FORUMS: list search recent posts

Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bill Davis
Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 5:23:09 am

I’ve delivered 5 separate corporate projects out of FCP-X and/or Motion 5 in the past three weeks. Short schedule, tough deadline stuff for large national or regional clients.

Some thoughts.

1. X produces much better looking video than Legacy did.
Was it jettisoning Quicktime for AV Foundation? The 64 bit floating point thing? The Core engines? Dunno. But for whatever reasons, graphics, type, composites and high rez assets in X look WAY better then what I was used to seeing out of Legacy. Colors hold better. High rez is truly high rez. And I didn’t have to work with proxys just to make things go smoothly enough to meet my deadlines.

2. X is actually more “edit friendly” than legacy.
Yes, I understand it makes you think and do things differently. But when you learn how it works, in addition to all the same basic cutting tools you’ve always had you get, new, exciting, useful and very, different ones. I’m editing significantly faster than before. Turns out the major things X is currently missing (multicam, OMF interchange, etc.) are things I rarely do. I get that if you depend on those daily, your mileage will vary. However, I find the current version to be a better general editing system than Legacy by a mile. For every thing that the “magnetic timeline” makes tougher, there are 5 things I find it makes WAY easier. I get that others hate it. I love it. Deeply. I'll take connected clips over tracks, vertically locked relationships over exclusively horizontal any day now that I've gotten used to the difference. Perhaps I'll find different kinds of projects in the future where it's more pain than pleasure. But for now. This is a much better daily editing tool than what I had before. Period.

3. The database inside X absolutely rocks.
This is truly transformative. Some projects don’t need it at all. But for the ones that do – this can make all the difference between frustration and delight – missing or hitting a deadline. I had a project last week that had 400+ high rez still photos as source files. Without keywording, that would have been an absolute nightmare. With it, not just during the initial build, but through the dozens and dozens of client change orders during the review process, the DB saved my sanity and my delivery deadlines.

For what it’s worth.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 10:26:40 am

Thanks for the report Bill. Nice to see some positive stuff here, I too find the more I use FCPX the harder it is to go back to other NLE's.

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Irvine, California



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 12:56:28 pm

"X produces much better looking video than Legacy did."

How are you determining this? Especially since there's no broadcast monitoring output yet. I haven't seen the same thing, but maybe it's dependant on media type.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Ben Scott
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 4:18:51 pm

export the clip out as source codec

put into fcp7 timeline

watch out to external video monitor

I did first week it came out

it looked a mile better than FCP7 renders

only place I saw issues on renders was the upscaling which is to be expected

the graphics looked very nice and very little aliasing


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 5:52:29 pm

[Ben Scott] "I did first week it came out
it looked a mile better than FCP7 renders"


I understand HOW to do it. I asked how it had been done. All I can say is that if you are seeing this extreme of a difference, then you've been doing something wrong up until now in FCP 7. No offense meant, but I'm saying this from a POV of having routinely finished FCP 7 projects that have been submitted to pretty tight network QC.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 6:03:06 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[Ben Scott] "I did first week it came out
it looked a mile better than FCP7 renders"

I understand HOW to do it. I asked how it had been done. All I can say is that if you are seeing this extreme of a difference, then you've been doing something wrong up until now in FCP 7. No offense meant, but I'm saying this from a POV of having routinely finished FCP 7 projects that have been submitted to pretty tight network QC.
"


Yup. I second that. Ben, if your FCP7 renders were lacking, I think you need to analyze what you were doing. I have to meet routinely the same strict standards as Oliver, and it is not a problem.


Return to posts index


Shane Ross
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 6:14:54 pm

I guess they look better because FCX is doing something to fix something you were doing wrong in FCP Legacy. Which is what it is designed to do...dumb down the technical stuff and do more things automatically for you. This is very good for those not technically inclined, but for those who want more control, who know how to properly online, this isn't something we want.

But, I can see why many people do. Allows them to focus more on creative and less on technical.

When I played with FCX for 4 days, I didn't notice any quality difference.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 7:00:23 pm

Yep, same here. I get pristine output from FCP7. And output aside, with Colorista or even the regular Three-way CC, I find I can make things look better in FCP7 because I have more control. FCPX isn't doing anything magic with rendering. If you see a big difference, much more likely your FCP7 settings are off.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 2:01:58 pm

[David Lawrence] "Yep, same here. I get pristine output from FCP7"

Just to circle back around to this question, I ran a short test with two projects - one edited in FCP 7 and another in FCP X. I took a master QT export from each and forced a render in the other program (slight crop to force render). Then I split-screened the results of these two tests in FCP 7 and viewed it on a broadcast monitor. The side-by-side comparisons (FCP 7 vs. FCP X and FCP X vs. FCP 7) were transparent. So, with standard video and basic graphics, they look the same.

