradition of developing world class image
handling tools with precise, flexible controls. Their production suite is really
starting to pool these advantages. Adobe is not Apple. This software is their
business, maybe more so than Composer is to an increasingly fragmented Avid with
a mile long product roster.
Competition is good for us. FCP is the best thing to ever happen to Avid
editors. If FCPX turns out to be a disaster which users flee from, it may hurt
all professional editors. I hope Adobe Premiere becomes a very viable rival in
its place.
For Americans looking towards towards the Moon this 4th of July and thinking
with pride of the Stars and Stripes planted there realize sadly if it had not
been for the Russians it may not have ever happened.
On a less dramatic note, anyone in love with a new Sony F3 or Panasonic AF100
should be sending Cannon a thank you card.
C.A.M.
RTVF
________________________________
From: blafarm <blafarm@yahoo.com>
To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Thu, June 30, 2011 8:50:49 PM
Subject: [Avid-L2] Re: The FCPX thread
> > The upcoming 64bit version may not be much beyond a port AT FIRST as there
>are hints that long standing core issues and criticisms will not be addressed in
>the initial 6.x.
>
I forgot to ask -- are those "hints" somewhere documented on the 'net for others
to read? I'd be very curious to see that.
While I can readily imagine the effort a 64-bit port requires -- I would be
completely and utterly depressed if Avid simply "cloned" all the existing
problems and shortcomings -- onto a new software platform.
With the longstanding and assumed excuse that the un-addressed problems and
shortcomings were somehow related yo, or delayed by, an eventual migration to
64-bit -- there's going to be an awful lot of unhappy editors -- if they show up
next year in v.6.
--- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "blafarm" <blafarm@...> wrote:
>
> That was very well said.
>
>
>
> --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, chris magid <chris_rtvf@> wrote:
> >
> > Adobe CS5.5 is a much better choice for folks that love FCP.
> >
> > A critical reason is plug in support and plug in architecture. There are many
>
> > useful plug-ins which simply cannot be used via AVX. A ton. Most of the Red
> > Giant stuff is FCP and Adobe ONLY. If folks like the plug-ins they have under
>
> > FCP, they may disappointed with Avid.
> >
> > I sent a lot of emails to plug in developers begging for AVX versions of
>things
>
> > like Red Giant Denoiser, which is absolutely stunning. But an AVX version
>ain't
>
> > happening.
> >
> > There are also issues with open format support which Avid only tickles
>through
>
> > AMA. Same goes for true and versatile 10bit, 4:4:4 or greater video support.
> >
> > Also, CS5.5 is more likely to support their existing video card and other
> > hardware. In addition to the high likely hood that they can get video out
>from
>
> > After Effects and Photoshop, much like they could with Motion. Which Avid
>can't
>
> > do.
> >
> > Tight integration with After Effects is another plus. It is also complete
>suite
>
> > with Photoshop and Encore.
> >
> > Honestly we have to assess peoples needs and workflows in good faith and make
>
> > sensible recommendations. We shouldn't just be homers for the tools we use.
> >
> > For those users that have criticisms of FCP items which Composer dose well,
>then
>
> > Composer may be a good choice.
> >
> > But for those that lament the loss of the FCP they love, then Premiere
>through
>
> > CS 5.5 is a better bet.
> >
> > FCPX's perceived failure has not made Composer better. Winning by attrition
>is
>
> > not really winning. The goal is to advance the capabilities, quality and
> > usefulness of our tools. Avid still has much work to do and should be very
> > concerned about the first impression they make with any new customers.
> >
> > This isn't some simple contest to see how many folks we can friend on
>Facebook.
>
> >
> > Much of the behavior and ballyhooing I've seen online from industry notables
> > bares a striking resemblance to their own criticism of kool-aid drinkers and
>fan
>
> > boys of other trendy production products.
> >
> > Personally I think there is a foundation in FCPX which could grow to be
> > something nice.
> >
> > Avid has yet to re-tool composer from the ground up as Apple just did with
>FCPX.
>
> > It is something which has been needed for years. The upcoming 64bit version
>may
>
> > not be much beyond a port AT FIRST as there are hints that long standing core
>
> > issues and criticisms will not be addressed in the initial 6.x.
> >
> > C.A.M
> > RTVF
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ________________________________
> > From: Terence Curren <tcurren@>
> > To: Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com
> > Sent: Thu, June 30, 2011 11:50:50 AM
> > Subject: [Avid-L2] Re: The FCPX thread
> >
> >
> > You are talking to the wrong people here. You need to be convincing the FCP
> > users out there. And the former Avid users who went to FCP. That is what
>Adobe
>
> > is doing very effectively right this instant.
> >
> > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com, "Rupert Watson" <rupert@> wrote:
> >
> > <<So far, I have not seen the same level of commitment from Adobe and I have
> > heard NOTHING about their support dept. How does that work? Do they pay for
> > people to take support calls about the software or have they followed the
>Apple
>
> > model? >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
If you want to donate to Red Cross quake relief, you can do so through your cell phone. Text redcross to 90999 to make a $10 donation. It will be on your next cell bill.
No comments:
Post a Comment