I received the following email today from someone who needs to remain anonymous. However, I trust them and their opinion and wanted to share their thoughts with you here as a way to continue our discussion.
While I don’t agree with all of this, it does spark an interesting chain of thought.
Larry
P.S. I did not write this, nor did I ask it to be written. I have obtained permission to share it with you.
– – –
Apple says that FCP X is about the future of NLE. After thinking about it, I think they are right.
It’s not just about the GUI or features per se… but the fact that our culture is going mobile and our work along with it. A new generation is growing up and moving them from iMovie to FCPX will be easy. Also the new generation will invent their own workflows and their own content and their own way of doing things. Apple may have jumped the gun in a way that made it impossible for a percentage of the current editing community to go along, but those folks are not the future. Not in the same way a 16-year-old iMovie whiz is.
Look at the big picture. Sales of standard PCs have fallen while portable products have been flying off the shelves. This is no fad, it’s the future.
Watch as the system requirements for NLE on the Apple side look more and more lean. Apple owns both hardware and OS, my bet is that they will leverage that to guarantee they are ahead of the curve in performance requiring smaller and smaller hardware overhead. It’s in this way, as the new generation of editors comes up, FCP will take back it’s place as the de facto platform for any level of project. I’m absolutely convinced (as is Apple) that sooner than you think, a teenager today will be working on an episode of “Extreme _____ Makeover” using an iPad__ with lots of storage on board. I already saw someone using an iPad as a 2nd display for FCP X and how some functions were already touch screen enabled. Those pissed off edit suite owners may be pissed off at what Apple has done, but just wait till all those up-and-coming digital kids start to see those very expensive edit suites as dinosaur grave yards.
That’s where Apple is headed and a powerful, sleek FCP that uses iCloud technology along with all the other new technologies is where the future really is. Does anyone remember those $250,000 edit suites that got replaced by a $1,300.00 Final Cut Studio, back in the day? Well, Apple is doing it again with one major change, this time they are obsoleting themselves before someone else does.
It really is the future, or at least it’s headed in that direction.
109 Responses to The Future of Non-Linear Editing?
← Older Comments Newer Comments →-
Peter Wiley says:
August 2, 2011 at 3:35 pm
-
Graham White says:
August 2, 2011 at 3:59 pm
-
Larry says:
August 2, 2011 at 4:31 pm
-
Nivardo Cavalcante says:
August 2, 2011 at 6:11 pm
-
Larry says:
August 2, 2011 at 6:14 pm
-
Dick Applebaum says:
August 2, 2011 at 7:19 pm
-
Larry says:
August 2, 2011 at 8:32 pm
-
Dick Applebaum says:
August 2, 2011 at 10:24 pm
-
Larry says:
August 2, 2011 at 10:59 pm
-
Don B says:
August 3, 2011 at 8:40 am
← Older Comments Newer Comments →At the end of the day, the future of editing depends on the future of the broadcast and motion picture industries. Both have undergone and are undergoing enormous changes.
For a number of years “Hollywood” has made more money via cable exhibition and DVD sales than ticket sales in theaters. Indeed, in some ways theatrical releases are advertising events for the DVD release. Now streaming movies threaten the DVD cash-cow. At the moment there are lots of people and companies trying to figure out streaming distribution. No one knows how it will work out, but consider recent reports about Apple’s rumored plans to release its own HDTVs. A recent Apple TV update added the capacity to buy and stream “TV shows”. The new Mac Mini does not have a DVD drive.
The advertising model that supported broadcast TV is drifting in the direction of obsolescence, as explained by Bob Garfield ( http://vimeo.com/6873200 )
You Tube is trying to encourage better content and bought a video production firm ( http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/08/technology/08youtube.html )
HTML now has a video tag.
What the guy says makes some sense. FCP X may indeed be aimed at this new world that is coming much faster than most think. Wether it’s the tool that wins the space is anyone’s guess.
@Frost … Your assumptions and your comments … give an insight into your level of professionalism. I’d hardly call the ability to export an EDL, an OMF, or to monitor [video] externally, features that only “Hollywood” editors require.
