I’ve gotten some emails recently asking why I’m not blogging very much. In thinking about this, I realized that I tend to write blogs when I have something that speaks to a larger audience.

However, for the last few months, I write several new articles a week covering Final Cut Pro X and post them to the Editing Resource Library on my website. There’s a lot of misinformation out there about what the program does and doesn’t do. My step-by-step techniques are designed to show you exactly how make the most of this new program.

So, just to show you what’s available, here’s a list of my most recent articles on Final Cut Pro X. I have dozens of articles – all available for free – that can help answer your questions about this program.

NOTE: Visit my Editing Resources page for a list of most recent and most popular articles. This page updates in real-time.

FCP X: The Limiter Filter

FCP X: Match Audio Between Clips

FCP X: Adding Video to a Shape

FCP X: Enhancing Audio

FCP X: Compound Clip Secrets

FCP X: Animating Timeline Effects

FCP X: Adding Timecode to Clips

FCP X: Copying and Pasting Clips

FCP X: Saving Audio Presets

FCP X: Quick Color Correction

FCP X: Create a Picture-in-Picture Effect

It was not your normal day.

Before the doors to MacWorld opened, I had the chance to sit down with Gary Adcock, founder of Studio 37, who lives somewhere beyond the high-end of today’s market.

“So, Gary,” I asked, “is the world really going to 4K?”

“Absolutely,” he replied,

And we launched into a wonderful conversation about 4K images, quad-HD, monitors, codecs, camera formats, and an eclectic discussion of the challenges of working with $100,000 cameras and lenses.

I loved it. Gary is a gifted story-teller and I’ll write about our discussion once I understand it better. I left convinced that the march toward higher resolution was inevitable.

Then, the doors to MacWorld 2012 opened and the first booth I saw was i4Software extolling the virtues of editing video on an iPhone.

Talk about mental whiplash…!

Last night, I presented a demo on Final Cut Pro X at the San Francisco Apple Store to about 70 people. Over half the people there had not edited video before. And less than 10% (because I asked for a show of hands) had ever been paid to edit video.

This got me reflecting on who is a professional and the future of video editing.

If video is your hobby, you can view the tumult our industry is going through with a bemused smile, as you watch an industry reinvent itself from the inside out.

However, if your livelihood depends upon trying to figure out what the heck is going on, that bemused smile turns into a terrified grin because all this industry change makes you feel like you are riding in a little red wagon while traveling at breakneck speed down a foggy mountain road.

Terrifying is a good way to describe today’s professional video environment.

MACWORLD

MacWorld made an interesting shift this year. The last time I attended, three years ago, it was all iPod covers and iPhone cases. It was in danger of become Walmart.

This year, I felt like I was in Best Buy. Something intriguing lurked around each corner. There were the obligatory covers and cases – including, yes, an iPhone case that doubled as a bottle opener – but there were interesting vendors hidden in plain sight.

MacWorld showcased the world of mobile devices. I was reminded of the photographer’s credo: “The camera in your hand is better than the camera you left at home.”

As I walked the show floor I saw crowds in the i4Software booth learning how to shoot and edit video on an iPhone using their Video Camera app.

Cinefy showed its app for video editing on the iPhone.

Blue showcased their family of professional mics that plugged directly into an iPhone or iPad.

MicW Audio highlighted some amazing small mics – both lavaliere and condenser that plugged directly into an iPhone or iPad.

iPro Lens presented its wide angle and fish-eye lenses for the iPhone.

Audio Engine devoted their booth to wirelessly streaming 24-bit audio from a computer to a personal or professional sound system.

And, probably my favorite booth was IndiSystem. This was run by a long-time grip with an infectious smile, who, in addition to a wealth of ideas, has access to 3D modeling tools, aluminum extruders, precision lathes, and a plastic model shop. He runs a hardware-creation toy store! Out of this, he created iSupport: incredible camera accessories – like jibs, camera sliders, and grips – for the iPhone. Perfect tools for photographing miniatures!

After walking MacWorld, I was reminded of Wayne Gretzke’s famous quote: “A good hockey player plays where the puck is. A great hockey player plays where the puck is going to be.”

