4 ms·

My only hope is this doesn't turn into a FinalCut-type fiasco where what they consider the new "pro" isn't all that useful for pro. (Yes, I know more pros are

by abruzzi 12y ago

My only hope is this doesn't turn into a FinalCut-type fiasco where what they consider the new "pro" isn't all that useful for pro. (Yes, I know more pros are on adobe lightroom, but I really hate renting software so I'm not going in that direction.)

archagon 12y ago
I think Lightroom is one of the few Adobe products you can buy without a subscription, unless they changed that recently.
- rifleman 12y ago
  This is still true
  - alexqgb 12y ago
    Seems foolish to change. Unlike every other app Adobe offers, LR is also a library. Renting access to your own assets is categorically different from renting access to software which is already somebody else's IP and is also getting (more or less) continually updated. Letting people buy LR makes them feel comfortable about never losing access to their own raw material. The savvy approach is to let them have this much, charge them to do interesting things with it, and let them keep the final output in a place that remains entirely theirs.
- abruzzi 12y ago
  Good to know. I haven't used it, since I like Aperture, but I'll keep that in mind if Apple delivers something that doesn't do what I need/want. (FinalCut is still useless for my workflow.)
modfodder 12y ago
As a professional editor and technical director, I hope Apple continues to innovate, trying to push their software into the future. Otherwise you end up with a bunch of NLEs that really don't offer much of a difference (which is where we were with FCP7, Avid, and Premiere several years ago). I want my tools to become better, faster and more efficient and sometimes that will mean I have a bit of a learning curve to adjust to the new tool. Regularly bouncing between the four major NLEs (really 3 major plus FCPX), FCPX has become the fastest and most efficient NLE for my workflow. You mileage may vary in your desire to see your tools evolve, but I much prefer radical evolution, otherwise we'd still be cutting film on slightly upgraded Steenbecks and Moviolas.
interpol_p 12y ago
I really like what Apple did with FCP X and use it quite a lot. I'm probably in the minority though.
- coldtea 12y ago
  Actually tons of editors have reversed their opinions with the subsequent updates. As of 10.1 I don't think anybody thinks it's any kind of bad program anymore. Initially it was mostly people not understanding that a "rewrite from scratch" is inevitably going to lose some of their features, but will provide a better foundation for future stuff. Plus, some professional users think that the rules of software development don't apply to them, and that some features they used in 2002 should continue to exist in 2014, because "we're pro". And Apple discontinuing fcp 7 prematurely didn't help with that either.

by abruzzi 12y ago

archagon 12y ago

I think Lightroom is one of the few Adobe products you can buy without a subscription, unless they changed that recently.

rifleman 12y ago
This is still true
- alexqgb 12y ago
  Seems foolish to change. Unlike every other app Adobe offers, LR is also a library. Renting access to your own assets is categorically different from renting access to software which is already somebody else's IP and is also getting (more or less) continually updated. Letting people buy LR makes them feel comfortable about never losing access to their own raw material. The savvy approach is to let them have this much, charge them to do interesting things with it, and let them keep the final output in a place that remains entirely theirs.
abruzzi 12y ago
Good to know. I haven't used it, since I like Aperture, but I'll keep that in mind if Apple delivers something that doesn't do what I need/want. (FinalCut is still useless for my workflow.)

modfodder 12y ago

As a professional editor and technical director, I hope Apple continues to innovate, trying to push their software into the future. Otherwise you end up with a bunch of NLEs that really don't offer much of a difference (which is where we were with FCP7, Avid, and Premiere several years ago). I want my tools to become better, faster and more efficient and sometimes that will mean I have a bit of a learning curve to adjust to the new tool. Regularly bouncing between the four major NLEs (really 3 major plus FCPX), FCPX has become the fastest and most efficient NLE for my workflow. You mileage may vary in your desire to see your tools evolve, but I much prefer radical evolution, otherwise we'd still be cutting film on slightly upgraded Steenbecks and Moviolas.

interpol_p 12y ago

I really like what Apple did with FCP X and use it quite a lot. I'm probably in the minority though.

coldtea 12y ago
Actually tons of editors have reversed their opinions with the subsequent updates. As of 10.1 I don't think anybody thinks it's any kind of bad program anymore. Initially it was mostly people not understanding that a "rewrite from scratch" is inevitably going to lose some of their features, but will provide a better foundation for future stuff. Plus, some professional users think that the rules of software development don't apply to them, and that some features they used in 2002 should continue to exist in 2014, because "we're pro". And Apple discontinuing fcp 7 prematurely didn't help with that either.