FORUMS: list search recent posts

FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Christopher Key
FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 12:32:08 am

I was recently given an Imac as a gift from a group that knows I've occasionally missed out on jobs where Final Cut was a required part of the equation. I've just started playing around with Final Cut and not much of it seems intuitive and a lot of what I'm seeing seems unnecessary - the magnetic track - audio and video grouped into one track - folders called events. I also just got the new CS6 Suite. For years I've been editing mostly with Sony Vegas on a PC because its easy and fast - and I use After Effects for anything beyond what Vegas can handle.

Lately I've been thinking I should spend more time with Premiere because of the new Prelude and Speed Grade additions and because you can also dump an entire edit from Premiere to After Effects.

What I'm wondering is... Is learning FCPX worth the time? I don't want to miss out on any potential jobs - but from the little bit of research I've done - most of those editor wanted ads were talking about Final Cut Pro 7 not FCPX.

If you do think I should learn it - what's the easiest way to go?

Christopher Key


Return to posts index

David Powell
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 1:13:00 am

You weren't missing out on any jobs in FCP X and my guess is you won't be for a while (if ever). There are plenty of jobs still going around in FCP 7. It is a bummer to have to learn a software that's EOL, but, all track based editors are similar, and you can figure it out, especially if you're using CS6 as well.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 2:21:24 am

[David Powell] "You weren't missing out on any jobs in FCP X and my guess is you won't be for a while (if ever). There are plenty of jobs still going around in FCP 7. It is a bummer to have to learn a software that's EOL, but, all track based editors are similar, and you can figure it out, especially if you're using CS6 as well.
"


Chris, I don't know where you are, geographically, but I echo David's sentiments. I also think that Pr 6 has VERY much in common with FCP 7, so learning one will help you learn the other. If you are in a very dense media market like LA or NYC I'd also recommend learning Avid Media Composer. Currently, I look at FCP X with some curiosity, but have--for the near future--little to no interest in pursuing it professionally.

I've always liked Sonic Foundry's (Sony's) software. I was using Vegas back when it was just a DAW that could also do video. My gut is that you will find Premiere and FCP 7 a much easier transition than going to FCP X.


Return to posts index


Mark Dobson
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 5:45:18 am

[Christopher Key] "What I'm wondering is... Is learning FCPX worth the time? I don't want to miss out on any potential jobs - but from the little bit of research I've done - most of those editor wanted ads were talking about Final Cut Pro 7 not FCPX."

More and more people are coming round to the advantages offered by FCPX over the more traditional offerings from Adobe and Avid.

If you are a freelance editor you will probably need a high skill level in all NLE programmes but if you are a freelance programme maker mainly working on your own FCPX is well worth learning. Get over the fact that it is different and learn how it actually works.

[Christopher Key] " I've just started playing around with Final Cut and not much of it seems intuitive and a lot of what I'm seeing seems unnecessary - the magnetic track - audio and video grouped into one track - folders called events."

There are a lot of new ways of doing things in FCPX and to call key features unnecessary without actually getting to grips with them could be a bit short sighted. There is now a large resource of affordable training material available for FCPX and whilst there are still many annoying workflow anomalies I would definitely recommend that you get to learn how to edit with FCPX.

Editing is a core part of our production company workflow and I really value having learnt FCPX and can see no advantage in returning to FCP7, or of learning Premier Pro.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 6:06:09 am

[Mark Dobson] "Editing is a core part of our production company workflow and I really value having learnt FCPX and can see no advantage in returning to FCP7, or of learning Premier Pro.
"


I was gonna argue with you, Mark, but I figure what's the point. Lets just say I can see an advantage in returning to FCP7, or of learning Premier Pro.


Return to posts index

Mark Dobson
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 9:02:08 am

[Chris Harlan] "I was gonna argue with you, Mark, but I figure what's the point. Lets just say I can see an advantage in returning to FCP7, or of learning Premier Pro."

For someone working with file based formats, doing everything 'in-house' and delivering a file based end product what possible advantage is there in returning to FCP7 or Premier Pro?

FCPX does everything I need to a really high, broadcast quality, standard with a minimum of fuss and complication.

I don't want to return to the square clunky world characterised by FCP7 and emulated in Premier Pro.


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 9:30:50 am

[Mark Dobson] "For someone working with file based formats, doing everything 'in-house' and delivering a file based end product what possible advantage is there in returning to FCP7 or Premier Pro?
"


I find it very difficult to believe that you are asking that seriously. Multiple open timelines. Advanced sync indicators. The ability to customize your screen or screens to your liking. Source windows. Tracks. A mixer. The list just keeps going. You may not use any of this stuff, but I assure that other people do. Pretending that you are unaware of this seems a tad bit snide.

[Mark Dobson] "FCPX does everything I need to a really high, broadcast quality, standard with a minimum of fuss and complication.
"


I'm happy that you've found something that you like. I'd say that your description fits my thoughts about FCP7, Premiere 6, and Media Composer 6. It is not, however, what I think of X. X certainly does not do everything I need. But, bravo that it works for you. I need sync marks. I like multiple timelines. I want a mixer. I want easy, apparent access to my audio files in the form of tracks.

[Mark Dobson] "I don't want to return to the square clunky world characterised by FCP7 and emulated in Premier Pro.
"


There's no reason that you should have to, especially if you are happy with the "square and clunky" world of FCP X. I mean, jeez, you can't really rearrange anything. Yeah, you can make it do two monitors, but just barely. It just doesn't have the versatility of either FCP 7 or Premiere. But, hey--some people like that whole square, clunky locked-down thing. I mean, who wants all those choices, right? I mean, that kind of freedom can be a little overwhelming, huh?

Mark, square and clunky are in the eyes of the beholder, and to me, X has been severely clunkified. That doesn't mean that I think there aren't any number of uses that X might be best for. And, I don't insult people for using it, or liking it over any other bit of software. What I get a little tired of, however, are evangelists--on both sides of this issue--who can't or won't see beyond their own needs.


Return to posts index

Mark Dobson
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 11:32:27 am

[Chris Harlan] "Mark, square and clunky are in the eyes of the beholder, and to me, X has been severely clunkified. That doesn't mean that I think there aren't any number of uses that X might be best for. And, I don't insult people for using it, or liking it over any other bit of software. What I get a little tired of, however, are evangelists--on both sides of this issue--who can't or won't see beyond their own needs."

Well you have to evaluate things from how they will serve you and yes for me FCPX works well. It does not easily fit into the world of large production houses or with people who need to collaborate a lot with other
editors.

But for editors working on their own and small production companies FCPX is a self contained and powerful piece of NLE software.

Going back to the original question of this thread - is learning FCPX worth the time? - Yes, definitely if you are prepared to learn how to use it properly. You can't just dip in and get a good workflow going immediately.

It is very different.

But if you want to be able to quickly organise, color correct and edit and output file based media it's definitely worth investing the time to learn how to use it.


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 12:42:11 pm

Both worlds have their own quirks and positives.
I for one get confused going back to MC from FCPX.
Why do I have to keep toggling that damn Smart Tool on and off?
I find editing, yes just editing and nothing else in FCPX is a breeze and lets me move naked thru the park without having to shut off a track and figure out why I cant do precision trimming.
dont get me wrong, I love Avid MC and I can fly in it too.
But when you work in FCPX for a few days then back, its a bit of a mind f*** :) In a good way of course ;
For the subject, sure learn it if you have time.
Trust me it wont take long to get it.
Ive been teaching it to brand new computer users for the last year.
It amazes me how fast learning FCPX is compared to legacy for my students.
Ive been doing that for almost 10 years with FCP.


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 2:42:45 pm

[Mark Dobson] "Well you have to evaluate things from how they will serve you and yes for me FCPX works well. It does not easily fit into the world of large production houses or with people who need to collaborate a lot with other
editors.

But for editors working on their own and small production companies FCPX is a self contained and powerful piece of NLE software.

Going back to the original question of this thread - is learning FCPX worth the time? - Yes, definitely if you are prepared to learn how to use it properly. You can't just dip in and get a good workflow going immediately.

It is very different.

But if you want to be able to quickly organise, color correct and edit and output file based media it's definitely worth investing the time to learn how to use it.
"



Mark, I agree with everything you are saying here.


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 6:00:58 pm

[Chris Harlan] "I find it very difficult to believe that you are asking that seriously. Multiple open timelines. Advanced sync indicators. The ability to customize your screen or screens to your liking. Source windows. Tracks. A mixer. The list just keeps going. You may not use any of this stuff, but I assure that other people do."

just because you use it in FCP7 doesn´t mean it is missing in FCPX in everyone´s workflow. There are tons of features in FCPX that are missing in FCP7 and once you used FCPX there is just no way back, because FCP7 feels EXTREMELY clunky.

Maybe you have a workflow that only works with these features you mentioned, but in X I never missed a sync marker and also don´t feel the need for rearranging windows and tabbed-timelines. For Exambple I just use the back/forward-arrow, which when you hold them flip-open a list of recently used timelines. So little different, similar functuality.

The mixer....you are definitely right about the mixer, though!



Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 6:11:53 pm

Alban you're a genius! Never though to hold down on that back arrow for a pop up list. Awesome!

John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 9:47:43 pm

[alban egger] "Maybe you have a workflow that only works with these features you mentioned, but in X I never missed a sync marker and also don´t feel the need for rearranging windows and tabbed-timelines. For Exambple I just use the back/forward-arrow, which when you hold them flip-open a list of recently used timelines. So little different, similar functuality."

Hey, Alban!

For me, its not tabbed timelines that I miss so much, as it is having multiple timelines--or Canvases, really--actually open. In FCP7, there's a trick that I think people who use single monitors are not aware of. Forgive me, if you know this. If, when using dual (or more) monitors, you un-tab a timeline and move it to a separate monitor, and then un-tab and move its corresponding canvas viewer to the same monitor, it becomes a separate, open timeline from the original timeline, and you can move between them by simply clicking on one or the other. I personally like the spatial relationships this allows me to set up between timelines I'm using for intermediate editing and my final timeline. Its probably the single thing I will miss most about FCPL.

As for the sync markers--I do a lot of micro surgery on audio and I find them very useful, both in the offsets that display on the timeline even if footage is unlinked, and in the canvas monitor in the form of the overlay for color-coded track timecode. Yes, I can get by without it, but its not something I want to get by without. Sadly no other NLE quite matches FCPL's implementation of sync tools.

I'm certainly not saying that everyone needs these tools, or even that I can't function without them, but I am pointing out that FCPL has some very useful tools for a certain set of people, and that there really are reasons other than fuddiness that people might be sticking with it, or otherwise mourning its passage.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 3:36:33 pm

[Mark Dobson] "For someone working with file based formats, doing everything 'in-house' and delivering a file based end product what possible advantage is there in returning to FCP7 or Premier Pro?."

I'm not sure if your question is rhetorical, but I'll answer it simply by saying that you can do a lot more with the Creative Suite than you can with FCPX... even if you add Compressor and Motion.

"FCPX does everything I need to a really high, broadcast quality, standard with a minimum of fuss and complication."

Fair enough... does this mean that others can't do what they need to do using software other than FCPX?

Shawn



Return to posts index

Mark Dobson
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 5:46:58 pm

[Shawn Miller] "
Fair enough... does this mean that others can't do what they need to do using software other than FCPX?
"


I believe that 70% of editing is brainwork with the balance made up of technical editing ability. Stick any good editor in front of any of the main NLE systems and they will produce a good result.

Editing is at the end of a chain of a lot of production decisions and by the time a file or tape is ingested into the system the editor should have a pretty clear idea of what needs doing to complete the project.

And as with many creative exercises editing is a process of reduction, of picking out the best material and
working with that.

And it's this side of the job, dealing with metadata, that FCPX really excels at. Within the event library It is now really easy to quickly organise a ton of clips into a clear structure, to hide rejected material, to even create sub edits, using compound clips, before even opening up a project to start editing in earnest.

FCPX is definitely not the most comprehensive package, nor the most developed and at the moment it has made little impact on the broadcast market but based on Apples commitment to the product through the 5 upgrades within a year I think it's got a bright future.

One day an insider will spill the beans on what really happened to produce the abysmal FCPX launch and also on the impact the vitriolic criticism had on the development team.


