FORUMS: list search recent posts

Beats by Dr. Dre???

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Bill Davis
Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 3:56:42 am

Don't precisely know why I thought this relevant to post here, but I was scanning Gizmodo and since my wife's brother bought my kid a pair of "Beats by Dr Dre" headphones for Christmas, he's been stuck to them like Linus and the blanket.

So this line of reasoning from the story caught my eye.

START QUOTE from a GIZMODO article written by Adrian Covert posted on 01/20/12

We live in a time when everything can be tuned to individual preference. The entire concept of subjectivity is arguably embraced more now than in any other era. This platonic ideal of ideal forms, whether it be audio, visual or otherwise, is not a concern for many people today. (Hell, look at Instagram)

SNIP

Beats by Dr. Dre are popular because they don't reproduce music as much as they transform it. They are the right headphones for the current era, because their design "customizes" the sound for the listener who wants bass. Music is never finished; we can chop and screw, add bass, slow it down 100x, mash it up with something else. And people will buy headphones that finish the music in the way they like.

It may not be your sound, but it's not necessarily a wrong sound.

END QUOTE

I don't see this as a direct reference to X, or to "traditional workflows" or anything really. Just an interesting way to look at alternative thinking about what some specific audiences want in today's society.

Plenty of photographers composite a dozen images together to create one final image that is totally "unreal" - but incredibly visually pleasing.

I'm personally not going to transform my workflow in order to insure that I perfectly capture audio from 20hz to 100 hz in order to have all my future videos sound "fabulous" to Dr. Dre attuned ears - but I still thought the different take on what "quality" means to various consumers and audiences was worth sharing.

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

Herb Sevush
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 2:05:27 pm

[Bill Davis] " I still thought the different take on what "quality" means to various consumers and audiences was worth sharing."

Back in the day of stereo components certain speakers (Cerwin Vega among others) were favored for their "maximall base" sound by the disco crowd. As usual the only thing new here is the amount of marketing surrounding an old practice.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 2:09:38 pm

Interesting read, but... You do realize that the argument being made - tailoring a product to custom preferences - is completely opposite of how FCP X has been designed, don't you? If anything, FCP X imposes one and only one workflow, which either works for you or it doesn't.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 2:15:25 pm

[Oliver Peters] " If anything, FCP X imposes one and only one workflow, which either works for you or it doesn't."

How does FCPX impose one workflow?

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 3:29:21 pm

[Steve Connor]How does FCPX impose one workflow?

Seriously? Because you only have that magnetic timeline and no option to turn on a second viewer. That's pretty significant right there.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 3:59:03 pm

[Gary Huff] "Seriously? Because you only have that magnetic timeline and no option to turn on a second viewer. That's pretty significant right there.
"


Using the Position tool turns the magnetic timeline off leaving you free to place, move and trim clips on the timeline without ripple.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index


David Lawrence
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 7:37:28 pm

[Steve Connor] "Using the Position tool turns the magnetic timeline off leaving you free to place, move and trim clips on the timeline without ripple."

That's wrong Steve.

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/17555

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 7:46:22 pm

[David Lawrence] "That's wrong Steve.

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/17555"


It's not David, I know it's one of your issues, but the fact is that gap clips are the only thing that ripple.

When you are familiar with the way the software works, and I know we've already had a huge debate about this, you IGNORE gap clips when using the position tool, you don't touch them, you don't trim them, they are simply spacers, you have no need to interact with them at all. You treat them the same as gaps on a Legacy storyline.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 12:45:50 am

[Steve Connor] "Using the Position tool turns the magnetic timeline off ..."

[Steve Connor] "the fact is that gap clips are the only thing that ripple. "

Steve, with all due respect, this is demonstrably incorrect. Everything in the Primary Storyline always ripples. You cannot turn off this behavior. Same with Secondary Storylines.

The Position Tool is the functional equivalent of the Overwrite Segment Tool on the Avid. It overwrites and automatically creates filler (gap) as needed. This is not the same as turning off ripple on the timeline!

[Steve Connor] "When you are familiar with the way the software works, and I know we've already had a huge debate about this, you IGNORE gap clips when using the position tool, you don't touch them, you don't trim them, they are simply spacers, you have no need to interact with them at all. You treat them the same as gaps on a Legacy storyline."

Gaps are objects with the same object behaviors as clips. They hold sync for connected clips. You can't ignore them, you have to deal with them.

Here's a simple example, in case you missed it:





As I wrote before:

[David Lawrence] "This is a very typical J/L-cut scenario with multiple audio sources. The connected clips are connected to the gap because that creates the correct sync relationship between them. All I want to do is move this connected group by a few frames or so to fix the pacing. I don't care about overwriting the primary. I can't use the select tool and holding down the option key doesn't help. The position tool is supposed to let you place objects anywhere you want so I use the position tool. I think this is a totally reasonable thing to want to do based on the tool's intended purpose. If you disagree, please explain."

Let's talk about trimming.

How do you perform an Overwrite Trim in FCPX? Without interacting with gaps? Seriously, I really want to know.

Trimming in the storyline is always ripple trim. If you don't want to ripple, you have to trim the gap object.

For example, let's say I want to trim back a clip left without affecting program length. The only way to do this is by performing a rolling trim with the gap to the right.

As far as I can tell, FCPX is the only NLE that makes you overwrite trim this way. You have to deal with both the clip and the gap. How is this easier or better?

I realize we've discussed this ad nauseum and I apologize for harping on the subject. But when I hear anyone claim that the Position Tool "turns off" the magnetic timeline, I really have to push back.

It's simply incorrect. You're confusing a tool mode with a timeline mode. They're not the same thing and it's important to understand the difference.

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


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 1:39:24 am

[David Lawrence] "Gaps are objects with the same object behaviors as clips. They hold sync for connected clips. You can't ignore them, you have to deal with them.

Here's a simple example, in case you missed it:"


You CAN ignore them, is this what you were trying to do in your example







Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 2:32:49 am

Not quite.

By individually selecting all the connected clips and re-positioning them in the Primary, you're changing the clip connection points thereby creating incorrect clip relationships. At 15 seconds, if you wanted all clips to remain attached to the gap, you would have to go back and reset their connection points.

The whole point of connected clips is that once you connect to an object on the Primary, you define a sync relationship to that object. When you move the object, the connected clips move with it.

This completely breaks down with gap objects. Gaps break the model.

The second half of your demo does answer my trim mode point. Thank you! I stand corrected.