I don't doubt that FCP X is doing some functions better than in FCP 7. The legacy app has had notoriously poor scaling algorhythms. OTOH, I've already found that the way FCP X handles DV25 clips (480 lines) in an SD timeline (486 lines) is worse than in FCP 7. Also FCP X's freeze frames seem to result in single-field and not whole-frame freezes (at least with interlaced SD clips). YMMV.

Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Thomas Frank
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 24, 2012 at 3:41:06 pm

You asked this first
[Oliver Peters] "How are you determining this? Especially since there's no broadcast monitoring output yet. I haven't seen the same thing, but maybe it's dependant on media type.
"


then you go here

[Oliver Peters] "I understand HOW to do it. I asked how it had been done. All I can say is that if you are seeing this extreme of a difference, then you've been doing something wrong up until now in FCP 7. No offense meant, but I'm saying this from a POV of having routinely finished FCP 7 projects that have been submitted to pretty tight network QC."

Maybe FCPX has a better render engine? I see this allot in the 3D App world.



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 6:21:26 pm

[Bill Davis] "missing (multicam, "

Why not use the sync button?


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 6:40:17 pm

[Richard Herd] "Why not use the sync button?"

I assume that's a joke, right?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index


Richard Herd
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 7:25:53 pm

You're no Bob Zelin, but getting close. At least Bob answers questions.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 8:54:33 pm

[Richard Herd] "You're no Bob Zelin, but getting close. At least Bob answers questions."

I take that as a very high compliment indeed. As for the question you want answered, by that I take it to mean you were serious about using the "sync button" for multi-cam purposes. What precisely would be your workflow for a 5 camera shoot where some of the sources are not locked by time code? What would the sync button do for you?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 10:49:46 pm

[Herb Sevush] "What precisely would be your workflow for a 5 camera shoot where some of the sources are not locked by time code? What would the sync button do for you?"

Sync the track. I've used it a bit, and it seems to work. But a 5 camera shoot of a concert video is worth a good test.

You'd put the media on a drive. Connect to the drive. Create the event. Select all the media from all 5 cameras. Right CLick. Sync option....wait to see what happens.

Ostensibly, a new compound clip is created with all the clips in sync, stacked on top of eachother.


Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 1:15:53 am

[Richard Herd] "Ostensibly, a new compound clip is created with all the clips in sync, stacked on top of eachother."

OK, now you've got this compound clip.

Of course first you would have scaled each clip back and re-positioned them so they are all visible as the same time; it doesn't work if you only see one angle while your trying to cut.

So now talk me through actually dropping the correct full frame clips down on the timeline in sequence, and changing angles after your first pass, and tightening up audio as you go, because I'm not talking about a concert with a fixed length piece of audio, but rather a one hour cooking demo that has to be cut down to 9 minutes.

Or maybe you'd rather work with a real multi-cam feature, which is how all the other 6 current NLE's handle it.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 23, 2012 at 8:03:13 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Of course first you would have scaled each clip back and re-positioned them so they are all visible as the same time; it doesn't work if you only see one angle while your trying to cut. "

What do you mean "it doesn't work"?


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 23, 2012 at 9:26:55 pm

[Richard Herd] "What do you mean "it doesn't work"?"

It doesn't work as in it's useless as an editing tool, not it doesn't work because the compound clip won't play.

You need a couple of things to edit multi-cam efficiently. You need to be able to see all your angles at the same time, always. You need that to make proper decisions about which is the best shot to use. You then need a way to drop that chosen angle onto the timeline for the duration you've picked. When playing back the timeline you still need to see all the angles in sync with the timeline so you can revise your choices and you also need a quick and easy way to replace one angle with another on that same timeline for those revisions.

There's more features that are helpful, and I haven't even touched the audio side of things, but that's a bare minimum. Now how do you accomplish that with your compound clips?

You can edit multi-cam without any special tools -- it's just incredibly time wasteful. This inefficiency obviously gets worse with every additional camera angle in your show.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index


Richard Herd
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 23, 2012 at 10:30:13 pm

Thanks for the clarification. I thought maybe it broke or something.


[Herb Sevush] "Now how do you accomplish that with your compound clips?"

I don't use multicam. Let's say I was editing a wedding or something, I would sync 'em and then skim the chunks of each clip I was working on. Like if the bride was throwing the bouquet and the scene was covered with 5 cameras and the whole little bit took 3 minutes. I would skim a bit, then cut, and make it primary. Then cut a bit a more and so on.

Nothing like live broadcast, though, where you have to choose on the fly.

[Herb Sevush] "You can edit multi-cam without any special tools -- it's just incredibly time wasteful. This inefficiency obviously gets worse with every additional camera angle in your show."

Yep. I haven't edited multicam since 2005, for a play.


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 10:57:48 pm

[Herb Sevush] "What precisely would be your workflow for a 5 camera shoot where some of the sources are not locked by time code? What would the sync button do for you?"

