FORUMS: list search recent posts

Coremelt's SliceX is awesome

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Jeremy Garchow
Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 8, 2012 at 9:27:08 pm

Finally. Real bezier masks in a modern NLE without hassle.

This is great. I am glad that plugin makers can bring this level of functionality to FCPX.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lsah20zBer1qzrlhgo1_400.gif


Product link: http://www.coremelt.com/products/slicex.html


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 8, 2012 at 9:46:35 pm

Thanks for posting that, very nice addition to the toolset there!

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Alan Okey
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 8, 2012 at 11:04:21 pm

"Finally?"

Smoke (and DS, I believe) has had this for years. "Finally" at this price point, perhaps.

I think Apple, Adobe and Avid are way behind the times for not including advanced masking tools within their NLE products. I'm really surprised that NLEs haven't absorbed more of the tools that are taken for granted in today's compositing apps. As we all know, NLEs aren't used strictly for cutting anymore, especially in the low to middle end of the market.

I'm very surprised that Apple didn't simply combine Motion 5 and FCP X into one application. There's really no reason that Motion's tools couldn't be integrated into FCP X, even as separate "rooms," etc. Then again, I say this as a Smoke fanatic and a compositor/editor, so perhaps it's not as cut and dried as I'd like to believe.


Return to posts index


Tim Wilson
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 12:08:39 am

[Alan Okey] "...Avid are way behind the times for not including advanced masking tools "

Avid's Animatte is a pretty sophisticated set of integrated masking tools. Here's a picture from an overview our pal Oliver Peters wrote in 2009.



I haven't checked it recently vs. built-in masking tools in other NLEs, so I can't evaluate how "fresh" these features feel, but the paint and tracking features in Animatte are also pretty cool, and when I was still editing, I wasn't aware of anything else as sophisticated in its price range.


And if we're talking plug-ins, Boris has had masking and motion tracking for masks built into ALL of the Continuum Complete filters, for 10 years.

But it doesn't plug into X yet, and costs a lot more than SliceX's $49. :-) That's an insane price, and CoreMelt makes really good, really fast filters. Even without seeing SliceX, I can recommend it based on Roger's previous work.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 3:36:56 am

Yeah, I was going to mention ANIMATTE. Avid has had that for, what, a decade now? But then Jeremy doesn't consider it a "modern NLE," so I didn't bother.

And it's price point is better. FREE.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 4:04:39 am

haha

This is more about FCPX.

In the beginning, people clowned fcpx for lack of plugin support and depth and they were right.

This plugin changes that and brings a level of sophistication, professional sophistication, to this application.

Coremelt's developer, very early on in the fcpx cycle seemed fairly discouraged with Apple due to the fundamental plugin architecture change and limitations.

Now, there's this.

I've really wanted custom drawn user shapes in my NLE of choice for a while now.

Avid hasn't been my choice even though I'm sure it's perfectly fine and has modern parts.

I had no idea Animatte was free as it seems like I have to spend $2500 bucks to get it.


Return to posts index


Shane Ross
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 4:35:45 am

FCP LEgacy didn't have a good bezier matte. There was a third party one that was out there...forgot what that was.

Animatte has been part of Avid main...developed by Avid...for a long long time.

BUT...it isn't a "modern" NLE...


HEE

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 7:08:41 am

[Shane Ross] "FCP LEgacy didn't have a good bezier matte. There was a third party one that was out there...forgot what that was. "

Silhouette. It now exists as a stand-alone, but they used to make an FCP plugin that would let you build masks inside the program. That was back when everyone was incorrectly calling the process rotoscoping.

I worked the 30 day demo, and had it on my list of things to acquire, but before I could, the masking in Motion developed to a point that I liked it better.

http://silhouettefx.com/silhouette/


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 7:28:04 am

I have been using CHV & Paul Crisp bezier mattes in Legacy for years. Crisp's were freebies and quite good. CHV were part of a huge package of plugins. Nice to know these Coremelt ones are nice and easy to plot without the messy targeting of Legacy.

I presume Pr relies on dynamic linking to Ae for that sort of image manipulation.


Return to posts index


Bret Williams
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 2:25:19 pm

I was using animate in 1998.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 5:12:22 pm

[Bret Williams] "I was using animate in 1998."