Return to posts index


Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 6:18:15 pm

[Mark Dobson] "... It is now really easy to quickly organise a ton of clips into a clear structure, to hide rejected material, to even create sub edits, using compound clips, ..."

Mark,

This is "really easy" to in FCP7, as well as pretty much any NLE as far as I can tell. Meta data can help in the process (for some approaches) but it is not necessary, and it isn't clear that it makes the first stages of editing universally "easier". I have no doubt that it has made your process quicker and easier, but I use very little meta-data in my process and I don't foresee that changing in the near future, quite aside from choice of NLE.

[Mark Dobson] "For someone working with file based formats, doing everything 'in-house' and delivering a file based end product what possible advantage is there in returning to FCP7 or Premier Pro?"

... preference, habit, other features, integration with other software, integration with other users, ease of use, price (if you already own FCP7), ...

The reality is that FCPX is one of several options now. If you're trying to make a case that FCPX is better, you haven't. It's certainly worth exploring and some users will find it to their taste, while others won't.


Franz.


Return to posts index

David Eaks
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 1:54:31 pm

I resonate with Marks comment-
"For someone working with file based formats, doing everything 'in-house' and delivering a file based end product what possible advantage is there in returning to FCP7 or Premier Pro?"

FCPX works well for me, very well, but everyone's workflow and requirements vary greatly. It may or may not fit your needs now but maybe it will completely fit your needs, better than any other NLE after the next couple of updates. I'm not saying I expect it to be perfect, but I'm optimistic that many of the remaining missing features and minor "gotchas" will be reimplimented and fixed.

I definitely think it is worth learning but be warned! In the beginning you may feel confused, even disgusted by its very existence. Then irritated and betrayed simply because it makes you feel this way. Stumbling around places you are sure that you should be familiar with, everything seems simplified but you still can't figure it out. It is offending and off-putting. After a while strange things will begin to happen. The world seems to shift around you, yet somehow everything is still in its proper place. Your belongings are available to you without having to go find them. Being unable to travel, yet capable of arriving at the destination. Just as you regain your bearings and can exploit the benefits of this new way of interacting with your surroundings it is too late, captured. The beast gently coddles you, imprisoned within in its fierce claws. Transforming you and your way of thinking, molding you to its will. All the while trying to observe your needs but fumbling with such a small and very demanding thing in it's massive grip. Struggling not to rip you to shreds while it keeps you from slipping between its fingers. You are free to pick up and leave at any time, though not without the possibility of having been permanently infected. If so, nothing else will satiate the hunger. Should you accept this existence as a new being, a hybrid created in the reality distortion field of this omnipresent but only self-aware entity, you may be viewed by some as a freak. Although somehow you know that you have been bettered by the experience. Greatly enjoying your new life and feeling confident that FCPX will eventually make up for its own shortcomings. At least that's how I experienced it, maybe a tad dramatized. YMMV.

Even if you just decide to go with another NLE in the end, it's worth it. Who knows? You might like being a freak. A "ProX", I do.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 2:39:44 pm

[David Eaks] "Should you accept this existence as a new being, a hybrid created in the reality distortion field of this omnipresent but only self-aware entity, you may be viewed by some as a freak. Although somehow you know that you have been bettered by the experience. "

David, do you have to shave your head to make it fully operational?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 3:11:49 pm

FCP X is certainly not going away, so it's definitely worth learning. OTOH, the market is very fractured right now and gun-shy of Apple, so it may or may not be productive for your job prospects.

The paradigm is different enough that in some situations its advantage and disadvantages become a wash. Yesterday I was in an agency-driven session. 6+ folks in the room all telling me to do different (and sometimes contradictory) things. This was in revising/re-cutting a complex, finished corporate piece, so lots of surgical changes. Some of the re-arranging went better due to the magnetic timeline and some resulted in a complete mess of a timeline.

That's something I still wrestle with and it's one of the weakest aspects of working with X. You find that you spend a lot of time juggling among the A (magnetic), T (trim) and P (position) modes, as well as having to manage the position of connecting points. This is completely different from other NLEs, because if you don't, timeline changes often have unintended consequences.

None of this is a deal-breaker, but it will have you longing for FCP7, PPro or Media Composer at times. I'm still trying to figure out the best way to deal with this and that's after a year of working with the program. I persevere because of the things I like about it, but I am REALLY hoping for big fixes in the next update.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Paul Jay
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 3:52:48 pm

Learn FCPX and Premiere CS6. They are both awesome and worth learning.


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 4:32:07 pm

[Paul Jay] "Learn FCPX and Premiere CS6. They are both awesome and worth learning.
"


I like the middle road approach.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 4:36:00 pm

X exists for one reason and one reason only.

Editing has largly changed from something that a few specialists did in expensive hardware dominated shops - into something that now can be done on simple, affordable consumer systems and produce the same quality given the appropriate editing skills.

Editing has been untethered.

So the tools need to be similarly untethered from the approaches of the past.

If you see your "career" as working simarily to the environments that were prevalent in the prior era - contributing as a role player in a shop environment. Then you should probably prepare yourself for that with traditional suite-friendly tools like PPro or AVID.

If, on the other hand, you think that editing will continue on the path toward individual empowered editing over collaborative "shop based" editing, then you owe it to yourself to explore and understand how the most successful video editing software tool creation company, Apple, sees the future of editing.

And that means taking the year or so of study required to really understand the new X approach.

Choices, choices.

"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: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 5:51:32 pm

[Bill Davis] "If you see your "career" as working simarily to the environments that were prevalent in the prior era - contributing as a role player in a shop environment. Then you should probably prepare yourself for that with traditional suite-friendly tools like PPro or AVID.

If, on the other hand, you think that editing will continue on the path toward individual empowered editing over collaborative "shop based" editing, then you owe it to yourself to explore and understand how the most successful video editing software tool creation company, Apple, sees the future of editing.
"


I still think that's a false dichotomy, Bill. CS6, for instance, offers quite a few more tools to a one-person-bander than X does. I mean, way more. Beyond not-even-in-the-same-ballpark more. And, its design lets it play with other tools, like DAWs, that that one-person-bander may also own, but, since it also has a DAW, that might not be necessary. And, it fits on the same laptop as X. Your rather constant ploy seems to be that anything that is not X is about big, last-century video and is used by cogs or "role players" in someone else's machine.

If I had to choose a single piece of software for a video editing business it would NOT be FCP X. Its far too limiting. Of course, in other arenas, it could be all you need.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 6:49:50 pm

[Chris Harlan] "If I had to choose a single piece of software for a video editing business it would NOT be FCP X. Its far too limiting. Of course, in other arenas, it could be all you need."

We understand this about you, Chris. You're heavily invested in what you've always done and the needs of your current business model. That's fine. But perhaps what's most "limiting" here isn't X, but the way you emotionally react to those who appreciate it - which tends to drive you to trot out this kind of language?"

Ploy? Cogs?

Are you doing lots of work for either Fox or MSNBC? You know, someplace where it's fashionable to use language to belittle and marginalize in order to puff up an otherwise weak position?

But on to the heart of things...


[Chris Harlan] "I still think that's a false dichotomy, Bill. CS6, for instance, offers quite a few more tools to a one-person-bander than X does. I mean, way more. Beyond not-even-in-the-same-ballpark more. And, its design lets it play with other tools, like DAWs, that that one-person-bander may also own, but, since it also has a DAW, that might not be necessary. And, it fits on the same laptop as X. Your rather constant ploy seems to be that anything that is not X is about big, last-century video and is used by cogs or "role players" in someone else's machine.


If you're correct in your analysis, Chris. Then X will fade away and Premier will become ascendent.

But I simply don't see that happening.

The only people I see talking about PPro are the ones with large vested operations and want a tool that's "more like FCP Legacy" largely for their editing style comfort.

As new editors flood in (and they are, in legions) they'll need to choose a tool.

I believe that tool will increasingly be FCP-X for lots of reasons. The primary is that it represents three market-making realities. It's inexpensive. It's very, very capable with tremendous "back end" potential rapidly developing. And, unless the editor is burdened with lots of ingrained practices that have to be jettisoned in order to adapt to it's new processes, it's extremely easy to acquire and learn at a basic, functional level.

And I can't emphasize that last element enough.

Buying X is a couple of clicks and a single, clean choice. With some basic training you can be cutting basic video on it in a couple of hours. The "auto" stuff in it makes basic easy in X. Easier than any other software I've used. Then like a good DSLR, as you learn to take control, it lets you turn all the "auto" off and be more precise.

Buying Premier Pro, in contrast is still wrapped in a maze of "bundle packages" and "own verses subscribe" options that make little sense for anyone but the company selling it. It reminds me of a photo gig I did with a Mamaya 4x5 camera with a Leaf back about 18 months ago. That was NEW grafted onto OLD. They tried to keep the "pro" of the 4x5 format - while adding some digital sizzle.

But few people are talking about 4x5 cameras today. The DSLRs blew past them - because they were simply better tools for these times.

For someone who just wants to learn to edit video and turn out quality work with minimal hassle - I believe X has the much superior path.

But the market will make the final choice.

In five years we'll look back at the way most contemporary editing is being done. And if at that point, the "mega-suite" something for everyone Premier approach is dominant, I'll say so.

If the more focused and connected model of X comes to dominate, we'll know that as well.

I haven't had a project that X couldn't handle beautifully and very efficiently once I learned to use it properly.

That's also true of AVID and PPro - but the paths are vastly different - and the main difference is that the last two are still trying to be the programs they once were in order not to "annoy" their bases.

Apple felt that annoying the base was both a necessary and fair price for making a better product for the future.

The only thing I know for certain is that nearly everything about how I make video has changed over the past 5 years. I don't use the same cameras, I don't' use the same tungsten lights, or analog audio gear, or CRT monitors I used to use. All of that technology has changed for the better.

Why should I use the same old style of software?

It's a reasonable question, anyway

"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

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 7:02:18 pm

[Bill Davis] " It's inexpensive. It's very, very capable with tremendous "back end" potential rapidly developing. And, unless the editor is burdened with lots of ingrained practices that have to be jettisoned in order to adapt to it's new processes, it's extremely easy to acquire and learn at a basic, functional level."

Bill,

Which NLE have you described here? It might be PPro, Avid, X, 7, Lightworks, or a few others.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 7:26:24 pm

[Bill Davis] "[Chris Harlan] "If I had to choose a single piece of software for a video editing business it would NOT be FCP X. Its far too limiting. Of course, in other arenas, it could be all you need."

We understand this about you, Chris."


LOL. We? You and the other doctors in the observation room?

[Bill Davis] "But perhaps what's most "limiting" here isn't X, but the way you emotionally react to those who appreciate it - which tends to drive you to trot out this kind of language?""

Oh, Doctor Bill. Physician, heal thyself.

[Bill Davis] "Ploy? Cogs?

Are you doing lots of work for either Fox or MSNBC? You know, someplace where it's fashionable to use language to belittle and marginalize in order to puff up an otherwise weak position?
"


Bill, you use more loaded language and set more straw arguments than any other person on this site. You go so far out of your way to "belittle and marginalize in order to puff up an otherwise weak position" that you should be receiving awards for it.


[Bill Davis] "If you're correct in your analysis, Chris. Then X will fade away and Premier will become ascendent.

But I simply don't see that happening.
"


Again, false argument! There's plenty of room for X. I expect it to thrive. There are a number of things that it is probably better at than any other NLE. I probably end up saying that in about a fifth of my posts. So, fiddle-stixs to you for creating an argument that I'm not having with you, so that you can make a point that isn't there. This is something you do a lot of, btw.


[Bill Davis] "As new editors flood in (and they are, in legions) they'll need to choose a tool.

I believe that tool will increasingly be FCP-X for lots of reasons. The primary is that it represents three market-making realities. It's inexpensive. It's very, very capable with tremendous "back end" potential rapidly developing. And, unless the editor is burdened with lots of ingrained practices that have to be jettisoned in order to adapt to it's new processes, it's extremely easy to acquire and learn at a basic, functional level.

And I can't emphasize that last element enough.
"


Hey, you get no argument from me. Especially if it improves, gets rid of its current ceiling, and loses some of its rigidity, it might just end up being top of the heap.

