#Editing and Editors
27 messages in this thread
Larry,
I VERY MUCH doubt Avid will ever release anything for the PC other than the new
version of MediaLog, which is a software for logging video clips.
All Avid systems are Mac-based and they will stay so, and commitment to the
platform has been reinstated publicly on a regular basis.
If you have a PC and are waiting for Avid to come near your quarters, you could
be waiting for ever. I suggest you buy a PowerPC so you can run your Windows
software AND Avid.
I use Avid myself and if ever they (very unlikely) will move to a PC system I
will change job. I swear.
Alberto
Hate to burst your Mac bubble, but Avid is porting the Media Suite to the
Windows environment. About time too.
Dean Oliver
Virtually Real
Dean –
Now THAT's funny! I just love it when folks get self-rightous about
platforms and economics 101 comes in.
It's the video, not the box.
db.out
Hmmm, It was not my intention to be self righteous. Just stating a fact about
the platform crossing.
Dean Oliver
Virtually Real
no, No, NO!
I meant the person before you was self-rightous about saying s/he'd
quit editing if Avid ever went to the PC platform.
your timing was funny, even if not intended, to me.
it's like someone says "I'll do x if y happens, but y will never happen"
and you know that x is something s/he would not like to do. Then
you come on and say "sorry. y just happened."
See? The Algebra of Humor. 🙂
db.out
Oh….(slightly embarassed)
I have such a hard time determining tone in the written word. That doesnt say
much about me since I write for Computer Graphics World 🙂
Dean Oliver
Virtually Real
Self-righteous is not the word, just say 'happy user' or 'satisfied customer'.
Otherwise you risk being a bit offensive and that is not on, at least not here
on CompuServe; slagging people off is probably more appropriate at the bar.
As for the video/box equation, I think there is a lot more to editing video on
a computer than a simple 'box'; but since this is how you call it, I'd say I
prefer working on a 'box' that is more user friendly than another one, since
I've got to use the 'box' not the video. Unless your idea of editing is simply
to watch the 'video'.
Alberto
Oh Alberto…
I observed a joke at your expense… I am sorry. But you set yourself up!
<<< I use Avid myself and if ever they (very unlikely) will move to a PC
system I will change job. I swear. >>>
Changing your job because you have to learn how to do something a little
differently, especially when Avid (I'm quite sure) would try to make it
as painless as possible, I would classify as self-rightous. Unless your
Mac forgot the emoticon saying you were teasing.
The winners in this world are the ones who adapt to changing situations. The
REAL winners are the ones who use as many platforms as they need, to get at
the tools that will put them on the forefront of their field.
I'm sure that there are several people with your temperment that are
sitting with their Amigas saying NewTek will NEVER port to the PC.
Never say never, Mr. Tabone. Economics 101.
<<< Ehm, sorry for you, I was talking about the BROADCAST systems, you know
I was thinking about my work. >>>
It's amusing how computers have a way of destroying boundries these days,
isn't it? What is BROADCAST QUALITY? Is it the RS-170 spec? Pretty
bad video can pass through that. Is it Betacam quality? Have you seen
the Fast DP/R? You might want to take a peek. Just to make sure you're
right.
Look – there WERE some pretty self-rightous folks in the print business
that are out of work now because of a little Mac program called Pagemaker.
Situations change – if you're wedded to Avid, you may want to look at
Avid's competition. Because if you don't and they start eating Avid's
lunch, and Avid goes away, then the folks that can work the competition's
products will be eating YOUR lunch.
It just bugs me when people bury their heads and are not open to new
ideas and thought. Change is constant. Surf with it, or drown in it.
Surf's Up, dude…
MoonDoggieBartz.out
Very smooth and polished reply, good style. You earned plus points after your
initial one.
Still, your views are accurate but, as far as my situation is concerned, they
are slightly off-mark. You're not wrong generally, but you're wrong to put me
in your perspective.
