Reality TV Producer Bunim/Murray Drops Final Cut For Avid

[jackhdev]

Great, so now Avid can be responsible for turning America's television into an utter toilet moving forward! Yay! Only the best for "reality" TV!

----------



Something tells me that the people in charge of Apple know about 1000x more than you do about what the company "should" be doing. Assuming, of course, that you're not just John Sculley trolling Macrumors these days....

That's fair to say. But most consumers don't care about what they're using. They use what pro-users, such as you and I say they should use. If I wasn't an Apple fan, but an Android or Windows fan (like my uncle, yuck!), then my family would be using those products instead. Apple is dumbing down their products to the point where I have no use for them and because they don't do what I need them to do (Lion Server, Final Cut Pro X).

Another example is large companies. If the companies even have a choice to which OS they use (most financial programs are made for Windows), then it all comes down to which OS they can support (let's forget about the price). With Lion Server, large companies can't support their employees! It's made for small businesses. Large companies don't have a choice. And they won't be able to buy rack mountable servers either. Just Mac Pros, which are huge when compared to the Xserve. So as a result, the employees will be given PCs. Not Macs.

In the end, my argument is that while some consumers will still buy Apple products, if you continue to push the pro-users who influence the consumers out the door (such as me in my family), then the consumers will gradually stop buying your products in favor of something else.

 

[fiddle]

ProTools is dying fast. They are so terribly behind everybody else. No wonder since their codebase still comes partially from the 80's. Sure, the markets will turn slowly, but the change is well on it's way. And this comes from a professional audio engineer.

I dont know Mrelwood, Im also an audio engineer, have been doing mostly post work for the past 8 or so years. Till this day, since I started around 14 yrs ago or so, I have not stepped into any studio/post house in manhattan that does not have a pro tools rig...

 

[milo]

I dont know Mrelwood, Im also an audio engineer, have been doing mostly post work for the past 8 or so years. Till this day, since I started around 14 yrs ago or so, I have not stepped into any studio/post house in manhattan that does not have a pro tools rig...

Studios and post houses in manhattan are a tiny fraction of the total using DAW apps. That seems to be PT's strength at this point (particularly audio post) but the number of facilities like that simply isn't that big, and shrinking all the time.

The new PT10 release certainly doesn't seem to be getting a good response from users "dying" may be a bit of an overstatement but I'd be shocked if their market share isn't consistently shrinking in favor of apps like Logic and others.

 

[danimal99]

As a software engineer also with a broadcasting degree, who has owned and used FCStudio 3 and now FCPX, I find it really grating to read self-proclaimed know-it-alls saying that Apple doesn't care about pros and that FCPX is a failure. If you have used the software at all in a professional capacity, and not just as an expert on YouTube videos, you know that this is a serious and DEEP tool. We're still only scratching the surface with what you can do it with it. It's also insulting to the developers- software this complicated and capable doesn't just write itself.

Apple knew when FCPX was released that a lot of people resistant to change and new ideas would have a problem with it. If they want to run back to Avid or Premiere because it feels comfortable and less change-y, so be it. That will just make more room for the the younger forward-thinking producers and editors that are coming up now.

 

[britboyj]

Many professionals, once they set out to actually use the software, discover that most of the features they want/use in FCP7 are still in FCPX, however differently placed/presented.

THIS!

I spent a good deal of time on MacProVideo learning FCPX when it came out, because on its surface, it looks a damn site easier to edit videos for my niece's basketball games and because I hate iMovie.

I had been using FCP7 for a year or so and was reasonably well versed and when I dove into FCPX it WAS frustrating - after the tutorials though, I was set. There's still some things missing, but they'll get there, just like the did with OSX, the old versions of Final Cut and Aperture. (Aperture 1.0 was atrocious but I know photo professionals who ditch Lightroom EVERY DAY for the current version)

 

[chrono1081]

If you lose the pro market, you lose the student and wanna-be pro market.

This is going to be just another (BIG) step in Apple's fall. They're losing their core, and trying to spread out too thin.

Que fan boy rhetoric .....

I can never take a quote that has to resort to the word "fanboy" seriously.

----------

THIS!

