Hi. yes, some studios are using, or have gone back to using, analog tape, which I totally dig, don't get me wrong. However, this is usually reserved for clients who can pony up the cash. (For example, it's standard fare to charge between $150 and $250 per reel.) as far as studios I've researched and people I've talked to, most clients opt for a DAW based option due to the lower cost.
Yes, some schools and studios use an older version of pt. however, as far as the two institutions I attended, the machines in their studios were not able to run OS 9 so that was not an option. And as far as college goes, I had no money to purchase a mac laptop at the time. The state assisted me with technology. However, they would not play ball with the mac option. so, it was take what they offered, or go without. Hopefully this will change for future students receiving support. Also, the networks at the two colleges I attended were all windows territory so I figured I might as well play ball. Cameron. -----Original Message----- From: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com [mailto:macvisionar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Karen Lewellen Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 4:38 PM To: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com Subject: RE: an Imac and voiceover? Again, and I do this not to pick on you, but to I hope encourage you to own your personal choices, without projecting on to anyone else. what you mean I think is that for you personally these things are important. An academic institution wants you to get the job done, and that job is going to vary from institution to institution. Radio schools, good ones at least, still teach you how to edit the old fashioned way, there is a reason for this, I will mention in a second. I can also think of two or 3 universities in major markets with classes that teach pro tools 5, because it gives you the fundamentals of the program without some of the bugs in say 6. So if you were required to teach a course in pro tools and needed to use speech, it could certainly be done. As for the demands of a commercial studio. I suppose you mean the ones you wish to personally work with? Both Michael Bubble's last album, "crazy love" that sat at the top of the charts last fall for weeks, and Kiss' last album were recorded in very commercial studios with 24 track analog technology. no gui required. I have a friend rather highly positioned in the kiss army, you want to tell Gene Simmons that what some see as legacy technology has no use? many popular artists are returning to the rich sound of analog, because they are tired of canned or for many what is canned digital sound. a well rounded professional can give a studio both, or so I personally feel. It may not be true for you, and that is terrific, but speak for your own personal needs, not others. It is a serious problem when this is not done, it suggests to anyone who is not using your machine, the entire computing population, that your tools are the best tools for them and this may not be the case at all. It can hurt over all access as well, because the uninformed think that if a site works with JFW, it is accessible, when a single product should never be the measure of workability. There is nothing stuffy about saying, this will open professional doors for me personally. Nor would it have been a waste of time to stay with a mac in college. That you chose differently is terrific, just say its your choice, not that someone is making you do this. Karen On Tue, 18 May 2010, Cameron wrote: > Hi. Okay, perhaps I should clarify my statement. By "us", I meant those > who need to work with current OS X only DAW platforms, like what you'd find > in commercial studios, or, what an academic institution would expect you to > use for teaching purposes etc. where the legacy operating system is not an > option anymore. > > Yes, if what you use works for you; meets your needs etc, then to you > personally, it's not out dated. > > Cameron. > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com > [mailto:macvisionar...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Karen Lewellen > Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 12:30 PM > To: macvisionaries@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: an Imac and voiceover? > > this is a fun topic. > I invite you to think about computers slightly differently, say like a > mode of transportation. > There are some who do not feel their needs are met unless they are zipping > along on the super highway with the most recent off the showroom floor. > There are others, who will pay thousands of dollars to drive say a vintage > roles Royce. That vintage machine cost more because of its value to that > individual, but its worth it to them, because it gets the job done as > they define it. > I tend to base all of my computer use, I dare say my technology use in > general, on getting the job done consistently > with few issues. Indeed I chose to maintain older mac structures since it > was what I required to get the job done at a desired level, meaning I > could provide my various audiences with quality storytelling. > Therefore to me, there is nothing outdated about this technology, no > more than say the above mentioned Roles. > However, this is me, and what I define as tool need not be the same for > you. I raised eyebrows at Cameron's" open doors for us," > idea because this suggest that everyone here uses technology just the > same, that they experience things as a one size fits all fashion, and for > the same reasons. Our very discussion illustrates this is not true, and > frankly I respect you too much as an individual, respect everyone too > much to deny them their unique needs and tastes by thinking you have to > do things the way I do them, smiles. To you, my setup is outdated > technology. > For me it is the right tool, and will continue to be the right tool, until > it can no longer allow me to do my craft. > as for how apple has met the needs of professionals like me, I invite you > to > review the history of apple's screen reading efforts and say the windows > screen reading history to compare. > I think that speaks for itself. > Thanks for the exchange, > Karen > > On Tue, 18 May 2010, Ben Mustill-Rose > wrote: > >> You said: >> now now, technology is only doorstop material when it no longer serves >> its function. >> I agree with this and own several older macs myself. However, people >> (Not you poticually, just people in general) should be realistic about >> what there hardware can and can not do. >> pt has been accessible for years, so I do not understand this door > concept. >> Yes, it is accessible if you choos to stick with an older version, >> running on old hardware with outdated assistive technology. >> I have made a lot of radio and money with my use of pro tools with >> outspoken, so have others. If this were not true apple would not >> invest in reaching these professionals. >> Perhaps I'm missing something, but what has apple done at all to reach >> professionals like yourself? Surely if they have done anything, you >> wouldn't have to be using the hardware and software that you do? >> >> On 18/05/2010, Dan Eickmeier <va3...@yahoo.ca> wrote: >>> , I've got an intel iMac which I got in 2007, and it's working just fine. >>> But if your iMac you have is a power PC one, such as a g3, or g4, you're > not >>> going to be able to. THe latest OS that you'll be able to, would be > Tiger. >>> On May 17, 2010, at 6:33 PM, Karen Lewellen wrote: >>> >>>> anyone running a voiceover solid os x edition on an imac? >>>> will send the data specifics if that Will help. >>>> thanks, >>>> Karen >>>> >>>> -- >>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups >>>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >>>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>>> For more options, visit this group at >>>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >>> "MacVisionaries" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >>> >>> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. >> To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. >> >> > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. > To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "MacVisionaries" group. To post to this group, send email to macvisionar...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to macvisionaries+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/macvisionaries?hl=en.