I know A LOT about the problems of adjusting to change, since I was trained
with film and I still think no other method of dealing with motion pictures can
surpass it in terms of quality, flexibility and pure production crafts. It is
men who make movies, not machines, and without the craft of dedicated men all
motion pictures are flat and squallid. A machine can be a perfect tool for a
job, but if a man is not comfortable with it, it won't produce the best he is
capable of. I refused to move into video editing because I hated the
mechanicalities of the editing process, because I hated the flat image quality,
because I hated the fact that I couldn't physically touch the thing and edit it
with my hands. I was behind many competitors and felt cut off somehow. I lost
a lot of work simply because I didn't want it, but I stood by my principle that
it had to be closer to film. Then, when Avid came about, I fell for it because
suddenly I could use all the things I learned about editing and I could cut
with a method that was similar to editing films. I had a Mac myself and that
obviously helped a lot. Editors hardly knew about it whilst I was all eyes and
ears for video and multimedia on a Mac, long before everyone else. Suddenly, I
was ahead of the competion, and to a large degree I still am. Because I am
comfortable with my tool, I have exploited my film knowledge and mastered
Computer-based editing to the point where I can cut so fast within broadcast
standards (more on this some other time) to be able to work in the news. That
alone is such a change in the Television industry that before new standards
come out, there will still be people trying to come to terms with editing on a
computer, never mind the logo on the case. When you get good at a job, people
demand you and it's you who dictate the condition of your work, not the others.
You choose the tools, not the other way around. And considering change simply
a different platform is like identifying a season by a different wind. The
real change will not be, in my view, Avid on Windows (which I still refuse),
but by an entirely different approach to Television, the Media and
communication. That's what the next real change is all about, and this is the
very reason for this forum, together with a few others.
And I am preparing for this change already, never mind your Windows PC.
Your views only take into account INSTALLED base of personal computers.
Television companies so far were only working with VCRs and expensive, yet
complicated, editing consolles. They DON'T have a Windows computer in their
cutting rooms. They look at systems, and buy a complete package. The fact
that Avid has built a reputation for non-linear editing means they will buy
directly from Avid. From this point of view, Avid has no interest in doing a
Media Composer or NewsCutter on Windows, when they already have a set-up which
is tried, tested and is already into its 5.0 or 3.1 version. The problem will
only arise with a system that can be set-up using a computer that's already
installed, and that's why they may do Media Suite Pro on Windows as well. This
is your grey and boring 'economics 101', and it stops there. The professional
TV editors like me have grown with Avid on the Macintosh and the installed base
in production companies and TV stations is on the Mac: this is the side of your
'economics 101' which makes me say that there's no need for a Windows-based
Media Composer or Newscutter. Just like all main DTP industries which have
started on the Mac are definitively not turning to Windows – God forbid!
What TV and production companies may do is look at other systems, which offer
different features or costs than Avid. I would be very hard pushed to see a
Windows NewsCutter (if it ever appears) having better performance or costing
less than a traditional Mac one.
Take a walk around a few TV stations and ask around. Then what YOU and the
others do with your own PC is not really my concern.
Clear enough? ;-}
Alberto
Alberto –
I, as Michael Towe, wasn't going to reply to this, but I feel compelled to
mention two things.
1) >>> It is men who make movies
I hate to bring this to your attention, but you've just insulted over half
of the population on this planet. You may have meant this in some sort of
"presidential we" fashion, but it's just plain illiterate in 1995. It's
my personal belief that this planet would be better off if we had the
true majority running it, and your words only prove my point.
2) What would Avid do if Apple Computer was no longer in business? I'm
not saying it will happen, but it might. This is where Economics 101 comes
in. From your words here, we already know what you would do – you wouldn't
edit video anymore. I bet Avid would switch platforms.
BTW, I concur with Dean and Michael on the points they raised.
Please… let's give this a rest. If this keeps up, I'm going to induce
my own version of Economics 101 and pull this forum off my NavCIS list.
Sincerely,
david bartz
WOW!
I guess we got told!
Tom (astonished at this diatribe).
Hi Alberto,
I promised myself that I would not get into this platform discusion….But
as the saying goes " All the best laid plans of mice and men tend to go astray
"
So here im my 2 cents worth.
The platform that you use is NOT IMPORTANT!!!!. What is important is that
you know how to tell a story. I have seen guys that can edit in cammera, pop
the tape out and have it look like they spent weeks in post. I can only wish
that I could do that, I would have saved hords of money. Editors need to stop
worying about what the hardware can do and start concentrating on what the
wetware can do ( wetware is the human brain ) after all this is what makes or
breaks a production.
