This past week I've been finishing a documentary with a heap of variable quality archival footage that I cut on FCP.  The finish and playout to film was done at the major post facility here in Melbourne.  This project admittedly had a chequered history - it had been through two other editors hands before I came to it.

I was pretty much resigned to the fact that my FCP would "lose" renders for no reason that I could determine.  I didn't even really mind all that much, because where I couldn't persuade FCP to find and relink the media I would re-render and get a cup of coffee.  There was no one looking over my shoulder and the frequent renders did at least buy me think time.

So we got to our online facility to up-res where necessary and dump everything out to Smoke, prior to clean up and scanning to film.  And I discovered that their well-maintained up-to-date FCP exhibited the same "beach ball of death" and random crashes as the older hire version that I'd been using.  The 90 minute program took all afternoon to dump.

Last night I also had another dump to supervise.  This was a low budget digital acquisition movie shot on HVX202 that I'd cut on my Xpress Pro.  This time we were playing out from Symphony to HDcam.  It took just over 90 minutes.  There were no crashes, no surprises, it just happened.

Fortunately the same producer was involved in both productions.  He has always semi-jokingly given me a hard time about my failure to get with it and embrace whole heartedly FCP.  After all, it's cheap, and it runs on an Apple.  It must be better.  After this week's experience he's breathing hellfire and damnation about FCP.  The eye-opener for him was that the previous editor and the on-line editor both had exactly the same issues with FCP that I'd had.

On the other hand the movie, started on Xpress, migrated to MC and finished on Symphony, just happened at every step of the way.

SandmanX82:

I think a lot of the problems are more often than not user error.

That could very well be, but he swears by FCP, and that's why I got it for him. He's a longtime user. I will admit, the "clunked around" descriptive came from me. I know how fast a trim is on Avid. What drove the client nuts, was the render before playback. There was a word and phrases containing the word that had to be removed.  B-roll clips were used to cover the jumps.  The transitions into the b-roll and any change whatsoever in them required a render. Being used to how fast MC is, it was frustrating for both me and the client.

SandmanX82:

I guess it all comes down to different strokes for different folks.

and so on and so on and scooby dooby doo . .Good luck my friend!

jwrl:

So we got to our online facility to up-res where necessary and dump everything out to Smoke, prior to clean up and scanning to film.  And I discovered that their well-maintained up-to-date FCP exhibited the same "beach ball of death" and random crashes as the older hire version that I'd been using.  The 90 minute program took all afternoon to dump.

Welcome to my world! Yes in a lot of cases it is easier to get stuff in to FCP vs. Avid. But at the end of the process, when you need to go out, that's when Avid sings over FCP.

Here's the problem with that in a business world. You can have a wonderful experience for over 1 year offlining with FCP. Then when it comes time to finish, it goes to hell. What does the client remember?

Give you a hint, they tend to remember the last part of the process. Cost me 20K on a major project we did in FCP last year. Could have almost bought a Symphony Nitris DX with that...

BTW: The client's editor demanded FCP from the start because she had a system at home. At the ned of the fiasco, they swore they would never work with FCP again. I wouldn't care as we have both options available to clients, except for the bad taste the clients were left with rubs off on our reputation.

In reality, we hide a lot of the problems with FCP from our clients as they would just think we don't know what we are doing, but that's not the case. FCP doesn't hold up well under the strain of a serious project. The aforementioned job was a 4 hour documentary film with every format of tapes, files, and pictures you can think of.

Sorry, 2.5 times more in price for the freedom from this kind of crap is WELL worth it.

Amen brother. That's what I tell students all the time. It's not the cost of the software, it's the cost of USING that software that is import to your business.

First off, let me say that I hate using Final Cut Pro, but here's the "reality" from my point of view.  When I began editing using NLE's some 10 years ago Avid was the only game in town.  And yes, by town I do mean LA.  Am I cutting for NBC or Sony or HBO? No.  I'm cutting for the myriad of guys out there doing documentaries and reality programming for places like Discovery, History Channel, MTV, etc.  If I were to go back even five years ago no one would even have asked me if I can use Final Cut.  Now, as a freelancer, it's pretty mandatory to know both FCP and MC.

Last December I cut a show for E! (who always used Avids) and guess what?  Yup, it was on FCP.  Why? Because production companies are CHEAP BASTARDS!  Have you seen the budget for a cable show?  So take that into account along with having a post supervisor or company head trying to squeeze every cent out of the budget and they laugh at the idea of spending $20,000.00+ for a new edit system.  Especially when you can cut and deliver a show in 1920x1080 using FCP.

What I think Avid fails to realize, is that all the momentum is with Apple right now.  You have no idea how I wish the guys here, (along with many other well-established companies) would see where investment dollars in new equipment is going.

