dustylense
Veteran
Yep, that's Apple's business model, and a smart one at that!
Avid's reaction to FCPX
- Thread starter Newman
- Start date
Yep, that's Apple's business model, and a smart one at that!
Theres a lot of things in the FCX presentation that resonated with me when doing day to day cutting, simple things that constantly make me think - why cant I just......? Many of those I saw answers to. The problem is none of us know what it means for the rest of the suite etc. So Im waiting for those details. Needless to say I'll get FCP X. My editing system has FCS and Adobe CS5 currently so I feel covered.
Where I am scratching my head right now is colour grading. I happily use Apple color. I have the Euphonix (now Avid) MC Color interface. Love it. But color does have its issues and I have been waiting for an update. So if thats not forthcoming in all of this, I will definitely switch that over to Da Vinci resolve.
Where I am scratching my head right now is colour grading. I happily use Apple color. I have the Euphonix (now Avid) MC Color interface. Love it. But color does have its issues and I have been waiting for an update. So if thats not forthcoming in all of this, I will definitely switch that over to Da Vinci resolve.
Mike Harvey
Veteran
As a PC/Adobe guy, I don't generally disagree with you, but for what you say about Avid. Where I work, we have put well over $1m into Avid. From the time the P2 card come out of the camera to the time you see the footage at home, it's all Avid, all the time. Editing workstations, media management system. playback servers, on air graphics systems, news/scriptwriting software... it's all one giant integrated Avid bundle. Until this thread, I didn't know Apple even had any sort of media management system... and as stated earlier, it apparently stinks. That's not a small matter. Apple may well have 2 million users, but how many of them are willing to pay for an integrated system the way Avid customers do? I'm not being rhetorical... I genuinely don't know. But I don't know if Apple has a system one could potentially pay $1m for in the first place.
Which is why I think this whole "We're number #1/We're more professional" argument is silly... they're going for different aspects of the market. It's not entirely Apples (pun intended
) to oranges when comparing their product lines. It's a bit like comparing Ford Explorer sales to Mercedes E-class sales... yes they're both automobiles, but they're different types of customers in many cases.
Which is why I think this whole "We're number #1/We're more professional" argument is silly... they're going for different aspects of the market. It's not entirely Apples (pun intended
Have to completely agree with you here Mike.
walnutcrunch
Well-known member
As... I didn't know Apple even had any sort of media management system... and as stated earlier, it apparently stinks. That's not a small matter. Apple may well have 2 million users, but how many of them are willing to pay for an integrated system the way Avid customers do? I'm not being rhetorical... I genuinely don't know. But I don't know if Apple has a system one could potentially pay $1m for in the first place.
Which is why I think this whole "We're number #1/We're more professional" argument is silly... they're going for different aspects of the market. It's not entirely Apples (pun intended
I disagree with the guy that said that Final Cut Server (media management) stinks. It works like a charm for us and it keeps getting better. It's also only $1000 bucks for unlimited users. It is however, only as good as its setup as I imagine the Avid systems are. Probably unlike avid, any joker can set them up which leads to poorly configured systems and workflows.
FCSvr is an amazing product and we'd be dead in the water without it.
Mike Harvey
Veteran
I don't know too many of the specifics of how it's set up as I'm neither an editor or engineer at work, but the hardware is bought from Avid, so it's pretty turn key as far as I know. But like I said, to a certain degree it's Apples (pun
) and oranges. Five years from now that could all change, but right now Avid has a pretty good lock on certain aspects of the market because they either currently or have in the recent past offered things the others don't. And those offerings are *expensive*... which I'm sure makes up for Apple's volume.walnutcrunch
Well-known member
What I really want to know, is if it is a case of ipads and netbooks. Netbooks were supposed to be the next big thing, and were becoming so. Apple looked at that whole idea and decided it stunk, even though it was conventional wisdom that netbooks made sense, and everyone had a netbook and apple didn't.