The fact that you don’t value these things, doesn’t preclude them from being a part of a collaborative workflow used by many in the industry – wedding videographers amongst them.
I slightly modified Graham’s comment.
Larry
You edit a video, does not mean being a video editor. There is a lot of learning to be a professional editor, assembly concepts, colorize, know how to cut a scene. I know, and I am an editor who needs to assimilate it all. Apple to make a profession, hobbyist.
Nivardo: I’m a bit confused about your last sentence: “Apple to make a profession, hobbyist.” Would you elaborate, please?
Larry
Here’s a look at editing from a different perspective — the prospective of one who employs the pros to do editing.
This is from a friend who is a high-level executive at one of the major TV Broadcast Networks. I asked for some feedback on FCPX vs FCP 7:
.
“FCP is actually a powerful program but I still think iMovie does the job for most less than 10 minutes productions. Its real value is revealed when using After Effects or Motion, integrated tight in the production. Content is still king and video ‘direction’ makes a video look pro… not really the ‘editing’ tools in most cases.
If you ever travel to NY I would love to give you a tour of some of the edit suites and see how the product is integrated in the workflow. FCP is not the main edit tool, however as a FCP fan you will see its value when connected to graphic virtual sets and tapeless video ingest servers. Pretty amazing in capable hands. But you will also see how simple on & off-line systems (equiv. to iMovie) does the bulk of the work.”
.
What really surprised me was:
” I still think iMovie does the job for most less than 10 minutes productions”
and
“simple on & off-line systems (equiv. to iMovie) does the bulk of the work.”
.
In my research on FCP 7 and FCPX, I have read multiple tales of when FCP was the “new kid on the block” — competing with the entrenched pro products costing 100 or 200 times as much.
I suspect that many, of today’s FCP 7 pros were early pioneers of FCP 1.0 — and were able to deliver a product faster and at lower cost that was “good enough” * to compete with the establishment..
* sometimes they were able to deliver a superior product or one not practical with the entrenched technology.
.
The executive quoted above says that iMovie is used for most jobs of 10 minutes or less and that iMovie equivalents do the bulk of their work.
They employ lots of professional editors.
.
What will happen to “today’s editing pros” when the iMovie equivalent is used for the bulk of work for 30-minute productions? 60-minute productions?
.
I am not suggesting that all pro editing will be done with iMovie — rather, that an evolving FCP X which combining FCP editing power with the speed and accessability of iMovie — this could satisfy many video production needs.
.
I guess the question is: “Will FCPX be good enough?”
To quote my friend: “The word came back. FCP X is a winner. “
Dick:
These comments certainly piqued my interest, because they seem to contradict what I’m hearing from other sources. Especially when (he) mentions that iMovie is being used for programs shorter than 10 minutes.
I am very doubtful about that. It, perhaps, suggests to me that this executive is not as familiar with their edit suites as (he) would like to pretend.
On the other hand, I could be wrong.
Where I do agree with you is that video editing is evolving quickly and the way we edit in two years will not be the same way we edit now. What we will be editing with, however, remains an open question.
Larry
Larry.
My friend has the props — so I don’t question the evaluation. I don’t think the statements come from a technical perspective — rather, from one who is responsible for the profit of the product.
I certainly will yield to your greater knowledge and connections within the industry — no question there!
However, pragmatically, it depends on who pays the bills and what they are willing to pay — and, for what!
Dick:
Thanks – sorry to have challenged the knowledge of your source. And the person holding the checkbook always has a large say in the matter.
Larry
For everyone holding up the idea that editors need to “embrace the future,” or that the former FCS represents the “dark days of the past,” please check out the article below from OneRiverMedia.com. It nicely sums up the breadth of damage that Apple has leveled upon a large number of loyal customers with it’s secretive, arrogant dismissal of a product line that was essential to the livelihood of this community. Apple made no provision whatsoever for these people in their years-long effort to “change everything!” And that’s the problem.
If you love iMovie Pro (aka FCP-ex), good for you. But if you don’t understand by now that it’s not just about the program, you’re missing the point.
“Is the trust for Apple gone for good?”
http://www.onerivermedia.com/blog/?p=322