But again, this is a tool mode. The timeline is still ripple only. You can't turn it off. The proof is my example of the ripple behavior that destroys clips to the right of the gap. Your demo does not address this behavior.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 2:52:15 am

David, why would you want the clips connected to the gap? Their relationship with each other stays the same.

I'm afraid your "proof" video only shows a lack of understanding about how you edit in FCPX, you don't work with gaps in that way

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index


David Lawrence
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 3:34:37 am

[Steve Connor] "David, why would you want the clips connected to the gap?"

To create a sync relationship between those two clips only. I don't want their sync relationship defined or affected by other clips in the storyline.

[Steve Connor] "Their relationship with each other stays the same."

Not exactly. In your example at 0:15, moving the clips down the storyline changes the connection of two of them to a clip on the storyline. Their relationship is now tied to that clip. What if that's not my intention?

Do the relationships defined by clip connections matter? If so then your demo fails because it defines the wrong relationship between primary and connected clips when the connected clips are repositioned.

[Steve Connor] "I'm afraid your "proof" video only shows a lack of understanding about how you edit in FCPX, you don't work with gaps in that way"

Overwrite Trim notwithstanding, I think I understand FCPX just fine. The problem is that the timeline object model is inconsistent, and in the case of my example, destructive.

The timeline is always rippling. That's what makes it magnetic.

besides,

[Steve Connor] "How does FCPX impose one workflow?"

;)

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 10:10:23 am

[David Lawrence] "[Steve Connor] "David, why would you want the clips connected to the gap?"

To create a sync relationship between those two clips only. I don't want their sync relationship defined or affected by other clips in the storyline."



Then move one of the clips to the primary storyline



[David Lawrence] "[Steve Connor] "Their relationship with each other stays the same."

Not exactly. In your example at 0:15, moving the clips down the storyline changes the connection of two of them to a clip on the storyline. Their relationship is now tied to that clip. What if that's not my intention?

Do the relationships defined by clip connections matter? If so then your demo fails because it defines the wrong relationship between primary and connected clips when the connected clips are repositioned."



See previous point.


[David Lawrence] "[Steve Connor] "I'm afraid your "proof" video only shows a lack of understanding about how you edit in FCPX, you don't work with gaps in that way"

Overwrite Trim notwithstanding, I think I understand FCPX just fine. The problem is that the timeline object model is inconsistent, and in the case of my example, destructive.

The timeline is always rippling. That's what makes it magnetic.
"


Once again your example shows that you don't understand how to edit in FCPX, the fact you didn't know about overwrite trim shows this. The timeline is NOT always rippling, you are wrong.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 7:51:17 pm

[Steve Connor] "Then move one of the clips to the primary storyline"

What if it's not "Primary"? This doesn't solve the problem or answer the question. Are vertical connected clip relationships meaningful or not?

[Steve Connor] "Once again your example shows that you don't understand how to edit in FCPX, the fact you didn't know about overwrite trim shows this. The timeline is NOT always rippling, you are wrong."

Steve, with all due respect, when I'm wrong, I'm happy to admit it. Are you able to do the same? I was wrong about Overwrite Trim. You are wrong when you say:

[Steve Connor] "Using the Position tool turns the magnetic timeline off..."

It doesn't turn it off.

[Steve Connor] "...leaving you free to place, move and trim clips on the timeline..."

Yes, it does do this.

[Steve Connor] "...without ripple."

No, it's not turning off ripple on the timeline. It's a tool mode that overwrites and inserts gap when needed. Not the same thing as turning off timeline ripple.

Try my example yourself and watch what happens.

The reason the edits get destroyed when you nudge a gap with the Position Tool is because the timeline is rippling them into the gap space.

If the Position Tool really "turns off the magnetic timeline" as you keep insisting, this wouldn't happen.

Try it. "You're holding it wrong" isn't an answer.

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


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 8:21:22 pm

[David Lawrence] "[Steve Connor] "Then move one of the clips to the primary storyline"

What if it's not "Primary"? This doesn't solve the problem or answer the question. Are vertical connected clip relationships meaningful or not?
"


When you need them to be - yes, but not always



[David Lawrence] "[Steve Connor] "Once again your example shows that you don't understand how to edit in FCPX, the fact you didn't know about overwrite trim shows this. The timeline is NOT always rippling, you are wrong."

Steve, with all due respect, when I'm wrong, I'm happy to admit it. Are you able to do the same? I was wrong about Overwrite Trim. You are wrong when you say:

[Steve Connor] "Using the Position tool turns the magnetic timeline off..."

It doesn't turn it off."


Yes it does, apart from gap clips, which is not a problem because you don't treat them as clips, they are gaps. You don't seem to be able to understand this.

I admit when I'm wrong, I have done a number of times on here, even DRW will attest to that. I'm not wrong on this.


[David Lawrence] "Try my example yourself and watch what happens."

As I said your example is NOT correct use of the FCPX timeline, you can take this from an experienced FCPX Editor.

[David Lawrence] "The reason the edits get destroyed when you nudge a gap with the Position Tool is because the timeline is rippling them into the gap space."

Yes, that's because the position tool ripples gap clips, but that's all it ripples

[David Lawrence] "Try it. "You're holding it wrong" isn't an answer."

Yes it is, you are wrong

Very much a case of "let's agree to disagree strongly"

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 10:11:12 pm

[Steve Connor] "Sorry, forgot to answer this. If you then find your clips are tied to another clip that you don't want them connected to, you simply lift that clip from the primary storyline, creating a new gap clip in the primary for your two clips to be connected to."

LOL, now we're right back to where we started!

[Steve Connor] "As I said your example is NOT correct use of the FCPX timeline, you can take this from an experienced FCPX Editor. "

Disagree. I think my demo reasonable and consistent with the timeline object paradigm.

Here's another way to think about it:

Gaps are objects. You can select them in the timeline index. You can move them with the arrow tool. You can connect clips to them. When you move gaps with connected clips using the arrow tool, everything works exactly as you'd expect.

If you move a clip with the Position tool, gap is left behind. Why? Because otherwise the timeline would ripple shut. This makes sense.

But if you move a gap with the Position Tool, even one frame, the timeline incorrectly assumes the intention is to remove the gap so it ripples shut.

The correct and consistent behavior would be for gap to be left behind. Simple. It should work exactly the same for gap objects as it does for clip objects. This would fix the problem be consistent with the Position Tool mode. I don't think I'm out of line here.

Steve, I respect your insights but there's more going on than "You're holding it wrong."

