Project I just completed in FCPX
Just wanted to quickly share a project I just completed in FCPX:
Really well done. Thanks for sharing.
There is no intuitive interface, not even the nipple. It's all learned. - Bruce Ediger
Nice Work. Can you share any drawbacks or advantages to using FCPX over your previous editor (Im assuming FCP 7).
[Davee Schulte] "Nice Work. Can you share any drawbacks or advantages to using FCPX over your previous editor (Im assuming FCP 7).
Thanks for the comment. I'm a long time Final Cut Pro user. Also Avid, and Media 100 in a previous life. For DSLR content FCPX is super fast and efficient. I'm using a 12 core Mac Pro with 32GB ram. The advantage is no transcoding to ProRes with DSLR content before the edit. So for this project it made sense.
Here is a short post I did about FCPX when it was released:
The main disadvantage for me is that I hate working without a broadcast monitor. Not only for color correction and client stuff, but I just feel naked without it. Kinda like riding a bike without a helmet. I'm already over the hump regarding learning the software, and so focusing on the story is what matters to me. I can edit fine on most platforms, etc.
Great job Logan.
I agree totally with your opinion that once we have real video monitoring with possibility of external scopes and playback to tape (this is already possible with Kona and Matrox though cumbersome) FCPX will be a fine editor.
Yes it is very different and very young with lots of rough edges so far. But it really is just about telling the story, not the tools you use. I have used FCP from v1 to v7, but I have always preferred working in M100 because it is faster w/o rendering, so I can try more versions faster. I find FCPX is now equally fast and with the new hardware a much less expensive set of tools than any other system I can think of. Soon I will be able to use my Matrox and Kona interfaces and then I will probably start using FCPX as my main NLE here at Westside A V.
I really like the DB and organizational aspect of FCPX. I plan to migrate all our stock footage into FCPX as a main library for all our footage. And I will try to use it for all new projects. I really like where FCPX seems to be heading. Metadata and searchable media is great.
Mostly it is just about telling the story as I stated above, and the CC and audio tools in FCPX are better than M100 and FCP7 in my opinion. And you will still be able to export to other apps if you need more sophisticated DAW or CC.
I think Apple Inc is on the right track, once again lowering the price and rolling media management into NLE's in a revolutionary way. I think some people are just uncomfortable with change.
Again, as the others said: great job Logan.
I'm not editing that much anymore and these jobs I do unfortunately never reach the public because of NDAs. In any case they are quite boring and so the public won't miss them.
They are complicated to do with any NLE. With FCPX in the current state they can't be done.
But I do like a lot of ideas and features of FCPX. Keyword collections are great once you understand, connection with Motion for generators, transitions etc is very cool. Handling DSLR footage is fast, I also love to edit my GoPro stuff with it. Next month we will do some 3D stuff with the GoPro and it seems - after some tests - that it will work smoothly.
The other side of the medal is for example working with P2 formats. It takes even longer than with the old fashioned Log&Transfer. Apple claims that they are working with native formats. In case of P2 it's true BUT all the clips are copied to a QT container. So IMHO there is no progress. All clips are automatically renamed with no option for the user. You can re-rename them manually. P2 clips do have quite a lot metadata. My hope was that all this metadata would be transferred - unfortunately not. But at least there are more visible compared to previous versions and other NLEs.
Another thing is workflow.
Many people here said it's only about story telling. I mostly agree. But to get to the point to start telling a story it might take some time to be organized - especially in a collaborative environment. And the story often has to be finished in a collaborative environment.
Here FCPX does clearly have several lacks which either can be fixed by Apple itself or third party developers. But the third party companies have to catch up, which will take a bit of time. For the third party people I do not mean those which create effects (maybe you even don't need them that often anymore as you create effects by our own with Motion). I mean those which create workflows.
The current update does give me some hope both for more metadata handling and workflow support with third party apps.
I do understand those people who like FCPX and do see a bright future and I think there is a least some future stuff which will be amazing.
I also understand those people who say it's not ready for prime time and not even a version which can be called a 1.0 release. For the latter ones I see a problem in so far that Apple is not too responsive. Adobe said "if you see a chance take it" - and they did. Avid did somehow the same in another way. This makes the situation even more complicated. Many people gave up to convince (email to) Apple that some features are needed (and use forums like this to complain), therefore Apple thinks these features are not needed, which leads again to new complaints.
I can understand all arguments, and I've to live with bugs and lacks of FCPX - if I want to use it. If I don't want, I still can run FCP7 for some time or switch to another app. Using FCPX, Premiere, Avid, Media100 etc can take some time to get familiar with. Sometimes time is money and sometimes time matters. Latter can be interpreted in whatever way you like.
Again: Logan, great work.
[Andreas Kiel] "Again, as the others said: great job Logan."
I totally agree on all points, especially working and finishing in a collaborative environment. FCPX is far from the best option for every job - but I'll choose to use it for the right project. Today I'm back in FCP7.