[Bill Davis] "Buying X is a couple of clicks and a single, clean choice. With some basic training you can be cutting basic video on it in a couple of hours. The "auto" stuff in it makes basic easy in X. Easier than any other software I've used. Then like a good DSLR, as you learn to take control, it lets you turn all the "auto" off and be more precise.
"


Dude, buying anything is pretty much that way now, and its only going to get more that way. Only takes a couple of clicks to download CS6 or Media Composer. AND, you can do that from the world's largest OS. I mean, an OS that has so many more installed seats that its laughable. So, who actually has the future advantage there? Seems like it might be NLEs that straddle both worlds.


[Bill Davis] "Buying Premier Pro, in contrast is still wrapped in a maze of "bundle packages" and "own verses subscribe" options that make little sense for anyone but the company selling it. It reminds me of a photo gig I did with a Mamaya 4x5 camera with a Leaf back about 18 months ago. That was NEW grafted onto OLD. They tried to keep the "pro" of the 4x5 format - while adding some digital sizzle.
"


Oh, I see. Offering actual choices is a BAD thing. Oh, Doctor Bill. Funny, I don't get your analogy at all. What it reminds me of is walking into a store that has its shelves stocked with a variety of products, as opposed to walking into a store where there is the exact same thing on every shelf.


[Bill Davis] "For someone who just wants to learn to edit video and turn out quality work with minimal hassle - I believe X has the much superior path.



But the market will make the final choice.
"


No. If that were true, there'd only be one car.



[Bill Davis] "In five years we'll look back at the way most contemporary editing is being done. And if at that point, the "mega-suite" something for everyone Premier approach is dominant, I'll say so.
"


I don't give two poops bout what is dominant. I just care about what I need.


[Bill Davis] "I haven't had a project that X couldn't handle beautifully and very efficiently once I learned to use it properly.
"


Okay. That's your business.


[Bill Davis] "Apple felt that annoying the base was both a necessary and fair price for making a better product for the future.
"


I'm always amazed at the certainty with which you can read Apple's mind.


[Bill Davis] "The only thing I know for certain is that nearly everything about how I make video has changed over the past 5 years. I don't use the same cameras, I don't' use the same tungsten lights, or analog audio gear, or CRT monitors I used to use. All of that technology has changed for the better.

Why should I use the same old style of software?

It's a reasonable question, anyway"


Sure it is.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 5:20:43 pm

[Bill Davis] "The only people I see talking about PPro are the ones with large vested operations and want a tool that's "more like FCP Legacy" largely for their editing style comfort."

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

[Bill Davis] "Buying Premier Pro, in contrast is still wrapped in a maze of "bundle packages" and "own verses subscribe" options that make little sense for anyone but the company selling it."

I guess for someone who values the simplicity and rigidity of X, choices are troubling. Since it's so hard to figure out these bundles I guess you don't use any Adobe products in your workflow. So tell me Bill, what do you use instead of Photoshop?

[Bill Davis] "That's also true of AVID and PPro - but the paths are vastly different - and the main difference is that the last two are still trying to be the programs they once were in order not to "annoy" their bases."

That's one interpretation. Another might be that they were interested in making the best tool they could for skilled editors and they wren't awarding points for reinventing the (color) wheel. Apple is casting a wider net into a larger sea, Adobe and Avid seem to be making high quality rods for serious fisherman. There is room for both approaches.

[Bill Davis] "The only thing I know for certain is that nearly everything about how I make video has changed over the past 5 years. I don't use the same cameras, I don't' use the same tungsten lights, or analog audio gear, or CRT monitors I used to use. All of that technology has changed for the better."

But I sit in the same chair and use the same eyes, ears and hands to do the work. I've held onto some of my CRT monitors as well - still great for accurate color correction. As for cameras, we are now going back to using older film lenses on some of these cameras, lenses that were last used 10 - 15 years ago. Things do not always change for the better, things are not that simple.

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 8:06:12 pm

[Herb Sevush] "So tell me Bill, what do you use instead of Photoshop? "

Pixelmator.

70% of the capability. 10% of the cost.

[Herb Sevush] "Apple is casting a wider net into a larger sea, Adobe and Avid seem to be making high quality rods for serious fisherman."

Fine.
Tho I'll note that at the top of the class, the expert Marlin fisherman are all well and good, but they aren't the ones putting the food on the worlds tables. That's left to those who spread the wide nets, not the targeted fishing lines.

[Herb Sevush] "Things do not always change for the better, things are not that simple."
This is true. But I don't see many Nagras out there anymore. Nor Kleig lights. Nor Mitchell BMCs.

So perhaps sometimes things actually DO change for the better.

Ask the slide rule manufacturers - if you can find one.

"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: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 9:45:59 pm

[Bill Davis] "70% of the capability. 10% of the cost."

The same could be said of X. Some of us need the other 30%.

[Bill Davis] " the expert Marlin fisherman are all well and good, but they aren't the ones putting the food on the worlds tables. That's left to those who spread the wide nets, not the targeted fishing lines."

That's why I said there's room for both approaches.

[Bill Davis] " But I don't see many Nagras out there anymore. Nor Kleig lights. Nor Mitchell BMCs. So perhaps sometimes things actually DO change for the better."

I never said some things don't change for the better, I merely said that all things don't change for the better. Violins haven't gotten any better, pitchers don't throw any harder, buildings don't last near as long - and I haven't noticed any vast improvement in the quality of movies or other media I end up seeing - I just notice that the ratio of crap to quality has suddenly gone up.

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 22, 2012 at 11:01:46 pm

[Herb Sevush] "The same could be said of X. Some of us need the other 30%."

No argument.

There are always those who have to use specialized tools for efficiencies in specialized circumstances.

But that's certainly no reason to argue that the larger group that can be helped by the more general purpose tool are less worthy of having a solution that better fits their needs.

That's all I've really been arguing here for the past year plus.

"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

Jules bowman
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 23, 2012 at 12:02:27 am

"Tho I'll note that at the top of the class, the expert Marlin fisherman are all well and good, but they aren't the ones putting the food on the worlds tables. That's left to those who spread the wide nets, not the targeted fishing lines."

Yes, and I believe those wide net casters are also depleting the global fish reserves in pursuit of ever increasing profits.

Onward Christian soldiers.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 23, 2012 at 6:23:04 pm

[Jules bowman] "Yes, and I believe those wide net casters are also depleting the global fish reserves in pursuit of ever increasing profits."

Well,

You actually only get "profits" if there are people who want to buy those fish.

Is your argument that people who want to eat fish should be forced to deal with scarcity in a more regulated fish sales system?

Or that some over-arching authority must be created with the authority to ration the fish supply?

Or that people who like fish need to be "encouraged" to eat something else?

Or that more research is needed to determine better ways to raise and source fish?

Or what precisely?

It's definitely good to note and point out problems that may arise over time because of patterns you can identify.

It's excellent, however, to move on from identification to actually trying to solve the problem you've identified in a way that doesn't disenfranchise the largest class involved in the issue.

Fish eaters are legion.

Making Fish $100 a pound will solve the overfishing thing in short other. But then only people who can afford that will get to eat fish.

Not a particularly viable solution in my book.

Any more than contending that because high end editors have diverging needs from those with more modest editing goals, that a developing tool that starts out with basic capabilities but has a clearly announced growth plan to expand is unworthy of use simply because it's not "perfect" for all users at present.

Ready to hear your ideas on how this should work.

For fish, or for NLEs - your call.

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

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 5:51:03 pm

[Bill Davis] "The only people I see talking about PPro are the ones with large vested operations and want a tool that's "more like FCP Legacy" largely for their editing style comfort."

I don't do a lot of creative cutting any more, so my needs are certainly different than yours here, but I spend so much time in After Effects, Photoshop, and Illustrator that I regret not switching to Premiere sooner. Dynamic Link is cool.


[Bill Davis] "As new editors flood in (and they are, in legions) they'll need to choose a tool."

True. However, we also talk about how editors aren't just editors anymore. They must also be graphic designers, motion designers, sound designers, and colorists, and Adobe's suite of offerings plays to this. Photoshop is a near must-have in nearly all levels of production, and After Effects and Illustrator are very, very common in video production, too. That's a pretty big wedge driving in front of Premiere Pro.


[Bill Davis] "Buying Premier Pro, in contrast is still wrapped in a maze of "bundle packages" and "own verses subscribe" options that make little sense for anyone but the company selling it."

I don't know. I think Adobe's Creative Cloud makes a lot of sense for customers, too -- and if it doesn't make sense for you, you can still buy the perpetual license.

Creative Cloud costs $50 per month. If you start work at 9:00am, your month's fee will be paid for by 10:00am on the first day of every month. You get a really impressive set of tools for less than twelve hours' worth of work over the course of each year.

I'd bet a surprising number of editors give more money every month to Starbucks than they would to Adobe on subscription.


[Bill Davis] "Apple felt that annoying the base was both a necessary and fair price for making a better product for the future."

Actually, I think Apple's price is, for lack of a better term, artificially low. I don't think anyone other than Apple could afford to sell an NLE so cheaply.


[Bill Davis] "In five years we'll look back at the way most contemporary editing is being done. And if at that point, the "mega-suite" something for everyone Premier approach is dominant, I'll say so. If the more focused and connected model of X comes to dominate, we'll know that as well."

I'd argue that "focused" and "connected" are great words to describe the tightly-integrated specialty apps in Creative Suite. I guess it's a matter of perspective.

FCP Legend was everything to everyone, and it came to dominate the NLE market. FCPX doesn't seem to be playing that game. I have no doubt that FCPX will continue to be a commercial success, but I'm not sure that we'll see Legend-style domination in the NLE space again for some time from any of the players.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 6:02:30 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I don't know. I think Adobe's Creative Cloud makes a lot of sense for customers, too -- and if it doesn't make sense for you, you can still buy the perpetual license."

My problem with the cloud version is what happens if you stop paying? I believe you are not able to open your last version once you stop paying. With a "perpetual license" you may not choose to upgrade but at least you can open old projects 10 years later.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 6:18:27 pm

[Herb Sevush] "My problem with the cloud version is what happens if you stop paying? I believe you are not able to open your last version once you stop paying. With a "perpetual license" you may not choose to upgrade but at least you can open old projects 10 years later."

Yup.

That's the tradeoff for not shelling out $2600 upfront for a perpetual license for Master Collection ($1900 for production premium).

On the other hand, at current pricing, you won't break even buying a new perpetual Master Collection license and upgrading every year versus subscription until 2040. If you only upgrade every other year, or if you buy Production Premium and do upgrade every year, you break even buying versus subscribing in 2019.

And of course, if you chose to stop subscribing and really needed to open that file, you could choose to go month-by-month. It might still be cheaper.

It's not right for everyone, and I'm still a little leery of "renting" software myself, but it will be worth consideration for a lot of folks -- especially the ones just starting out who don't have thousands of dollars to sink into software licensing upfront.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 7:39:29 pm

[Walter Soyka] "It's not right for everyone, and I'm still a little leery of "renting" software myself, but it will be worth consideration for a lot of folks -- especially the ones just starting out who don't have thousands of dollars to sink into software licensing upfront."

I think the real value is for a facility that wants everything they offer and the value of always having the latest upgrade. As for the economics, I don't think the $50/month fee will remain that low for long. Once they have you hooked your helpless if they raise the monthly rates. They're just like any other pusher, and the customer is just another junkie who needs a fix.

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 8:10:30 pm

Imagine some poor sap who suffers a lost wallet or some ID theft a couple of days before the software has to "re-activate" and who's on deadline that same week.

Talk about a nightmare.

"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

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 8:24:12 pm

[Bill Davis] "Imagine some poor sap who suffers a lost wallet or some ID theft a couple of days before the software has to "re-activate" and who's on deadline that same week. Talk about a nightmare."

Is that really any different than any of the other auto-billed dozen services you might rely on?

ID theft is bad all around, but you could move your account's billing to another card in about a minute and a half on the web site.

I think you'd have some time to work it out, too. From the CreativeCloud FAQ [link]:

Do I need ongoing Internet access to use my Creative Suite applications?
Because your Creative Suite applications are installed directly on your computer, you will not need an ongoing Internet connection to use them on a daily basis. However, you will need to be online when you install and license your software, and at least once every 30 days thereafter. The software will alert you when you need to connect to the Internet for a license status check.