[Steve Connor] "Very much a case of "let's agree to disagree strongly""

This we can agree on! ;)

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 10:14:45 pm

[David Lawrence] "[Steve Connor] "As I said your example is NOT correct use of the FCPX timeline, you can take this from an experienced FCPX Editor. "

Disagree. I think my demo reasonable and consistent with the timeline object paradigm."


I guess you're holding it wrong ;-)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 10:21:19 pm

[David Lawrence] "But if you move a gap with the Position Tool, even one frame, the timeline incorrectly assumes the intention is to remove the gap so it ripples shut."

Which is why you don't do it, but it is the ONLY thing that ripples in the timeline when using the position tool, whether it's a bug or the end of a logic chain in the software that assumes when you move a gap you, don't want to create another gap so it ripples. But of course you can trim gaps and connected clips without rippling, as you say, using the arrow keys as in my newer video.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 10:05:14 pm

[David Lawrence] "No, it's not turning off ripple on the timeline. It's a tool mode that overwrites and inserts gap when needed. Not the same thing as turning off timeline ripple.

Try my example yourself and watch what happens.

The reason the edits get destroyed when you nudge a gap with the Position Tool is because the timeline is rippling them into the gap space."


David, is this what you were trying to do in your "example" - notice there is NO rippling going on.







Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 10:22:17 pm

[Steve Connor] "David, is this what you were trying to do in your "example" - notice there is NO rippling going on."

Steve,

THANK YOU for digging deeper and giving this a try.

No, your demo is doing something different. You're performing a slide edit on the gap. Note how the head of the the clip in the Primary to the right of the gap is changing as you slide.

My demo is of an overwrite move. The head of the clip to the right of the clip should stay the same.

Try that with the Position Tool and watch what happens.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 10:27:08 pm

[David Lawrence] "No, your demo is doing something different. You're performing a slide edit on the gap. Note how the head of the the clip in the Primary to the right of the gap is changing as you slide."

True, because the clip is not rippling


[David Lawrence] "My demo is of an overwrite move. The head of the clip to the right of the clip should stay the same.
"


As in my first video

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 10:41:09 pm

[Steve Connor] "True, because the clip is not rippling"

That has nothing to do with the in and out points of the surround clips. I'm not interested in changing the head and tail of the surround clips. This has nothing to do with whether they ripple or not.

[Steve Connor] "But that would mean the timeline to the right of the clip is rippling?"

No. With overwrite, nothing on the timeline should move in either direction, except the object you're dragging with your cursor. You might cover objects to the left or right with the object you're dragging and shorten them, but they should never change position on the timeline or lengthen.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 11:16:05 pm

[David Lawrence] "No. With overwrite, nothing on the timeline should move in either direction, except the object you're dragging with your cursor. You might cover objects to the left or right with the object you're dragging and shorten them, but they should never change position on the timeline or lengthen."

Which is exactly what happens in my first video, also in the second video no edit points change position as well. The only thing that happens is that the clip to the right of the gap is lengthened as the gap clip moves, the original edit frame in that clip stays in the same position.

[David Lawrence] "But if you move a gap with the Position Tool, even one frame, the timeline incorrectly assumes the intention is to remove the gap so it ripples shut.

The correct and consistent behavior would be for gap to be left behind. Simple. It should work exactly the same for gap objects as it does for clip objects. This would fix the problem be consistent with the Position Tool mode. I don't think I'm out of line here."


This is true, and it's either a bug or the end of a logic chain in the programming that assumes you don't want to create a gap by moving another gap, either way it's inconsistent behaviour I'll give you that. That's why we don't use gaps in that way when editing in FCPX, as I explained previously.

I demonstrated the way you can achieve what you were trying to do without moving the gap clip, call it a workaround if you want,

[David Lawrence] "Steve, I respect your insights but there's more going on than "You're holding it wrong.""

For whatever reason, correct usage of FCPX if you want to avoid this behaviour, is to avoid moving gap clips with the position tool. Your example demonstrates using the tool incorrectly based on FCPX at this time. That doesn't mean it doesn't highlight the issue with gap clips though.

I will not agree with your statement that the entire timeline is "ripple only", because apart from the gap behaviour, when you use the position tool, it isn't.

What I can say, through my months of experience with FCPX on a range of projects, is that the issue doesn't affect how I edit in FCPX at all.

I may disagree with some of your logic but I have a great deal of respect for the way you approach things which makes me question and re-examine the way I work in FCPX, every time you pursue an argument like this I learn something new and that's certainly a good thing.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 23, 2012 at 12:25:39 am

[Steve Connor] "The only thing that happens is that the clip to the right of the gap is lengthened as the gap clip moves, the original edit frame in that clip stays in the same position. "

Right, but even though that doesn't change picture, it changes sound. It's now a different sound edit. Since picture is covered, sound is likely the reason why it's there in the first place. Or maybe the connected clip above is compositing over it. Lots of reasons why you might not want the head to change.

[Steve Connor] "I will not agree with your statement that the entire timeline is "ripple only", because apart from the gap behaviour, when you use the position tool, it isn't.

What I can say, through my months of experience with FCPX on a range of projects, is that the issue doesn't affect how I edit in FCPX at all."


Fair enough, I won't try to convince you. I believe you when you say it's not a problem for the way you work. We'll have to agree to disagree on this one. I find the bug interesting because I think it reveals something about the magnetic timeline's programming logic and conceptual model. I believe the timeline is working exactly as designed. The bug is with the Position Tool. I do hope the next update addresses it. The fix seems pretty simple and once it's fixed this is all moot.

[Steve Connor] "I may disagree with some of your logic but I have a great deal of respect for the way you approach things which makes me question and re-examine the way I work in FCPX, every time you pursue an argument like this I learn something new and that's certainly a good thing."

Thank you! It's completely mutual. I really appreciate you pushing me to sharpen my arguments and especially appreciate learning more about FCPX from you. Even if we disagree, I really enjoy the dialogue. Thanks again!

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 9:42:03 pm

[David Lawrence] "Not exactly. In your example at 0:15, moving the clips down the storyline changes the connection of two of them to a clip on the storyline. Their relationship is now tied to that clip. What if that's not my intention?
"


Sorry, forgot to answer this. If you then find your clips are tied to another clip that you don't want them connected to, you simply lift that clip from the primary storyline, creating a new gap clip in the primary for your two clips to be connected to.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 2:20:21 am

[David Lawrence] "Trimming in the storyline is always ripple trim. If you don't want to ripple, you have to trim the gap object.