This gonna start a RAP throw down?

I was using animate
in nineteen hundred ninety eight - YO.

Cut my teeth on A/B Roll
Learning AVID was a stroll

But X has got me spinning, ya'll
Cuz da learning curve is TOO damn tall.


(oh, never mind)

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 7:38:57 pm

Damn autocorrect kept it from being animaTTe. So there goes your rap. Sorry.


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 10:38:51 pm

[Bret Williams] "Damn autocorrect kept it from being animaTTe. So there goes your rap. Sorry."

Then with your permission....

++++
I was using animate
in ninety-eight where I was at - YO.

++++
Editing being what we do and all.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 12:47:16 am

Yeah.

Finally.

Smoke and DS are quite a bit more than your garden variety NLE.

I've used all the plugins, none have been as tightly integrated as SliceX.

It feels like it's part of fcpx, there's no awkward cross hair control points, and you can draw a custom shape mask with bezier right on the fcpx interface. You don't have to launch yet another interface inside of an interface and deal with a clip well/drop zone.

Keep taking pot shots if you'd like, but this is a pretty damn good sign post of capability.

Either you like it or you don't, the debate is waning.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 8:49:39 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Either you like it or you don't, the debate is waning"

Well so long and thanks for the fish then. :-)


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 12:49:39 am

[Alan Okey] "I'm very surprised that Apple didn't simply combine Motion 5 and FCP X into one application. There's really no reason that Motion's tools couldn't be integrated into FCP X, even as separate "rooms," etc. Then again, I say this as a Smoke fanatic and a compositor/editor, so perhaps it's not as cut and dried as I'd like to believe.
"


Yeah, Motion is pretty terrific at masking and when you could easily round-trip, using it felt like a module of FCP. I expected X (or 8) to fold it in, too.


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 3:07:04 am

pretty impressive actually from someone who isnt into FCPX, like Jeremy said, from watching the little video, it seems like its part of FCPX and more tightly integrated than anything ive seen.. If i was using FCPX, it would be a no brainer for 50 bucks. But yea Avid has animatte and paint, not too mention the free Avid FX which is pretty badass for alot of things.

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


Return to posts index

Don Walker
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 7:30:06 pm

[Chris Harlan] "[Alan Okey] "I'm very surprised that Apple didn't simply combine Motion 5 and FCP X into one application. There's really no reason that Motion's tools couldn't be integrated into FCP X, even as separate "rooms," etc. "
I'm hoping against hope that the reason we haven't seen round tripping developed to Motion, is that Apple is hard at work integrating it into FCPX...... That's my dream anyway.

don walker
texarkana, texas

John 3:16


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 8:00:12 pm

[Don Walker] "I'm hoping against hope that the reason we haven't seen round tripping developed to Motion, is that Apple is hard at work integrating it into FCPX...... That's my dream anyway."

I do agree with you and Mr Okey that they could have simply wrapped Motion in to FCPX. They seem to have done it (sort of) with Soundtrack Pro, at least with the heavy lifting filter interfaces.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 9:49:17 pm

"[Don Walker] "I'm hoping against hope that the reason we haven't seen round tripping developed to Motion, is that Apple is hard at work integrating it into FCPX...... That's my dream anyway.""

Not sure I agree with this.

The subset of Motion already expressed in the X titler is plenty for most users. Being able to work directly in Motion and express the result right to the Title library - and being able to re-open the Motion file IN MOTION for further refinement with just an option double click within X is enough, IMO.

I'd hate to see X take the path of trying to be a one size fits all solution if that means they build into it massive complexity that sits idle for most of it's core users.

And trying to integrate those thousands of actions and spline options in Motion directly into the code of X would be a huge mistake in my judgement. YMMV.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Don Walker
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 9:56:03 pm

[Bill Davis] "And trying to integrate those thousands of actions and spline options in Motion directly into the code of X would be a huge mistake in my judgement. YMMV."

Okay Bill, I'll grant you that; a compromise would be the ability to send clips, compound clips, or secondary story lines to motion with all timing and attributes intact. Can I crave that?

don walker
texarkana, texas

John 3:16


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 10:05:50 pm

[Don Walker] "Can I crave that?"