Herb was he talking about how X syncs through sound?

As long as all 5 cams had sound you wouldn't need TC right? For me that was another selling point. Not having to worry about jamming TC anymore.

You select all 5 clips from the cams and hit sync. Line them up and use the v key to toggle the cams into the main monitor. Then break out the blade tool and start cutting.

Isn't that how Mark did that drummer boy video. That was smok'in BTW


Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 10:01:30 pm

Bob Zelin? The Don Rickles of tech support? LOVE that guy!!! Bob ROCKS!

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 6:41:40 pm

[Bill Davis] "3. The database inside X absolutely rocks.
This is truly transformative. Some projects don’t need it at all. But for the ones that do – this can make all the difference between frustration and delight "



This is one of the main strengths of X for me. It's ability to tag sections of long clips with such ease is what I like.

Let's say you got a 3 hour baseball game. If I ran the zoo I would have our interns go through those games and tag by player, HR, Ks, steals or what ever.

Once you have the players name in it's down to a one click and drag. Drag click Drag click Drag click.

Use the skimmer (that rocks) to get through the game faster. Step in the box. Step out of the box.
adjust battling gloves. Step back in the box. Foul ball. Step back out of the box. Aghghhhhhh!!!!

Get past all that crap to the play. Drag click Drag click Drag click

The whole game, heck the whole series could be tagged before lunch.

NFL

I'd have someone on all 22. Mo, HH, cart and low EZ just for starters.

It's not just a three hour game, it's no fewer than 10 cameras being recorded at the same time.
We keep ALL those angles.

Think about how much footage that is for a whole season.

The play, from the player, from the game from the camera angle that you're looking for in seconds.
Now THAT'S what I'm talking about.

Some like X for small projects but the ironic thing is, the more footage you have to deal with the more
useful X is.

I don't need all that tagging for something small.

I need it for the entire season.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 7:27:59 pm

Yeah!

It also helps when a new director overshoots his coverage.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 9:21:24 pm

The true take away is simple.

X might not be what one particular "you" needs.

But one "you" is not everyone.

We all fall into the trap of thinking that how we edit is how editing always needs to be done.

Tony just showed us how one type of extremely professional - massive money on the line - workflow can make use of the tools in X to do a better job.

Herb and Shane and Chris don't see how it helps them. And they know their workflows better than anybody else so that's fair.

But they can't extrapolate their particularly needs and experiences into the "holy writ" of editing any more than I can.

My needs, Tony's needs, Herbs needs may sometimes be similar - but that doesn't been they are the same.

And that's the big lesson here.

I am one kind of editor that represents one market segment. X is great for me. If you need to edit like I do - medium to large company corporate video - it's a fabulous tool. That's all I'm saying.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 9:27:46 pm

[Bill Davis] "I am one kind of editor that represents one market segment. X is great for me. If you need to edit like I do - medium to large company corporate video - it's a fabulous tool. That's all I'm saying. "

Totally fair statement, Bill. Thumbs up.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 9:34:55 pm

[Bill Davis] "My needs, Tony's needs, Herbs needs may sometimes be similar - but that doesn't been they are the same."

The question then becomes should the market break down into "niche" NLE's that are aimed at specific users, or is the ideal to make an NLE that fits all workflows.

For instance, as per Tony's comments, there are products made solely for sports, narrowed down to different products for each sport, that can break down game films much faster than FCPX can. At what point do you say - enough specialization, I don't know what project I'm likely to cut next, I want something that can handle anything?

I'm not disagreeing with you by the way, I'm just exploring the implications.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 10:00:24 pm

[Herb Sevush] "The question then becomes should the market break down into "niche" NLE's that are aimed at specific users, or is the ideal to make an NLE that fits all workflows."

[Herb Sevush] "At what point do you say - enough specialization, I don't know what project I'm likely to cut next, I want something that can handle anything? "

Bingo. This is probably my biggest beef with what Apple did to FCP in designing FCPX. Over the years I've used legacy on everything from short PSAs to music videos to multi-channel museum installations and more. I've edited and mastered albums with it. I can create workflows for any kind of time-based project I throw at it. It was (and currently still is) my universal, time-based media tool.

FCPX seems highly optimized for very specific workflows. Great if it fits your needs. If so, it gives tremendous leverage. But I find anything outside what it likes to do is incredibly cumbersome. Much harder to roll your own workflow. Hopefully it gets better. We'll have to wait and see.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 10:45:02 pm

[Herb Sevush] "For instance, as per Tony's comments, there are products made solely for sports"

Are you referring to the EVS?

We use that to but it cost way more than 300 bucks. No way they will spend all that jack.

But why does my method have to be limited to sports?

Take a long form doc that you have 30 folks with at least an hour long interview a piece.

You can't remember what everybody said. Say you have been on the doc for a year.