I edit on a PC with a Video Machine. I love the system and it works for me.
As far as what system you ( or any other editor uses for that matter ) it's
realy a moot point for me. I need to concentrate on what my system will do and
how I can CREATIVLY use it's assets.
>>I'd say I prefer working on a 'box' that is more user friendly than another
one,<<
I see this stated so many times by MAC users and it still makes no sence to
me. User friendly is a reletive term. All of my experiance on computers is on a
PC. I know this system well and so for me it is " User Friendly" Since I don't
use a MAC if you were to sit me in front of one it would be less than " User
Friendly " Now maybe after I used a MAC for awhile it would become " User
Friendly " but to tell the truth I don't have the time.
To put it in simmple terms it's the editor that makes the box…not the
other way around.
Regards,
Michael W. Towe
Falcon Video Productions
Santee Ca.
Michael,
see my reply to David Bartz, to find that I am saying the same things.
True, what works for me doesn't necessarily work for the others, but there
again I never sanctioned that everyone should use the Mac or Avid on the Mac to
cut video. All I said was that I (underlined) would NOT accept to work on a
PC, be it running Corel Draw or a souped-up version of Avid and the Mac OS.
That's MY choice but obviously some PC aficionados get pissed off for such
behaviour.
There again, you yourself say "if you were to sit me in front of one [Mac] it
would be less than " User Friendly ".
Why this concept should work for you and not for me?
Us MacUsers are very sensitive on the issue but also because in all these years
people like Dean Oliver (on this forum) have put us in a ghetto because the Mac
wasn't a serious computer, because it was slow, it didn't have much software,
it cost too much money and it didn't run Lotus 1-2-3. Again, because it wasn't
Ms-Dos compatible, it didn't belong to their world, didn't have a big anough
share of the market. Yeah? We were not part of the majority, we were weird and
we had to be kept at distance, just like a jew during WWII. We are refugees,
Michael, we live on little islands like DTP & Graphics, because we are not
mainstream. Then we get pushed out by some Mr. Bill Gates and his Windo-s. So
we venture into new territories like Multimedia & DTV and we try to plant a few
sticks around, only to have PC people chasing us again out.
I just would like some Dos user say: oh I love my computer but wouldn't it be
nice to have a Mac too for some fancy artwork? Instead, all they say is: when
is Photoshop going to be ported? When is PageMaker going to be ported? Why
hasn't Avid ported over to Windows yet? And especially, "about time too" as if
anything good going round in the computer world can ONLY be on their platform,
everything else is simply not to be taken seriously.
These people deserve as many system errors as their computer can deliver, and
as little good software as their I/O bus and SVGA monitors can handle.
Alberto
Alberto:
>I just would like some Dos user say: oh I love my computer but wouldn't it be
nice to have a Mac too for some fancy artwork? Instead, all they say is: when
is Photoshop going to be ported? When is PageMaker going to be ported? Why
hasn't Avid ported over to Windows yet? And especially, "about time too" as if
anything good going round in the computer world can ONLY be on their platform,
everything else is simply not to be taken seriously.<
I'd just like to jump in here–and, as someone who uses *both* Windows and Mac,
hopefully circumvent *another* instance of Mac partisans and Windows partisans
trying to stare each other out of countenance <g>…
Until recently, the reason so many folks purchased Windows-based systems over
Mac systems was because, for a small business or private practice (which
described me and the folks I worked for, pretty much), Macs were *expensive*. I
spent my first year and a half as a desktop publisher designing publications on
a Mac Plus(!!!) because the cost to upgrade past that was ruinous to my boss.
When we finally *got* a new Mac, it was the "top of the midrange" IIVX (for
around $5,000 w/a larger hard drive–but no CD-ROM, since people who sold it to
us insisted we couldn't have both–and enough memory to run PhotoShop), which
two months after we bought it was a white elephant. My boss is *still* paying
that off, which is why we haven't upgraded to PowerMac yet–and he's
understandably leery about the upgrade, given what happened the last time…
Fortunately, Apple finally realized that their market had flatlined at their
original prices, and made a determined effort to make Macs affordable and
compatible to the vast base of Windows/DOS users. By then, however, most people
were reluctant to make a changeover that meant learning a new platform (all
right, it's an easy-to-use new platform–but try telling that to, say, my wife
who's *still* using WordPerfect 5.1/DOS and refuses to change) and not being
able to use the same software they'd used before.