For example, let's say I want to trim back a clip left without affecting program length. The only way to do this is by performing a rolling trim with the gap to the right.
"


Simply not true, watch the end of my example video where you can see overwrite trims over gap clips

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 4:26:51 pm

[Steve Connor] "How does FCPX impose one workflow?"

No custom layouts for anything.
No batch export and the workflow benefits it can provide.
No QT reference exports and the workflow benefits it can provide.
Lack of mixer panel and track-based versus clip-based mixing (you had an option in "Legacy").
Unified viewer.
Lack of I/O for industry-accepted metadata formats (EDL, XML, ALE, FCP Batch Lists, Tab Delimited, etc.)
Emphasis on metadata-based logging without the option to effectively and extensively use manual logging and organization methods.
No manual relinking and the workflow benefits it can provide.

That's just the short list....

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 4:56:00 pm

[Oliver Peters] "No custom layouts for anything.
No batch export and the workflow benefits it can provide.
No QT reference exports and the workflow benefits it can provide.
Lack of mixer panel and track-based versus clip-based mixing (you had an option in "Legacy").
Unified viewer.
Lack of I/O for industry-accepted metadata formats (EDL, XML, ALE, FCP Batch Lists, Tab Delimited, etc.)
Emphasis on metadata-based logging without the option to effectively and extensively use manual logging and organization methods.
No manual relinking and the workflow benefits it can provide.

That's just the short list."


Fair point , we all know what it's lacking, but it is incorrect to state FCPX offers you forces you into ONE workflow

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 11:36:15 pm

[Steve Connor] "Fair point , we all know what it's lacking, but it is incorrect to state FCPX offers you forces you into ONE workflow"

I guess it's how one looks at it. Once you start removing so much, you are left with a rather simplistic system that doesn't give you many options. How do you define workflows? I'm not talking about editing styles, but rather using the NLE in the same way (within a larger ecosystem) as I have with FCP thus far.

BTW - I firmly believe that most of these things are gone and that Apple has no intention of bringing them back, except through third parties. That let's them wash their hands of any responsibility to make these work or make sure they don't break with an iTunes update or something like that ;-)

In case you think I'm joking about that last flip comment, an iTunes update of a few month ago causes Alexa ProRes4444 files - generated with cameras on firmware 1.0 - to intermittently become unreadable on some machines.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 5:07:21 pm

[Oliver Peters] " If anything, FCP X imposes one and only one workflow, which either works for you or it doesn't.

Oliver
"


Sorry, Oliver, but I find this to be extremely faulty reasoning.

It's only true if you're stuck in defining "workflow" as the way one particular type of editor wants to edit.

Yes, the toolset in X is unique. But in my personal experience that toolset is wide, variable and flexible. Not "limiting" at all.

I have at least half a dozen contextual ways to get a clip into my timeline. I can append, overwrite, connect, etc, etc. This is the absolute antithesis of "one workflow."

Concrete example: I can put anything from a traditional master shot, to a soundtrack, to a collection of discrete scenes in my primary storyline. That's not at all "one way" - it's truly "any way I prefer." The key is that the editor has to learn about the new capabilities and those strengths and weaknesses of each. If, as you suggest, there is simply "one way" to edit in X. Then all the smart guys here would have figured out exactly what it can and can't do in the first week - and this endless debate would have faded away. That we're still talking about precisely how it works six months after introduction is prima facia evidence that it's not a simple "one way to do things" construct at all.

The problem (and I acknowledge that this is purely my opinion, not fact) is that those who have the most problem with the way X is designed are those who are unwilling or unable to look at how the new tool's unique capabilities can foster different approaches to their editing work. They are often stuck in a mindset built around "I want to edit how I've always edited, end of story."

I can sympathize with that. For many, change is hard, risky, and possibly even threatening to their business. But that's no reason that it should be unavailable for those who want to embrace it.

The primary reality of FCP-X is that it's a micro suite of five basic interconnected "work area" functions. Two relatively minor ones (ingest and export) one sleeper (IMO) the project library - and two that are major and more or less transformative regards to editing possibilities.

Those are the Event Library and the new Timeline construct.

Most people who dismiss the software focus their attention and wrath nearly exclusively on the timeline. And yes, it's changed significantly. It's also where virtually ALL the editing was concentrated in the traditional NLE model. So I get that altering this has riled people.

But they did - so there you go. Holding on to anger or hostility is useless. It's changed. Argue all you want but the new model is in place, and all I'm saying about it is that I find the new one EXTREMELY useful and fully featured - even if some of those features are such that people resist them or are not useful in their preferential style of editing.

That one may or may not "like" the magnetism at first is actually pretty trivial. Anyone with a brain and some experience can adapt to it. It's really not all that radical - just different. It takes a couple of weeks, IMO before you start to comfortably expect the magnetic behavior and start to see where it helps and where you need to use Position to override it. No big deal.

But timeline issues aside (and anyone who edits for a living knows that the timeline is only ONE part of editing), this move to "modularity" enables new connections and possibilities that are amazingly useful for many common program creation and, yes, even editing tasks.

Consider just the fact that decisions made in the Event Library are retained across all projects. That's a HUGE potential win for efficiency. It makes pre-work available not just for "this project" but or ALL subsequent projects that assets might be used in.

That the project library represents the "published state" of particular edit - also has huge potential. If its viewed only in the context of what a "timeline" used to represent in Legacy, it will look like a step backwards - but once you see what it really is, its just as easy to see where it might fit in a new world of rapid and agile content distribution.

X was totally re-imagined compared to Legacy. That re-imagining was not trivial - and it was also not arbitrary. IMO, they built X the way they did not because they didn't "understand" editing, nor because they were focused exclusively on a tool for one particular type of editor (the iMovie graduate) - but because they completely understood the wide range of what "editing" might become in a more fully digital, more data centric era - and for a marketplace with increasingly diverse needs. (A key point since there are more "editors" now that every before - like it or not - dismiss those who aren't in highly paid seats or not - or who do work like "I" do - or not.)

That's fundamentally why I disagree with your assessment. I believe this tool is better for more diverse editing than Legacy ever was. Because it has more varied tools. Yes, in the initial build, they concentrated on tools that are universal (like the database) which can be used by all in very different ways, tailored to individual work styles - over tools are more "mission specific" like OMF export or multi-cam.

But the foundation is not "my way or the highway" it's nearly totally "here's a wider array of tools you can use to do things that you couldn't do as easily before. - yeah we put some shiny new ones that you're not used to (like the magnetic timeline) right up front to announce that this is not a "traditional" NLE- but if you can't let go of your older habits yet (or just don't want to) - just poke around a bit. That stuff is around as well.)