Yes you could use your markers and notes but why couldn't a person break down and tag out that interview like I would tag out a backwards k by Carpenter?


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 11:03:23 pm

[tony west] "Yes you could use your markers and notes but why couldn't a person break down and tag out that interview like I would tag out a backwards k by Carpenter?"

I work with interviews a lot. Tagging has limited value when dealing with actuality. There's no substitute for actually knowing exactly what words were said. Transcripts are way more important. Boris Soundbite solves one half of the problem. If someone could come up an auto-transcription program that really worked, it would be truly game changing.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 12:00:18 am

I guess I don't understand why David.

You would still log the interview as normal.

You would note it.

But In a clip that let's say is 50 min long a person talks about dogs in one section and cats in another.

I want to go right to the dog section within a long interview. I don't need to know her exact words, I just want to get into the range of the topic faster.

I just interviewed a woman in different States. I tagged her in the cities first, then her topics.

It seems limitless to how detailed you could get with these tags.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 12:58:47 am

[David Lawrence] "Transcripts are way more important. Boris Soundbite solves one half of the problem. If someone could come up an auto-transcription program that really worked, it would be truly game changing."

David,

I agree with the fundamentals of this, however, as someone who's done a LOT of corporate interviewing over the years, I find transcripts to have their own unique limitations. They codify and subsequently expose what was said, but seldom contain a clue to how it was said.

I've looked up way to many quotes to discover that while the words were precisely "this is a great bottle of whiskey" when you go to look at the footage, what you actually find is "Uh...what...oh yeah, uh, this (looks at the bottle with distain) is a "great" (obviously meaning terrible as he sneers at the bottle) - long pause while he glances off camera at the PA - then sneers back at the bottle, stifles a belch - and mumbles " bottle of whiskey."

A transcript tells you nothing about the reality of the clip - only the words being said.

A simple keyword locking that clip into the "negative comments" collection is a whole lot more useful than any transcript.

Tho both are obviously very useful tools in many situations.

Actually, let me take this farther. If in the next line in the same interview, the guy says "Naw, I'm being harsh, this stuff - it doesn't suck." In X, you can label the whole thing as "negative comments." Then range just the last three words as "positive comments." and find each.

That's pretty sweet.


FWIW.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 1:38:36 am

[Bill Davis] "A transcript tells you nothing about the reality of the clip - only the words being said. "

The exact words being said are a Very Big Deal.

[Bill Davis] "A simple keyword locking that clip into the "negative comments" collection is a whole lot more useful than any transcript. "

Totally disagree.

A simple keyword gives the general idea of what's being said

Transcripts give exact words. With Soundbite, I can find them instantly. This is way more useful and the kind of detail I need when I start cutting. Tags are great as pointers, but they give much less information about the actuality.

In the end you have to listen.

There's no substitute for actually hearing the way something is said. Especially if you need to Frankenclip a new phrase together. A word in your "reject" collection may be exactly what you need to save a phrase.

Tags are simply the top level of organization. As you drill down, transcripts, Soundbite, and listening become way more useful.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 2:58:39 pm

[David Lawrence] "In the end you have to listen."

I'm sorry fellas, I'm not saying that I wouldn't look at the footage for the interview, quite the opposite.

AFTER I look at the footage I would tag it. That's why I would be tagging it. Because I looked at it and liked it. I don't want to put it in now. I will put it in later, and it will be easy to find.

In the case of sports I wouldn't need to as much because a HR is a HR and a K a K. It's not an opinion. In that case an assistant could tag for me.

In the case of the interview I would tag myself.

See the difference? The tag feature is still being used, just by different people depending on the show.

I don't particularly like looking for footage. I don't find it fun or creative and it can be a time hog.

A tool that helps me find it faster is great for me.

The less of that there is the more time I can spend being creative putting it together : )


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 6:46:02 pm

[tony west] "The tag feature is still being used, just by different people depending on the show.

I don't particularly like looking for footage. I don't find it fun or creative and it can be a time hog.

A tool that helps me find it faster is great for me.

The less of that there is the more time I can spend being creative putting it together : )"


Yes Tony, we understand exactly how you and those working with you are using tagging for your interviews. But, as David and I are both saying, that's just another method of logging and typing in metadata, which still requires a human being to listen to the dialog at a speed at which it is intelligible. So, tagging in FCPX is nice, and it's a very welcome addition, but it's not nearly as revolutionary and game-changing as many are touting.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 1:02:58 am

[David Roth Weiss] "So, tagging in FCPX is nice, and it's a very welcome addition, but it's not nearly as revolutionary and game-changing as many are touting.
"


I'm going to disagree here David.

Air conditioning in a fully equipped Rolls or Cadillac that only a select few can afford is a feature.

AC in a 15,000 Ford or Chevy that anybody can afford "is" revolutionary. It changes the game for all drivers. It redefines what "standard equipment" has to be for car sellers

The database in X brings the power of high level DB flexibility down to software that any editor can afford. That's game changing in my estimation.

