Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Avid Launches Media Composer 6, Symphony 6, NewsCutter 10
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well at least Media Composer is being offered on my platform of choice...to bad I'm reading they're going to stop building hardware to run it.
Of interest to me, since I work in a moving image library is this tidbit:
"The company is also launching Avid Marketplace, which offers in-system access to stock footage from Thought Equity Motion. The Avid Marketplace also enables customers to browse available video and audio plugins along with other products in the Avid Store to complete a suite"
Of interest to me, since I work in a moving image library is this tidbit:
"The company is also launching Avid Marketplace, which offers in-system access to stock footage from Thought Equity Motion. The Avid Marketplace also enables customers to browse available video and audio plugins along with other products in the Avid Store to complete a suite"
I don't share your analysis, Apple is banking on the pro to buy a Mac Pro with their copy of FCP X, hence the price tag can end up at $6000 anyway, for that pro (but they also now have a new workstation). The difference in philosophy is that Apples model also allow new users and the so called "pro sumer" to enter at a low price. Some of these new users are the pros of tomorrow.
haha funny post, I must admit, every time I work with FCPX I think WOW if only I had time to learn it all so I can be sure to get the same speed / end result (edit a lot on location, almost instant edit / showing)
So many things I love about FCPX, and it fits perfectly in my tapeless workflow (RED, SxS XDCAM etc.) Right now the real problem is continuity, not everybody that works for me is ready to learn FCPX so we stick to 7 and we are checking out AVID (got 3 seats MC 5.5,) loved AVID so if 6.0 gives me full 64bit goodness like FCPX it might be a direction to go as well.
Especially because AVID leaves the door open to a Windows workstation in case of Mac Pro meltdown.
As for pricing meaning pro, well everybody has a copy of Mpeg streamclip somewhere and it is free so there you go.
But $6000 being expensive, add another two zeroes and I might blink. The old AVId systems I used started at 35K, not even talking about the 60K Beta recorder or 80K camera +lens. (the joke being that camera ended up on eBay and sold for $120, then again it was 20 years old.
FCPX has a lot of hidden cleverness, if you bother to look you will find it a pleasant surprise. To think apple has thrown, what? 30 million+? out of the window just for imovie pro is a bit silly.
So many things I love about FCPX, and it fits perfectly in my tapeless workflow (RED, SxS XDCAM etc.) Right now the real problem is continuity, not everybody that works for me is ready to learn FCPX so we stick to 7 and we are checking out AVID (got 3 seats MC 5.5,) loved AVID so if 6.0 gives me full 64bit goodness like FCPX it might be a direction to go as well.
Especially because AVID leaves the door open to a Windows workstation in case of Mac Pro meltdown.
As for pricing meaning pro, well everybody has a copy of Mpeg streamclip somewhere and it is free so there you go.
But $6000 being expensive, add another two zeroes and I might blink. The old AVId systems I used started at 35K, not even talking about the 60K Beta recorder or 80K camera +lens. (the joke being that camera ended up on eBay and sold for $120, then again it was 20 years old.
FCPX has a lot of hidden cleverness, if you bother to look you will find it a pleasant surprise. To think apple has thrown, what? 30 million+? out of the window just for imovie pro is a bit silly.
Thanks for this. I like what you said about H.264 and no more transcoding...thats epic!
I disagree that current SLRs are capturing better video than high end cameras from only 5 years ago. They've certainly spawned a revolution of sorts and it's hard to beat them in their price range, but they still have a ways to go.
Despite that, I'm not sure what that has to do with demand for high end editing. Sure, there are a lot more people out there shooting and editing video, but they're not all just cutting quick and dirty videos and posting to youtube. If anything, the opposite rings true. Now there are high quality video capture devices in the hands of more people and they're going to need high end editing software to go with it.
Unless we're using a different definition for "high-end."
You can export AAF/OMF with Automatic Duck
http://www.automaticduck.com/products/pefcp/
FCPX now supports XML.
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/software-update.html
You said AE know the software better than anyone else. If you did, you would knew about these updates. So much for being professional "Mr. Hollywood."
LOL at you for thinking that the OP isn't aware of those updates, as are just about everyone on this thread.
During your 15-second google research session, you must have overlooked the fact that the automaticduck plug-in costs more than FCP X.
So, shut up.
Hmm...That does look really familiar.
Want to bet that the next major update of Premiere will also have the FCP X look, in addition to a lot of its new features?
Other software has had that look for a while now.
----------
Actually, Avid had the two monitors and one timeline view back in the late 80's.
You actually managed to not understand the most crucial point of that post.
----------
A professional editor is someone who makes money from editing. There's no other definition which you'll get people to agree upon. Professional is not a word which needs to be redefined over and over in every single tech conversation. Get over it.