I spent a good deal of time on MacProVideo learning FCPX when it came out, because on its surface, it looks a damn site easier to edit videos for my niece's basketball games and because I hate iMovie.

I had been using FCP7 for a year or so and was reasonably well versed and when I dove into FCPX it WAS frustrating - after the tutorials though, I was set. There's still some things missing, but they'll get there, just like the did with OSX, the old versions of Final Cut and Aperture. (Aperture 1.0 was atrocious but I know photo professionals who ditch Lightroom EVERY DAY for the current version)

I agree with this statement because I know people who started off thinking it was more feature limited than it really was. Sure some things are missing, but not near as many as people make it seem.

People who edit video professionally that I know use multiple softwares. Its silly how some people will consider themselves "pros" but only know one way of doing things. Thats not professional, thats just knowing one software really well.

I can't imagine if I called myself an IT professional and only knew one operating system, or how to only fix a Windows server.

 

[iamkarlp]

One question, though. And I'm asking as a non-video-professional who is genuinely curious about the software/system...

As a workflow issue, would the (now discontinued) combination of Final Cut Studio+Server, XServe, XSan have been a comparable option?
If not, then I guess this would have been a natural sort of progression anyway in moving a complete workflow from one company's product to another.

If it had been viable, though, then for the production houses that do this sort of work Apple is basically pushing them to the competition. And at that point, although these options still work on Mac hardware, surely it also adds a potential loss of several hundred hardware purchases?

And say what you will about Reality TV. Personally I dislike it, but I guess that it still requires a lot of the same processes and techniques used in making a film or documentary.
Seriously, I've seen enough shows to know that they sift through what must be hours of footage to tell a version of events that suits the "story" they are trying to tell. There may not be the "mass exodus" of users that some were predicting, but I also doubt this will be the last production house to do so.

One could make an argument that Apple did in fact provide some semblance of this when you mixed up XSAN-FCStudio-FCServer-XServe; but in reality it wasn't even close.

Even back in what some would probably deem "the glory days", when each of those products were online and looked healthy, I only ever considered that workflow a poor-mans version of the AVID workflow.

While it did work, even well for some people, Apple has never whole-heartedly tried to match the AVID workflow.

The important thing to realize however is that it's fine. Apple really has no business building the competitor to AVID's workflow. That's really a job for Autodesk (if they were to choose to do it).

In some ways I think it is even healthier. While I think Apple does a great job with the OS and hardware, they don't need to develop every piece of software for it. I'm glad AVID (and autodesk) are out doing their thing and providing another level of product for those who need (and can afford) it.

As for FCPX -

Apple is doing (in my opinion) amazing things with it and its upcoming versions. Over time not only will we get scores of new features, but I also expect we will see built-in (simplified) media management and even rudimentary (but usable) multi-editor support.

I am running into more and more people dealing with web, industrial, wedding, promo, local access, etc video areas who are moving off of things such as vegas, pinnacle, simple/old premier, etc onto Mac + FCPX + Motion because it offers them a very manageable path to greatly increased quality and editing performance. As for long time users of FCS, whether they are switching or not seems to have more to do with how much tape they are (or aren't) dealing with.

All this is to say that if you are to the point where you need what AVID has to offer, Apple won't (and I would argue never has) provided a workflow at that level. And that's ok.

Thanks,

Karl P

 

[george-brooks]

Unless Apple gets smart and releases FCP X as Final Cut Express, and builds an ACTUAL Final Cut Pro 8 in the next few years, I too will probably be switching over to Avid.

----------

Many professionals, once they set out to actually use the software, discover that most of the features they want/use in FCP7 are still in FCPX, however differently placed/presented.

Yes but most professionals, actual professionals, don't have time to learn new software when their old software works just as well or better. And if they're going to actually take the time to do it, right now it seems to make more sense to learn Avid instead, an actual industry standard.

 

[roadbloc]

Its quite amusing seeing people try and defend FCP X. Its long been regarded a failure, put on the pile of failures from Apple pile, with Ping and and every mouse Apple invented.

Time to move on. If Apple care so much about it, they will correct it. If they don't, then they won't and it will be a clear indication on where the future of Apple is going.