That the teenager can learn to better manage assets in the same general way that a Hollywood Motion Picture editor might is a BIG DEAL, IMO.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 1:40:25 am

[Bill Davis] "The database in X brings the power of high level DB flexibility down to software that any editor can afford. That's game changing in my estimation."

This is one of those things you so often write that sounds logical on it's face, but which seriously fails the sniff test.

The database functionality is nothing truly game-changing, it's old hat for Avid users. And, you didn't mention it above, but Adobe's embedded metadata capabilities are darned powerful, and arguably not fully utilized yet, but they also temper anything that can be said about X changing the game in that reagrd. More about this to come in my forthcoming article...

So, what's left? It seems that at the heart of the matter of what really changes the game for you is really just the price of FCPX. While $299 is attractive, that in and of itself is not the game-changer you'd like it to be.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 4:08:11 am

[David Roth Weiss] "While $299 is attractive, that in and of itself is not the game-changer you'd like it to be."

Once again, if you are correct, then FCP-X will wither and die. The high level editors will be as dissatisfied as you are - and it won't succeed.

If I'm right, and there are legions of new people who want to do their own video creation at all levels of expertise from personal art projects to high end corporate videos - and they find the toolset in X both useful and powerful enough to enable their success. X will simply strip away the folks who had to pony up #1k to use Legacy for tasks not at the "hollywood" level - and Adobe and Avid will have to survive on those for whom Creative Suite or Avid Prrices are not a barrier.

Those companies got a bump from the initial Legacy EOL flurry and their smart, opportunistic marketing. But that's kinda over. Now the real game begins. The long game. The one where all three packages (and others) go head to head for success in sales and adoption.

No telling how many seats will migrate. If it's hundreds or even thousands nothing much will change.

I'm convinced it won't be "hundreds of thousands" out of the 2 million paid seats that Legacy earned.

And if X keeps developing, it will form a powerful alternative because of all three aspects. Price, general editing capabilities and support.

What will be really interesting is if the Apple engineers working with the new platform are truly looking down stream and imagining new features that the re-build makes possible.

Looking just at the Project Library - and at iCloud - what if they decide to marry those and do to broadcasting what they just did to book publishing. Something truly disruptive? It's not outside the realm of possibility over, say, a decade of X development.

Yeah, that doesn't address issues here and now for an editor going to work tomorrow. But Apple does have a rep for the long range, transformative play.

Food for thought.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 2:29:51 am

"That the teenager can learn to better manage assets in the same general way that a Hollywood Motion Picture editor might is a BIG DEAL, IMO."

Those same teenagers couldn't be bothered with clip naming in FCP7 other than 'untitled_1' 'untitled_2'. Thank goodness FCP added the number after the untitled. I have absolutely no faith that these self same newbies will be doing Hollywood heavy type databasing, even if FCPX forces them to do some.

The reason many like me have been and remain dismissive of FCPX is because of what's missing. It doesn't fit into my workflow, so having a great database system doesn't matter if it can't be used downstream of broadcast finishing facilities.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 4:27:39 am

[Michael Gissing] "Those same teenagers couldn't be bothered with clip naming in FCP7 other than 'untitled_1' 'untitled_2'. Thank goodness FCP added the number after the untitled. I have absolutely no faith that these self same newbies will be doing Hollywood heavy type databasing, even if FCPX forces them to do some."

I absolutely agree with regard to 49 out of 50 teenagers who will likely use X to cut something in the next 5 years.

It's that 50th guy or gal we all have to watch out for.

As it has ever been.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 4:31:18 am

"It's that 50th guy or gal we all have to watch out for."

I hope that special one in 50 learns all the editing software out there because if they are good, they will be in demand and need to be flexible.


Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 7:01:03 am

Great in-demand Editors, at least here in LA in the feature film world, get to dictate whatever tool they want to cut with.

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Irvine, California



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 3:24:40 pm

[Lance Bachelder] "Great in-demand Editors, at least here in LA in the feature film world, get to dictate whatever tool they want to cut with."

Hmmm.... Is that why Walter Murch had to recut "Wolfman" on Media Composer instead of FCP?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 4:53:03 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Hmmm.... Is that why Walter Murch had to recut "Wolfman" on Media Composer instead of FCP?

- Oliver"


Well, isn't that like saying that (insert director or editor here) "had" to cut (insert film here) back in 2005 on AVID instead of FCP.

Nobody here has ever alleged that X sprung forth fully realized and developed and with all the capabilities of the previous version.

The whole POINT of X was to take a completely fresh approach to NLE design.

It's not "just another AVID" - and actually, neither was Legacy for it's first 3 years.