In terms of highest end, even regular FCP was not the most feature filled NLE on the market. AMC was always the highest end product. The only reason FCP sold and became popular was because it was insanely cheaper compared to Avid. And when it first appeared, except a few adventurous people, nobody was using it on high end projects like feature length films. The situation was almost the same as today. FCP X is not feature filled, yet it costs around 1/10 as much as Avid. If there's any reason for people to use it, it's the price. It'll take time, exactly like the original FCP, for FCPX to reach the status where it can be used everywhere. And when it does, if it can carry the same price tag, it'll be even more competitive than FCP, which sold for 1k, not 300$.
FCPX might be toned down for now, but in the near(?) future it'll have all those fancy things that PP and MC have so editors can create CGI-laden videos instead of "basic" content with excellent scriptwriting and storylines!
Take your CGI and shove it, dogg....
Take your CGI and shove it, dogg....
Thank you for the morning entertainment with my coffee, nothing like a good troll first thing in a thread.
We use DSLRS/HVX's and super high ends. all the time in prof tv shows and movies, 5D and 7D are all over, software upgrades like this though help us process and use that footage way quicker, and you'd be surprised how much video actually comes from crappy sources or youtube.
Also regard that 6k pricetag, people that are trained on this software make around $800/day to use that 6k software, companies charge other companies around $1200-$2400/day to use the software.
6K package isn't for the home user who edits the occasional video, it's for the company that buys that 8K workstation with 12gb of ram, has a 50TB server hooked up to it, with super awesome HD displays.
Oh, wow, you must be new here...
That's pretty reasonable for software. My engineering friends say that AutoCAD and other design programs are extremely expensive--and you even have to pay a licensing fee per year (usually $1000 or something if I recall).
And special effects programs, like Nuke (a compositor), also cost a few thousand to buy and then several thousand a year to license.
People like you that mindlessly follow Apple give the rest of the Mac community a bad name.
Last edited:
No the hardware DX box is 30K extra, at least it was 30K with version 5, so I expect it to be the same still
haha.EDIT: enzobot24 found that it's 13k not 30k.
See my post above about how much companies charge to use it and you'll see that it's not all that expensive once you make the first purchase and it pays off quite quickly.
Last edited:
No the hardware DX box is 30K extra, at least it was 30K with version 5, so I expect it to be the same still
See my post above about how much companies charge to use it and you'll see that it's not all that expensive once you make the first purchase and it pays off quite quickly.
Ah, just confirmed. Yeah, the DX is $13k for the interface.
Haha, the software is fairly cheap.
The tapes we buy are around $100-$150 for an 43min show, each episode of a tv show usually buys around 10 of them for airing, archival, copies, network executives etc..
The tape machine to write onto those tapes is around 100k, or 10k/month to rent. lol
Are those HDCAM tapes? I know that those can record at 880Mbit/s... so 4:4:4 chroma subsampled goodness.
Haha, close.
HDCAM SR is 880mbit/ 4:4:4,
HDCAM maxes out at 4:2:2
Sexyness.. If you all could see what a finished show looks like before it gets compressed to your cable box you'd be amazed. I'd kill to get an HDCAM or SR tape of some of my favorite movies or shows. I'd probably pay the $400+ it would cost per episode or per movie even though I could only watch it from work, haha.
Just a little fun for you guys, currently brining in some footage from a fancy 4:4:4 camera, roughly 70 minutes, and it's eating up close to 800GB of space.
And just as a note to all you guys about all these high costs. Without this high end hardware you all wouldn't be able to enjoy those amazing vsfx that you see in all your favorite movies.
We need every bit of every last possible detail and the most color information that you can't even see until you get it inside of these systems from each one of those pixels to work our magic that makes movies appear almost lifelike when done properly.
We need every bit of every last possible detail and the most color information that you can't even see until you get it inside of these systems from each one of those pixels to work our magic that makes movies appear almost lifelike when done properly.
This is intriguing. I am Final Cut 7's biggest fan. I continuously argue with friends and colleagues about how superior it is to Media Composer. But I like the changes I see here. I look forward to checking it out.
I'll say right now though, there is a learning curve, I started on Adobe Premiere and switched to Avid, it took me a bit before I was just as comfortable on the system as I was on Premiere.
But in my opinion, once you get past the curve you'll stick with it. Avid usually comes out with a 30/day trial fairly quickly (before release or day of release), try it. They provide a nifty uninstall utility if you hate it.
Edit: But to sum it up, you're on FCP 7, everything is coming up "roses" (FCP X or Lion), it's going to be time to upgrade to something fairly soon before something breaks and no one wants to fix it, who knows which .X.X update will break something beyond repair.
SIDE OFF TOPIC RANT: I recently upgraded to Lion, Why did they have to F with finder and make it annoying! Grey icons?! Device Manager, WTF.. Even with that bw to color converter it only affects the finder in lion and not the finder than opens up when I'm Saving in Photoshop... GRRRRRR <END OFF TOPIC RANT>