Alberto, I happen to like *both* systems for different reasons–and am
fortunate enough to have access to both. Most people, however, aren't that
lucky–it's either upgrade what they have already, or don't upgrade, period.
It's not that Windows folk are eager to drive Macintosh off the face of the
Earth (at least, I'm not–and except for a handful of "DOS or die!" partisans,
I suspect most other folks aren't either)–they'd just like a computer system
that's compatible *and* affordable.
I find the Mac to be a better-integrated operating system than Windows, and
it's certainly better supported for handling cross-platform conversions. As for
the "speed" issue, I've always found that the somewhat clumsy design of Windows
(running several megs of RAM atop a 640K base system) tends to negate a lot of
the speed gain–my 486/66 w/16 megs of RAM at home opens PhotoShop at about the
same speed as my IIVX w/8 megs of RAM at work. However, the reason I've *got* a
Windows system at home is because I can't afford to own two systems, and the
readership I write for (mostly, video consumers) tend to have Windows computers
and want DTV products they can run on those.
I don't think it's a conspiracy if a company, having designed a product that
works well on one platform, decides to port it over to another–it's just good
business. And it's not a conspiracy that DOS-based systems are more popular,
despite the fact they're not quite as easy to use, as Mac systems–it's the
advantage of competition, since there are a number of companies making
DOS-compatible computers, while only Apple and one other company, I think, are
making Mac-compatibles. In not licensing their technology to other computer
manufacturers, Apple made the same mistake Sony made back in the 70s
w/Betamax–hoping to corner the videocassette market by keeping the technology
to themselves, Sony's Betamax got trounced by the visually inferior, but less
expensive and more readily-available, VHS.
Now let's all make nice, okay? I'd *hate* this to turn into the Desktop
Publishing Forum, where DTP issues turned into political hissing matches…
Tim Liebe
Tim,
Very well put. Just recently our company bought a PowerMac 8100 and more than
10 AST Pentium/90s with same 64M RAM and giga bytes disk. The real application
performance we got from both is similar as we tested them, too. The reason
that we don't buy more PowerMac is simply because we can buy *3* AST PCs with
the same price. Also, we found most of the Mac software packages that we use
are far more expensive than their Windows version here. The reason that we
EVER buy a PowerMac (regardless it's SO expensive) is because our new designer
knows only about Mac and he hates our old Mac IIs. (I think we will never try
to hire another designer who can only use Mac to do his/her works. For the
price/performance, we'd better to buy a SGI for them to work with. Gee! A
good idea. I should talk with my boss about this tomorrow.)
–Vince
Vince:
>The reason that we don't buy more PowerMac is simply because we can buy *3*
AST PCs with the same price. Also, we found most of the Mac software packages
that we use are far more expensive than their Windows version here. <
I know what you mean <rueful g>! I'm actually fond of the Mac, personally, but
it's a real expensive love affair–and if I can do roughly the same thing in
Windows, I can live with the quality compromises in exchange for being able to
work, period…
BTW, where are you, anyway? I assumed San Franciso for some reason, but your
other post to me suggested you might be overseas. Over here at least (New York
City), PowerMacs have come down in price somewhat so they're within the range
of high-end normal cost, but there's still the difference in software
price–though that gap's also beginning to close.
As for SGI, afraid I don't know anything about it, except that a lot of people
seem to be using it. Would it be hard to switch over from working on other
platforms, and does it resemble either Windows or Mac OS? Could it be used
w/any form of Mac or DOS personal computer, or do you need a whole new
computer?
Best,
Tim
Tim,
I must be a foreigner to you, I live in Taiwan (an earth distance from you).
In here, the Mac's price is always going up, sky high. So, it has a poor sale.
Since we made most hardware components of PC here, the price of less known
brand PCs is about half of the AST's quote. However, we like the maintainance
contract that AST offers (and we use it often) so that we stay with it.
About SGI/Mac/PC, I think the thing really matter is the application that being
used. Since we're a software developing house, we will have no problem to find
a person to setup the machine and environment for the designer. He can learn
and use the software package to do things. However, a general feeling about
SGI software is that they all have a difficult UI to work with. But, may be
that's because the tasks to be done is very complicate, too.