Just as FCP v.1.0 was a perfectly useful editing tool with ample room for improvement - X is nothing more or less than the same. Murch, Schoonmaker, or Wall, or any other talented editor would have been vastly dissatisfied editing a movie on Legacy 1.0 - but probably find doing so by V3, or V4, and by V5, all the bottlenecks had dropped away and the software earned it's consideration in the toolset of nearly all professional editors.

Only time will tell if X follows that path.

What really is getting tedious is those who still insist on treating X like some freshman high school athlete who's older brother won the Heisman Trophy so everybody relentlessly trashes the kid for not being "as good" as the elder sibling.

They are different people. With different strengths and weaknesses, just with similar DNA.

Period.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 8:14:15 pm

[Bill Davis] "What really is getting tedious is those who still insist on treating X like some freshman high school athlete who's older brother won the Heisman Trophy so everybody relentlessly trashes the kid for not being "as good" as the elder sibling.

They are different people. With different strengths and weaknesses, just with similar DNA. "


Frankly, their DNA isn't at all similar. They just have the same last name. And few people are trashing the kid. Mostly people are trashing the parent's decision to murder the Trophy winner in his sleep.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 23, 2012 at 8:45:46 pm

[Chris Harlan] "And few people are trashing the kid. Mostly people are trashing the parent's decision to murder the Trophy winner in his sleep."

We are video editors, not tabloid editors.

It's dead. Get over it.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 23, 2012 at 9:10:33 pm

[Bill Davis] "[Chris Harlan] "And few people are trashing the kid. Mostly people are trashing the parent's decision to murder the Trophy winner in his sleep."

We are video editors, not tabloid editors.

It's dead. Get over it."


Bill, I'm way over it. You just have a nasty habit of making up wild metaphors that don't actually mirror the situation. I was simply taking your misguided metaphor and putting it in proper perspective.

If anyone needs to get over anything--believe me--its you.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 25, 2012 at 5:04:49 am

[Chris Harlan] "Bill, I'm way over it. You just have a nasty habit of making up wild metaphors that don't actually mirror the situation. I was simply taking your misguided metaphor and putting it in proper perspective.

If anyone needs to get over anything--believe me--its you."


Of all the people on the planet who are NOT over FCP-Legacy, I think you're right at the front of the line.

Your own words - "Mostly people are trashing the parent's decision to murder the Trophy winner in his sleep."

When the caterpillar morphs into the butterfly, the caterpillar doesn't die Chris, It's just moving on. For the folks who continue to think the finest form of transportation is remaining rooted to the traditions of soil travel - it might be confusing. But for those who want to fly a bit - not so much.

(couldn't resist another tortuous metaphor, dude - the temptation is simply way too strong.)

Look ma, my editing is FLYING. Nope, it's not an airliner yet. In fact, it might be just a itty bitty motorized hang glider. But the view is STUNNING. And people who aren't afraid to fly are seeing some new perspectives up here. And if this thing ever becomes a real airplane, we're gonna be changing the standards of world travel, that's my bet.

(grin)

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 25, 2012 at 5:58:56 am

[Bill Davis] "Of all the people on the planet who are NOT over FCP-Legacy, I think you're right at the front of the line.

Your own words - "Mostly people are trashing the parent's decision to murder the Trophy winner in his sleep."
"


If you take it out of context, Bill I suppose you might have some sort of case. If you pair my response with what you said, I believe what you'll find is that I was lampooning hyperbole. Sorry if I wasn't clear about that.

I'm still interested in FCP X, and hope it eventually becomes useful for me. I'm also interested in what I--and others--are going to do in the interim. If it is an interim, and not an end.

But, Bill. Why are you here? If you're such a butterfly, why haven't you flown away to found your airline? (Ouch.) You've reached your decision in the FCP X or Not Debate. So why are you still here?


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 25, 2012 at 5:42:45 pm

[Bill Davis] "When the caterpillar morphs into the butterfly, the caterpillar doesn't die Chris, It's just moving on. For the folks who continue to think the finest form of transportation is remaining rooted to the traditions of soil travel - it might be confusing. But for those who want to fly a bit - not so much."

If your intent is self-deprecation, this hilarious. Please let me know so I can decide whether to laugh or to stick my finger down my throat.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 1:47:12 am

[Bill Davis] "I find transcripts to have their own unique limitations. They codify and subsequently expose what was said, but seldom contain a clue to how it was said."

Of course that's true if transcripts are used in a vacuum, or if you happen to stumble upon transcripts lying in the street somewhere. But, that's not the issue. Of course printed transcripts have to be used in conjunction with the recorded material, and sound bytes marked accordingly, just as you would have to place keywords, marks, or other metadata in your NLE of choice, whether it is FCP, X, or Avid. As David Lawrence said, "In the end you have to listen."