THE IMPLICATIONS

The high-end of the market is not going away; the world of Gary Adcock attests to that.

But the tools are changing. And I think MacWorld is showing us where the puck is going to be. Not for the high-end, perhaps, but for the rest of us.

Last night, at the SuperMeet, Alex Buono, the head of the Film Unit for Saturday Night Live, explained that he gets a script on Thursday, shoots on Friday, and airs on Saturday. Speed and workflow are everything to him. He shoots on a variety of cameras, with emphasis on the Canon 5D, 7D, and 1D. (And the new Canon C300.)

With budgets continually shrinking, camera technology morphing on a daily basis, and deadlines ridiculously short, I think we need to redefine “professional.”

There is a time and place for “heavy iron.” Some shows require all the equipment we can throw at them… (I was told recently that the SuperBowl will have 43 robotically controlled cameras this year.)

But all too often we define ourselves in terms of the tools we use. As soon as we do that, however, we limit our opportunities.

At the SuperMeet lounge last night, I was hanging around the Peachpit Press booth when an editor walked up and told me that when he first saw a demo of Adobe Premiere in 1997, he was busy editing linear tape and laughed when Adobe showed how to do a DVE move in software.

“Shoot,” he said, “with our equipment we pressed a few buttons on the switcher, recorded it live, and we were done.”

“Yes,” I said, “but it took you three-quarters of a million dollars of equipment to do it.”

“Ah,” he replied, laughing, “but it wasn’t my money!”

Today, it’s our money. And our time. And this affects our ability to feed our families. Technology this year is in a whirlwind of evolution, constrained only by the sluggishness of the economy.

Philip Hodgetts presented three ideas last night at the SuperMeet that can help us grow our business. He suggested we:

1. Mind our own business. That is, figure out what business we are actually in and why someone else would want to do business with you.
2. Give yourself an unfair advantage. That is, network with the people around you and stay informed and up-to-date.
3. Own a piece of the action. That is, create something that you own and can sell yourself.

Just as the DV revolution undermined film, the new mobile revolution threatens a lot of what we used to believe in. But it also provides us a lot of opportunities if we recognize that people coming new to video on mobile devices can benefit from what we know.

Forcing the story to fit the technology you know is a trap. It will work for the short-term, but longer term you get pigeon-holed in a backwater with no clients. Don’t let old habits prevent you from learning new techniques.

All of us are story-tellers at heart. Focus on the story and your creative approach to it. When you let the story guide you to the technology it needs to be told, you will always be in demand.

People pay money to hear good stories well told. They could care less about the gear you use to tell them.

Let me know what you think,

Larry

I posted a brief video on YouTube, “Polishing edit skills and books for editors & directors” in which I recommend some books about editing and directors. Perhaps because I was thinking about the recent release of my own book, “Final Cut Pro X: Making the Transition” – and the creation of my Amazon Author Page – http://www.amazon.com/author/LarryJordan/ – which I hope you’ll visit – I wanted to share these links with you here.

Behind the Seen: How Walter Murch Edited Cold Mountain Using Apple’s Final Cut Pro and What This Means for Cinema by Charles Koppelman.

Mastering MultiCamera Techniques: From Preproduction to Editing and Deliverables by Mitch Jacobson.

Apple Pro Training Series: Motion 5 by Mark Spencer.

The Green Screen Handbook: Real-World Production Techniques by Jeff Foster.

All the books on color grading and correction by Alexis Van Hurkman.

Real World Video Compression by Andy Beach.

All books on video compression by Brian Gary.

Video Compression for Flash, Apple Devices, and HTML5 by Jan Ozer.

In the Blink of an Eye Revised 2nd Edition by Walter Murch.

The Conversations: Walter Murch and the Art of Editing Film.
by Michael Ondaatie

One the the secrets that I’ve learned to improving both my production and editing skills is to watch a video with the sound turned off. This allows me to concentrate on the visual without getting hooked into the story. It is always enlightening to see how much you can learn this way. I use this technique for my own work, as well as analyzing the work of others. Best of all, it doesn’t require any money or special gear, just an ability to focus on the screen and learn from what you see.

(Caution: I’ve found that this technique drives the rest of my family nuts! So, I’ve been told this is an activity best done when no one else is around.)