 

[chrono1081]

Its quite amusing seeing people try and defend FCP X. Its long been regarded a failure, put on the pile of failures from Apple pile, with Ping and and every mouse Apple invented.

Time to move on. If Apple care so much about it, they will correct it. If they don't, then they won't and it will be a clear indication on where the future of Apple is going.

I don't see it so much as defending the product, just pointing out that people who call themselves "pros" can't be too good at what they do if they only know one way to do it. (At least in my post above).

For example if Unity stopped being good, I wouldn't cry about it I'd just jump to UDK. I can make games on either platform because I know how to make games.

Same goes for my work in IT. If all of the sudden I wasn't allowed to use a Windows machine anymore no biggie, I know Linux, Mac, and am familiar with BSD.

People in a creative field always have to learn new things. I'm constantly floored at those who kick and scream and boohoo because FCPX isn't exactly what they wanted and make excuses on why they can't learn new software (or in many cases, learning a new way to do something in the new version of a software).

I learn new software all the time and its not even software I necessarily use on a daily basis, I just have to know it inside and out to support the people who do use it at work.

I think many people just like to have the "pro" titled associated with their name but like I said before, I can't consider someone who only knows one program for their profession a "pro".

 

[QuiteSure]

Unless Apple gets smart and releases FCP X as Final Cut Express, and builds an ACTUAL Final Cut Pro 8 in the next few years, I too will probably be switching over to Avid.

----------



Yes but most professionals, actual professionals, don't have time to learn new software when their old software works just as well or better. And if they're going to actually take the time to do it, right now it seems to make more sense to learn Avid instead, an actual industry standard.

Yes, of course, that is the age-old problem for professionals: stay with what you know or grow by learning new things. Must pay the rent and baby needs new shoes. Those who succeed in all fields do so because they are willing to walk the extra mile to stay on top of their chosen fields. No one ever said it was easy.

In thinking about this thread (and a similar thread currently running on Ars Technica) I came to realize that Apple had been subsidizing much of the video post-production industry by selling what was really a ridiculously inexpensive alternative to the Avid workflow product. As has been stated previously in this thread, Apple cannot afford to use engineering and development resources on a product that is geared toward the upper end of the professional market. Apple is now a huge company; it must cost millions (or tens of millions) of dollars for Apple to redesign reengineer and redevelop Final Cut. A major post production house wants to buy of hundred licenses for Final Cut Pro at $1000 per seat? That's still only $1 million. 10 of those are still only $10 million. On the other hand if 500,000 consumers spend $300 to buy Final Cut X that's already $15 million for Apple. A worthwhile concentration of Apple's resources.

On the other hand, iPhones are where the action is for Apple because the carriers finance the purchase of what are actually highly priced handheld computers. Consumers won't pay $700 for an iPhone 4S but AT&T and Verizon will pay half that to Apple because the consumers will sign up for pricey two-year service commitments. Nobody is subsidizing the purchase of Final Cut Pro licenses.

 

[roadbloc]

I don't see it so much as defending the product, just pointing out that people who call themselves "pros" can't be too good at what they do if they only know one way to do it. (At least in my post above).

For example if Unity stopped being good, I wouldn't cry about it I'd just jump to UDK. I can make games on either platform because I know how to make games.

Same goes for my work in IT. If all of the sudden I wasn't allowed to use a Windows machine anymore no biggie, I know Linux, Mac, and am familiar with BSD.

People in a creative field always have to learn new things. I'm constantly floored at those who kick and scream and boohoo because FCPX isn't exactly what they wanted and make excuses on why they can't learn new software (or in many cases, learning a new way to do something in the new version of a software).

I learn new software all the time and its not even software I necessarily use on a daily basis, I just have to know it inside and out to support the people who do use it at work.

I think many people just like to have the "pro" titled associated with their name but like I said before, I can't consider someone who only knows one program for their profession a "pro".

I don't think its the matter of only knowing one piece of software. I write for one of my incomes, and whereas I know how to use a few pieces of word processing software, I have become very attached to Apple's Pages (despite its lack of features) and is the main reason why I buy Macs. If an update screwed up Pages tomorrow, I would be furious. My workflow would be ruined. I'd have to go to the hassle of switching whatever Pages files I have to Office or Vi or LibreOffice some other software.

