The present and future of post production business and technology

Another Perspective on Final Cut Pro X A great perspective imho

I rather like this take on the reaction:

Beyond that, the new FCP is supposed to be easier for people who have never done serious video editing before. Pros don’t care about this, of course. In fact, many don’t like the idea of making video editing easier and expanding the pool of people who can do quality video editing. Making a task or software easier to use both makes current users’ jobs easier but also lowers the barriers to entry.

The thing about many Pros is that they like complexity on some levels. They like the idea of being elite and doing something that very few people can do. Or, more precisely, doing something that very few people would put up with. Just look at how complex and ugly Bloomberg Terminals are to see how people and industries like using something that looks complex and hard to comprehend by outsiders. Wall Street veterans have resisted a easier-to-user, easier-to-learn, more attractive Bloomberg Terminal for years.







8 responses to “Another Perspective on Final Cut Pro X”

  1. Jamie T

    Interesting perspective, but people seem to engage more in things that they find challenging: a person will invest much more time playing Chess rather than Tic-Tac-Toe. ]

    An article that made me think about FCPX and the post industry.


    1. I think in the world that FCP X is targeting, getting a result quickly and in abundance trumps perfection. The challenge is to get more done faster. I’ve long related that Shirky article and used is for a much earlier post. The Good Enough Revolution, but the Shirky one is Why the Broadcast TV Networks are toast which directly references Shirky.

  2. Jeff Handy

    My take is simply that I have to be able to hand off a project to any editor on our SAN. The editing is simple enough and our needs are nothing fancy. But it must be predictable, rock-solid reliable, shareable and enterprise-savvy. FCP 7 is exactly that. Hopefully the next rendition will be as well. Only time will tell.

  3. Jeff Handy

    And FWIW, I find ease of use as a rather compelling feature. I would not make a move to Avid unless and until FCP can no longer fit our needs. I also think the above argument is a nonstarter. But it is entertaining to here such hypotheses.

    1. Chris Wilby

      Jeff, it may be a nonstarter, but, thats because you’ve got an open mind about such things. You only have to have been on to the Apple forums this last fortnight or so, to see that things out in the big bad world of the ‘professional’ is as Philip says. Sad but true…

  4. Chumley

    The idea that “pros” want editing software to be complex because that offers job security is ridiculous. What people want is software with the features needed to do their job. I do not subscribe to the idea that FCPX is useless for everyone but for some jobs it is not yet up to the task.

  5. Riiight.

    So I should be happy with FCPx’s Color Board and call it a day?

    Otherwise I’m elitist? No one needs more control than that?

    After all – quality is dead anyway.

    I find that line of reasoning just as weak and self-indulgent as any other I’ve heard about why Broadcast pros should shut up about Apple EOLing FCP.

  6. No, I don’t think*you* should be happy with the color board. I think people who need tools outside FCP X should go to tools that provide what they need. It’s only a matter of weeks before we get a replacement for XML interchange and then FCP X Project can be taken to your finishing tool of choice, with direct video output.

    But should Apple have made a specialist tool then pass it off to the non-specialists who are the majority of their market? I think not. They made a core editing application to meet the needs of the majorit, with – I believe – a more robust interchange capability so that third parties can fill the ecosystem as they did for FCP 3-7.