Re: RE : AW: The stone age DS

[SQITAOS(at)aol.com]

In a message dated 8/10/2005 11:30:21 A.M. Eastern Standard Time, m_thomas7(at)comcast.net writes:

Even if you have 50k into your FCP system its still less than half the price.

I have seen many companies here in NYC set up $40K - $50K FCP systems with all the trimmings, plugins, maxed-out storage, consoles, etc.  Some of these suites are absolutely beautiful and handle ALL the work I normally see funneled to DS.  Though I am not a fan of the FruitBox, you cannot ignore the disparity of cost between Apple and Avid products and what each is capable of handling.  With the lack of 3D development and Avid's unwillingness to explore OpenFX, I'm starting to believe that the DS platform should be in no higher in cost than the $75K range.  Many small companies cannot absorb the cost of such a system at $150K when they can build 3 workstations handling 3 times the work to create a larger cost/profit margin.  And I'm sorry to say, many clients will accept an overnight render on AfterFX if it gives them the viz effects they want if the company they choose to do their work at utilizes several lower cost workstations to achieve the same or better results than one big, fat, expensive Swiss Army knife.

 

Just for fun, I entered a bid of $200K yesterday on the 7.6 Nitris up for auction on Ebay just to see what the reserve price was.  Know what it was?  $75K.  Did it sell?  Hell no.  The highest bid was $66,100.  This gives you some idea of what people are willing to really throw at a system like this, even though the reserve was a good deal with storage and assurance.  5 Star Productions is auctioning their 4.0 system for $24K.  I asked a local reseller what it would cost to upgrade that system to the latest version and hardware.  $85K!!!  Ummm, somebody do the math for me.

 

One company I know decided to abandon their DS and invest in FCP.  This gave them the flexibility to purchase decks they normally had to rent out on an 'as needed' basis.  A system that conforms and color corrects, working in both SD and HD gave them wiggle room to expand, rather than be strapped to one workstation that limited their resources.  They then went on to build a graphics suite that not only could they bill out at a higher rate but use simultaneously as their editing workstation.  They made certain sacrifices in order to have a better opportunity to expand, and in the long run the company is much better off for it.  Further proof that Avid really doesn't care about it's DS user base, because it makes accepting the cost of a workstation like DS hard to swallow for small to midsize companies that can offer many more resources for roughly the same cost.

 

Times a changin', and so are our loyalties.

 

Regards,

 

Sean

 

 

 

 

240_e. 27th_st. _suite_25g__ny__ny _10016
212 683 7225_ 646 279 8808_ sqitaos(at)aol.com