One final point before my head explodes with frustration, I wonder how many editors here use Avid at work, but have Final Cut on their home systems.  I know I do.  And why?  Because all I had to do was copy the discs from work and install it.  That's not to say that I've never purchased either companies software.  I have a nice purple dongle for DV Xpress sitting in a drawer collecting dust.  Same goes for my FCP Studio 1 box on the shelf, but I didn't have to buy an upgrade.  But I digress.  My point is simply that anyone can install FCP on their home computer and learn the program for free (more or less) and that translates into a skilled labor force using FCP in the workplace.  Does this happen with everyone?  No. maybe 1 out of every 100 for all I know.  But what sucks is that they didn't need to spend thousands of dollars getting certified to become an editor, or even an asst. editor.

So yeah, while I have to waste a lot of time waiting for crap to render, and while I have to manage my media by hand and do a lot of other piddly crap with FCP that sucks up my time I guess I really shouldn't complain, because it's more days of work for me.

Anyway, enough ranting.

ntermini:

I really shouldn't complain, because it's more days of work for me

Exactly. More days for you and more days of editorial out of the budget. So, exactly where is the savings to any sensible business? If I can save two days off of every budget in editorial, the difference in the price of my Avid gear is paid of in one month of work. I think THAT is the reality that is beginning to sink in with each FCP experience.

ntermini:

What I think Avid fails to realize, is that all the momentum is with Apple right now.

The new management is well aware of that.

ntermini:

So yeah, while I have to waste a lot of time waiting for crap to render, and while I have to manage my media by hand and do a lot of other piddly crap with FCP that sucks up my time I guess I really shouldn't complain, because it's more days of work for me.

And that my friend is Avid's biggest challenge. They need to get that word out to the market at large. To this point, they have been woefully unsuccessful at educating the public about their actual value.

ntermini:

I wonder how many editors here use Avid at work, but have Final Cut on their home systems.

I use Avid at work, and I have FCP at home. I never (well, hardly ever) touch it. That's because I also have AXP on the same machines, and they will soon be MC. One thing I will say about FCS2, I like Livetype, Motion, and DVD Studio Pro. I use 'em all the time, and I'll keep upgrading just for those tools. To me, those programs alone are worth the price of the package. The power and flexibility that the Symphony Nitris DX will deliver makes the 35K well worth it to me.

ntermini:

So yeah, while I have to waste a lot of time waiting for crap to render, and while I have to manage my media by hand and do a lot of other piddly crap with FCP that sucks up my time I guess I really shouldn't complain, because it's more days of work for me.

That's certainly one way to look at it. "Cup half full" approach. Congratulations - I think that makes you an optimist!

All this is well and good, but lets not fool ourselves and think Avid has a stationary target to shoot at in Apple and FCP.  FCP has advanced MUCH more rapidly than Avid in the past 5 years and there is no reason to believe that it won't continue to do so in the future.  While in its infancy, the FCP to Autoscreet workflow is getting better (XML) and seems will get better in the future (according to Autoscreet folks, not Apple).  It is ahead in the Red workflow (still a kluge, but still ahead).  It offers a better package of products for the buck for a large market of creative folk.  And it is getting the majority of new editors coming into the business these days.

Unless there is some big change at Apple and they dump the product, it will get better and better.  Avid cannot shoot at FCP where it is today, but where it may be in 24 months or so, and then again in another 24 months.  This is not going to be easy for Avid.

sw (finishing a project going directly to DVD on FCP because its easier this way, not that I particularly want to)

Hi Scott

Guess we just have to wait and see what the new management and "New Thinking" come up with. I know you agree that dropping AXP and lowering the price of MC was a giant step in the right direction. The new education pricing, and possibly, hopefully, more aggressive marketing to that market could have a major effect on future new editors.

I love Apple. I own 14 macs. If they develop FCP to the point that it makes my life easier and makes me more money than Avid - You bet I'll use it. So far that hasn't happened.

Meantime, if nothing else, it'll be interesting to see how it all shakes out.

BLKDOG:

Well I do agree Bill that Avid is still not in a position to compete in the low end of our business. However, from the point of view of a production facility, Avid has one very huge advantage over  the other system you mention and that is support. Especially now that the new execs are straightening things out. The ability to pick up a phone and get support for anything from a dead system to how to make a dissolve is a big deal for most of us out here. These forums are invaluable to a lot of us. My personal experience with FCP and Adobe are no where near the level of comfort we have with avid support. Just try calling Apple with a FCP question. You can't. Edius support? Worse than Avid's on a Avid's worst day.

I realize that Avid needs to get their support contract prices in line with the market but, hopefully, that will happen soon. 

So, for us, the incredible power of these new boxes coupled with all the support we receive on the back end makes the price of the Nitris box worth it. I think the Mojo DX is a very poorly thought out offering but we'll have to see where that thing goes when it's released.