On the other hand, printed transcripts can be distributed and used to collaborate with writers, producers, secretaries, P.A.s, etc. who are off-site and without computers and/or editing apps. That can be invaluable to those of us "dinosaurs" who still collaborate with others during the filmmaking process. :)

Considering the enormous amount of time they can save during post for so many people, transcripts are still incredibly cost-efficient when shooting and posting tons of lengthy interviews. It's unfortunate that many newbies and experienced filmmakers think they are a waste of money, because that can be the worst example of cutting off one's nose to spite one's face, as the time spent in post can be the most costly there is.

Transcripts should not be considered extinct yet by any stretch. And furthermore, the metadata and database capabilities of FCPX are really not the "groundbreaking" solutions to all the difficulties of post as you and so many others like to claim. Helpful? Yes. Part of the solution? Absolutely. But, the groundbreaking answer to all our prayers that somehow justify all of those things gone missing? No way!!!

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Eddie Stein
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 2:10:40 pm

Hello David,

You might want to look at Premiere Pro. It has a function built in that will attempt to transcribe your video. Then you can search the text, or copy and paste it if you need to generate a transcript. It won't do it in professional script format, but it is a great start. You won't have to leave Premiere Pro to use the feature either. Avid also has some add ons such as Avid ScriptSync and Phrase Find but these are an extra cost.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 6:25:32 pm

[Eddie Stein] "You might want to look at Premiere Pro. It has a function built in that will attempt to transcribe your video. Then you can search the text, or copy and paste it if you need to generate a transcript. It won't do it in professional script format, but it is a great start."

Thanks Eddie, but if you look at the link below you'll see that I wrote one of the very first reviews of Adobe's "Speech Search" feature nearly three years ago when Adobe CS4 was launched. Unfortunately, it's speech recognition engine has never achieved the higher accuracy that was promised, so it is still not really accurate enough for most users, often producing wildly comedic transcriptions.

http://library.creativecow.net/articles/weiss_roth_david/speech_search.php

However, getting back on topic, about those things the metadata and database functions of FCPX bring to the table. I've looked closely at all of the various applications and add-ons over the years, and net, net, net, FCPX does add several nice features to the mix of products in the market that attempt to solve the difficulties of editing and tracking large volumes of material. But, it is not the "transformative" app that is the answer to all things that Bill Davis and others like to claim it is. In fact, FCPX completely misses the boat in one very important area that is the subject of an article I'm currently writing.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 6:51:53 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "In fact, FCPX completely misses the boat in one very important area that is the subject of an article I'm currently writing."

Great.

Knowledge being power, after all and alternate perspectives being the building blocks of good personal opinions.

I'm intrigued since whatever that "one very important area" is, it must be universally required rather than, specific to those who edit in a particular type of workflow - since you deem the feature worthy of an entire article.

Looking forward to it.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 7:07:36 pm

[Bill Davis] "I'm intrigued since whatever that "one very important area" is, it must be universally required rather than, specific to those who edit in a particular type of workflow - since you deem the feature worthy of an entire article.

Looking forward to it."


Excellent!!! I'll be looking forward to your reaction Bill.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

John Godwin
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 7:26:25 pm

DRW "But, it is not the "transformative" app that is the answer to all things that Bill Davis and others like to claim it is."

That statement, in my humble opinion, sums up what's wrong with this whole debate. I see the "pro" FCPX people largely saying "Hey, it does this well, I really like this function, actually it does do this thing" all the while acknowledging there are missing pieces and limitations. I don't recall anyone seriously saying FCPX will be all things to all people. Maybe somewhat transformative...

I do see some of the "anti" people saying FCPX is worthless and a slap in the face. The same people seem to speak in absolutes and ascribe absolutes to the pro FCPX folks. I find it much easier to take the more measured comments seriously.

Personally I've used it for a few non-critical projects (things I could quickly recover from in the event of a major malfunction) and do find it faster for most of my purposes and actually fun again. Sometimes. I'm waiting for the next update to decide whether or not to commit, and even then I have CS installed just in case. Measured, not all or nothing.

Best,
John


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 8:18:28 pm

[John Godwin] "That statement, in my humble opinion, sums up what's wrong with this whole debate. I see the "pro" FCPX people largely saying "Hey, it does this well, I really like this function, actually it does do this thing" all the while acknowledging there are missing pieces and limitations. I don't recall anyone seriously saying FCPX will be all things to all people. Maybe somewhat transformative..."

Thankfully, much of the overstated hyperbole and rhetoric about FCPX has indeed tempered somewhat over the last few months. However, hugely overblown and cliched terms like "transformative" and "groundbreaking" were being bandied about here quite flippantly for months after the initial June 21st release of FCPX.

It's good to see that reality has finally set in, but it hasn't always been this way.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
http://www.drwfilms.com

Don't miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing "The Whale" to the Big Screen:
http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfit...