Also, please stop by my Amazon Author Page and leave a comment. And I would be remiss if I failed to suggest that you purchase my newest book: Final Cut Pro X: Making the Transition at Amazon.com. Lots of great tricks and tips techniques packed into one slim volume to help you Power Up your editing!

Let me know what you think.

Larry

The latest Government Video Expo opened today in Washington, DC, and, as in years past, our podcast, the Digital Production Buzz, has a team of reporters covering the event.

I thought you might be interested in how we are covering it.

We have equipped each of our reporters – Ed Clark and Tchad Moore – with a Zoom H4n digital recorder and two Shure SM58 hand mikes.

Our producers – Cirina Catania and Debbie Price – have scheduled interviews with conference speakers and key industry leaders which Ed and Tchad then interview. (We are always interested in interviewing new people — let me know if you want to be added to our list.)

The interviews are transferred from the Zoom recorders via USB and compressed, in their raw state, into a single ZIP file which is transferred to our home offices here in LA via Dropbox.

The files are then downloaded and edited by Hilary White and myself. As soon as they are edited, the files are posted to our GV Expo Buzz website, while two or three of our favorite interviews will be featured on this week’s show, with a few more featured next week.

If you haven’t checked out our latest interviews, make a point to visit here.

And, if you are in the DC area, swing by the Walter Washington Conference Center and check out the exhibits. They always have a great collection of new gear that’s worth seeing.

Thanks – and let me know what you think.

Larry

His voice was magical … summoning helicopters, gonzo moose, a startled cow, a man falling sixteen stories into tapioca pudding… it was a voice that created magic out of puffs of air.

Tom Keith died yesterday, the LA TIMES reported this morning.

For those that have not fallen under the spell of a “Prairie Home Companion,” hosted by Garrison Keillor, a blank look can be forgiven. Prairie Home has been on the air since the early 1970’s. It’s a radio show, airing Saturday evenings live from St. Paul, Minnesota.

Robert Altman’s last film, “A Prairie Home Companion,” presented an evening at a show — thus forever confirming that what goes on behind the scenes is ALWAYS more interesting than what goes on in front.

But radio is theater of the mind – and that’s where Tom Keith came in. What does a grade school teacher sound like when instantly being shrunk from 6 feet to 3 inches? Or a drunken caribou stubbing his toe? Tom instinctively knew how to make the sound, and the composure to create it in real-time for a live radio show.

Sound effects that were undeniably believable and off-the-wall funny. Tom could carry an entire scene on sound effects alone.

While I have met Garrison Keillor, I never met Tom Keith. I had the pleasure of watching the show live on two occasions, plus many more when PBS would broadcast a simulcast. Garrison is the soul of the show, but Keith was its heart.

“Tom was one of radio’s great clowns,” said Keillor. “He was serious about silliness and worked hard to get a moo exactly right and the cluck, too, and the woof. His whinny was amazing.”

It struck me, as I was reading the obituary, that we all get so caught up in the technology, that we forget the magic.

Tom Keith, armed with only a pair of hands, a versatile mouth, and a light-speed imagination, brought the impossible to life.

I will miss his singing walrus, the pre-pubescent teenager forever coping with growing up, and the garbage truck backing up into a tree. Because I can see them in my mind as clearly as if I were there. And I was.

The imagination of the mind trumps the imagination of the screen — and I’m grateful Tom lived to remind me of that.

Larry

Let me confess, before you read further, that I am such a fan of singing and dancing that… well, let’s just say that when I was a young director, I was in awe of the television musical specials directed by Dwight Hemion and produced by Gary Smith.

Most of the performance video techniques that we rely on today were invented by these two guys. To my mind, they are the gold standard against which all other performance videos need to be judged.

Anyway, I was given a ticket to a preview of the upcoming 3D Glee Concert Movie. So I went to see it tonight. (And, yup, I’m a fan of the show — it has singing and dancing!)

The movie interweaves three storylines: onstage performances to what looks like a crowd of about 50,000 enraptured screaming Gleeks, backstage with the performers getting ready to go on, and interviews and profiles of fans.

Its also shot in 3D.