'Simply switching' as you put it, may not be so simple for some users. I have no doubt that they know more than one piece of software, but there is nothing wrong with having a favourite. And if that favourite screws up, workflow is ruined and people get upset. Especially when it comes to Apple's ecosystem, which Apple obviously make it difficult to get out of.

I'm not saying your theory is wrong, I'm sure it applies to some of these 'pros'. But not all of them. You can't say you wouldn't be a tiny bit upset if the company that makes your software decides to do a dirty great stinking poo on your hard drive. Now I don't know if FCP X is any better or worse than FCP 8, I have no interest in it. But surly if it was a good update, people would be happy about it?

 

[chrono1081]

I don't think its the matter of only knowing one piece of software. I write for one of my incomes, and whereas I know how to use a few pieces of word processing software, I have become very attached to Apple's Pages (despite its lack of features) and is the main reason why I buy Macs. If an update screwed up Pages tomorrow, I would be furious. My workflow would be ruined. I'd have to go to the hassle of switching whatever Pages files I have to Office or Vi or LibreOffice some other software.

'Simply switching' as you put it, may not be so simple for some users. I have no doubt that they know more than one piece of software, but there is nothing wrong with having a favourite. And if that favourite screws up, workflow is ruined and people get upset. Especially when it comes to Apple's ecosystem, which Apple obviously make it difficult to get out of.

I'm not saying your theory is wrong, I'm sure it applies to some of these 'pros'. But not all of them. You can't say you wouldn't be a tiny bit upset if the company that makes your software decides to do a dirty great stinking poo on your hard drive. Now I don't know if FCP X is any better or worse than FCP 8, I have no interest in it. But surly if it was a good update, people would be happy about it?

I agree it would be frustrating (especially Apple pages because its the only word processor I can do more than just the basics in ) and I would be mad if tomorrow ZBrush, or Unity, or Houdini updated and didn't work the same way anymore but it wouldn't be the end of the world. I'd learn the new interface, if it didn't do what I wanted I'd then switch software to something that did do what I wanted.

I understand people being upset, but some of the users are being a bit extreme.

 

[ProVideo]

I fear that FCPX is to FCP7 what Motion is to Shake. Motion has never gotten to where Shake was in terms of professional options, and it's still limited when compared to After Effects. With every update, I kept hoping that Motion would reach a point where it could be a replacement for After Effects and/or Shake, but it never has. It has continually stayed in the consumer/prosumer market, without reaching the next level. If this is what the future of FCPX holds, then I will move on to other NLE options as Shake users moved onto After Effects, Flame, or Nuke.

 

[Yogomi]

Thanks for your response.

The reason I asked is that I wondered whether you were voicing your support for Apple based on successful use of FCP X in a production environment. It would seem that you are not.

It strikes me that your enthusiastic words about FCP are a bit misplaced, given that you yourself aren't willing to use the new version for your own work.

I'm sorry. Was this a direct comparison of Avid to FCP X? I don't recall anywhere in this thread where it says that. My "enthusiastic" words are not misplaced at all. I was referring to what I was referring to; not what YOU are referring to.

The reason I chose the previous version of FCP over FCP X is because that is what I use at home and have not made the transition yet. Since I am getting in and hitting the ground running as thing are going to move pretty fast once I start, I felt it would be quicker for now for me to be able to work on projects back and forth with the same version.

I never said I refuse to use FCP X. I never said FCP X was bad or horrible. As a matter of fact, I AM going to buy it. I just haven't yet because I haven't needed to make any kind of change in my workflow that FCP X could or would provide, that I know of, and with my workload, I haven't had the time to look into it.

Please excuse me if I said something that offended you to the point where your felt you needed to be condescending.

-F.

 

[firestarter]

I'm sorry. Was this a direct comparison of Avid to FCP X? I don't recall anywhere in this thread where it says that. My "enthusiastic" words are not misplaced at all. I was referring to what I was referring to; not what YOU are referring to.