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

Oliver Peters
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 11:55:18 pm

[Bill Davis] "It's only true if you're stuck in defining "workflow" as the way one particular type of editor wants to edit. "

That's not how I define workflow. I'm talking about how you can use the NLE beyond just a cutting style within the NLE. However, even there, the point is that Apple has eliminated almost all of the versatility that was available in "legacy" simply by the GUI design itself.

[Bill Davis] "I can append, overwrite, connect, etc, etc. This is the absolute antithesis of "one workflow.""

You are talking about edit commands and keystrokes, not workflow. BTW - these aren't unique. Apple simply collapsed target selection, track patching and editing into fewer commands. A Connected Clip edit command isn't much different than Superimpose in "legacy".

[Bill Davis] "The primary reality of FCP-X is that it's a micro suite of five basic interconnected "work area" functions."

I think you are making more out of this than is there. Every NLE software amounts to the same thing as what you've described.

[Bill Davis] "Those are the Event Library and the new Timeline construct. "

Apple simply copied what Avid did in 1988 - only they didn't do as good of a job with FCP X.

[Bill Davis] "EXTREMELY useful and fully featured"

Useful - yes. Fully featured??? Not even close.

[Bill Davis] " it will look like a step backwards - but once you see what it really is, its just as easy to see where it might fit in a new world of rapid and agile content distribution."

I'll believe that when I can have 100 projects instantly accessible without the system choking.

[Bill Davis] "I believe this tool is better for more diverse editing than Legacy ever was."

I simply don't agree, because today, I can do more with FCP 7 than I can with FCP X and in many cases, than I can with Media Composer or Premiere Pro.

[Bill Davis] "here's a wider array of tools you can use to do things that you couldn't do as easily before."

I'd really like to see examples of that, because I just don't see it. Yes, I understand the metadata methods and I see where you might see that as a wide array of new tools, but what about the rest of the app?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 12:40:57 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Bill Davis] "It's only true if you're stuck in defining "workflow" as the way one particular type of editor wants to edit. "

That's not how I define workflow. I'm talking about how you can use the NLE beyond just a cutting style within the NLE. However, even there, the point is that Apple has eliminated almost all of the versatility that was available in "legacy" simply by the GUI design itself.

That's your point and I accept it. Mine is that everything above after the word "eliminated" is simple opinion. Nothing wrong with expressing an opinion. But everyone understands that opinions are not facts.


[Bill Davis] "I can append, overwrite, connect, etc, etc. This is the absolute antithesis of "one workflow.""

You are talking about edit commands and keystrokes, not workflow. BTW - these aren't unique. Apple simply collapsed target selection, track patching and editing into fewer commands. A Connected Clip edit command isn't much different than Superimpose in "legacy".

I don't see it that way. I superimposed clips a thousand times in Legacy. They never maintained any relationship to the clip they were imposed upon. Move the main clip and the relationship between the super and the timeline shifted. The only way to easily fix the relationship was to "sub clip" or possibly "sub-sequence" things. Maybe functional, but obscure and needlessly complex, IMO. And a process that forced you to "packetize" the project in ways that extracted it's own penalty.

So i'm not convinced.

[Bill Davis] "The primary reality of FCP-X is that it's a micro suite of five basic interconnected "work area" functions."

I think you are making more out of this than is there. Every NLE software amounts to the same thing as what you've described.

I guess this is one of those things like when the guy asked Mr. Armstrong to explain Jazz. "Sorry, but I don't think I can explain it to you. You either understand it or you don't." That's not any kind of slam by the way. It's just an attempt to indicated that I see things as an X user that I think require a new context to appreciate. I might well be ignorant and other software may already do everything that X can do. But if so, then I'm REALLY baffled as to what the big deal about it being so over radical that it threatens the very lifeblood of working editors planet wide.

It's either a total departure (right or wrong) or it's just another choice. It can't be both, can it?

[Bill Davis] "Those are the Event Library and the new Timeline construct. "

Apple simply copied what Avid did in 1988 - only they didn't do as good of a job with FCP X.

Then why didn't Avid better compete with FCP Legacy? Were they simply ahead of their time? Overpriced? Poor salespeople? If X is so derivative - nothing but a cheaper Avid approach - again, why all the hate? What's wrong with offering what AVID did in 1988 - but for $299. Sounds like a huge win to me.

[Bill Davis] "EXTREMELY useful and fully featured"

Useful - yes. Fully featured??? Not even close.

Then explain to me what "features" that it's lacking that the general video editor must have? This argument only works in context of specific needs of editors working in very narrow bands of the overall editing profession. I accept that it doesn't do ALL that legacy did. But I contend that nearly ALL editors don't need "ALL" of what legacy did. You were forced to pay for and live with all sorts of capabilities that might make you "feel good" to have waiting for use - but in a practical sense, many editors (and I was one of them) never came close o needing some of those.(For instance I've never had the luxury of working with an outside scoring house or a color correction professional. I know the value of that for those that need it. But I don't need it or wish to be charged for it. What's wrong with that?

[Bill Davis] " it will look like a step backwards - but once you see what it really is, its just as easy to see where it might fit in a new world of rapid and agile content distribution."

I'll believe that when I can have 100 projects instantly accessible without the system choking.

OK. Fine. Just don't forget that you may not be able to have that if there are 100,000 people in line ahead of you who find that having 10 or 20 concurrent projects do a fine job of meeting their needs.

[Bill Davis] "I believe this tool is better for more diverse editing than Legacy ever was."

I simply don't agree, because today, I can do more with FCP 7 than I can with FCP X and in many cases, than I can with Media Composer or Premiere Pro.

Yes, I understand that. But X is not legacy. Look, my Motorola V-99 phone had a great contacts list that I could sync with my computer. When they discontinued it, the new model had no software to continue the sync. So for a whole phone generation, I lost the capability. Eventually, part of the reason I went to the iPhone was because I was frustrated with that fact. If you need to change software to obtain satisfaction, feel free. I don't find I have to. And I'm grateful for that.

[Bill Davis] "here's a wider array of tools you can use to do things that you couldn't do as easily before."

I'd really like to see examples of that, because I just don't see it. Yes, I understand the metadata methods and I see where you might see that as a wide array of new tools, but what about the rest of the app?