Not if you're Bill Davis.

all your base are belong to us*



*later edited for clarity


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 2:45:36 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "all your base belong to us"

You're not reaally THAT old are you Jeremy?

Next you'll be asking Apple to bring back Bruce and posting pictures of your 1984 original Mac...

Like I did here!!!

4943_bills1984mac.png.zip

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 3:06:25 am

I forgot an "are". :(

I can't see the zip file here. I'll check it later.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 3:28:49 pm

[Bill Davis] "Next you'll be asking Apple to bring back Bruce and posting pictures of your 1984 original Mac..."

"I’m glad it’s getting weird again. I didn’t understand it when it wasn’t weird." I couldn't agree more, Bruce. Please come back and espouse your words of wisdom.

All I'm saying, Bill, is that there are good reasons to have more tools in one box than having less tools in more boxes. You don't seem to be ashamed of Soundtrack Pro filters and tools being wrapped in to FCPX do you? What about the FCPX shape masks and secondary color correction tools? While primitive, they are pretty good and a welcome addition to an NLE.

Motion, with all of it's strengths, could be a great addition. The types of things that Motion can do are part of the broader "editing" term, at least for me. If I'm doing it there are many many others that are doing it.

I also color correct my footage, my guess is that there's a lot of people that don't. Should we pull all of the color correction tools out of FCPX because some people don't use it?

It's why I like the idea of Dynamic Link so much in the Adobe Suite. I use Ae a lot and I'm not a motion graphics designer. If Ae's tools could be wrapped right in to Premiere's interface, I'd be OK with it. What I don't like about it, is that it creates yet another container in the timeline.

With SliceX, there's no container, simply a filter, and I don't have to send/receive. It's right there at my fingertips at all times.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 5:05:21 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "All I'm saying, Bill, is that there are good reasons to have more tools in one box than having less tools in more boxes."

No problem, but there are also good reasons to have fewer boxes. IRL, size and weight come to mind. I think there's a general virtual equivalent to that. Bloat. Lots of people here are commenting that the 10.06 update was nice in that things were "snappier" as to performance. At what point does "more tools in one box" promote the opposite? (turgidity, perhaps?)

[Jeremy Garchow] "Motion, with all of it's strengths, could be a great addition. The types of things that Motion can do are part of the broader "editing" term, at least for me. If I'm doing it there are many many others that are doing it."

I guess I just see Motion as existing in a whole different realm of complexity. Maybe I don't understand code well enough to understand how it's not - but Apple elected to make it it's own program with a custom built UI that suits it's wheelhouse tasks. Then they extracted just the most necessary modules of it (and used the same underlying "language") in order to make it work as the X titler.

I just can't conceive how you'd wrap the entirety of it into X without increasing program bloat significantly. I feel this way because Motion 5 has HUGE depth. Not just hundreds - but thousands of UI controls. Wrapping them into the body of X just for the percentage of it's users who are willing to spend the time and effort to do that level of MoGraph work regularly seems kinda silly. Particularly when there's a perfectly reasonable way to do it right now.

This is probably coming from my conditioned resistance to adding too much "expectation" to the video creation process.

For instance, many years ago I learned to LOATHE 3D titling - not because it wasn't visually exciting - it clearly was. But because the typical client conversation was always "If our budget is $10,000 for the spot with regular titles - what's the budget for the same project with fancy 3D titles? And the answer was nearly universal: $10,000.

Same with Motion Graphics these days.

Hours and hours of additional work - but usually little if any flexibility on the compensation end.

I know there are plenty of shops where that's NOT the case. But I also think wrapping it in would strengthen the idea that MoGraph work is now just a fundamentally expected part of day to day editing.

And that would hurt, rather than help, the perceived value of specialized work.

FWIW.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 5:28:27 pm

[Bill Davis] " but Apple elected to make it it's own program with a custom built UI that suits it's wheelhouse tasks."

Have you taken a good look at Motion 5? What does it look like to you?

Here's a refresher:

FCP 7:



Motion 4:



FCP X:



Motion 5:





[Bill Davis] "Then they extracted just the most necessary modules of it (and used the same underlying "language") in order to make it work as the X titler."