Apple instead came out with the iPad which conventional wisdom said would be a marginal product at best. Instead it really evolved portable computing and many of us realized that all those things we thought we needed, we didn't actually need and apple showed us a different way to do things.
Now that's not to say that new way is for everyone, but it sure is for a lot of people.
What I really am excited to see is if they do that with FCP X. I would love for that to happen. Who wouldn't? Can they pull it off? We'll see once we get our hands on it. But again the part that excites me is they might be trying to take editing in a whole new direction. If they don't, well, we'll switch to whatever platform works
Apple instead came out with the iPad which conventional wisdom said would be a marginal product at best. Instead it really evolved portable computing and many of us realized that all those things we thought we needed, we didn't actually need and apple showed us a different way to do things.
Now that's not to say that new way is for everyone, but it sure is for a lot of people.
What I really am excited to see is if they do that with FCP X. I would love for that to happen. Who wouldn't? Can they pull it off? We'll see once we get our hands on it. But again the part that excites me is they might be trying to take editing in a whole new direction. If they don't, well, we'll switch to whatever platform works
Jason Adams
Section Moderator
here is the full demonstration if it has not been posted.
Everyone responds clearly from their own position relative to platform and work area. What is clearly happening is that the requirements for each of these areas are not coming together as people may thing but growing apart. Everyone likes the glitz but when practicality sets in cost and integration become really important. This is where brand loyalty and sunk costs start to be important. Changing platform or program functions raise issues of doubt. The presentation of FCP X was nice and contained lots of new things for the MAC but not for the PC fraternity. Most are available on products costing a lot less than $299 notably ADOBE Elements which is available for the MAC at $80. We do not yet know the final feature content of FCP X. IS it going to be iMovie Plus or a replacement for FCP. AVID has a clear hold on the high end broadcast and film industry I expect their main competition at the moment isn`t Apple FCP but Grass Valley products and Edius. At the other end are the consumer market who buy more cameras than any other group and the customer base is mainly Window PC with products dominated by Adobe Elements, Sony Vegas, Cyberlink . The professional block in the middle comprises wedding and event to agency type companies and independent film units. Their needs are different for sure. Volume will be the consumer dominated by the PC market which already has these easy to use semi auto editors. The broadcast need media control, quick cutting and shared workspace with network output and maybe integration with legacy units. Why would anyone think one product can do all this.
Ron Evans
Ron Evans
keylight
Veteran
Clearly a video promoting FCPX belongs in a discussion about "Avid's reaction to FCPX"....
(I kid, but do think it's funny that you posted it here.)
keylight
Veteran
That sums it up for a lot of people.
Not really accurate, since AVID has pretty much offered most of those things on a MAC for a while. But if you're set up as a FCP shop, then unless a job comes in that really needs the extras that AVID offers, you probably aren't going to be switching.
Of course, if I were setting up a whole new shop, I'd choose AVID, but then I've been primarily and AVID guy for 16 years.
But all in all, I think you've probably summed it up pretty succinctly. Lots of different products that fit in different markets, with a little bit of overlap in areas.
Jason Adams
Section Moderator
There are a lot of talk about features and announcements in this thread. Thought it was pertinent to the discussion if you did not see the keynote. Not taking sides or promoting. Typing this response on a MC 5.5 suite now.
I swear I never understand this position. "Charge me more and I'll respect you in the morning?"
Really? Most professionals I know in this and any other field are going to use the tool that gets the job done. So long as they can afford it, they will buy what works. In my own experience, a lower price makes people more inclined to try it rather than less. Clients do not care if you used Avid, Adobe, Vegas, or FCP X. They care if their video looks good. Whether it is a feature length movie like True Grit or their daughter's wedding, it doesn't matter to the end user. They'll be happy they got a good product (assuming the editor did a good job).
If FCP X, or Vegas, or Pinnacle, or iMovie has some feature in it that somehow makes that end product better or shaves time off my delivery to the customer, I am down with that. I fail to see how anyone else trying to actually make money would see it any differently.
