This IS the Avid L2: Re: [Avid-L2] Re: FCP X update

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Re: [Avid-L2] Re: FCP X update

I can not keep up. I just want to edit. Sigh.

DD

On 10/24/2012 7:37 AM, john@digitalcut.com wrote:
>
> Amending my response, I have hopes after reading this;
>
> http://www.macworld.com/article/1165108/first_look_final_cut_pro_x_10_0_3_restores_professional_features_adds_notable_new_ones.html
>
> If its true, I take it all back
>
> John Kilgour
>
> On Oct 24, 2012, at 9:24 AM, "john@digitalcut.com
> <mailto:john%40digitalcut.com>" <john@digitalcut.com
> <mailto:john%40digitalcut.com>> wrote:
>
> > Ok, maybe the word suck was too much. It's brilliant! It's awesome!
> Is that what you want to hear? It's so awesome, that all of my
> broadcast clients have yet to install it in their professional
> environment. Most of NYC is either still on FCP 7 (which IS awesome),
> or has gone back to Avid. I really don't have the time to school you
> on the well documented reasons why FCP-X is crippled.
> >
> > John
> >
> > On Oct 24, 2012, at 8:38 AM, "haus" <switthaus@mac.com
> <mailto:switthaus%40mac.com>> wrote:
> >
> > > Thats the best answer you can give? Smells like fear to me.
> > >
> > > Tell us all why it sucks?
> > >
> > > sw
> > >
> > > --- In Avid-L2@yahoogroups.com <mailto:Avid-L2%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "john@..." <john@...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Google it brother
> > > >
> > > > John Kilgour
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Oct 23, 2012, at 9:19 PM, Philip Hodgetts <philip@...> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Oct 23, 2012, at 5:59 PM, john@... wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > It still sucks (for broadcast)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > John Kilgour
> > > > >
> > > > > Specifically why? You may well be right but I'd like to know why.
> > > > >
> > > > > Philip
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> >
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>

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