If you are referring to publishing certain parts of it to X, but it's fairly limited. You cannot access Motion directly in X. You are basically creating your own filters that share some sort of framework, you aren't using Motion when you open a published effect. There is a reason when you open Motion is asks if you want to create a "Final Cut Pro Effect". If you add parts of Motion back to the FCPX filter that aren't publishable in X, they get lost along the way.

[Bill Davis] "Not just hundreds - but thousands of UI controls. Wrapping them into the body of X just for the percentage of it's users who are willing to spend the time and effort to do that level of MoGraph work regularly seems kinda silly. Particularly when there's a perfectly reasonable way to do it right now."

There isn't a way to do it now, save what can be published. The communication is one way, you cannot start in FCPX and move to Motion, you have to start in Motion, publish an effect to FCPX, go back to FCPX, then open it back in Motion if you want it modified. WTF.

Just like my Ae example. Ae has a broad enough toolset that I don't use it for motion graphics. I would want the same from Motion. It has certain tools that would be good to have in the edit so I don't have to fart around with multiple renders, applications, and interfaces. The SliceX UI is a great example of this.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 5:36:44 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "You cannot access Motion directly in X."

The ability to Option Double Click on any Title Effect in X and Launch and Load it into Motion for work serves me just fine.

The full Motion code doesn't have to be loaded up and running all the time when I"m not using it to serve my needs.

That's all I'm saying.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 6:10:18 pm

[Bill Davis] "The ability to Option Double Click on any Title Effect in X and Launch and Load it into Motion for work serves me just fine.

The full Motion code doesn't have to be loaded up and running all the time when I"m not using it to serve my needs.

That's all I'm saying."


But what I (and others) are saying, is that Title Effects aren't enough.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 6:24:29 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "But what I (and others) are saying, is that Title Effects aren't enough."

The restoration of "Send to Motion" would be enough for me.

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 7:37:04 pm

[Steve Connor] "The restoration of "Send to Motion" would be enough for me.
"


It's the definition of "glaring omission."


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 9:48:29 pm

I'm inclined to agree, he said randomly - I don't see the benefit of rolling the entire cart of motion into FCPX -I actually find that impossible to imagine.

Motion as it stands - as an extremely advanced rigging area for FCPX design elements that can publish intelligent parameters that dial directly into the companion editing system, that publishing system - is light years beyond anything the other vendors are doing. light years. Adobe could whistle to try and do this. they get to virtualise AE comps as clips - and sluggishly. thats it.

If FCPX hadn't crashed and burned as it did (argue otherwise) there would be a far more clear view of the insane advantages this kind of rigging would provide to mid size corporate and commercial clients. Its a controlled play and package area between design and editing that would be best expressed by repeated experimentation in environments where graphics guys deploy it for editors, in mid size fast moving facilities - where complex client brand elements could be shared as live intelligent elements - sub brand variables for colour and typography scale etc depending on ad components say.

But because the primary sell - FCPX itself - largely died on the ground in all the places Apple was targeting it to - we never got to see Apple's motion play work out in the field.

Coming personally from a design background originally, I'm most sorry to see the re-working of motion with rigging in the undifferentiated trash heap.
How apple came to fundamentally re-cast motion's role feels like the smartest thing I've seen in ages.

aside from that - apple provisioning bezier or true b-splines (forget keyframing) in masking is probably trivial over two dot releases. although the idea of making sky replacement mattes in the editing system strikes me as silly. in 90% of cases apple's current masking system kicks everything's ass.

Its a fabulous masking implementation.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 11, 2012 at 10:28:11 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] " there would be a far more clear view of the insane advantages this kind of rigging would provide to mid size corporate and commercial clients. Its a controlled play and package area between design and editing that would be best expressed by repeated experimentation in environments where graphics guys deploy it for editors, in mid size fast moving facilities - where complex client brand elements could be shared as live intelligent elements - sub brand variables for colour and typography scale etc depending on ad components say."

I think you're finally starting to get it!

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 11, 2012 at 4:43:11 pm

And yet Apple's own marketing can't articulate these features in its marketing.

I think FCPX/Motion would excel in the kind of environment where there needs to be controlled branding.