Again, subscription may not be right for everyone -- but just because it's different doesn't automatically make it bad, right?

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 9:00:18 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Again, subscription may not be right for everyone -- but just because it's different doesn't automatically make it bad, right?"

Hi Walter.

Nope, it's not a fatal flaw. Just a small concern from someone who's lost a wallet and realized that because I had to cancel and get ALL my cards re-issued, it took a week to 10 days to get everything sorted out.

And yes, it's probably not a mission critical problem since Adobe doesn't vet ownership viability in order to launch.

That said, I still like Apple's idea of using the new electronic distribution model to drive costs down so low that the barriers to ownership have virtually disappeared.

The Adobe way might be functionally kinda the same. But you can't deny that Apple in choosing to emphasize low-cost ownership over the Software as a Service model, has perhaps given their customers a bit more to feel secure about.

I appreciate that.

I might be old-fashioned, but I feel more comfortable OWNING the tools of my trade than renting them.

But that's probably just me.

"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

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 9:32:24 pm

[Bill Davis] "I might be old-fashioned, but I feel more comfortable OWNING the tools of my trade than renting them. But that's probably just me."

No, I'm with you. I do have one Creative Cloud license, but I kept my perpetual licenses, too.

I just think it's good that the option is there to get access to all the power in Creative Suite for less than a fancy dinner.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 9:46:30 pm

[Walter Soyka] "I just think it's good that the option is there to get access to all the power in Creative Suite for less than a fancy dinner."

Not dismissing this at all.. but I will note that you don't get any of that power without investing pretty huge personal time resources in learning to operate the software.

I'm not sure how comfortable I'd be in putting in the months and years to get really good at something that remains foundtaionally owned by someone else who is just letting me "use" it so long as I keep paying.

Photoshop is a good example for me. I had a large project late last year and did the rental thing on two copies of PShp for my suite during a big PowerPoint project working with out of state designers for a while. Then six months went by without my using it again (I typically use Pixelmator for basic graphics manipulation as I've noted elsewhere) only to realize that I'd left one of the rental licenses active which had been draining the rental fee each month away form my account without my getting any benefit from it.

Nobody's fault but my own for getting distracted on the financial stuff during the busy holiday season, but managing software rental is another thing that's more distraction than core practice to my thinking. So it starts out with a black mark in my brain.

But that's just me.

"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

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 9:57:48 pm

There's some other stuff in Creative Cloud, like that 20 GB of storage and some kind of synchronization. I'll have to try to give that spin and see if it's valuable.


[Bill Davis] "Photoshop is a good example for me. I had a large project late last year and did the rental thing on two copies of PShp for my suite during a big PowerPoint project working with out of state designers for a while. Then six months went by without my using it again (I typically use Pixelmator for basic graphics manipulation as I've noted elsewhere) only to realize that I'd left one of the rental licenses active which had been draining the rental fee each month away form my account without my getting any benefit from it. Nobody's fault but my own for getting distracted on the financial stuff during the busy holiday season, but managing software rental is another thing that's more distraction than core practice to my thinking. So it starts out with a black mark in my brain."

Would you have felt better about that if you had paid $700 for a full, perpetual license that you weren't using?

I think a lot of our connection to ownership of our tools is emotional, driven perhaps by pride in craftsmanship or fear of of uncertainly. Most other business are trying to change their capital expenditures over to operational expenses wherever possible in part to make the books look better and in part to mitigate risk.

Personally, I actually really like the hybrid approach: buy a perpetual license and get on a maintenance program. I own a perpetual license of Maxon CINEMA 4D Studio, but I have a service agreement with them, too. I pay them a fixed amount of money every year, and they send me all the new updates, whenever they come out. It still has the high upfront cost, but you get the other benefits of constant updates and predictable costs.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 9:17:48 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Again, subscription may not be right for everyone -- but just because it's different doesn't automatically make it bad, right?"

Agreed. I own my copies, and plan to continue that way. What I really like is that I can scale seats up or down quickly if I need to. It becomes a nice side option.


Return to posts index

Christopher Key
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 4:46:10 am

Hey Walter - I'm using the adobe cloud and I like it and I also find many of my clients want me to do much more than edit a video - they want me to make a website, design an ad, create a picture-book etc etc etc so I bought the CS3 Master Collection years ago and this year switched to the cloud and I like it - I'm getting it for 30 a month for the first year which is less than a third of updating and I have all the latest apps. The main reason I want to work with Premiere Pro more is because of the way all the apps work together - My dad is a retired computer programmer who predicted years ago that some day people would generally rent software on a need to use basis and it looks like things are headed that way. If Adobe continues to update their suite every year and a half the price should be about the same as traditional upgrades.

Christopher Key


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 8:26:37 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Creative Cloud costs $50 per month. If you start work at 9:00am, your month's fee will be paid for by 10:00am on the first day of every month. "

that's put beautifully.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 9:09:16 pm

Bill,

While I certainly agree with you that X exists for one reason and one reason only I am afraid we differ on the reason. From my perspective X exists to harvest an infinitely larger profit pool. Is that the future? I don't know. Neither do you. You seem to regard editing as as some sort of dark age secret that has been protected by evil guilds for low these many years. And that X has somehow set editing free. Time will tell. But editing has not been as you say "untethered." Practically speaking we are tethered to our clients and also tethered to telling a story. And in both those respects X does not work for a great many people at the moment, despite all your (completely speculatory) claims that X is the future.

Tim


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 8:51:23 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Practically speaking we are tethered to our clients and also tethered to telling a story. And in both those respects X does not work for a great many people at the moment, despite all your (completely speculatory) claims that X is the future."


Tim,

Well, we certainly disagree here. Not about the clients or storytelling stuff. We agree on that.

But I'll push back strongly on any implication that X "does not work." for some hidden reason.

It's possible that it doesn't work for "a great many people" simply because they haven't taken the time to understand it well enough to get the results they might if they took the time to investigate it more.

I know this contention will annoy many here, but what else can it be?

Look, my needs can't be that much different than yours. I want to shoot careful, properly produced video. And I want to bring it into a tool that lets me easily identify and focus on the parts of the program that are the most beneficial to my audience. I want to arrange these, add titles, graphics and sound to enhance the programs effectiveness for my audience. And output a great looking master.

In a nutshell, that's what video production is. And X does all of that perfectly.

I freely acknowledge that many editors have complex and sophisticated learned workflows and habits that they feel are central to both their comfort and effectiveness in doing their jobs.

And I also freely acknowledge that to the extent X makes them change their approach or habits, will leave them feeling uncomfortable about trusting it to produce work to their standards.

That's perfectly rational.

But that simply don't change the fact that for MOST editors doing MOST kinds of typical editing work - X is an exceptionally capable editing program. if you use it at all, you know it's capable right out of the box of generating superb quality output. It's got excellent general purpose content management tools - and whether you "approve" of stuff like it's optional magnetic timeline or not - nobody with a brain can say it doesn't do the vast majority of anyone's traditional list of basic editing tasks with speed and efficiency.

It's primary problem is that it doesn't do these jobs precisely the way too many editors are USED to doing them. So it makes them uncomfortable at first. But that's very different from saying that it's somehow inept at of doing professional quality work, because that's simply not true.

If the next season of Leverage doesn't get to air, and we see articles saying that X was the cause, I'll re-assess. But if it does. Then just like Cold Mountain broke Legacy into the big time, all the nay-sayers will be left with is the same line we've heard all along.

I don't like it cuz it's different.

That's fine. But it's also arbitrary, individual and WAY short of persuasive, IMO.

Seriously. What can't X accomplish that any editor needs to accomplish in your view? Where is it's glaring weakness? Have you delivered anything with it yet? Why not? What's stopping you? What's missing - not that you're merely accustomed to relying on - but that you NEED in order to use it effectively?

I'm truly curious because it seems to me that after this much time, most of the angst here, is still because it requires one to change their thinking and workflow. NOT because it lacks any actual fundamental editing capability.

"It doesn't work the way I'd like it to work" is perfectly fair for any editor to think about X.

"A pro can't edit with it" is not. And that's the implication that keeps coming up here again and again.

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

Scott Sheriff
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 4:56:20 pm

In case you haven't read any of my posts, you need know I'm no fan of X.
In this forum you will find a small cluster of fans who will no doubt extoll the virtues of of movie hero, and talk about how they use it on project after project with excellent results. All of which is subjective to say the least.
If you are asking if you should stick with tried and true software like FCP, which is a suite of applications that cover several disciplines, and translates easily to most other proven editing platforms or go with movie hero which is essentially imovie on steroids, just look at jobs posted in the year and a month that X has been around paying careful attention to the rate offered for FCP, Avid, Premier editors vs editors who know X.
If you do that you will find the real answer to your question.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair


Return to posts index

James Mortner
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 5:36:49 pm

FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT FIGHT...


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 10:48:37 pm

OK. I'll fight. Whaddaya got?

Tim


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 6:16:10 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "In case you haven't read any of my posts, you need know I'm no fan of X.
In this forum you will find a small cluster of fans who will no doubt extoll the virtues of of movie hero, and talk about how they use it on project after project with excellent results. All of which is subjective to say the least.
If you are asking if you should stick with tried and true software like FCP, which is a suite of applications that cover several disciplines, and translates easily to most other proven editing platforms or go with movie hero which is essentially imovie on steroids, just look at jobs posted in the year and a month that X has been around paying careful attention to the rate offered for FCP, Avid, Premier editors vs editors who know X.
If you do that you will find the real answer to your question.

"


X shortcoming aside, I haven't seen one person asking for an X specific editor yet (besides the rate), and i do alot of freelance. I have it in my toolkit, and have been poking it with a stick, just cause i thought it would come up one day, but really i dont think anyone in LA is taking it seriously yet.

Neil Goodman: Editor of New Media Production - NBC/Universal


Return to posts index

David Powell
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 6:51:07 pm

Yes I believe the question as to whether or not it was worth learning, was in the context that he was passing up jobs for FCP, because he was limited to Vegas. It had nothing to do with how well the software works. It looks like his clients are dictating which software is used, and to be honest there are more jobs posted for Sony Vegas than FCPX.

This idea that freelancers should be highly skilled in ALL NLE's is nonsense. In todays environment, an Editor is often expected to be an expert in Sound, color correction, and motion graphics. Being highly skilled in One NLE is hard enough and it shows by Editors who make comments like "why do I have to keep toggling the smart tool." Anyone who knows Media Composer well knows that the smart tool doesn't have to be touched ever. I was just in a room with an FCP editor who had been using since version one, and didn't even know that the autosave could be adjusted. I cut a doco with an Avid Editor from version 1 who didn't know how to use the attic or find function.

I see a lot of people commenting on NLE's that they have not been properly trained on, and then form an opinion of its "clunkiness" and "intuitiveness". This includes FCPX. That is why I dislike when people say "download the trial and see if it works for you." You're better off taking that time searching the web for which NLE has or is missing certain features for the workflow that you are tackling. Learning Avid and FCP7 are safe bets however because the market demands them. Media 100 is a great NLE (the first I learned on) but there are no jobs for it as a freelancer so why should I get highly skilled in its use? FCPX is in Vegas, Media 100 territory. People love them, but there is no freelance market for them. Spend your time Mastering Avid and FCP 7 (there aren't many jobs on Premiere either) its takes time, but is well worth it.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 9:56:06 pm

[David Powell] " ...(there aren't many jobs on Premiere either) its takes time, but is well worth it."

It depends on what you do. You probably won't find many PPro listings for broadcast work, but if you do corporate, motion graphics or or event work, you're much more likely to encounter Premiere.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 10:06:46 pm

[Shawn Miller] "[David Powell] " ...(there aren't many jobs on Premiere either) its takes time, but is well worth it."

It depends on what you do. You probably won't find many PPro listings for broadcast work, but if you do corporate, motion graphics or or event work, you're much more likely to encounter Premiere.

Shawn
"


My guess is that, in the promo world, there are a number of Creative Directors itching to push it in that direction. I know of two medium-sized boutiques--one specializes in game promos, the other in broadcast promos--that are planning to venture into Premiere, though both are still on FCP 7. When the new season starts, I'm planning to mix it in, along with Media Composer. I'm sort of at that point where I'm enjoying bouncing around between them because it feels like a bit of a workout. My muscle memory is even beginning to remember what system I'm on.