One tiny example. In the share menu, there's an incredibly easy way to email low rez copes of your timeline directly to clients from inside the app. It's a small marriage of "in the program interface" email and clip compression. It's made my client approval dubs "insanely" easy to generate.

I also love how the Project Library allows me to glance at an array of Projects and see which version of a project has a visual change in it. That I can scrub through these and hone in on changes, different titles, or alt cuts is a treat.

I also love how simply loading up drives " auto repopulates" the Project Library with no need to manually re-load projects or assets. If the drive is present, the project come to life. Take a drive off line, and the links go dormant, which, unlike Legacy, means I don't have to manage huge "Capture Scratches" any more. NAS guys had this, but I didn't. And now I do.

That's three small touches among many. But a few "top of mind" ones that makes me enjoy using the software.

- Oliver
"


"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

Oliver Peters
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 1:06:31 am

[Bill Davis] "It's just an attempt to indicated that I see things as an X user that I think require a new context to appreciate."

With all due respect, you seem to approach these topics as if you are the only one using FCP X and that if someone only used it, they would like it, as you do. There are plenty of people who are just as familiar with how to use the software and have decided that it just hasn't been well-designed, misses a lot of necessary features or simply doesn't meet their needs. Since its release, I have been using FCP X every chance I can to shake it out on real jobs. It still hasn't advanced beyond a love-hate relationship for me. Sure it's fun to edit with at times, but I don't see it as faster or particularly innovative. Just different for the sake of being different.

My 2 cents, of course. I like FCP 7 and would have loved to have seen some type of mash-up between the two. The software was easily released a year too early, but I think Apple's path is pretty clear. The next Q1 update will likely make that more clear. Unfortunately, listening to its customers doesn't seem to be part of Apple's equation. If it were, we would have some choices within the app, which was the basis of your original post, I believe. Those who have been sitting on the fence in wait for that release will probably decide.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 4:24:36 am

[Oliver Peters] "Unfortunately, listening to its customers doesn't seem to be part of Apple's equation. If it were, we would have some choices within the app, which was the basis of your original post, I believe. Those who have been sitting on the fence in wait for that release will probably decide. "

I don't want to belabor this thread, but I can't resist pointing out that it circles back to the same position taken by nearly all the critics.

That "listening to it's customers" is kind of dog whistle code for "*I* am the customer you must serve" - and I have no quarrel with any and every pro speaking up to indicate what they need and how X falls short of meeting those needs.

But again, just because your kind of pro needs something, that does NOT mean that all editors do. Maybe Apple was listening to customers - but not exclusively customers like you? With 2 million paid seats, there's a LOT of diversity out there.

I remember clearly at the last TWO or THREE Supermeets Brian Meany and others on the FCP engineering team set up an interview camera outside the meeting at NAB and interviewed a significant cross section of actual users.

What if the truth of the matter is that the bulk of the users simply aren't folks like you?

What if they saw growth in other areas - and NOT in high end seats like yours? What if they have studies in hand that speaks of a shrinking market for the ecosystem that supports the TV station or Movie studio set and explosive growth of video on the internet and the corporate use of video and motion graphics in business?

If so, then not worrying over much about meeting your needs might just be a reflection of the fact that the overall path to success starts out with a focus on general editing, and when that's done right, they're willing to grow it into the professional space exactly like they did with the original release?


Anyway, I've beat this too much. If you have comments, I'd love to hear them and let you have the last word. I truly appreciate the sounding board and the opportunity to test my ideas against others like yourself here.

Thanks for reading and giving my thoughts consideration.

Peace.

"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: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 4:59:46 am

"That "listening to it's customers" is kind of dog whistle code for "*I* am the customer you must serve" "

It is a bit of a stretch to suggest this Bill. And yes we are flogging a dead horse.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 3:35:34 pm

[Bill Davis] "What if the truth of the matter is that the bulk of the users simply aren't folks like you? "

LOL. You are certainly making some assumptions here. For the record, I do cut high-end projects, but those are in the minority. As a freelancer I work on anything that I get called on to do. I also cut the same kind of convention support videos you've discussed on this forum, as well as news and sports. So there is a lot of diversity in the work I do. I certainly appreciate your points-of-view, I just don't have as much confidence in whether Apple is developing a product that properly meets the needs of any of my clients. I'm sure Apple has talked to some customers. It's just that those I know - who have had that sort of input - seem to be truly puzzled by the direction Apple has taken with FCP X.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Daniel Frome
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 4:12:10 pm

I'm seriously beginning to think that you don't actually care about FCPX at all, but have found a golden way to troll us all into useless debate. I look at this debate forum and realize the pattern... you sir, are definitely going to have the last laugh.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 6:42:29 pm

[Daniel Frome] "I'm seriously beginning to think that you don't actually care about FCPX at all, but have found a golden way to troll us all into useless debate. I look at this debate forum and realize the pattern... you sir, are definitely going to have the last laugh.
"


Don't know about the last laugh bit. It's not my intent. My intent simple. I see X differently than a lot of other people do. And I think the alternate view is deserving of a public airing. Period.

And specifically about this post, I wasn't trolling at all. I was pointing out that the reality that "standards" for what can be considered professional tools are not set in stone - but increasingly flexible among the ultimate arbiters of business success - todays consumers.

I suspect that some here find that on-topic and useful. Or not.

Look, particularly on this board and in this forum, FCP-X has taken what I consider a grossly unfair beating.

It was never either salvation or damnation - but a narrative was developing here that painted it with a single brush - that of being "unprofessional."

I rejected that from day one. Still do. Vigorously. That same rap is layed by some on my kids headphones. But he loves them passionately. So is he wrong? Is he ignorant because he enjoys something that don't meet my personal standards? (Acttully, I gave them a listen and found myself really liking them - so go figure!)

Probably because my whole career has been reasonably non-traditional and the practices that have worked best for me were never the ones that depended on large institutional support - but more those that empowered me to learn and do things that stretched me as an individual.

The loudest voices damning X were those who kept saying it was "unprofessional" by defining "professional" in narrow terms of the view from their institutionl workflow or large post house seat. They weren't "wrong" just limited in perspective. (As am I, I freely admit.)

I haven't held a "seat" in a big corporate production structure for more than 20 years. I don't aspire to those, nor claim to know what't necessary for success in those. But I am an outsider that regularly gets invited into those organizations to observe (as I did in TV stations early in my career) participate as a freelancer (as I also did for much of my career) and finally, create and sell finished work for clients as a turnkey production operation concentrating largely on corporate communications.