OK - my point is that the previous version of FCP is essentially dead, and you have never used FCP X - therefore you don't know if it's 'fit for purpose'.

Any comparison of Avid vs FXP must assume a transition to FCP X, because old FCP is end of life.

Please excuse me if I said something that offended you to the point where your felt you needed to be condescending.

I didn't intend to be.

Your first post in this thread was quite dismissive of this companies move to Avid.

I merely wanted to find out whether you had any relevant experience to support favouring FCP (and therefore FCP X) over AVID as a strategic choice. As you haven't used and don't own FCP X, you don't have the experience, and I would therefore treat your recommendation accordingly.

That's the point I wanted to make.

 

[liquidrumors]

I honestly think Apple could careless.. They are not after the big media creation market anymore. They are after the end game. The devices you play the created media on and subscriptions to play it. They have diluted Final Cut and Logic so much the Pros aren't using them as much. I have been a logic user for 7 years now and have seen it get more and more dumbed down.

After all, why should apple be in this business? Avid can do it better because thats all that avid does.

 

[salacious]

final cut pro 7 is like beautiful woman with no make up, final cut pro x is like your girlfriend who had plastic surgery gone HORRIBLY HORRIBLY WRONG!!!

i deleted fcpx and went back to 7, not because im a hater but because i couldnt export a simple mobile phone movie.. i mean seriously even a free programme could do it with no flaws.. shame i really love the look of fcpx shame it works like greeces economy..

 

[Yogomi]

Your first post in this thread was quite dismissive of this companies move to Avid.

.

It was dismissive of the influence of a REALITY SHOW producer's switch to Avid. That was all.

I'm not sure about the people you work with or your peers, but my colleagues do not look to reality shows for the latest in cutting edge ideas and inspiring film work.

-F.

 

[ProVideo]

It's funny to see people completely dismiss reality shows of having any value while lumping them all together. Like it or not, reality shows have influenced other genres of film and television as well. For example look at "Arrested Development", "Modern Family", and "Louie". They are shot in roving camera styles like reality shows, even though they are entirely scripted shows. Before reality shows came along, TV sitcoms were just three stationary cameras on an artificial set with canned laughter thrown on top. Same format from the 50's to early 90's. Reality TV changed that. If you look deeper into it you can see it's influence on many other areas across many genres outside of "reality tv" to where aspects are adding value to other genres.

When someone goes off on all reality tv, they sound like the same people that were bashing rock in the 50's & 60's and saying rap is crap in the 80's and 90's. Most of what is on TV is and has been crap and will continue to be so, no matter the genre, dismissing an entire genre shows ignorance of the creative field and makes one sound like an old fuddy duddy.

 

[danahn17]

It was dismissive of the influence of a REALITY SHOW producer's switch to Avid. That was all.

I'm not sure about the people you work with or your peers, but my colleagues do not look to reality shows for the latest in cutting edge ideas and inspiring film work.

-F.

Just to play the devil's advocate, while reality shows may not be artistically inspiring, cutting edge, or what not, I don't think it's right to just dismiss Bunim/Murray's move to Avid as nonsense. If anything, i think it proves the opposite. If the "lowest common denominator" in programming thinks Apple's products and long-term vision/support isn't good enough, it has got to make you think.

BTW, I looked them up on wikipedia and they produce some really big name shows. And while I'm not a fan of reality programming by any means (actually I dont watch them at all)... if I can recognize the names of their productions, then they're definitely a big industry player. At the very least, its a big win for Avid that a big, established group would jump ship.

 

[Yogomi]

Just to play the devil's advocate, while reality shows may not be artistically inspiring, cutting edge, or what not, I don't think it's right to just dismiss Bunim/Murray's move to Avid as nonsense. If anything, i think it proves the opposite. If the "lowest common denominator" in programming thinks Apple's products and long-term vision/support isn't good enough, it has got to make you think.

BTW, I looked them up on wikipedia and they produce some really big name shows. And while I'm not a fan of reality programming by any means (actually I dont watch them at all)... if I can recognize the names of their productions, then they're definitely a big industry player. At the very least, its a big win for Avid that a big, established group would jump ship.

This is not a right or wrong matter. It is a matter of preference.