So, in the promo world, I see Pr6 making a few waves. In long form, probably not so much until Adobe gets the render-out wrinkles a bit more domesticated.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 11:51:33 pm

[Chris Harlan] "So, in the promo world, I see Pr6 making a few waves."

That's interesting, I guess I just assumed that everyone in broadcast would just go Avid or Smoke. I'm really curious to see what the post landscape will look like in a few years... personally, I'm hoping to see a lot more diversity across tools, platforms and software providers. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 12:20:18 am

[Shawn Miller] "[Chris Harlan] "So, in the promo world, I see Pr6 making a few waves."

That's interesting, I guess I just assumed that everyone in broadcast would just go Avid or Smoke. I'm really curious to see what the post landscape will look like in a few years... personally, I'm hoping to see a lot more diversity across tools, platforms and software providers. :-)

Shawn
"


What it is, as far as I can tell, is Pr6's relation to AE, in that it integrates well, and that there are copies just laying around. Plus, the subscription option allows for a quick build up and breakdown of extra seats in a crunch period, which the promo world is very susceptible too. Add to that, the ease of transition from FCPL to Pr6, and you get some movement.

I should mention, though, that a few promo folks like our own John Davidson are keen to move forward with FCP X. I'm looking forward to going and seeing their X setup later this summer. I'm quite interested to see what they've got going.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 12:41:57 am

[Chris Harlan] "I should mention, though, that a few promo folks like our own John Davidson are keen to move forward with FCP X. I'm looking forward to going and seeing their X setup later this summer. I'm quite interested to see what they've got going."

That is interesting, I would like to see if Motion starts to come more into play as well, as FCPX gains more uptake. I hope you and John will report back and let us know how X shakes out in the world of Promos.

Shawn



Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 2:35:08 am

Sorry, didn't read the whole post first. Yes, we're getting into Motion now. Only thing I noticed is that a slate we built in motion too a long time to render. I may have done something stupid with it though. Learning is a never ending process :).

John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.


Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 2:33:35 am

My ears are burning! I was gonna stay out of this fight!

Currently three of the spots on our site's main page slider were done on FCPX. I don't like to call out specific projects/clients on sites I can't control, but you're welcome to step over and check 'em out. We haven't had time to update with some of our newer projects, but we have 3 more movie tie ins that should be up in a week or two.

Aside from the occasional layback or digitize, we're totally out of 7. We're trying to get our systems to play well with Blackmagic and AJA's digitize layback utilities, but they're a little finicky. Today we started building slate templates in Motion and using them as editable generators in FCPX. We've just started to work with Motion, especially for building wild transitions. It's kind of fun to make them.

We've been 99% FCPX since May, which has resulted in us working faster despite our lack of knowledge about FCPX. It's a process. Today was our first string out done in FCPX that didn't make our heads hurt, so I guess we're getting somewhere. Oddly, it was a digital delivery so the string out was pretty much unneeded.

I'm glad we switched and look forward to IA coming out with handles for AAF exports in August, which will make our ProTools mixer very happy. That said, we're getting good with roles for the time being.

John Davidson | President / Creative Director | Magic Feather Inc.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 3:13:46 am

[John Davidson] "My ears are burning! I was gonna stay out of this fight!
"


No. You're currently the Dude.

[John Davidson] "I'm glad we switched and look forward to IA coming out with handles for AAF exports in August, which will make our ProTools mixer very happy. That said, we're getting good with roles for the time being.
"


See, the Dude abides. I can't wait to see what you've got cooked up over there.


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 10:46:00 pm

If you have the time to spend then trying to figure out why an ant goes left rather than right (or vice versa) becomes a valid question.

Tim


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 7:04:53 pm

If people are looking to hire you to use the software they have to edit with, or that is compatible with the software they use...then pay attention to what they are using. Like many others here, I have pretty much only seen companies using FCP 7 or Avid (Premiere, not yet) and hiring editors that know those systems. SO the FCP they are talking about is most likely FCP 7. But you need to find out what version they are talking about to be sure.

I have seen only one case of a company switching to FCX in this town (Los Angeles) and requiring all the editors use that. And the company produces videos for a YouTube channel. Everything else that is broadcast is either Avid or FCP 7. Unless you count the folks at LEVERAGE who switched to FCX...ok, two places.

The point is...find out what people who are hiring are using, then learn that. FCP and FCX are very different, and you need to know which they are talking about.

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 2:15:40 am

[Neil Goodman] "but really i dont think anyone in LA is taking it seriously yet."

Um... I'm in L.A. and I take it seriously. So there's one. :-)


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 4:30:37 am

[Charlie Austin] "Um... I'm in L.A. and I take it seriously. So there's one. :-)"


I think you need some company Charlie.

I noticed that Damian Allen is the instructor on Sound Editing in FCPX on ripple training.

His resume looks like this


"Damian Allen is well known in the visual effects and post-production industry as a leading technique and technology consultant. Most recently he has served as the Chief Technology Officer and Compositing Supervisor for 3DRevolution, a 2D-3D conversion studio who have completed conversion work for Hollywood features such as Immortals (2011) and Cats and Dogs 2 (2010). He concurrently owns and operates Pixerati LLC, a high end design and consultancy company for the Hollywood film industry."

What is he doing wasting his time with this small time product ; )

It was a good course BTW


Return to posts index

Mark Dobson
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 19, 2012 at 7:31:07 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "In this forum you will find a small cluster of fans who will no doubt extoll the virtues of of movie hero, and talk about how they use it on project after project with excellent results. All of which is subjective to say the least.
"


If there is any subject that lends itself to a subjective point of view, editing could well be it.

This forum is successful because it allows both sides of the FCPX debate.

To denigrate people, refer to them as a small cluster of fans, who have taken the time to become proficient in this new software, to refer to it a 'movie hero' says more about a lack of objectivity than anything else.

And referring to FCPX as imovie on steroids doesn't actually move the argument on from those early days back in June 2011.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 2:36:57 am

[Mark Dobson] "To denigrate people, refer to them as a small cluster of fans, who have taken the time to become proficient in this new software, to refer to it a 'movie hero' says more about a lack of objectivity than anything else.

And referring to FCPX as imovie on steroids doesn't actually move the argument on from those early days back in June 2011."


I heartily agree. For folks on *both* sides of the fence. ;-) It's like the modern version of the classic Mac vs. PC "debate". lol

All i know is that I'm using X as much as I can because I like cutting in it. The quirks that sometimes slow me down are more than offset by the speed gained, by me, in other areas. I can move stuff back and forth from FCP 7 fairly easily, I can spit out EDL's (EDL-X is awaiting approval on the app store) and X2Pro should solve the audio export end (handles!) with their next version in a few weeks. But, hey... if I need to go to Pr or MC, no biggie... I know 'em all. It ain't rocket surgery. :-)

So to the the OP... learn 'em all. Ya never know right? Well... except iMovie. I hate iMovie. ;-)


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 3:15:37 am

[Charlie Austin] " heartily agree. For folks on *both* sides of the fence. ;-) It's like the modern version of the classic Mac vs. PC "debate". lol
"


Ain't it just?

[Charlie Austin] "But, hey... if I need to go to Pr or MC, no biggie... I know 'em all. It ain't rocket surgery. :-) "

True enough.


Return to posts index

Christopher Key
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 3:18:33 pm

Wow - I didn't realize the minefield I was stepping into - LOL. Maybe it's a good thing I didn't ask motion or AE?

Some of what I'm hearing sounds kinda scary - especially no mixer? How do you precisely control multiple audio tracks? As far as computer editing goes I started in audio and then moved into video editing - and I like to have a lot of control over audio so I hope that's possible in FCPX.

One of the reasons I abandoned the Mac in the past was the fact that when they upgrade their systems - whatever you had been using is likely to become extinct with no warning. Sounds like this is what happened with FCP7.

Still there seem to be reasons to learn FCPX that will make it worth the time and maybe I'll like it for some projects. It does sound like it won't be what most wanted ads are looking for, but it also sounds like FCP7 is on its way out and in a few years you probably wont be able to run it on the latest Mac operating system - like much of the old Mac software in my closet.

Personally I wish manufacturers would make systems that are more compatible and similar so these debates are unnecessary. An editing system is mainly a tool to rearrange audio and video clips in a sequence, a job that used to be done with a razor blade and tape. In almost any other profession your skill with the hammer is far more important above the hammer brand you use.

Christopher Key


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 3:37:10 pm

[Christopher Key] "How do you precisely control multiple audio tracks?"

Manually key-framing (rubber-banding) levels within the clip. If there are multiple tracks from the same source, you have to break them apart. There are some functions, like Range-based level adjustment, that make mixing easier than it sounds. Audio editing improvements (and hopefully better mixing) are on Apple's feature list for the next update. There's also a healthy set of Logic filters with X.

[Christopher Key] "Sounds like this is what happened with FCP7."

Still going strong in most of the world and likely to work fine with Mountain Lion. After that, all bets are off.

[Christopher Key] " but it also sounds like FCP7 is on its way out"

This past year has been a wait-and-see year. I think you'll see a lot of migration (in all directions) during this coming year.

[Christopher Key] " An editing system is mainly a tool to rearrange audio and video clips in a sequence, a job that used to be done with a razor blade and tape"

In some ways (for better or worse), X is actually a return to those basic concepts, more so than most of the "modern" NLEs.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 4:17:12 pm

[Christopher Key] "Some of what I'm hearing sounds kinda scary - especially no mixer? How do you precisely control multiple audio tracks? As far as computer editing goes I started in audio and then moved into video editing - and I like to have a lot of control over audio so I hope that's possible in FCPX. "

I'm coming from a similar place as you... Started in audio, was a post production mixer for years, and moved to video. FWIW, I really like working with audio in X.

I think the Roles concept, while still in it's infancy and sort of a paradigm shift, is incredibly powerful. I think of roles kind of like mix groups. Combined with compound clips it's really easy to "mix". Assign VO, DIA MX FX, and whatever subroles you want, get your rough mix with keyframes, stick whatever role(s) you want in a compound clip and change the overall level, add fx, whatever. You can't ride a fader in real time yet, but I'm sure that's coming. Like anything else, you can change levels while the sequence is playing... Unlike anything else you can edit - trim, select clips and change levels etc - while the sequence is playing. There's a ton of room for improvements, bug fixes etc, but I'm digging the direction they'r going with it.

I'm really looking forward to more Role functionality such as grouping like roles in the timeline etc. I really don't miss tracks at all. It does take a while to wrap your head around how things work or don't work in X, but once you get it it's very cool. I actually don't even use the primary storyline/magnetic timeline... doesn't suit my needs but it's nice to have the option to not use it. Anyway... learn all the NLE's... they all have free trials so why not right?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools." ~


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 5:40:49 pm

[Christopher Key] "Still there seem to be reasons to learn FCPX that will make it worth the time and maybe I'll like it for some projects."

Sorry, mate. I misunderstood your question. FCP X is definitely worth learning, but from my POV, not first. Its on my ToDo list, but pretty far down, unless the environment changes some. For me, its mostly a curiosity. But that certainly could change. Its why I keep my eye on it.


Return to posts index

Christopher Key
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 8:00:42 pm

Hey Chris, I don't think you misunderstood, and thanks for your replies - as well as everyone else - the conclusion I've come to is that FCPX MAY at some point become popular enough that it will be what the wanted ads are looking for - and since it has a different way of doing things it might be worth it to understand that way - and since I do have a copy of it that I didn't have to pay for - what the heck. I'll learn it - but like you it sinks down on my to do list - I'll be learning it in my free time. It is apparently nothing I need to know at this moment and usually I learn new skills on a need to know basis.

Christopher Key


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 5:51:29 pm

FCP7 is dead. Forget it. Apple doesn't support it anymore.
PP6 is similar to FCP7, because it is trackbased. But that's about it.

I have moved on to FCPX and it is exactly what a modern editing software needs. It is not compatible with old workflows, and probably doesn't have a strong foot in the market, but I wouldn't be shocked if 2 years from now it is just where FCP7 was 14 months ago.

FCPX is much easier to learn. So if you want to learn a NLE for the future it is great. if you want freelance jobs NOW then you are better off with a traditional one



Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 6:10:41 pm

"but I wouldn't be shocked if 2 years from now it is just where FCP7 was 14 months ago."