I know what CEOs and Corporate Presidents like - what their SVPs like - and what their designated reps will approve to pay for. That's good enough for my business model. Plus I love, love, love what I do. (tho it drives me nuts sometime.)

That I help anyone understand anything about editing from my perspective is an accident of the fact that most of the time, that's the core of my job — looking at how stuff works and translating that for others, primarily in visual, but often in written, or even auditory form.

Honestly, this is not primarily about ME as an editor or pundit or prognosticator. It's about my understanding of the software - which is somewhat better than most since I"ve been sitting at it for six months now - but likely no where near as good as others who have different critical thinking skills or who bring different evaluative criteria to the assessment. I can (usually) slough off comments directed at me personally. But I have a pretty low threshold for comments that badly malign the tool - when my direct experience tells me that reality is nothing like what's being bandied about.

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

Rich Rubasch
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 21, 2012 at 8:39:54 pm

The more I read this forum and the longer FCP X sits in an unused Lion partition on by boot drive the more I want to dig in and make this thing work.

But I do have real work to do and even our switch from Leopard to Snow Leopard was fraught with little workflow stumbles (printer driver misbehaves, need to re-serialize apps, install new updates before we could move forward etc) on six FCP systems. Dragged us down for a few weeks with those nagging hang ups. But we've settled in...

So FCP X will eventually get my attention, just like that manuscript that has sat for a while, and those guitar lessons I keep saying I'll take. And I can't wait to snap a few clips together magnetically, then slide them away and snap 'em somewhere else.

Been with Apple since 1992 and they have rarely if ever disappointed me. Maybe Mac OS 6 wasn't so great, but 7.1 was awesome!

Oh, I'll get around to it.

When is NAB again?

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
Founder/President/Editor/Designer/Animator
http://www.tiltmedia.com


Return to posts index

Don Walker
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 12:19:09 am

If everybody on this forum would look at FCPX for what it really is, I think we could all sleep easier at night.

FCPX was / is a totally different but completely unfinished NLE that was pushed out the door at least a year early, by a leadership style, that wanted to upstage a competitor at a trade show.

When the big Q1 release comes out, I would suspect we will have a much better understanding of what X is supposed to be. I also suspect there will be a lot more than just external monitoring and multicam, out by the end of the year.
The actions of Apple in February, April, and June, hurt a lot of people, but all you have to do is read the biography to understand what;s going on. Hopefully FCPX will mature into what the NLE it shows the potential to be. If not well....

don walker
texarkana, texas

John 3:16


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 22, 2012 at 12:54:57 am

[Don Walker] "FCPX was / is a totally different but completely unfinished NLE that was pushed out the door at least a year early, by a leadership style, that wanted to upstage a competitor at a trade show."

I've been saying that myself since last June 21st, so no argument there.

[Don Walker] "When the big Q1 release comes out, I would suspect we will have a much better understanding of what X is supposed to be. I also suspect there will be a lot more than just external monitoring and multicam, out by the end of the year. "

Lots and lots of tea leaves swirling around in this statement though...

[Don Walker] "The actions of Apple in February, April, and June, hurt a lot of people, but all you have to do is read the biography to understand what's going on."

Personally, I find this part of your message to be "guilt by inference." To the best of my knowledge, Walter Isaacson's bio never mentions FCPX, and whether it reveals anything definitive about the problems with associated with release of FCPX or the EOL of FCP legacy is really more conjecture and maybe wishful thinking than I'm prepared to acknowledge.

[Don Walker] "Hopefully FCPX will mature into what the NLE it shows the potential to be. If not well...."

No one wants it to fail, except maybe AVID, Adobe, Sony, Canopus, etc., but if it does, your "If not well..." will translate into an incredible blunder, and a huge waste of resources and time for all concerned, and it will most likely become one of those well-studied failures, like Classic Coke and the Ford Edsel, as others have suggested.

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

Mitch Ives
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 23, 2012 at 6:24:40 pm

[Don Walker] "If everybody on this forum would look at FCPX for what it really is, I think we could all sleep easier at night.

FCPX was / is a totally different but completely unfinished NLE that was pushed out the door at least a year early, by a leadership style, that wanted to upstage a competitor at a trade show.

When the big Q1 release comes out, I would suspect we will have a much better understanding of what X is supposed to be. I also suspect there will be a lot more than just external monitoring and multicam, out by the end of the year. "


My point exactly. At the risk of lowering the bar too far for people like Bill and Steve, my problem isn't with the interface or the design criteria, it's with the amateurishly unfinished nature of it. It was released with a titler bug that two guys writing software in a garage would have caught. Seriously?

The AutoSave doesn't work, which wouldn't be a problem if we had manual save, but we don't. This is causing a lot of issues for a lot of people, as evidenced by the threads in this forum.

You can't keyframe the color correction filter? Seriously?

And of course no external monitoring... and/or Multicam (which I acknowledge not everyone cares about).

For me, the next update will tell us a lot. It'll tell us how serious Apple is about fixing defects and filling in the holes in the Swiss Cheese that is FCPX.

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 23, 2012 at 8:43:23 pm

[Mitch Ives] "My point exactly. At the risk of lowering the bar too far for people like Bill and Steve, my problem isn't with the interface or the design criteria, it's with the amateurishly unfinished nature of it. It was released with a titler bug that two guys writing software in a garage would have caught. Seriously?"

BS. Pure and simple. Mitch, we're friends. But you're assessment here is just plain wrong. There's nothing "unfinished' about software that has let me meet five different delivery deadlines with paid work over the past month. It's finished, it works fine on my hardware. Period. Features for the future is a reasonable issue of contention. But if it's not "operating" for you - you've got something wrong. Because it's operating for me fine.



[Mitch Ives] "The AutoSave doesn't work, which wouldn't be a problem if we had manual save, but we don't. This is causing a lot of issues for a lot of people, as evidenced by the threads in this forum.
"


Again, sorry, but I have to disagree totally. AutoSave has not just worked well for me, it's worked AMAZINGLY well. Whenever I start doing really complex or fast operations (particularly when I start chaining my mind rapidly, doing, undoing, then re-doing things - which yes, sometimes causes it to crash.) X recovers about as flawlessly as any software I've ever seen.

I"ve done that half a dozen times in the past month of high pressure work. And each and every time when the software re-loads, I'm back to almost the EXACT state of the project the second before the crash.

I'm NEVER seen "auto save" work like this before. And I think it's one of the best features of the whole product.