For one thing, I am not a slave to technology where I feel I am not doing my best work if I am not up to date with the latest software that all the "popular" ones are using. I produced all my music (currently on iTunes, Amazon, Rhapsody, Pandora) in an OS9 environment for at least 10 years just up until last year. It was a matter of preference because I was getting the results I wanted out of the gear I chose to use. One can brag about having all the latest software and technology and condemn me for not having the "lates" version, but in the end what has been DONE with it?

Software does not influence or inspire me. Respectable work does.

Also, I do not equate popularity with quality. There are a lot of "big names" and "popular shows" on TV, but that does not mean they are the best there is to offer.

You just stated yourself that you do not like, care for, or watch reality shows. Saying that, you have admitted that you yourself have not seen anything amazing or inspiring. For the sake of argument, you only state that because they are popular they deserve my respect. I politely disagree.

We all have opinions here. Mine are not directed at anyone specifically on this forum because I don't know anyone personally.

To sum up: I am not influenced by a reality show director's move to Avid because I don't see his work as groundbreaking or inspiring. That is my personal opinion, not weighing in on a right or wrong issue, which this is not.

-F.

 

[Yogomi]

It's funny to see people completely dismiss reality shows of having any value while lumping them all together. Like it or not, reality shows have influenced other genres of film and television as well. For example look at "Arrested Development", "Modern Family", and "Louie". They are shot in roving camera styles like reality shows, even though they are entirely scripted shows. Before reality shows came along, TV sitcoms were just three stationary cameras on an artificial set with canned laughter thrown on top. Same format from the 50's to early 90's. Reality TV changed that. If you look deeper into it you can see it's influence on many other areas across many genres outside of "reality tv" to where aspects are adding value to other genres.

When someone goes off on all reality tv, they sound like the same people that were bashing rock in the 50's & 60's and saying rap is crap in the 80's and 90's. Most of what is on TV is and has been crap and will continue to be so, no matter the genre, dismissing an entire genre shows ignorance of the creative field and makes one sound like an old fuddy duddy.

I can definitely understand your comment. I was front and center during "The Real World". At the time, it was definitely groundbreaking and inspiring. "The Office" (original and US versions) and "Parks & Recs" are other fine examples.

You have to take into consideration that technology was nowhere as accessible to everyone as it is now. Anyone can get a camera, software, computer and write, direct, or produce something which is not necessarily a good thing.

Just like rock and rap, people get ahold of something and ruin it for the sake of money and catering to the lowest common denominator. See what others are doing, copy it, mass produce, and cash in.

Rock, hip-hop...they are not what they used to be compared to what they are now to the masses. Neither are reality shows. The most popular ones portray the worst in people. That is what drove me away from them.

I actually have had a few friends involved in reality shows (have a friend on one that is currently running) and it's pretty disheartening what studios will do and how they will edit things to create turmoil and portray something in a negative light.

-F.

 

[LethalWolfe]

I think people not very familiar w/the situation are missing the significance of this. Mark Raudonis, the Senior VP of Post at Bunim/Murray, and his team brought FCP into an environment that it is not suited for at all, an environment where most people wouldn't dream of using FCP, and they made it perform at a top flight level. Mark was also a pretty prominent FCP evangelist. That's not to say he was a fan boy, but he was active both online and off in dispelling the myth that FCP would collapse, or at best limp along, if put in such a demanding environment.

RealityTV is an area dominated by Avid because it plays more to Avid's strengths (multi-user environment, thousands of hours of shared footage, strict media management, etc.,) and BM was a 500lb gorilla that could choose whatever workflow they wanted and they chose FCP at a time when most still thought that only people that couldn't afford Avid would go with FCP.

I don't watch any of the programing that Bunim/Murray produces but to discount them switching to Avid because of the content they create is missing the forest for the trees.


Lethal

 

[100Teraflops]

Well, Apple has traded one market for another. Like every other company, the bottom line is important. However, my analogy is not an excuse for Apple to abandon the professional video editing team. My definition of a professional video editor is a person who punches their meal ticket via the video editing industry: one has to be paid for their services. Nonetheless, this is not good news for Apple. Actually, it's kind of sad.