I would. But then again, I'm in Hollywood, so I'm part of the market FCX isn't aimed at. I highly doubt FCX will ever see the proliferation that FCP 7 did in this town.

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 7:34:03 pm

[Shane Ross] "I'm in Hollywood, so I'm part of the market FCX isn't aimed at. I highly doubt FCX will ever see the proliferation that FCP 7 did in this town."

Had to randomly chime in here... You may or may not be right about the proliferation part, but I'd respectfully disagree about X not being "aimed" at professionals. It's absolutely not like the fairly easy switch people made from Avid to FC7, and there are some features they still need to fix/add. But as far as actually editing, it's as "pro" as you want it to be. :-) The biggest deal for me is being able to easily send elements out to someplace like New Wave for finish, and I don't think that's too far off. In my worthless opinion anyway. ;-)

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 8:03:12 pm

[Charlie Austin] " You may or may not be right about the proliferation part, but I'd respectfully disagree about X not being "aimed" at professionals."

I didn't say it wasn't aimed at professionals. I said it wasn't aimed at my specific market in Hollywood. Because it lacks pretty much every feature we need. EDL support (yes, we still work with EDLs and deliver EDLs), OMF or AAF support for DAWs (Apple didn't do it...third parties did). Capture from non-firewire tape based decks. Oh...yeah, they rely on third parties to solve that too. It is designed for people to do everything INSIDE the app, including color correction (Yeah, speaking of THAT tool...aimed at beginners, not professionals) and audio mixing.

The Hollywood workflow is that of collaboration. Editor...colorist...audio mixer...VFX. We also still use tape input and output on a regular basis.

This app isn't aimed at us...it is aimed at OTHER editing professions. Sure, a lot of people have gotten it to work for their specific broadcast markets...and with the aid of third parties who fill the gaps Apple couldn't be bothered dealing with, some in my neck of the woods have gotten that to work. But it's all a shoe horn. FCP 7 did ALL of this, and a lot more. It did everything I needed, everything a lot of people needed. But then FCX comes out lacking a majority of what I need...and even with the updates they have done, they still lack a majority of what I need done. Again...relying on third parties to fix what they cannot be bothered with.

It works for most...not for me. Not for most LA productions...and I cannot see it ever gaining the same market share that FCP Legacy did.

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 9:20:00 pm

[Shane Ross] "I didn't say it wasn't aimed at professionals. I said it wasn't aimed at my specific market in Hollywood. Because it lacks pretty much every feature we need. EDL support (yes, we still work with EDLs and deliver EDLs), OMF or AAF support for DAWs (Apple didn't do it...third parties did). Capture from non-firewire tape based decks. Oh...yeah, they rely on third parties to solve that too. It is designed for people to do everything INSIDE the app, including color correction (Yeah, speaking of THAT tool...aimed at beginners, not professionals) and audio mixing.

I'm not evangelizing here, just trying to correct what I see as misinformation. Third parties or not, you can do all that stuff with FCP X. I'm not saying it's seamless yet, it absolutely isn't, but it's do-able if you need to. I happen to think it's going to get better, and I say this as someone who needs this stuff as well.

[Shane Ross] This app isn't aimed at us...it is aimed at OTHER editing professions. Sure, a lot of people have gotten it to work for their specific broadcast markets...and with the aid of third parties who fill the gaps Apple couldn't be bothered dealing with, some in my neck of the woods have gotten that to work. But it's all a shoe horn. FCP 7 did ALL of this, and a lot more. It did everything I needed, everything a lot of people needed. But then FCX comes out lacking a majority of what I need...and even with the updates they have done, they still lack a majority of what I need done. Again...relying on third parties to fix what they cannot be bothered with.


Well... first, I don't see it as a bad thing that you need to go to third parties to do some of this stuff. Not everyone needs it, and if all ya gotta do is spend a few extra buck to get the added functionality you require, assuming it works well, who cares? Keeps the cost of adding seats down.

Second, I suppose I'm looking at FCPX with a slightly different perspective. X is really a version 1 application, and in comparison, version 1 of the original FCP did exactly *none* of the things you listed above. Everything was a shoehorned kludge. Everything. I was trying it out then cuz' i liked the timeline/interface better than my Avid, and all I heard was pretty much exactly what everyone is saying now about X. But I liked it, and cut some stuff on it, and somehow managed to make it work and finish a spot. That was in Feb 2000, about 10 months after FCP came out. Not long after that I got the company I was at to start switching over, other companies started switching and now, FCP is a de facto standard. I've got the exact same vibe now with X.

I guess I just get annoyed when folks (in general, not specifically you BTW) rag on Apple, when all they're really doing is exactly what they did with the original Final Cut. We'll see how it works this time I guess... :-)

-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~


Return to posts index

Dave Jenkins
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 3:58:51 am

Yes, but they should have brought it out as another product! As FCP 10 people (me) had certain expectations. If it had come out as a 1.0 product it would have been looked at differently in my opinion. I look forward to the next update but is NOT version 10!!!!

[Charlie Austin] "I guess I just get annoyed when folks (in general, not specifically you BTW) rag on Apple, when all they're really doing is exactly what they did with the original Final Cut. We'll see how it works this time I guess... :-)
"


Dajen Productions, Santa Barbara, CA
MacPro Two 2.66GHz Quad Core - AJA Kona LHe
FCS 3 OS X 10.7.4
FCP X, Adobe CS6, Logic Pro, Squeeze, Filemaker


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 20, 2012 at 9:20:31 pm

[Shane Ross] "It works for most...not for me. Not for most LA productions...and I cannot see it ever gaining the same market share that FCP Legacy did."

I think Shane is right that X won't move much toward the traditional "Hollywood way" of working.

The more interesting question, perhaps, is whether Hollywood will move more toward the X way of working over time?

Will X (in year 5) be sitting in a small suite in Hollywood exporting regularly scheduled network programming directly onto the satellites and internet - toe to toe with HBO and NBC?

That's something I actually wouldn't bet against. After all, it's not like the company that produces X lacks program development muscle. ; )

Will "Network Broadcast TV" may become just another delivery target on everyones Share menu.

Time will tell.

"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

Christopher Key
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 4:58:24 am

I just watched this video intro to FCPX at http://fcp.co/final-cut-pro/tutorials/780-final-cut-x-moving-forward-in-vid... (found a link on the cow) and now I see what some of the fuss is about - this is definitely a new style of working - there were some interesting features, some of it seems more complicated rather than easier, and some of it seems like old time functionality in a new wrapper (instead of grouping its a compound clip) with some new lingo attached - almost as if they just wanted to be different - I hate that - Of course I haven't actually tried doing an edit with it yet but I'm planning to - I just shot an audition for some local chefs and have one small edit left to complete for them - so I think I'll try putting it together in FCPX and see if I can get it to work.

Christopher Key


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 8:10:40 am

[Christopher Key] "some of it seems more complicated rather than easier, and some of it seems like old time functionality in a new wrapper (instead of grouping its a compound clip) with some new lingo attached - almost as if they just wanted to be different - I hate that - Of course I haven't actually tried doing an edit with it yet but I'm planning to "

The "Wrapper" is much more than grouping. The compound clip is a timeline in itself and a great organizational tool (e.g. to control 8 or 16 audio-tracks within clips) and the main force in multi cam edits (where the compound turns into a multi clip container with its own functionality).

The only lingo issue is the PROJECT, which is a TIMELINE. I can live with the event name, but project is just wrong, agreed. If they did it to be different does´t matter really, but it seems that way and it does´t work. We still call the timeline timeline here, although we are used to the term "event" by now.

I suggest to you and the OP to get a trial and watch some training (I can recommend Ripple Training, but there are others and also free tutorials out there). FCPX is fundamental different, that´s why these discussions become what they are. But it is fundamental right for modern workflows.



Return to posts index

Christopher Key
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 4:37:16 pm

The compound file container does seem convenient for mutli-camera shoots - something I didn't think of when watching the video.

Christopher Key


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 7:15:52 pm

[alban egger] "The only lingo issue is the PROJECT, which is a TIMELINE. I can live with the event name, but project is just wrong, agreed. If they did it to be different does´t matter really, but it seems that way and it does´t work. We still call the timeline timeline here, although we are used to the term "event" by now."

alban,

I know what you're saying, but I think Apple has this right. In X, it's only a "timeline" when you're working directly IN the storyline editor.

When you "back out" of your timeline in X, you're in the Project Library - which is essentially an expression of all your timelines - and more. It's a place where you can see, scan, judge and critically, "export or publish" your work.

At the project library level, you can't change your content. That's reserved for the Tiimeline. Plus the term "timeline" is too familiar to too many editors and the term has traditionally indicated the disconnected, separate entities in most NLEs - and in X, "timelines" are far, far from disconnected and separate.

I agree that when you're working INSIDE the storyline - you ARE in a timeline, so using that term there is perfectly appropriate.

But when you're working in other parts of X, such as the Project Library, the term "timeline" poorly reflects the new thinking about project organization that X represents.

New terms for new approaches, 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

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 8:40:21 am

[Shane Ross] I said it wasn't aimed at my specific market in Hollywood. Because it lacks pretty much every feature we need. EDL support (yes, we still work with EDLs and deliver EDLs), OMF or AAF support for DAWs (Apple didn't do it...third parties did). Capture from non-firewire tape based decks. Oh...yeah, they rely on third parties to solve that too. It is designed for people to do everything INSIDE the app, including color correction (Yeah, speaking of THAT tool...aimed at beginners, not professionals) and audio mixing.

The Hollywood workflow is that of collaboration. Editor...colorist...audio mixer...VFX. We also still use tape input and output on a regular basis.


You use the word Hollywood as a trademark. Over here in Europe Hollywood is the world of Batman, The Avengers and The Hobbit. I wonder how many tapes will be used to distribute The Hobbit, shot on two REDs in a 3D rig.

What you talk about is a network environment stuck in a 2003 workflow. I am sure Apple did NOT aim at that market, because its workflow will die sooner than later. Our national broadcaster is still producing on IMX tapes in standard definition, although they broadcast in HD. But they at least acknowledge they choose to stay in their workflow (editing with FAST, which is from 1999), because the switch is so expensive, not because their way is better, faster or cheaper on a daily basis.

You talk about a workflow that works. Fine. Agreed. FCPX won´t fit in there right now. It never will on its own.

But for producers who are on a tapeless workflow producing docs and films shot (maybe globally in 50Hz and 60Hz) on C300s, F3s, GoPros, Phantoms and 5Ds all in one EVENT edited in different projects for different distribution-lanes (in-house broadcast, sold broadcast, web and sale) FCPX offers a flexibility FCP7 can´t compete with.
We are working on a global campaign for a few months now. Every spot is shot on F3s and C300s. Edited and mastered in FCPX, graded in a post-house, audio done elsewhere in ProTools, graphics come in from After Effects.......I don´t know where the problem in collaboration should be? Oh yeah. We had to press Export XML instead of export EDL.....that´s about it. Tough. Phew.

When you diss the FCPX colourboard....have you ever tried it and tried FCP7 3-way corrector next to it. HUGE difference in QUALITY! 8-bit vs. 16-bit. You gotta be kidding calling FCP7´s color-correction professional - in 2012.

Collaboration? The future is XML, not EDL. Resolve, not Color. Probably AAF not OMF. Apple dropped the floppy, the FW400 port and other tools we thought essential. But usually soon after we realize they were right. The floppy? FW400? What were we thinking.

So what am I trying to say: If you have a workflow that works, fine. But that does not mean the new way is wrong, just because it is different.
Disclaimer: I don´t say it is right for everyone or the holy grail in NLEs (yet), but for me it works better than my previous NLEs (SpeedRazor, Fast/Liquid, Edius, FCP).



Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 2:04:55 pm

[alban egger] "But for producers who are on a tapeless workflow producing docs and films shot (maybe globally in 50Hz and 60Hz) on C300s, F3s, GoPros, Phantoms and 5Ds all in one EVENT edited in different projects for different distribution-lanes (in-house broadcast, sold broadcast, web and sale) FCPX offers a flexibility FCP7 can´t compete with."

