Sam here…. It’s starting to dawn on me what professional subconsciously means to a lot of people in the post-production world.

It means, “overly-complicated thing that is so confusing that the average person can’t use it. And the people who do know how to use it never need to explain why things with the particular product don’t work the way they should.”

When I look at at some of the software out there that’s considered highly professional I notice some common themes. User documentation tends to be inaccurate, not covered, or completely wrong… and yet the veteran users often say how much better it’s gotten.

Getting up and running with many of these products is often extremely difficult… almost like it was designed to keep people away from the interface and features. Basic functionality that you would expect from any piece of free consumer software can be touted as a “new innovation” that still often doesn’t work as expected (or without knowing which submenu or preference you need to have memorized).

The bottom line is that because many of these applications are so specialized and expensive, it becomes an excuse to explain away the entire product’s MASSIVE design and implementation flaws. Essentially, the attitude becomes “well, this is the most professional and expensive thing there is… if you don’t get it, you probably shouldn’t be doing this sort of work.”

My own recent experiences with some of these tools made me think a lot about whether the fact that I tend to use a lot of Apple products in my day to day has made me less capable, or whether Apple’s simplistic design has simply made my threshold for unnecessary complexity far lower than it used to be.

At the end of the day, my definition of professional is finding the most efficient, practical way to get from point A to B without having to sacrifice quality.

What I’m finding more and more in the post production world, though, is that a lot of professionals hide behind their apps’ complexity as a way of keeping their lack of actual working knowledge hidden and preserving their rates.

For most people, all professional really means is “have you created a system that the average person can’t use so that you can charge more money for this complicated, specialized product?”

I’m pretty sure the average colorist getting $650 an hour is not happy about Resolve Lite going free. Especially when the same exact application used to be much harder to use and part of a million dollar hardware package. And that was just a handful of years ago.

A real professional should be looking at the traditional production pyramid of cheap, fast, good (pick two) and doing their best to find ways to deliver all three in as painless a way as possible to their clients. That’s real value, and real professionals know that the faster you can do the same job (at an equal quality) as someone else, the more money you can make from that job.

Delivering at that level of cheap, fast, and good would mean that you would want your tools to be as simple and easy as possible so that you can get done what you need to get done without the tools getting in the way… and so you don’t need to constantly apologize for poorly executed design choices while you work.

The general idea is that developers should design for simplicity and ease of use and with the end user in mind… very few people besides Apple do that. Give a 4 year old a Blackberry instead of an iPad and you’ll see exactly what I mean. And yet somehow they get slammed for applying that philosophy across the board to their professional applications.

At the end of the day, I’m just a little surprised that in order to be considered professional you have to have something that only a subset of people can figure out… when the truth is that the only thing that matters when it comes to being professional is the end product.

I wish more professional products followed that philosophy. We’d all be able to get more work done.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Sam Mestman, FCPWORKS.

This blog post contains the personal musings of FCPWORKS’ Workflow Architect, Sam Mestman. Sam’s also a regular writer for fcp.co and MovieMaker Magazine, teaches post workflow at RED’s REDucation classes, and is the founder and CEO of We Make Movies, a film collective in Los Angeles and Toronto which is dedicated to making the movie industry not suck. If you’ve got any FCP X questions or need some help putting together a system, drop him an email at workflow@fcpworks.com and you can follow him on Facebook or Twitter at @FCPWORKS.

Version 10.1.4 of FCPX hit yesterday… and from what I can tell the general reaction was a mixture of disappointment/sadness/impatience… due to its not having perceptibly new tentpole features (and so close to Christmas too). Except for FCPX users that work in the Broadcast world, who I think all simultaneously pumped their fists. I think it’s a worthwhile maintenance update with the critical addition of native import/playback/export of the MXF format for higher profile clients.

MXF is a file format or container that for a very large segment of broadcasters is critical to workflow. As in, without it being supported directly there’s no uptake of FCPX, period. So even if you’re not using FCPX yourself, its complete inclusion in FCPX is a sure sign that Apple intends this application to be used in professional broadcast environments.

All this MXF goodness is likely a result of acquiring the good folks over at Hamburg Pro Media, which closed up shop mysteriously last summer. This used to be an expensive plugin that barred many broadcasters from getting into FCPX as a platform. Now it’s just a no-brainer and it means if you’re looking at the value proposition of learning FCPX as a platform for getting jobs in the broadcast market, your vista just got a whole lot wider. More on that here and here.

Now if you’re not one of these broadcast clients… guys, seriously, this is not the end of the world and it does not mean Apple has stopped caring about you and is going to stop innovating with this app.

As a person who has been lucky enough to peak behind the curtain and see how the sausage gets made, and has met the people on the FCPX team, and considers a lot of them friends… THOSE GUYS CARE. They are listening to you. They have not abandoned you.

The thing that was most difficult to me when I did my first stint and met the FCPX team for the first time was simply that I didn’t know how software development worked. Just because you want a particular feature doesn’t mean that it’s easy to implement… and just because you want a particular feature that used to be in another application (FCP7), it doesn’t mean that’s the way that feature should implemented moving forward.

The biggest thing I learned from working with those guys is that I didn’t even know what I didn’t know… and that things take time… and that the software was in good hands. The bottom line is this… if there’s something you really want to see implemented in FCPX, use the feedback form in the app and let Apple know. I know for a fact that they read those. If you think yesterday’s release was FCPX in its final form… you’re crazy. We’re going to have a special upcoming insider’s blog on how to give better feedback to Apple soon.

If you want my opinion… I think the FCPX team is just getting started and yesterday’s update was just a few bug fixes and some major fixes they knew they could address and deliver safely to certain customers while they’re busy working on bigger things. These are not educated guesses, these are knowing how the process goes.

So… all I can say to the FCPX users back home who are not happy about the lack of major new features in the latest update – keep calm, keep editing, and use the software in its current implementation… we’ll all be able to look back a few years from now and simply laugh about all the drama this kinda stuff caused.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Sam Mestman, FCPWORKS.

This blog post contains the personal musings of FCPWORKS’ Workflow Architect, Sam Mestman. Sam’s also a regular writer for fcp.co and MovieMaker Magazine, teaches post workflow at RED’s REDucation classes, and is the founder and CEO of We Make Movies, a film collective in Los Angeles and Toronto which is dedicated to making the movie industry not suck. If you’ve got any FCP X questions or need some help putting together a system, drop him an email at workflow@fcpworks.com and you can follow him on Facebook or Twitter at @FCPWORKS.