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™


Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 22, 2012 at 12:53:25 am

[David Roth Weiss] "Thankfully, much of the overstated hyperbole and rhetoric about FCPX has indeed tempered somewhat over the last few months. However, hugely overblown and cliched terms like "transformative" and "groundbreaking" were being bandied about here quite flippantly for months after the initial June 21st release of FCPX. "

To counter the equally overblown and cliched terms like "non-professional" 'utter crap" and "a total disaster" that were being flung at it during round one - when none of us had the foggiest clue about the actual nature of the software.

Remember the long thread about how so many folks came away from all the applause and oohs and aahs at the SUPERMEET silently AGAST about it? Why? Turns out it was a lot more complex than anyone suspected at that point, and most of those who dissed it didn't have much clue how it actually worked. They just reacted to what was missing and different and gave absolutely no weight to what might have been useful or even better about it.

That negative view was also "being bandied about quite flippantly" for months after the release.

If we're to take to task the cheerleaders (holding up my hand) then shouldn't we also take to task the blind naysayers?

Turns out this was a more complex plan than all of us suspected.

And so it goes.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 1:59:18 am

[tony west] "Are you referring to the EVS?"

Actually I was referring to XOS ( http://www.xosdigital.com ) a company that makes software for the video departments of football and basketball teams, both pro and college (there are others competing in that market.) Yes they cost way, way, way more than 300 bucks and you need to buy different applications for each sport. For that money you get incredible speed in breaking down and archiving games with a very rich database.

I don't think it realistic for a TV news department to have them, I was talking theoretically about the value of targeting niche areas in editing.

Just as X might be faster than say Avid in cutting sports there are other specialty programs that would be faster than X. My question is - is that the wave of the future, specific NLEs for specific tasks, or is a general purpose NLE still more valuable?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 2:30:59 pm

[Herb Sevush] "is that the wave of the future, specific NLEs for specific tasks, or is a general purpose NLE still more valuable?"


I don't know if you could make enough money making something for a small group.

Maybe if your cost were low enough to make it.


Return to posts index

Marvin Holdman
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 20, 2012 at 9:27:58 pm

Does anyone know if the tagging info for clips can be exported from FCPX in some form of vanilla data file? (such as XML, or tab delineated?)

Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username - vidmarv


Return to posts index

Rafael Amador
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 2:07:06 am

[tony west] "As long as all 5 cams had sound you wouldn't need TC right? For me that was another selling point. Not having to worry about jamming TC anymore."
With the present speed of sound traveling in the atmosphere (hope apple don't change it) just 10 meters distance from camera to camera can means a 1 frame delay.
rafael

http://www.nagavideo.com


Return to posts index

Andreas Kiel
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 11:08:31 am

Does anyone know if the tagging info for clips can be exported from FCPX in some form of vanilla data file? (such as XML, or tab delineated?)


Simple answer: No way!

Andreas

Spherico
http://www.spherico.com/filmtools


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 21, 2012 at 10:34:50 pm

Often I have been sound posting and the director has used a transcript to search for words so we can "Frankenclip" (love that DL).

Even though I am also doing picture grade and online, we only have a Media Managed version, never all the rushes so we have an edit assistant in another city pull the audio we need and ftp it. Lots of my director colleagues do not have Macs so saying they should have FCPX on their laptop is a problem. They all have Word or Libre Office so they can always access and search a doc or spreadsheet.

Even in an FCPX world, every long form doco maker that I work for will want transcriptions. They are often a deliverable requirement.


Return to posts index

Andreas Kiel
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 25, 2012 at 12:39:28 pm

Here's something for Bill Davis.

Bill, I can understand that you are excited how good X is working for you. But I can't get rid of the feeling that you imply in your responses, that most of any kind of complaints about X is based on a kind of ignorance of the user and that the user is not willing to learn X or is not willing to throw away old fashioned habits.

So it would be great to have a better description about what you are doing, which cameras/codecs you use, how the project/events are organized etc.
This will help others to understand your statements (others should do a better description as well).

If I would like to bash, for example I could say:
FCPX only supports Prores as render format dot (which is true as you can see in the developer specs).
FCPX doesn't support chapter markers any more - makes pre-post way slower when creating rushes for review dot
X doesn't support 3rd party codecs/accelerators - and that won't change in the near future dot
XML export and import is crappy - which makes collaborative workflows a nightmare dot
Multiclip is missing and can't be implemented in a usable way with this X interface dot
etc.

I do say that - but without the dot
And I try to help people to find workarounds and get a better understanding, and in some cases create scripts or little apps to help people feeling better in the X ecosystem.

Anyway the forum has a 'debate' extension - so anything is allowed like in a normal discussion face to face.

Andreas

Spherico
http://www.spherico.com/filmtools


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Post work-rush thoughts about FCP-X
on Jan 25, 2012 at 2:04:48 pm

[Andreas Kiel] "Anyway the forum has a 'debate' extension - so anything is allowed like in a normal discussion face to face."

CreativeCow.debate, I like that!

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]