Alban,

One of the projects that I'm cutting this year is shot on Epic, C300, FS100, GoPro, 5D, some HDCamSR (and a few other formats) in a variety of frame rates.

I'm cutting it (like the other projects I'm working on this year) in FCP7.

What "flexibility" am I missing?

Franz.


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 3:06:18 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "One of the projects that I'm cutting this year is shot on Epic, C300, FS100, GoPro, 5D, some HDCamSR (and a few other formats) in a variety of frame rates.

I'm cutting it (like the other projects I'm working on this year) in FCP7.

What "flexibility" am I missing?"


Well, Franz, just a small example: Let´s assume you are editing in a 1080p25 distribution timeline.
the C300 shoots 100 clips in 720p50 (so you have slow-motion and audio), a lot of over cranked 720p25 (with S&F recording enabled and mixed between 32 and 48 fps) and the rest in 1080p25.
In FCP7 to go the correct way of conforming the clips 720p50 clips so they play in slow-motion you would have to identify them, duplicate the original clips (to keep them untouched), then import the clones into cinema-tools and conform them (which is a destructive process!) and then re-import into FCP7. This will take you a while if all operators shoot that way and it happens a lot in our documentary productions.

In FCPX cinema-tools is implemented (just like the 16-bit engine of Color, the Logic effects etc). I have mapped the letter "4" as my conform tool. So I have all these mixed clips in my event and drop them into the timeline. Here I can decide if I want them to be 50p (and keep the natural speed and audio) or 25p (making it slomo and I now have to decide what to do about the audio). It is a button in the timeline. No roundtrip to cinema tools.

I have just finished production of a 9 day-shoot with 4000 clips (31 hours) and a lot is NOT in 25p and I never ever have to worry about it.

This is a small example (which can be huge on the time you spend in organizing your media) and once you get into key wording, pre-selecting and sorting footage it gets more and more in favor of FCPX. And that´s before you even start the editing process.

The only problem FCPX could have in your setup is ingesting the HDCamSR footage. Something we would have to solve out-of-house anyway, because we never owned any HDCam equipment; always rented.

EDIT: Since I was at this I made a small tutorial about this procedure: http://www.eggermedia.com/blog/2012/7/21/conforming-50p-without-cinema-tool...


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 3:42:03 pm

Alban,


Thanks for you response.

(First, one side note, "conform" in cinema tools is not strictly a destructive process since it can easily be reversed and the data retains its original integrity.)

In terms of frame rate flexibility, the integration in FCPX as you've described it does seem more adept than FCP7, though I don't see how it fundamentally differs from speed effects (one click and a dialog, with copy and paste ability).

(On another side note, our frame rate conversions (should there be any) will (likely) be handled by the finishing lab. For fractional conversions I still find hardware conversions superior to software, though I would be open to being disabused of this prejudice.)

But, as you've said, you have described a small example.

The project I described is just pushing past 100 hours of source material with more shoots to come, and this is typical for the projects I work on. The mix of formats is also typical.

When I read about restricted timeline durations, the difficulties of the timeline paradigm, an underdeveloped audio mixing paradigm, and uncertainty with compound clips, I am not enticed by small examples. I'm not won over by the use of meta-data as a selection tool (though I understand others find it useful), but I am excited by the new push in terms of integrating meta-data into editing software (FCPX is not alone in needing development on that front).

Be ye not mistaken! - I have frustrations with FCP7 (as I have since FCP2). But my larger point is that when I was considering these projects, FCP7 was still the most attractive solution - flexibility being a large part of that assessment.


Franz.


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 6:52:17 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "The project I described is just pushing past 100 hours of source material with more shoots to come, and this is typical for the projects I work on. The mix of formats is also typical.

When I read about restricted timeline durations, the difficulties of the timeline paradigm, an underdeveloped audio mixing paradigm, and uncertainty with compound clips, I am not enticed by small examples. I'm not won over by the use of meta-data as a selection tool (though I understand others find it useful), but I am excited by the new push in terms of integrating meta-data into editing software (FCPX is not alone in needing development on that front)."


Well my current project has 31 hours. Nothing FCPX cares about. It works just like it does with 2 clips.

Timeline duration limitations? Never heard that one. Tried it now. Put 4 hours into a project/timeline and made a compound out of it. dropped another few hours. made a compound of all again. dropped more hours and compounded the lot. In the end I had over 15 hours in one timeline compounded about 7 times into each other. I can skim in the timeline and in the project browser. FCPX does´t really care. It takes about 40 seconds until FCPX responds when you drop 4 hours into a timeline. That´s the only holdup.

difficulties of the timeline paradigm.....as you can imagine I disagree there. There are workarounds needed in certain situations, but once you used X you are forced to many more workarounds in FCP7 when going back. And soon you realize they are not workarounds, but different approaches to the subject just like PP6, Avid and Edius do different tasks different.

audiomix is currently underdeveloped. Agree.

uncertainty with compound clips? What is that about? They work great for me. What´s uncertain there? Compounds are even a great tool to mimic tracks if needed/wanted.

Metadata: Just like you I do not use it (enough) on import. Anyway not more than the way FCP7 can use it (camera name etc). The organizational tools that make X better are the metadata the editor creates. Range based keywords, smart collections and the way you can "bin" your footage easier than in other NLEs. Sure you can sub clip and duplicate in FCP, but X does it much more elegant and the event is better structured with a better visual overview than the bins in FCP7.

I am afraid some here still are thinking 10.0.0 when talking about FCPX. A lot has changed. A lot of uncertainty and bugs are gone. A lot of different workflows have proven to be just fine in X and most requests I see are easily handled. Most, Chris Harlan for example has some specific audio-requests, which X can´t easily handle yet. At least from my point of view, because I simply don´t do 5.1/7.1-editing.



Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 8:03:02 pm

[alban egger] "Well my current project has 31 hours. Nothing FCPX cares about. It works just like it does with 2 clips."


Alban,

Thanks for this.

Most of the reports I've read from those working with X seem to report short timelines as optimal (I did a quick search but can't find any references - so maybe I imagined that).

There are certainly few reports of people using X with large amounts of footage over long edits. So if you have experience, please post.

As for the rest - I'll resist repeating myself here (timeline, audio, bins vs. sequences, compound clip issues all covered many times), except to say that it hasn't yet enticed me to experiment.


Franz.


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 8:25:10 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "There are certainly few reports of people using X with large amounts of footage over long edits. So if you have experience, please post.

As for the rest - I'll resist repeating myself here (timeline, audio, bins vs. sequences, compound clip issues all covered many times), except to say that it hasn't yet enticed me to experiment."


What is a long project to you? I made a 52-minute sports-documentary for a festival that was done in 10.0.0!! And it worked. It had 7.000clips, about 55 hours footage.
I had problems on my 2008 MBP with 4GB RAM, but my 2009 MacPro with 16 GB had no issues at all. Now my 2011 MBP edits big projects fine as well. So hardware might have been an issue from early adopters.

16GB RAM are needed for long-edits. That´s about it. Since 10.0.4 it is a very complete feature set with 3rd party apps filling some specialists´ holes (e.g. OMF out, Xto7, 7toX).

I am also repeating myself here ;-) but a lot of the perception of FCPX comes from the first 3 days of its launch and urban myths that evolved from that, not from hands-on experiences.

A lot of my stuff is broadcast as 26-minute pieces, but I have no doubt a two hour-edit from 10.000 clips or a series of ten 45-minute films would work just fine in X within one event.



Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 9:24:24 pm

[alban egger] " Since 10.0.4 it is a very complete feature set with 3rd party apps filling some specialists´ holes (e.g. OMF out, Xto7, 7toX)."

Alban,

"Complete feature set" is a subjective term. There have been issues reported with some of these third party solutions. Have you used them a lot?

[alban egger] "What is a long project to you?"

A lot of posts I've read are by people working regularly on short pieces (10mins or less). By long form I mean (arbitrarily) an hour or longer, usually with high shooting ratios, and often with long edit periods. Your experience seems to fit into this.

[alban egger] "a lot of the perception of FCPX comes from the first 3 days of its launch and urban myths that evolved from that"

I read here regularly and try to keep up on the latest - I don't perpetuate myths. There are people using X successfully, that seems clear. On the other hand I think your trouble free experience with X is unusual, at least in terms of posts I read here.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 9:47:19 pm

[alban egger] " I have no doubt a two hour-edit from 10.000 clips or a series of ten 45-minute films would work just fine in X within one event."

Alban,

... a sampling of some of the threads I've read concerning issues in long projects:

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/37972#37972
This one is about "massive amounts of footage" (by which they mean only 700 Gigs) and "long timelines" (over 30mins as well as discussion of the events folder getting too bloated (from 75 scenes).

This was Craig Seeman's assessment in that thread (you may have a different one):
So the digestible version would be:
• A Job can have multiple Events in many cases if large.
• Event based Compound Clips are work areas that are to be dropped into Projects/Timelines and broken apart, not used as Clips.
• We need to examine how to handle Event based Compound Clips when they need to be divided, to avoid bloat.
….We do need to think more about workflow for large projects.


http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/28761#28761
Steve Connor, Hunter Weeks posted more positive experiences with larger projects.

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/36301#36301
on disk access issues, "background" rendering, "native" editing

http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/34096#34096
regarding timeline mechanics and also the bloating issue with compound clips

Some of those maybe 10.0.3 - I think most are 10.0.4


Franz.


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 22, 2012 at 7:28:37 am

[Franz Bieberkopf] "
http://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/37972#37972
This one is about "massive amounts of footage" (by which they mean only 700 Gigs) and "long timelines" (over 30mins as well as discussion of the events folder getting too bloated (from 75 scenes)."


In this project the problem was (from flying over it, I have work to do also ;-)) that the OP had 700 gigs of media that wanted to be transcoded.
I had an event with 1,2 Gigs without problems. Of course when you tell your Mac to process 1,2Gigs while you edit with the same data it will cause problems in any NLE. In many workflows the material gets transcoded or re-wrapped before actually ingesting it into the NLE. X allows you to do that on import or later. I often Import the native material and the over night tell X to optimize the event. The fact that background-processing is not really background-processing is probably more a Mac OS problem than anything else. Where´s my Amiga these days?

I see no reason to split events into two just to keep them smaller. I have 16GB RAM in a octa-core-2009 Mac Pro (Lion) and it works even with FW800 drives. My colleague uses an iMac, 32GB, Thunderbolt drives and X is flying even faster on his machine. Skimming is very responsive on that machine even in big libraries with Waveforms on (I turn waveforms off in the event, because I miss the extra RAM).

I can recreate a bloated Project with massive Compound clips, but so far have not seen an issue with it. But to be honest I usually have compounds of max. 20-40 clips (e.g. the sound-effects of a timeline for final mixing). Usually my compounds are just a handul of clips. But I can have dozens of these small compounds without issues.
X demands hardware. Mine is probably the lowest limit. Many of the problems I read are found there (especially RAM). 64-bits take their toll.

If Apple adds audio-mixing and MXF-export I will be happy and the feature set will be pretty much complete for me ;-)



Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 8:06:57 pm

(Edit: double post)


Return to posts index

Mathieu Ghekiere
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 3:53:09 pm

Hi Alban,

as a FCP7 and FCP X user, just curious: which button are you referring to?
Is it in the Retime tools?

Thanks,


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 5:59:25 pm

Mathieu,
Read this, I explain it there
http://www.eggermedia.com/blog/2012/7/21/conforming-50p-without-cinema-tool...



Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 3:48:35 pm

[alban egger] "The Hobbit, shot on two REDs in a 3D rig."

This is an excellent post Alban.

I have pondered this front the beginning. When I think of big time Hollywood projects, Who is shooting that stuff on tape?

We don't even use tape in my smaller market anymore.

When X first came out I thought the knock from Hollywood would be weather or not this product could handle 5k footage well, and if it couldn't they would say it's not ready.

I didn't imagine people saying it's not ready because it's looking past the old technology of tape.
(that's not to imply that's all folks are saying about it not being ready, I'm just talking about the tape thing)

When I think of tape, I think of someone stuck with old equipment because they don't have the budget to keep up. I don't think of top end.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 4:02:36 pm

[tony west] "Who is shooting that stuff on tape?"


Tony,


Ideology aside - that is probably a more interesting and genuine question to ask:

Who is using tape now? How is it being used?