For people interested in production and editing the movie is worth seeing for a variety of reasons.

First, the sheer energy, enthusiasm, and talent of the performers just radiates off the screen. It is enormous fun watching talented performers who clearly enjoy what they are doing.

Second, the editing on the main set pieces is always good and many times borders on amazing. The performance by The Warblers is an outstanding example of successful editing in a 360 degree environment. The Puck solo as he traverses the entire floor of the stadium is a great balance between being lost with the crowd and keeping the viewer oriented. And the dance number by Brittany and her backup dancers is a clinic on how to edit dance for the big screen.

However, there are also a number of other things to watch that didn’t work so well. Notice how 3D does not enhance the performance. In many cases, there were real issues where they had trouble shooting a live scene and keeping performances separated from the screen plane. All too often, the performer would touch the edge of the physical frame and the 3D effect was lost. The Mercedes set piece is an excellent example of the breakdown of the screen plane. 3D may sell tickets, but it doesn’t enhance the performance… especially a live performance when so much of camera work is “keeping up and winging it.”

Another issue with 3D is that camera angles that work in 2D, don’t work in 3D. An example of this is a low camera angle shooting up at a performer. Very uncomfortable. Also, fast cuts that work great in 2D, are too fast in 3D. The brain can’t orient in space fast enough.

The whole 3D editing issue needs to be thought through more when dealing with fast-paced music. In this case, the cutting was too fast and the 3D made it disorienting.

Notice how hard it is to weave three separate storylines, and five different Gleek profiles into a coherent performance video. Also notice that the documentary sections switches into 2D, then back to 3D for the music. As an editor, how would you handle the challenge?

For anyone who’s a fan of the show, the movie is well worth seeing.

For people who are fans of production and editing, the movie provides an exceedingly good example of what works and what doesn’t when integrating performance with documentary footage. And, while most of us don’t work on this scale or with these budgets, this combination is a popular format where we are all wrestling with the same issues:

* How do we transition from speaking to performance and make it appear seamless?
* Is the musical performance enough to carry the film? If not, what do we need to add?
* How do we compensate for the inherent imperfections in a live performance?
* How do you edit multi-camera musical performance without excessive jump cuts and without obstructing the flow of the performance itself?
* How important is it to make people in the film audience feel like they are in the concert audience?

An example of this last question is compare the editing of this concert to the editing in “Singing in the Rain,” any Fred Astaire movie, or “Woodstock.” The Glee movie has outstanding talent that can easily fill the frame, yet, many times, the editors were afraid to stay with a shot, cutting off action too soon, just to keep the pace up.

Many times, I feel that editors are afraid to trust their actors to fill a scene. That the imperative of cuts for the sake of cutting gives the illusion of pacing, but actually obscures what’s going on and frustrates the audience.

When you are trying to hide the fact that your performers are inept, then rapid cutting, shaky handheld shots, wild angles, bad lighting, and unmotivated effects are the rule. But when you have talent that glows, cutting too soon should be a crime.

I enjoyed the movie. And I’m old school – I’ll buy it on DVD when it comes out. Its worth watching more than once because there’s a lot we can learn from it – both good and bad.

As always, let me know what you think.

Larry

One of the problems of being in the middle is that I can see both sides. I don’t necessarily agree with them, but I can appreciate their point of view.

My blog this morning – Who’s Accountable – touched a nerve because, in addition to the people that commented directly on the blog, I’ve also had several private conversations with Apple and people who are very, very upset with Apple.

What’s become obvious over the last week, is that the way the Final Cut Pro X launch was handled has totally overshadowed the features of Final Cut Pro X.

Over the last several days, I’ve been consumed with trying to decide what to do – stay with Final Cut or move to another platform. If I switch, what do I switch to? What advice should I give to others trying to make the same choice?

As my office will attest, all this internal debating has not made me a pleasant person to be around.

Let me share my thinking with you — then, you can decide for yourself whether you agree or disagree.

First, let me say that I think the launch of Final Cut Pro X was very badly handled. As I’ve written, I don’t think Apple needed to cancel Final Cut Studio (3) as abruptly and coldly as they did. They should have given us more time to make an orderly transition. They were thinking as a technology company, not as editors managing a decade of assets.