What advantage do you see in charging $999 for it? LEts just assume that Apple knows how to make money with supply and demand, and that they have done the research to know that they will make just as much at $299 as they do at $999. The only difference is that more people can now affod the software. Unless you simply want exclusivity so that your competition cannot afford it, this is all win.
I can now get a pro quality NLE for $700 less than I can on Windows (or $200 less if you count Vegas Pro as good as Premier).
If someone gave me a Porsche, the fact that I didn't pay for it would not make it slower (had to get a car analogy in there).
If Avid and Adobe see people jumping ship to FCP X, they will either a) have to offer more to entice users up to the $999 price point, and we win or b)drop price themselves, and we win. If FCP X is all that and a bag of chips, its all good.
If Porsche starting selling cars for $1000 everyone would own a Porsche. And no one would be impressed when you pulled up in your Porsche.
Jason Adams
Section Moderator
My point is the price is so low that the 2500 dollar Avid folks might say. FCP is not a pro editor and may choose to not try to match features and innovations. FCP has been very good at keeping Avid honest. Avid has lowered prices, increased features, and allowed 3rd party hard ware since FCPs release. Avid is a better company with FCP breathing down their neck and stealing their users.
I do however feel like FCPs accessibility and price could make editing a commodity and not an art form in the minds of Clients. I work with Ad Agencies and I think they will be more inclined to have Flash artists, web designers, and graphic designers become in house editors because it only costs them 350 bucks and its soooo easy to use. It might become harder justifying 100 bucks an hour to a client when your edit suit is now an iMac and $350 download from the app store.
I hope FCP blows everyone away and shifts the editing paradigm again. I am just saying that our day rates and client expectations could be something that is effected.
I do however feel like FCPs accessibility and price could make editing a commodity and not an art form in the minds of Clients. I work with Ad Agencies and I think they will be more inclined to have Flash artists, web designers, and graphic designers become in house editors because it only costs them 350 bucks and its soooo easy to use. It might become harder justifying 100 bucks an hour to a client when your edit suit is now an iMac and $350 download from the app store.
I hope FCP blows everyone away and shifts the editing paradigm again. I am just saying that our day rates and client expectations could be something that is effected.
Joe Walker
Well-known member
But that is what was said back in 1999 when FCP 1.0 came out. Look what happened...Avid's dominance and ego in the Film/TV industry let it fall behind because FCP was the more affordable, reliable Editor for many in the industry. Quite honestly, if it weren't for FCP, there probably would not be a software version of Media Composer. Competition is good and quite honestly, with Apple's history, I'm banking on them to continue where they left off. Maybe not FCPX Version 1.x...but 2.0 and beyond. Only time can tell...
Final Cut was already cheap enough that the barrier to entry was really low. $1,000 isn't much if you can get jobs with it. The average person isn't a good editor, and folks who do heavy post-production use a lot more than just one program or suite.
There will be a lot more high end hobbyists cutting on Final Cut now.
If some ad agencies use folks who aren't qualified editors, that will be ironic. They are already fighting against design competitions. Though, I wouldn't be surprised if it happened on the low end.
Look on youtube; younger kids copy Andrew Kramer's After Effects tutorials all the time. That doesn't mean that they get paid big dollars to rip off his tutorials. They are just having fun with a tool.
It takes time to develop a rhythm as an editor, and it takes even longer to know how to design a workflow. Final Cut being cheap doesn't make every hobbyist an experienced editor.
Everyone seems to be assuming the entire Final Cut Studio suite will be $299. Keep in mind Apple only showed Final Cut Pro, not Motion, Color, or DVD Studio Pro. Final Cut Pro is $299, not the entire suite of apps. If they sell each app for $299, then it becomes a $1200 package, close to what it was before.
True. But if Apple really wants to poke Adobe in the eye, it'll offer the other apps at a deep discount (the whole bundle for, say, $599). Might be nice if Apple updated and 64-bitted Shake and threw that in for cheap, too (or, even better, free).