Their net income has been under $50m for the past 3 years: Avid could easily have gone bankrupt over the past few years. It's a very low volume industry and some companies are very vulnerable. I imagine some of the lack of interoperability is due to other niche NLE makers wanting some proprietary lock-in. With FCPX having 2.5 million+ users, it's pretty mainstream so I doubt it will get abandoned like the others but I could see it being a low-priority project for Apple. If it's a niche product, it is usually EOL'd. When the driving forces behind the projects move on, the project eventually goes into maintenance mode for a few years.
This has happened with a few products at Apple like Aperture and some they purchased. It sounds like he had a major role in the direction of Final Cut and every product he worked on: The original FCP creator Randy Ubillos left Apple a few years ago. This would make it much easier to integrate FCPX into a different workflow because a project could be started on FCPX for planning and putting ideas together and the edit can be switched transparently to Da Vinci or Premiere later in the process for refinement.Īpple has said they have over 2.5 million FCPX users and the vast majority of users will be sole editors so the product will be designed around the most users. For example non-destructive color corrections and filters won't be the same in every app but where they aren't supported, this would be flagged as a native portion and there can be a requirement to store a proxy render in collaborative workflows for previewing. It wouldn't matter if every machine supported every part of the master edit as long as they were preserved on making changes. They'd be able to cherry pick parts into the master and there can be a notation system for suggestions. If someone wants to check out an alternative edit, they can switch to that branch and play the timeline. There can be a master edit stored in this format and there can be a version control system where multiple people can branch and commit changes into the master edit. The quickest way to design a format would be for each major NLE developer to have an ascii project format and a group can find a way to express everything that's needed in an open timeline format. A program's specific settings could be stored in an auxiliary data portion but probably wouldn't be needed. It shouldn't be an exchange format like EDL, AAF but a project format. This would save file paths relative to a library root and each machine would set the root, which can be a shared library or local. If 3D apps can use complex formats like FBX, USD etc, there can be a standard timeline format in JSON or XML that FCP can save and Da Vinci, Premiere can open/sync the same timeline directly. There's no reason that editing apps can't all have a shared timeline description format. There's also a request for collaboration features, FCPX has a single-user library and they'd like to have shared libraries. The requests include a beta program for 3rd party tools to test them before updates come out. The only way this could feasibly be done is by open sourcing it but this would show how much active work is being done on it. The letter notes some of the requests, the original FCP wasn't cross-platform and isn't expected. "Industry-standard workflows" means totally cross-platform.
0 kommentar(er)