Canceling Final Cut Server, even though it was incompatible with Final Cut Pro X, has unnecessarily jeopardized companies building a business on that platform.

Apple never does things accidentally, so they will disagree with me. Probably strongly disagree… I remember a remark one of the people at Apple told me before the launch, in that they were expecting a lot of controversy over the new version of Final Cut Pro.

Well, we can certainly agree about that.

I also think that Apple seriously erred in not providing a conversion utility between Final Cut Pro 7 and FCP X. The one-two punch of canceling FCS (3) and an inability to convert old projects dominated the discussion far more than the merits of FCP X.

Apple will disagree, but the launch did not take the feelings and passion of editors properly into account. And damage was done.

On the other hand, there are some very cool new features in Final Cut Pro X. Some editors are writing and telling me how much they are enjoying the new program. (Just as other editors are writing to tell me, at length, why they are moving to Avid or Adobe.)

There’s a lot of passion on both sides. And both sides have some truth behind them.

But, let’s look at a few more points:

* Apple said in their presentation at NAB that FCP X redefines video editing for the next ten years. There is lots of additional development planned.

* Apple told me that because FCP X is distributed via the App Store, they can update the program much more frequently than when it was sold as a package on DVD.

* Apple wrote in their FAQ that they are already working on adding new features, such as XML and multicam, to the product and releasing updates quickly.

* Apple has stressed that FCP X is designed to provide a feature set for professionals, and not just as an upgrade for iMovie. (I am not saying they MET the needs of professionals, but a look at the architecture of FCP X reveals features that no iMovie user would ever need.)

* However, it is also self-evident that Apple needed to provide a clear and consistent upgrade path to iMovie users who were totally lost trying to understand how Final Cut Express works. Apple feels that it is possible for one product to meet both needs.

As I wrote in an earlier blog – Moving Forward – the first rule of business is to stay in business. All of us should keep an eye on our options. Check out what Avid, Adobe, and Media 100 are offering. If you feel you can’t wait, then switch.

But I would also suggest that many of us would benefit by taking a deep breath and giving Apple a chance to live up to their promises for the program.

Final Cut Studio (3) still works.

It took Avid, Adobe, and Apple many years to evolve their programs to their current feature set. I’m willing to give Apple a few months to get their act together and fix what’s broken with FCP X.

I’m going to stay with Final Cut Pro for a while. Work at learning the new version. Give feedback to Apple on what they need to do to improve things. And share what I learn with you.

Final Cut Pro X has a lot of exciting potential – but, for many of us, that potential is not yet realized.

The burden is on Apple to deliver on their promises, update the program quickly, and repair the damage they did during the launch. The proof is in the program.

If they succeed, great. If not, Avid and Adobe will still be around in six months.

Larry

Like many of you, I’ve been losing sleep this last week trying to figure out what’s going to happen to my business after the debacle of the Final Cut Pro X launch.

I read in a blog last night that Steve Jobs has gotten involved in this mess and that “really great things will be happening really soon.”

So my first question is: “Why does Steve Jobs need to get directly involved in what is essentially a straight-forward upgrade to one of their well-established products?”

And this led me to a bigger thought: “Who’s Accountable?”

As I woke up this morning, I had a day-dream of Phil Schiller, VP of Worldwide Marketing, appearing on my podcast, the Digital Production Buzz, to answer questions from listeners.

(In reality, this will never happen. Apple stopped giving on-the-record interviews, with the exception of Mr. Jobs, many years ago.)

So, imagining that Mr. Schiller were on the program, here are the questions I would ask:

1. What was the benefit to Apple of immediately canceling Final Cut Studio (3) with the release of a brand-new and untested product; when there was no technical reason (according to Apple) to do so?

2. Why did Apple feel it was necessary to alienate one of their most passionate fan bases with this release; were professional users that expendable?

3. What responsibility does Apple have when canceling a product to companies that built businesses around those products in terms of notification and support?

4. Conversely, what does Apple require of its vendors, when a supplier to Apple decides to modify a manufacturing method?