If you're interested in that question,this forum is probably a good place to survey.

No doubt part of that answer is people "stuck with old technology"; it is not the whole answer.

You also ignore the question of dealing with materil that isn't newly acquired - ie vast archival resources that are on tape.

My own recent experience with tape has been with WesCam aerials which were delivered as a mix of HDCamSR tape and ProRes4444 files.


Franz.


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 22, 2012 at 12:30:09 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "ie vast archival resources that are on tape."

This makes sense. There is a ton of old footage still on beta and other tape formats.

Wescam offers Red and HD files also so I'm thinking much of their new stuff they shoot would be file.


What will folks do with all their tape when they stop making those beta machines at some point.

Shouldn't people start digitizing their stuff for the long run?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 6:17:34 pm

[tony west] "[alban egger] "The Hobbit, shot on two REDs in a 3D rig."

This is an excellent post Alban."


Except that in actual practice, you couldn't cut Hobbit on X in its current form. The film is being cut on multiple Media Composer systems with shared storage and conformed with Quantel Pablo.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 6:35:45 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Except that in actual practice, you couldn't cut Hobbit on X in its current form. The film is being cut on multiple Media Composer systems with shared storage and conformed with Quantel Pablo."

I didn´t claim it was edited on X!! I said the "Hollywood-trademark" has nothing to do with tape based network workflows. And FCP7 is just as far away from The Hobbit as X is.



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 6:47:18 pm

[alban egger] " didn´t claim it was edited on X!! I said the "Hollywood-trademark" has nothing to do with tape based network workflows. And FCP7 is just as far away from The Hobbit as X is."

Agreed. I didn't mean to imply that you had. I simply took your point as being that Hobbit was an example of the future of file-based post and that by extension, X was somehow better suited for this world. Sorry if I misunderstood your original point.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Richards
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 3:33:17 pm

[Shane Ross] "I highly doubt FCX will ever see the proliferation that FCP 7 did in this town."

Nobody does blacklisting like Hollywood.





Too soon?

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 7:14:03 pm

[Andrew Richards] "[Shane Ross] "I highly doubt FCX will ever see the proliferation that FCP 7 did in this town."

Nobody does blacklisting like Hollywood.
"


Knowing some of the people who lived through that, I'd just have to say that is a pretty cheep shot, and in no way comparable to anything happening with X.


Return to posts index

Andrew Richards
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 8:02:32 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Knowing some of the people who lived through that, I'd just have to say that is a pretty cheep shot, and in no way comparable to anything happening with X."

Too soon indeed then. That was supposed to be black comedy, I know very well how bad a time that was.

Best,
Andy


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 8:14:03 pm

[Andrew Richards] "Too soon indeed then. That was supposed to be black comedy, I know very well how bad a time that was.
"


And I responded far too sharply. There was just so much anger for so long. In film school, I had teachers that had been black-listed. Al Levitt was my second year writing teacher, and what happened to him and his career was just awful. On the other hand, "Hollywood" took care of him, too. Folks like Walt Disney knowingly hired him under his pseudonym, for which, he was ever grateful. Of course, Al's been dead for almost a decade now, so maybe I should let it go some.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 21, 2012 at 10:47:23 pm

Here are some general observations I've had in working with X and I feel that these points are part of the reason that many have had such wildly different results.

1. X loves RAM. Load your machine up to the max. The difference between 16GB and a full 32GB is significant and noticeable, especially with effects that are left unrendered.

2. X does not mix certain codecs and frame rates well. Place Animation codec over a ProRes codec and the playback chokes. Place a 720p/59.94 clip inside a 23.98 timeline and the playback chokes.

3. The more junk you have in your timeline (like H.264 files straight from a Canon 5D), the more issues you will have in large projects. Stick with ProRes variations for best results.

4. The translation utilities do not work consistently. When they do, it's great. When they don't, there's no workaround to fix it. Right now I've had routine Xto7 translation problems with any clip from a C300 that's gone through conversion using either FCP X's Import from Camera or FCP 7's Log and transfer (and imported as an MOV file into X for editing).

5. The difference between how actual timeline editing functions using the magnetic (A), trim (T) and position (P) modes is very significant. Magnetic and Position have absolutely no parallel in any other NLE. These are two different editing styles built into the same software. All three modes are needed to use X well.

6. The better performance you get from the drives where Projects and Events are written (not necessarily the media), the better the application will respond to you.

7. Some UI feedback to the user is inherently slower in X than other NLEs because of the built-in UI animation. Sometimes you have to slow down to let X do "its thing". It does not react well to being "slammed around" as you can with FCP 7 or Media Composer for example. Maybe also Premiere Pro.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 22, 2012 at 7:12:43 am

[Oliver Peters] "5. The difference between how actual timeline editing functions using the magnetic (A), trim (T) and position (P) modes is very significant. Magnetic and Position have absolutely no parallel in any other NLE. These are two different editing styles built into the same software. All three modes are needed to use X well."

I read your list and also the threads you opened which Franz now pointed me at.
On your list are several obvious recommendations that have nothing to do with X, but NLEs in general. Of course a fast drive helps (SSD or Thunderbolt), of course it is better to optimize h.264 material before editing especially in long projects where you end up with hundreds of GoPro, Contour and DSLR clips in between high-qulaity broadcast formats.

And the editing modes have to be used in all NLEs. Every NLE needs a slip, a ripple and sometimes a position tool. It is a mix of your subjective preference and your project and the state of it (rough layout or end tuning) if you like ripple trimming or the position tool (which is simply wild dropping of content into the timeline). I see no difference.

The difference in the magnetic timeline is that you don´t have to worry about the connections up and down the line. A trim here doesn´t affect sync 30 minutes later. There are no clip collisions and everything stays in correspondence to each other as you left it. And you don´t need to lock or select tracks for all that. So to me this is a feature, not a problem. Because if I want to have sync with a audio track or want to keep a static project-duration I either use "P", "T", secondary story lines, compound clips or other measures. X is very flexible to achieve exactly what I need no matter if it is a 50-minute doc, a music-video or a corporate same-day-edit. But it takes a bit of time to get used to it of course. But it took me more time to "get" FCP5 when I started with it coming from Fast and Edius.



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 22, 2012 at 1:50:49 pm

[alban egger] "On your list are several obvious recommendations that have nothing to do with X, but NLEs in general."

Sure, but I feel some of these affect X more than others. I see a marked difference in X with 32GB of RAM versus 16GB with unrendered effects. I don't see this same difference with Media Composer or Premiere Pro, even though they are all 64-bit NLEs. SSD should help X more, since the app has to write to the databases far more frequently than the others. For example, at one facility, I cannot write project/events to the SAN volume without serious issues. Not sure why. Writing to the local drives (with media on the SAN) is fine. No such problem with Premiere or FCP7. My point is, that when some editors indicate problems with X, it often has to do with the system.

[alban egger] "And the editing modes have to be used in all NLEs. Every NLE needs a slip, a ripple and sometimes a position tool."

I agree, but just feel that A, T, P are completely different modes and affect your editing practices in ways that comparable functions don't in other NLEs. Not a judgement, just something newcomers need to understand.

[alban egger] "The difference in the magnetic timeline is that you don´t have to worry about the connections up and down the line. A trim here doesn´t affect sync 30 minutes later. "

Yes and no. Here's a situation I frequently deal with. I edit a music bed as a connected clip. Then I make a music edit to have the piece end properly, which creates a minimum of 2 connected clips. If I do a "magnetic" trim between where the two halves of the music are connected, it will change the music edit point. A standard NLE doesn't cause this to happen, because of tracks. So with X, I also have to think about whether to compound the music or make a secondary storyline. Or I have to alter the connecting point of the second portion before doing the trim. Again, not a matter of better or worse, just different and something to understand.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 22, 2012 at 5:39:57 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Here's a situation I frequently deal with. I edit a music bed as a connected clip. Then I make a music edit to have the piece end properly, which creates a minimum of 2 connected clips. If I do a "magnetic" trim between where the two halves of the music are connected, it will change the music edit point. A standard NLE doesn't cause this to happen, because of tracks. So with X, I also have to think about whether to compound the music or make a secondary storyline. Or I have to alter the connecting point of the second portion before doing the trim. "

Well in these cases I use compounds, because often I end up with three music parts (Intro, Music extension or shortening piece and ending). I can freely move the parts until the rhythm and the bars fit to each other, fee them as needed, select them all, OPT-G, Done.

In track based this was more complicated. I usually had atmo in 3+4, music in 5+6 and VO in 7. Now when I have 3,4 and 7 occupied I couldn´t align the music parts above each other to align their waveforms to find the bars/rhythm quickly. And this is the reason why I find track based more constrained once all tracks are occupied. You need to move the music-pieces down or sideways to be able to align them on 4 or 6 tracks. In the magnetic timeline everything moves out of the way during the process and then you compound it and that seems way more intuitive than tracks (to me!!!)



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 22, 2012 at 11:55:45 pm

[alban egger] "Well in these cases I use compounds, because often I end up with three music parts (Intro, Music extension or shortening piece and ending). I can freely move the parts until the rhythm and the bars fit to each other, fee them as needed, select them all, OPT-G, Done."

Correct. Except that when you make changes in the middle, then you have to change the music relationship. If you have already created a compound, you then have to break it apart again in order to make the changes in context to the rest of the material. Adjust the length/overlaps and then compound again. Extra steps, IMHO. I'm not saying it's bad, just a matter of each editor figuring out what works best for them. In all cases, though, it completely deviates from standard design in all other NLEs and DAWs.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 22, 2012 at 10:54:28 pm

Oliver,

Nice post.

These are sensible and useful observations and will definitely help people clarify their thinking."

Well done, 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

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 22, 2012 at 11:56:13 pm

[Bill Davis] "These are sensible and useful observations and will definitely help people clarify their thinking"

Thanks.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jules bowman
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 23, 2012 at 12:04:07 am

Are apple still supporting FC10?

Wow.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 23, 2012 at 12:08:59 am

[Jules bowman] "Are apple still supporting FC10?"

Is this just a snarky comment? You'll note that FCP X is featured in their MBP TV ads. That's a pretty solid show of confidence (and commitment) by Apple.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jules bowman
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 23, 2012 at 12:47:55 am

Yes. Though also a serious dig at Apple's philosophy in my own way. It is also a general fatigue at some of the evangelising that goes on about FC10 which tends to be rather, um, selective in its assessment of FC10 and the general associated 'evolve dinosaurs you are wrong' commentary that comes with it.

FC10 is new and shiny, sure, but it is also incredibly flawed, buggy, and in my opinion, which is the only one that truly matters to me, is like trying to play/sing a song with two guitar strings and a gob stopper in your mouth... though you do get to perform it standing on your head, so yay, evolution rocks!!!

And no, sorry, I won't note it, I don't really watch much TV anymore and when I do it is on the iPlayer so no adverts, thank god.

My iPad is a great way to browse the web in bed though. Love tech gadgets. Frivolous fun. So yay, apple rocks too!!!


Return to posts index

Benjamin Mullins
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Jul 23, 2012 at 9:19:35 am

Hi Christopher,

If you are interested in learning FCPX then check out Larry Jordan's training material. It's as good as it gets for learning new software really.

As to whether or not you should invest a great deal of time in X is another question. Personally right now I am not, simply because there is not a demand for it. If that changes, so will my approach.

I did go through Larry's entire set of tutorials when X was first released and I spent several months using it for personal projects but I enjoy FCP7, Premiere & Avid MC a LOT more. Considering the market share that FCP7 had/has it says a lot that people are still debating whether or not to even learn X a year after it's release.

Ben.



Return to posts index

Christopher Key
Re: FCPX Newbie - is learning FCPX worth the time?
on Aug 4, 2012 at 7:10:40 pm

I'll look at the training materials - but I did complete a simple edit in FCPX and I suppose I'm just scratching the surface - but for visual based editing on the fly this is a pretty cool way to work - I can see that this might tick some people off because it could be kind of like the drum machine for drummers - it really simplifies the editing process. It didn't actually save me any time over my usual workflow but there were some things I liked about it and I can see how this could grow in popularity. Probably not the best tool if you have lots off footage that needs to be cut up to exact specs, but an interesting program.

Christopher Key


Return to posts index

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