Have a nice day.
–Vince
Vince:
>I must be a foreigner to you, I live in Taiwan (an earth distance from you). <
Really? Your English is excellent–I guess that's why I assumed San Francisco
(we have a large Chinese-American population there, as well as a thriving video
& multimedia industry).
>In here, the Mac's price is always going up, sky high. So, it has a poor
sale.<
Understandable, I guess–for a computer w/such an international reputation,
Apple seems to pride itself on its "Ammuricanism"!<g> Hopefully, you'll see the
prices of Macs go down too, soon's they determine that their new pricing plan
(instituted in early 1994 over in the US) is *good* for their business…
>However, a general feeling about SGI software is that they all have a
difficult UI to work with. But, may be that's because the tasks to be done is
very complicate, too.<
No, it's probably that the UI's hard to deal with <g>… Seriously, I know next
to nothing about SGI except that few people over here seem to use it. Mostly,
it's Mac, DOS or Amiga–w/a significant minority also using Unix.
Take care!
Tim
Alberto,
While your useful participation in this forum is encouraged and welcome,
participation that is helpful and friendly, diatribes are neither encouraged
nor welcome.
This forum is for the discussion of Desktop Video by professionals, amateurs,
and wannabes … the assumption is that folks here are adults and can act as
such. If you wish to engage in "my computer is better than your computer"
wars, please do it elsewhere.
-sja
Ehm, sorry for you, I was talking about the BROADCAST systems, you know I was
thinking about my work. I mean Media Composer and the NewsCutter, which are
ON-LINE systems (maybe you know what that means?). I don't see nor foresee a
Windows version for those.
The Media Suite Pro was designed as a 'low cost' system, with all that it
entails.
Anyway isn't it peculiar that you always get our software ported to your
platform rather than the other way around? I suppose you're happy now that
you've got your little slice of the cake.
PS My 'Mac bubble' is made of cast-iron and doesn't pop with your remarks.
Alberto
You stated:
>>Anyway isn't it peculiar that you always get our software ported to your
platform rather than the other way around? I suppose you're happy now that
you've got your little slice of the cake.
PS My 'Mac bubble' is made of cast-iron and doesn't pop with your remarks.<<
As for always getting your sloppy seconds, this is not always the case. Is
there 3D Studio for the Mac? Howabout the Personal Animation Recorder? True
NLE right on the PC. Crystal Graphics Topas was ported from the PC to the Mac
as was Cakewalk Professional. So you see Alberto, the nice thing about having
several platforms to choose from is that we ALL benifit from each other's
discoveries. While I may not be using "the most expensive" or latest gadgets
on the market, I have the joy of being my own boss and making a very decent
living in the process. Gee, it's just too bad that I am only a lowly slug
using an outdated architechture. Maybe tomorrow I will see the error of my
ways and buy a Mac.
As for the Power Mac. Yes, while it MAY run windows applications, it still
currently will not run anything that is 386 or above code. So basically you
have Windows running in real mode i.e. 286 mode. What a complete waste of
time!
This whole "chicken and egg" scenareo is pointless. I am positive that you
could come up with an endless list of apps that have originated on the Mac and
we could get into this silly little war over nothing but quite frankly you are
not worth my time.
Have a wonderful day!
Dean Oliver
Virtually Real
You have a funny idea about time, since I still must have been worth the ten
minutes it took you to type your last message, though. Maybe you just love the
sound of your own voice, huh? This time you have the 'bubble', and it's all
about yourself.
As for your hypocritical wishes, take a real one, straight from the heart: I
sincerely hope you go bankrupt.
Do us all a favor, Alberto: Take this to private mail.
Unless you like the sound of your voice.
(5 seconds, hopefully not wasted)
Alberto,
I must say that I am sorry if somehow I have interupted your Prozac schedule.
My only point is that everyone from all formats can learn from one another.
As for you hoping I go bankrupt, that is your (childish) perogative. If you
tend to have this type of attitude throughout life, at work, with your clients,
then I truly feel sorry for you. Take a bit of advice from someone without a
block of granite on his shoulder…GET OVER IT!!!!