5. What is the benefit to Apple for assuming a strict rule of silence whenever something goes wrong? (A short period for research is understandable, but not when it stretches for weeks. The number one rule of PR is communication – but, apparently, not for Apple.)

6. Conversely, what would Apple’s reaction be if one of its vendors, say FoxConn, refused to talk to Apple when something went wrong, such as an explosion?

7. Why is Apple unwilling to provide a general roadmap to those products it considers “professional”?

8. Conversely, what would Apple’s reaction be if Intel refused to tell it about new chips it was developing?

9. Trust is a very tricky thing. It takes time to create and can be destroyed in an instant. Does Apple perceive the extent to which it has breached this trust and what will Apple do to recover from it?

Not one of these questions deals with the features of a product. They deal with the moral character of a company.

As consumers, we are held accountable through license agreements, laws, and regulation.

But who holds corporations accountable?

The sad part is that no one holds corporations accountable. We will never learn these answers. And the damage that’s been done will be irreparable.

Larry

Long-time newsletter reader and Final Cut Pro developer Alex Gollner (Alex4D) posted a blog late yesterday about a secret meeting between Apple and some of its enterprise customers in London.

You can read the entire blog here.

Here’s a summary of the key points that Alex listed in his blog, covering tweets from Sam Johnson, who attended the event:

1. FCP XML in/out is coming via 3rd party soon…no FCP 6/7 support project support coming ever it seems…

2. Ability to buy FCP7 licenses for enterprise deployments coming in the next few weeks…

3. FCPX EDL import/export coming soon…

4. FCPX AJA plugins coming soon for tape capture and layback…capture straight into FCPX bins.

5. XSAN support for FCPX coming in the next few weeks…

6. FCPX Broadcast video output via #Blackmagic & @AJAVideo coming soon…

7. Additional codec support for FCPX via 3rd Parties coming soon…

8. Customizable sequence TC in FCPX for master exports coming soon…

9. Some FCPX updates will be free some will cost…

So far, there is no official word from Apple about this.

What I find most interesting about these statements is the degree to which Apple is counting on third-party developers, rather than Apple itself, to provide missing features in Final Cut Pro X.

Next week, both AJA and Blackmagic Design are doing stage presentations at my Final Cut Pro X Event – we should learn a lot more about this latest news then.

Click here to learn more about our Final Cut Pro X event.

Thanks,

Larry

Well, the last two weeks certainly have been tumultuous. But this weekend is a good time to take stock and figure out where we go from here.

Over the years I’ve learned that Apple does not follow the market, it tries to lead the market. And, with megahits like the iMac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad, it is impossible to ignore their success.

However, it isn’t always successful, which is why we find ourselves in the position we are in now. And, keep in mind that it is US, not Apple, that are in a difficult position. Apple’s DNA (and vast bank account) insulates them from clamor and controversy in the marketplace.

Yesterday, as I was thinking about this blog, I sent an email to my contacts at Apple asking if they would either announce a timetable of when we could see the next “major release” of Final Cut Pro X, or whether Apple was considering re-releasing Final Cut Studio (3) to the market.

Apple did not respond to my email; which I’ve also learned is an answer in itself.

So, the decision is not up to Apple, they have already told us what they are going to do. The decision is up to us – how will we respond?

THE MARKET

Apple has opened up a huge new market to video editing – I call it the “middle market” – people that need more than iMovie, but don’t need the vast capabilities of Final Cut Studio (3).

This is a good thing, I think, because ultimately it will give many of us work as these users push up against the barriers of FCP X and need to accomplish tasks that can’t currently be met with FCP X.

I remember the desktop publishing wars of the 1980’s. Graphics designers did not go away when our computers starting displaying fonts and images. What happened was that the graphics design tools got better and designers with creativity and skill got more work.

The situation is the same today. Creativity and story-telling are still in demand, but the audience and tools continue to evolve.

OUR CHOICE

As I see it, we all have three choices:

1. Convert to Final Cut Pro X
2. Do nothing, at least for a while
3. Switch to a different editing program

CONVERTING

For single editor shops that work exclusively with tapeless formats and principally output to files, Final Cut Pro X is very attractive.

I am getting many emails each day from people that are working with it and are pleased with their results.