I suppose it requires some consistently in setup, system config, and hardware - but as you know, I'm not the best hardware guy on the planet and I'm running nothing but Apple Store basic rigs here. Nothing hot-rodded. I'm on a stock i7 MacBook Pro 15 running Lion - And X under Lion is the most graceful crash recovery construct I've ever seen.

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

Mitch Ives
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 23, 2012 at 8:55:32 pm

[Bill Davis] "BS. Pure and simple. Mitch, we're friends. But you're assessment here is just plain wrong. There's nothing "unfinished' about software that has let me meet five different delivery deadlines with paid work over the past month. It's finished, it works fine on my hardware. Period. Features for the future is a reasonable issue of contention. But if it's not "operating" for you - you've got something wrong. Because it's operating for me fine. "

So you're saying that they didn't ship FCPX with a Titler that didn't save your changes and instead defaulted back to the defaults? Why are there threads discussing this then? Why did Apple fix it after 4 months then?


[Bill Davis] "[Mitch Ives] "The AutoSave doesn't work, which wouldn't be a problem if we had manual save, but we don't. This is causing a lot of issues for a lot of people, as evidenced by the threads in this forum.
"

Again, sorry, but I have to disagree totally. AutoSave has not just worked well for me, it's worked AMAZINGLY well. Whenever I start doing really complex or fast operations (particularly when I start chaining my mind rapidly, doing, undoing, then re-doing things - which yes, sometimes causes it to crash.) X recovers about as flawlessly as any software I've ever seen.

I"ve done that half a dozen times in the past month of high pressure work. And each and every time when the software re-loads, I'm back to almost the EXACT state of the project the second before the crash.

I'm NEVER seen "auto save" work like this before. And I think it's one of the best features of the whole product."


So any of us that shut down and then when we re-launch some of the work we had done is gone are some how delusional? Jeez Bill, even Steve Connor admits its a problem (to his credit).



[Bill Davis] "I suppose it requires some consistently in setup, system config, and hardware - but as you know, I'm not the best hardware guy on the planet and I'm running nothing but Apple Store basic rigs here. Nothing hot-rodded. I'm on a stock i7 MacBook Pro 15 running Lion - And X under Lion is the most graceful crash recovery construct I've ever seen."

It recovers from crashes better than any other program... maybe that's because it has to?

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 24, 2012 at 6:57:19 pm

[Mitch Ives] "So any of us that shut down and then when we re-launch some of the work we had done is gone are some how delusional? Jeez Bill, even Steve Connor admits its a problem (to his credit).
"


I don't get it very often, but it does happen. Instead of doing a safety "save" every hour (which you can't do in FCPX of course" just check your "undo" is working every hour. That way you don't risk any more than an hours work.

Hopefully the next release will see versions implemented.

Steve Connor
"FCPX Agitator"
Adrenalin Television


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 24, 2012 at 7:04:58 pm

[Steve Connor] "Hopefully the next release will see versions implemented."

Nike's mantra is "Just do it."

Apple's mantra is "Just hope!"

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

Mitch Ives
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 24, 2012 at 7:49:20 pm

[Steve Connor] "I don't get it very often, but it does happen. Instead of doing a safety "save" every hour (which you can't do in FCPX of course" just check your "undo" is working every hour. That way you don't risk any more than an hours work."

Yes Steve, I read your tip on the other forum. It's encouraging to see people coming up with work-a-rounds. Still, that's not as good as not having the problem.

The point I was trying to make, which Bill doesn't seem to appreciate, is not that I don't like FCPX. I do. There, let me say it again... I do. I see some real brilliance in what they are doing with FCPX.

No, my point is that this product is very "un-Apple", in that they don't usually release anything with things like an unworkable titler (fixed 4 months later)... an AutoSave that lets you loose work occasionally (because we can't manual save)... etc. I expect more from Apple, that was my point... but then I can since I've been buying their products for over three decades.

Clearly this was rushed out... I don't know if it's because Steve was nearing the end, whether there was some legal issues with FCP7 (as others have suggested). I don't know the reason, I just know that those of us that have Apple products since the late 70's are accustomed to better dialed in solutions.

And I still maintain that my point is valid...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 25, 2012 at 4:56:18 am

[Mitch Ives] "So you're saying that they didn't ship FCPX with a Titler that didn't save your changes and instead defaulted back to the defaults? Why are there threads discussing this then? Why did Apple fix it after 4 months then?"

Legacy shipped without JKL transport functions. They fixed it. We moved on. Same old.

[Mitch Ives] "So any of us that shut down and then when we re-launch some of the work we had done is gone are some how delusional? Jeez Bill, even Steve Connor admits its a problem (to his credit)."

I didn't say it never happened to anybody. I said it's never happened to me. And I'm a pretty heavy user these days. My largest FCP-X management problem is clearing off my previous projects to free up render space for the next ones. (Hint: Clear Render Cache is contextual and works for Events when you invoke it from the Event Browser - and clears the cache of Projects when you invoke it under the Project Library - took me a bit of fiddling to realize that.)

[Mitch Ives] "It recovers from crashes better than any other program... maybe that's because it has to?
"


Some of my timelines have crashed as many as half a dozen times - causing me to slow down my operaion and not "undo" so much. (they tend to be more deadline intensive jobs.

OTOH, I've had projects go start to finish without a single crash.

I'm not saying its flawless. Just that it's effectively getting my work done and I haven't missed a deadline since I adopted it for all my work.

Nothing more than that.

For me, it's TOTALLY ready for every day money on the line work.

But I freely acknowledge I'm not everyone. But I'm also not some kind of super user who uniquely knows how to make it work with twine, spit and bailing wire. I'm just a guy with a lot of work right now who cuts most every day on it. And it's working really well for me.

No more than that.

"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

Don Walker
Re: Beats by Dr. Dre???
on Jan 24, 2012 at 3:04:01 am

Bill,
I LOVE, editing in FCPX, but there is no way in the world that you or anybody else would convince me that Randy and crew thought the software was ready to be released when it was. They were behind the power curb getting this done and the whole editing world was clamoring for something....... The highest levels of management found out about Avid dominating the Final Cut SuperMeet, and because it wasn't a flagship product where Steve would present it, It was done in a very sloppy manner.
Now I admit this is a lot of conjecture, but a good percentage of the stuff on this forum is.
In the past couple of days after reading this thread, I think one of the reasons they killed all support of 7, was the need for an "all hands on deck" emergency emphasis on bug fixes and feature upgrades to get X where it needs to be. IMHO

don walker
texarkana, texas

John 3:16


Return to posts index

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