But you have to pay EVEN MORE for that support (i.e. a support contract). Even with "new thinking" Avid won't talk to you post-sales unless you pay them each and every year "to be thier friend."  User community is good, but you can argue that the same is true for other systems on the Cow, DM etc.

Bottom line, looking for rationale outside the functionality of the box/app itself is more of an excuse than a reason for the way-out-of-whack pricing, especially on MojoDX which has no analog I/O for real-time monitoring.

Finally, what really shows this to be the brain-child of an addled marketing department is a policy which right-prices the software (see, bang for buck I agree $2500 is fair compared to $500 - $900 of other apps mentioned) but, forces existing owners of that software to pay more for upgrading than just buying a new license / dongle as if they never owned it!  I am just not yet reading any counter arguments that give me objective facts to logically rationalize what appears to me to be an irrational pricing structure.

See, this is my exact problem.  I'm looking for a rational, objective, well argued, factual reason why I am wrong in thinking Avid has gone nuts.  Instead its a bunch of emotional egoistic BS like the FCP vs Avid flame wars we  have to put up with all the time.

I don't give a crap if you use a Stanley hammer or a Craftsman hammer to drive the nail.  But if you tell me the Stanley is 4x the cost of the Craftsman, you'd also better explain why its use gives me 4x the benefit in ROI and productivity, otherwise it makes me a danged fool for paying the "logo premium".

Haze:

SandmanX82:

I guess I don't understand some of the reasonings of what people are posting.

 

The fact that you don't understand is crystal clear.

Despite multiple posts from Andrew, Blackdog, Terrence and others you can't seem to wrap your head around the simple idea that Avid costs more but for many users it's well worth the extra money.  You continue to harp on the price point.  If low price is your only consideration in the products you purchase, I think you might have better luck at Wal-Mart.

ntermini:

First off, let me say that I hate using Final Cut Pro, but here's the "reality" from my point of view.  ... production companies are CHEAP BASTARDS!  Have you seen the budget for a cable show?  So take that into account along with having a post supervisor or company head trying to squeeze every cent out of the budget and they laugh at the idea of spending $20,000.00+ for a new edit system. Especially when you can cut and deliver a show in 1920x1080 using FCP.

Yes, and so are public sector and private non-broadcast operations in medical, educational, legal, law-enforcement, military etc. etc. etc.  (All the budgets going to exec bonuses and to replace spent ammo....).  Here is another reality that obviously escaped Avid marketing:

"Given the recent auctions for post-production gear and the lowball prices paid, do not count on a lender providing cash for purchase of new post gear without putting up some significan't collateral other than the gear itself."  -Neil Weinstock, TV Broadcast, April, 08.

Boradcast engineering is recording an actual shrinkage in the number of TV stations, and more to come as the digital transition date is closer, plus ad revenues are rapidly decreasing to the point that a number of industry observers have said that Broadcast is a dying industry.  This all lead to downward price pressure on every aspect of content production.  And yet Avid wants to up the price?  Part of survival in changing market place is adapting to market conditions.  Avid doesn't seem to be doing this with DX hardware.

And they seem to particularly want to anger and drive away MC users who are not likely to ever need / buy a support contract. Where is the logic in forcing these existing users to pay MORE for the upgrade from MC 2.8 to 3.0 than if they just bought a new license outright? (and at 5x the cost to a current Xpro to MC upgrade which doesn't bother me so much, but other MC users will likely be angered by when the wake up to it.)

ntermini:

Anyway, enough ranting.

Yep, that is my exit line too.  It is quite clear that no one has a grasp on any logical, objective, sane reason for DX pricing, so there is no point in arguing it anymore. 

I'm outta here...

wmcole:

Where is the logic in forcing these existing users to pay MORE for the upgrade from MC 2.8 to 3.0 than if they just bought a new license outright?

wmcole:

Where is the logic in forcing these existing users to pay MORE for the upgrade from MC 2.8 to 3.0 than if they just bought a new license outright?

And where do you get this information Bill since upgrade pricing has not yet been announced?

You don't know what the upgrade is going to cost. 

As for paying for support. You get 30 days of free support with every software purchase. Do you get to contact apple at ANY time when you buy FCP...no.

You also have support reps like Marianna, Bob Russo, Michael P. and others who participate here to help customers. Ever seen an Apple rep on the Cow or Apple's own boards? 

How about the moderators here? If Avid support doesn't answer here, we've been given unfettered access to support channels in order to help you. Can't do that over at Adobe or Apple?

Not to mention that Avid is going to be re-designing its support models to (Presumably) lower pricing and give extra value for long term support.

As  few of us have posted, it's not  the cost of the software that concerns us, it's the cost of using the software. On average my FCP suites cost me 1/3 more to run than my Avid suites do. That extra time in the bay can't always be billed back to the client so yes, the extra invested in Avid pays of for me in a very short time.