For non-mission-critical projects, the current version of FCP X may meet your needs.

ABSTAINING

As I’ve written for years, however, even if Apple released an all-singing, all-dancing, rock-star of a program, I would still counsel waiting until a dot One release.

This is especially true for large shops, edit houses with massive amounts of existing material that they need to repurpose, or editors working on deadlines that cannot be missed.

Apple’s emphasis on secrecy during development in order to maximize surprise at launch means that the initial release of a product is almost never stable enough for serious use.

As examples, FCP 4.0 didn’t stabilize until version 4.0.2, FCP 5 took until version 5.0.4 and, some would argue, 5.1.4 to become solid. FCP 6 took until version 6.0.2 (with four more versions after that), and FCP 7 is currently sitting at version 7.0.3. (And the sordid history of QuickTime releases and bug fixes is best left for a mature audience…)

As I’ve written many times in the past, waiting before upgrading is never a mistake. I tend to wait a few months before upgrading my production gear. However, at the same time, I will upgrade my testing gear to the latest version – and start to learn it – as soon as it is released.

There is no harm in waiting until FCP X starts to stabilize.

SWITCHING

The wild card in this whole equation is the cancellation of Final Cut Studio (3). Our decisions would be a lot easier if Apple had not forced our hand.

First, I am deeply saddened that Apple’s vaunted engineering prowess is unable to code a conversion utility from FCP 7 to FCP X. However, they say they can’t, so I believe them. (And, even if they can, they won’t; which works out to the same thing.)

This means that if you have a large number of FCP 7 projects that you have even a remote possibility of needing in the future, you would be foolish NOT to purchase a product that can read them.

Whether you go with Avid Media Composer and Automatic Duck, or Adobe Production Premium, you, your company, your media and your projects have a far greater priority than the political and emotional issues of supporting, or not supporting, the latest release of Final Cut Pro.

Protect yourself first.

Pick the software you are most comfortable working with. Hire an assistant editor to have them do tests to see how well your projects transfer from FCP 7 into it.

Both Avid and Adobe are running “Switcher” campaigns — which doesn’t surprise me. If I were doing their marketing I would do exactly the same thing. Take advantage of this special pricing – protect your assets.

Apple says FCP 7 will run on Lion. However, it would be foolish to expect it to run on every operating system in the future. At some point, you will need to convert your assets. The best time to do so is now while all your projects, media, and the software you are using is current.

Whether you want to convert your whole operation to a new platform depends upon many different factors; cost not the least of them.

But the first rule of business is to stay in business. Protect yourself. Make sure you can get access to your assets in the future.

LARRY’S RECOMMENDATION

For new Final Cut users, purchase FCP X and enjoy it. It has many good things to recommend it.

For existing Final Cut 7 users, it is too early to know what FCP X is really going to be. But it is also way too risky to bet the ranch on it.

Download FCP X and learn it, but be very cautious putting it into serious production.

I recommend you create a system for converting your FCP 7 assets to either Avid or Adobe.

Then, wait and see what Apple does with the next release of FCP X. For me, the next release, not the current one, will set the direction for the future.

But protect yourself now.

CONCLUSION

This event gives all of us a chance to stop and reflect on who we are and what we do.

The core of what I do, personally, is to train, teach, and inform. I do this across a wide variety of products and using a wide variety of media. My core value does not change with this update.

What changes are the subjects that I teach. And, as we all know, technology is a constantly evolving mix of old and new products.

Think about what YOU do – are you a Final Cut editor, OR are you an editor that uses Final Cut? Are you defined by the technology you use or the stories that you tell?

As you are deciding whether to convert, abstain, or switch, spend a few minutes thinking about who you are, what you do, and how you want to earn a living.

In the past, religious wars were fought over Apple vs. Avid. The new war is FCP 7 vs. FCP X. Like all wars, these battles create a flurry of impressive fireworks, but leave a bloody trail of destruction in their wake. And very rarely do they settle anything. Old tensions still simmer.

So, let’s slow down and take stock. Apple has given us an opportunity to make a choice. They aren’t going to change their direction, so we need to decide if we are comfortable where they are taking us.

And that choice is different for each one of us.

Let me know what you think.

Larry