Some people bring up ease of use. SliceX is a major improvement of the awkward point control garbage matte control of FCP Legacy.

Others often bring up the dependency on third party support as if it were a deficiency. If Apple builds the proper hooks (and to me this is far more important than building in features), third parties can focus on their specialties.

As a side note, it's interesting that NoiseIndustries has also updated their plugin set for PremierePro support. Obviously that's a desirable market but, based on NI's issues, it's a much more difficult hurdle. NI notes some filters won't work and transitions require, what I consider, awkward execution.

I suspect Apple is focusing on extensibility and while they certainly have much further to go, I think that's one of their underlying developmental goals for FCPX.

Personally I still think Round-tripping will return when Logic X comes out. I think that whole "subsection" is still under development and won't be out until all the pieces are in place.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 12, 2012 at 8:42:38 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "If FCPX hadn't crashed and burned as it did (argue otherwise) there would be a far more clear view of the insane advantages this kind of rigging would provide to mid size corporate and commercial clients. Its a controlled play and package area between design and editing that would be best expressed by repeated experimentation in environments where graphics guys deploy it for editors, in mid size fast moving facilities - where complex client brand elements could be shared as live intelligent elements - sub brand variables for colour and typography scale etc depending on ad components say."

Indeed. I keep waiting for FCPX/M5 to get some traction in my niche. No signs of that as of yet, but the shared renderer and system of checks and balances between designer and editor are very interesting.

Not to belabor the low-ceiling point, but adding expressions to Motion would make it an exponentially more powerful tool when considering rigging and publishing. Feature request!

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

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 13, 2012 at 12:31:53 am

[Walter Soyka] "Indeed. I keep waiting for FCPX/M5 to get some traction in my niche. No signs of that as of yet, but the shared renderer and system of checks and balances between designer and editor are very interesting."

completely - I feel like shedding a single tear for the motion rigging effort - if you think of it in terms of a designer today deploying a layered PSD ref, instead he is deploying controlled type, object, colour, as live alternate template options directly accessible within the editing system, even an imported PSD in PPro can't offer this kind of deployed brand conditionality - but..
but the core FCPX editing timeline failure was waaaay too big.

Apple took a gigantic risk reducing its intellectual scape so far, and my bile aside, the main proposition; the editing environment itself, is simply rejected as a valid editing exercise. or at least according to my propaganda. still - I don't see how they get a functional timeline - i think they eke this out and it fades to vegas or edius. I don't think there is any pulling this misfire back. the core A/B methodology is too loony and burned in.

incredible missed opportunity all the same given the level of effort.

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 14, 2012 at 12:10:18 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "completely - I feel like shedding a single tear for the motion rigging effort - if you think of it in terms of a designer today deploying a layered PSD ref, instead he is deploying controlled type, object, colour, as live alternate template options directly accessible within the editing system, even an imported PSD in PPro can't offer this kind of deployed brand conditionality - but.. but the core FCPX editing timeline failure was waaaay too big. "

Looking at agency work, there are two hurdles. To get this benefit, it's not enough to get agency editors away from FCP7/MC/Pr/whatever over to FCPX -- you have to get agency designers away from Ae to M5, too.

It's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem, but the benefit is tantalizing enough that I don't think it's completely outside the realm of possibility.



[Aindreas Gallagher] "incredible missed opportunity all the same given the level of effort."

Short-term, yes.

Long-term? Maybe not. Apple have nothing to lose here. They can play in this space as long as they want without penalty. For all the Sturm und Drang here over Apple's decision not to release an FCP8 or a real 2012 Mac Pro, there are stil an awful lot of people here who look at me like I'm stark raving mad when start talking about PCs.

There's the question of resources, which comes up here every so often. With their $117B of cash-on-hand [link], Apple could buy Adobe ($16.11B market cap), Autodesk ($6.95B market cap), and Avid ($240M market cap), leaving them just shy of enough cash left over to buy Amazon ($102B market cap) just because their name starts with A, too. (Give them another couple quarters and that might be achievable as well.) Skip Amazon for now, and buy Sony ($10.81B market cap), and then it's FCPX vs Lightworks.