May you rest in peace,
Dean Oliver
Virtually Real
Alberto,
With Mac's market share slipping 2% per year (down to 8% of the market now) and
with more and more vendors porting to windows (Adobe PhotoShop being a big one
for Video Graphic suppliers), the advent of the IBM PowerPC line in Qtr3 '95,
and the strong showing of the Alpha based machines in graphics and animation,
it is possible that Macintosh could end up going the way of teh Amiga sometime
in the '96 – '98 time frame. In fact, if Alpha interst is just a flash in the
pan and is not maintained and expanded, inspite of supporting WindowsNT, DEC
could also go under in the next couple of years. And a company like Avid, you
can bet, is not going to be unaware of those trends and planless with respect
to them. In addition, they would not announce any R&D/Prototypes on other
platforms as it would hurt sales of the current product ("I'll wait for the IBM
PowerPC WindowsNT version insted of getting the mac version….").
Maybe your resume needs updating… :^}
wmc – via Autopilot!
??????
Hmmm….I heard vultures are early birds but you're a bit ahead of your group,
judging by the information in my hands…
Maybe this sip of freshly squeezed juice might kill your thirst for agony and
death:
"CUPERTINO, California–January 19, 1995–Apple Computer, Inc., today announced
record revenues, and earnings for its first fiscal quarter, which ended
December 30, 1994. For the quarter, Apple's revenues were $2.83 billion, a 15%
increase over the first quarter of fiscal 1994, and represented the highest
quarterly revenue figure in the Company's history. Net income for the quarter
was $188 million, compared with $40 million in the same quarter a year ago.
Simultaneously, Apple announced that it shipped its one millionth Power
Macintosh personal computer or upgrade, reaching an important milestone ahead
of schedule–just 10 months after introduction of its systems based on the
powerful PowerPC microprocessor. "In 1994 Apple took the lead in bringing RISC
technology to mainstream personal computing" said Michael Spindler, Apple's
president and chief executive officer. "Today's one million unit milestone is
a testament to our customers' acceptance of Power Macintosh as their platform
for the future, and to Apple's ability to deliver on its objectives." The
Company also attributed its record revenues to demand for its entry-level
multimedia Macintosh products, including the Performa 630. Shipments of
Apple's Performa products were particularly strong to consumer and home office
customers.
During the quarter, developer support for the Power Macintosh platform grew.
There are now over 400 Macintosh applications on the market which have been
optimized to take full advantage of the high performance of the RISC-based
Power Macintosh system. In addition, the first licensees of the Mac OS
–Macintosh operating system–announced their intentions to market PowerPC
systems running the Mac OS. Radius Corporation and Power Computing, Inc. both
announced that they expect to bring their systems to market during calendar
1995. In November, Apple, IBM Corporation, and Motorola announced that they
intend to define and market a common hardware platform based on the PowerPC
microprocessor. This hardware platform is intended to be capable of running
multiple operating systems, including the Macintosh OS, Warp/OS2, and Windows
NT. "We are committed to openly licensing the Macintosh OS," said Spindler.
"We believe that our first licensing agreements, together with the creation of
a common hardware reference platform for PowerPC based computers, lays a
foundation for broader acceptance of the Macintosh." Compared with the first
fiscal quarter a year ago, the Company's improved earnings were the result of
strong revenue growth combined with higher gross margins as a percentage of net
sales. The improvement in gross margins was due primarily to the introduction
and sale of new higher margin products, including Power Macintosh computers.
Operating expenses for the first quarter were 19.3% of net sales and
represented one of the Company's lowest operating expense ratios in its
history.
Apple Computer, Inc., a recognized pioneer and innovator in the information
industry, creates powerful solutions based on easy-to-use personal computers,
servers, peripherals, software, online services, and personal digital
assistants. Headquartered in Cupertino, California, Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL)
develops, manufactures, licenses and markets products, technologies and
services for the business education, consumer, scientific & engineering and
government markets in over 140 countries. -30- Apple, the Apple logo,
Macintosh, and Performa are registered trademarks and the Mac OS and Power
Macintosh are trademarks of Apple Computer, Inc., registered in the US and
other countries."
As for my resume, thank God the majority of my employers are quite different
from you!
Avid isn't going to move to PC over Apple…but they are right now beta testing
a new system which is PC pased.