Now I don't think Apple cares enough about the digital content creation space to go buying out competitors. However, they certainly have enough cash that they can afford to wait until college kids starting on FCPX today start making NLE purchasing decisions in the workplace in the future.

In more practical terms, people can't stay on FCP7 forever. As interesting as the last year and a half has been, I think the next year and a half will be more interesting as it becomes less and less practical for the sorts of institutions that you and I have been discussing to remain on Legend. They'll have to go somewhere...

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

Craig Seeman
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 14, 2012 at 12:27:04 am

[Walter Soyka] "However, they certainly have enough cash that they can afford to wait until college kids starting on FCPX today start making NLE purchasing decisions in the workplace in the future."

I've mentioned before, Apple will win (or at least do well) simply by attrition. They will get young people now and as they move up the decision making ladder will move into new "facilities" (whatever that is as the market changes) much more so than established facilities.

[Walter Soyka] "As interesting as the last year and a half has been, I think the next year and a half will be more interesting as it becomes less and less practical for the sorts of institutions that you and I have been discussing to remain on Legend. They'll have to go somewhere..."

Which gives Apple more time to make improvements and dig for the "must have" feature(s). Of course it gives Adobe time as well to deal with issues and improved workflow as well (like maybe a timeline codec). Maybe I'll be surprised but I see Avid taking more erosion in the market place especially if Adobe is aggressive.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 12, 2012 at 8:37:50 pm

[Bill Davis] "No problem, but there are also good reasons to have fewer boxes. IRL, size and weight come to mind. I think there's a general virtual equivalent to that. Bloat. Lots of people here are commenting that the 10.06 update was nice in that things were "snappier" as to performance. At what point does "more tools in one box" promote the opposite? (turgidity, perhaps?)"

A classic counterexample might be Smoke -- very broad feature set, very fast performance. (Admittedly this came with very high hardware requirements until very recently.)



[Bill Davis] "Not just hundreds - but thousands of UI controls."

From a UI perspective, Autodesk showed the way years ago. Smoke is highly contextual (both in 2012 and earlier, as well as the 2013 Pre-Release), showing only the tools and information relevant for the task at hand. The UI is massively deep, but very well designed and organized, striving for consistency as a primary driver of UI familiarity and speed.



[Bill Davis] "I just can't conceive how you'd wrap the entirety of it into X without increasing program bloat significantly. I feel this way because Motion 5 has HUGE depth. "

FCPX and M5 share a renderer, and they both have to handle media I/O. An integrated FCPX/M5 (really what I was hoping for in FCP8, pre-X) could actually be lighter-weight from a system resource perspective than running FCPX and M5 as separate apps at the same time.



[Bill Davis] "Wrapping them into the body of X just for the percentage of it's users who are willing to spend the time and effort to do that level of MoGraph work regularly seems kinda silly. Particularly when there's a perfectly reasonable way to do it right now."

But it doesn't have to be a tool dedicated to mograph. Animation/compositing apps have toolsets that are useful in design, color correction, compositing, and editorial. (In fact, you could argue that all these tools today are fundamentally special-purpose compositors.)

Personally, I see all these disciplines converging (though I am the first to admit some bias here). I don't believe anyone on the market today has a truly outstanding solution that wraps this all together in the one perfect package, and I see both significant strengths and weaknesses in Adobe's, Apple's, and Autodesk's respective approaches to the problem.



[Bill Davis] "Same with Motion Graphics these days. Hours and hours of additional work - but usually little if any flexibility on the compensation end. I know there are plenty of shops where that's NOT the case. But I also think wrapping it in would strengthen the idea that MoGraph work is now just a fundamentally expected part of day to day editing."

Motion sells for $50. As Aindreas has pointed out elsewhere, Motion is rarely used as a primary design application. It's practically an FCPX plugin. If there's any damage to the perceived value of mograph there, it's already been done.

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

Jim Giberti
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 10:44:30 pm

[Don Walker] "I'm hoping against hope that the reason we haven't seen round tripping developed to Motion, is that Apple is hard at work integrating it into FCPX...... That's my dream anyway.
"


Totally with ya Don.


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 4:03:28 am

Thanks Jeremy, just grabbed it.


Return to posts index

Kai Rankio
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 10:00:38 am

Why not check out Fcpeffetcs.com and their Advanced Masking Tools v.2. It seems to do just the same, with a nicer price tag.

Product link: http://www.fcpeffects.com/collections/new-stuff/products/advanced-masking-t...


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 1:37:06 pm

CoreMelt have said that keyframing points may be possible in a future release

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

David Cherniack
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 3:56:16 pm

"CoreMelt have said that keyframing points may be possible in a future release"


'Finally' is sounding more and more less than final. But who needs key frames, anyway. They just complicate things.

David
AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 6:56:52 pm

without keyframing - is Slice X better than Advance Masking Effects from FCPeffects.com? Masking video without being able to keyframe seems very limited and in many cases, useless

http://www.fcpeffects.com/collections/entire-catalogue/products/advanced-ma...

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 7:53:54 pm

[David Cherniack] "'Finally' is sounding more and more less than final. But who needs key frames, anyway. They just complicate things."

Don't get me wrong guys, I didn't say this was a rotoscope tool.

You can key frame the matte position/scale/rotation, you just can't keyframe the individual points.

I enjoy the custom bezier mattes without the 4,8,10,16.20 or whatever point garbage matte. This plugin is not that and if you have a look at the "freeform shape tool" it's much better than a fixed point based system.

No, it doesn't compete with Smoke, DS, or Dynamic Link to Ae, but it is a big step forward in not only FCP NLE capability, but specifically FCPX plugins. And it is available right in the FCPX interface, I don't have to go to another "room", application, or section.

I think it's pretty f*cking awesome, especially when they said things like this couldn't be done.

Cheers yer beers.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Jim Giberti
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 9, 2012 at 10:52:28 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I think it's pretty f*cking awesome, especially when they said things like this couldn't be done.
"


Yeah, it seems that some are overlooking the real news here - we finally have trackable masks. That's been on the top of my list regarding FCPX color correcting. You couldn't animate the points of any masks as they are made in X, we just wanted to be able to move them with subjects after they're created.

This is a really big plus from my perspective. Another big negative checked off the list.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 1:53:57 am

[Jim Giberti] "This is a really big plus from my perspective. Another big negative checked off the list."

I'm glad someone else sees it that way as well.

I find this little plugin really powerful, and amazingly fast and capable. I know we have talked about building custom plugin interfaces in FCPX before, and although this is still an on screen control, its really well done and cool.

I love it. It really does feel like it's a part of FCPX and not a plugin or filter.


Return to posts index

Morten Ranmar
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 10, 2012 at 7:55:35 am

Now, if we could also keyframe the color corrections...

- No Parking Production -

2 x Finalcut Studio3, 2 x Prod. bundle CS6, 2 x MacPro, 2 x ioHD, Ethernet File Server w. X-Raid.... and FCPX on trial


Return to posts index

nicolas horne
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 12, 2012 at 3:02:29 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "You can key frame the matte position/scale/rotation, you just can't keyframe the individual points."
this is why i miss Color, where you could keyframe as many points as you wanted, and control the amount of feather everywhere.
but i agree keyframing is boring. let's hope for Color X, with auto tracking of the points. (and three way round tripping with FCP X and Motion X! )


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 12, 2012 at 4:18:59 pm

[nicolas horne] "this is why i miss Color, where you could keyframe as many points as you wanted, and control the amount of feather everywhere.
but i agree keyframing is boring. let's hope for Color X, with auto tracking of the points. (and three way round tripping with FCP X and Motion X! )"


I don't know much, but I would imagine Lock and Load X does some sort of tracking.

It would be cool if SliceX could use lock and load tracking data.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Coremelt's SliceX is awesome
on Nov 12, 2012 at 4:29:18 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "[nicolas horne] "this is why i miss Color, where you could keyframe as many points as you wanted, and control the amount of feather everywhere.
but i agree keyframing is boring. let's hope for Color X, with auto tracking of the points. (and three way round tripping with FCP X and Motion X! )"

I don't know much, but I would imagine Lock and Load X does some sort of tracking.

It would be cool if SliceX could use lock and load tracking data."


I don't miss Color because Resolve does the same job even better

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

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