FORUMS: list search recent posts

FCPX proving to be very fast

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
craig slattery
FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 1:29:26 am

The end of week one, cutting a half hour special for The Culture Show BBC Two. FCPX is proving to be incredibly fast, we have finished the first week of the edit a day early. We started with 900GB of rushes and archive. The plan for this week was to sync pull the main interviews, and if possible take a look at some of the actuality. At the beginning of the week we felt this might be a tall order.
In actual fact we have cut all the interviews down to manageable segments. We’ve been through all the actuality and cut sequences for each of the locations. The production team, still need to film in London later in the month. But for the moment we’ve cut back as much as we can with the exiting rushes. We’ve managed to do that in just 4 days. Unbelievable.
The down side, as a freelancer Im doing my self out of work.

FYI 60min specials are cut in 5-6 weeks, half hour specials 3 weeks. On this special, 30mins, because of the schedule we have a two week offline.


The Director/Producer Im working with WAS a sceptic. We told him before Christmas that we would be cutting the special in X. He has some knowledge of editing, with FCP7 and has worked mainly with editors on AVID. He had heard bad things about X and was worried with the tight schedule. When we parted at 6:30 this afternoon he was singing its praises and declared, it would be hard going back. I simply said, 'stick with me kid and you wont have too'.


Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 1:41:29 am

Yep. Couldn't agree more.

Bring on the 20 paragraph rant replies!

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 2:54:05 am

We know it's not FCPX, he's taking performance enhancing drugs.



Return to posts index


Don Scioli
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 4:55:00 pm

Duh, i could have told you it was fast 6 months ago,


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 5:43:50 pm

[Don Scioli] "Duh, i could have told you it was fast 6 months ago,"

Unfortunately when people say that, the skeptics may be pondering what hallucinogens the editor might be using or what's in the Kool-aid they're drinking. Granted that may not be indicative of people on this forum but it's something I see.

If you take a quick gander a the #FCPX hashtag on Twitter the nastiness is still rampant and IMHO reflects more negatively on the poster than FCPX users.



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 2:58:24 am

[craig slattery] "The down side, as a freelancer Im doing my self out of work."

This what happens when they dumb down an NLE. It makes all the decisions for you and gets done faster.

Actually you're now guaranteed call backs for revisions because, according to others, apparently you will forever be the only one in the U.K. who edits with FCPX.

Of course no facility should ever allow a free lancers to chose the NLE they work best with if it's not Avid or Premiere or FCP7 because what would they do when they can't afford to hire you back in six months. After all they don't save any money if you do a better job faster. There's just no ROI on that.



Return to posts index


willy pimentel
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 3:45:56 am

Omg.. Fcpx just can't win!!!

Willy Pimentel
Motion Graphics Editor
Macbook Pro 2011 thunderbolt/ TBolt Displey/ 2 SSD Hds /lacie Tbolt


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 12:20:27 pm

[Craig Seeman] "This what happens when they dumb down an NLE. It makes all the decisions for you and gets done faster."

I saw this coming so I put my daily rate up on the 1st of January.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 4:40:09 pm

[craig slattery] "I saw this coming so I put my daily rate up on the 1st of January."

Ha! Good!. So I guess this makes Oliver's description of "what happens when they can't afford to hire me back?" more likely.



Return to posts index


craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 5:36:00 pm

[Craig Seeman] "So I guess this makes Oliver's description of "what happens when they can't afford to hire me back?" more likely."

Apparently, there are not many skilled FCPX editors about, and these skills don't come cheap!!!!


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 5:50:55 pm

[craig slattery] "Apparently, there are not many skilled FCPX editors about, and these skills don't come cheap!!!!"

Why it's so dumbed down easy to learn, anybody can use it and be fast... which is why so few use it of course!

I'm sorry if I'm having a bit of fun with this but, at this point, some of the negative reasoning I'm seeing (elsewhere) is absolutely twisted.



Return to posts index

Virgil Scott
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 9:20:15 pm

I'd rather spend the time saved to refine the work I've completed, do the little extras that set your work apart from others, all of course billable time.


Return to posts index


Dave Gage
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 3:51:28 am

Craig,

Very cool! Do you have a post somewhere where you outline what your hardware specs and workflow is and you could put a link up here? If not and you have a few minutes, I'd like to hear about what you're doing that appears to working so well.

Are you using a 27" iMac as your main machine. What OS and version of FCPX are you on? Any tricks in your workflow to keep FCPX moving?

Thanks,
Dave


Return to posts index

Mark Dobson
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 6:09:50 am

Hi Craig,

Thanks for the post about how you are getting on with FCPX at the BBC.

I was just wondering how you deal with interview material.

Do you fully transcribe?

We split interviews into sections by creating favourites and then type a synopsis for each favourite.

Be interested in how you go about it

Thanks

Mark


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 11:59:25 am

I turned to the director and said, ‘why do YOU think we have achieved so much in such a short time?’ He said, ‘I think its because its so visual, you really fell like you are in it’.
And that’s what I have been experiencing since we started the trial in X. Its unlike any other NLE, the way it affects you tonally and visually. I will post my workflow later today, but just briefly, Ive been using projects in the same way as I use sequences in FCP7 and the instant visual reference to material that you have already worked on, ie cut down is brilliant.


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 5:21:21 pm

[craig slattery] "I turned to the director and said, ‘why do YOU think we have achieved so much in such a short time?’ He said, ‘I think its because its so visual, you really fell like you are in it’. "

So many people are challenged by others to explain why they feel FCPX is faster. I like this answer.

People are often put in the position of "keystroke counting" to prove speed. For many people it's more about being able to process information faster.

One might even proffer that it extends to some of the design decisions that went into FCPX. People will argue the technical merits of a trackless magnetic timeline but I suspect, for some of us, we can process the information faster... and that can't always be measured in "keystroke counting."



Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 5:38:01 pm

[Craig Seeman] "One might even proffer that it extends to some of the design decisions that went into FCPX. People will argue the technical merits of a trackless magnetic timeline but I suspect, for some of us, we can process the information faster... and that can't always be measured in "keystroke counting.""

You said it much more eloquent than I could.


Return to posts index

Virgil Scott
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 9:24:36 pm

Does anyone else feel more "free" creatively when in FCPX? Maybe it's just me, or maybe it was the UI overhaul and newer editing paradigms that put my mind in the "new things" zone. Whatever the case. I have tried new things and made new techniques, that whilst possible in previous and other NLE's, never occurred to me. Sorry to go on a tangent.


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 6:47:58 pm

[Craig Seeman] "People are often put in the position of "keystroke counting" to prove speed. For many people it's more about being able to process information faster."

I have been back in FCP7 editing a piece with many parts.

It is very frustrating. I keep trying to make FCP7 work like FCPX and it fails. :)

Now that I have complete control over what parts move and don't move in FCPX, going back to FCP7 and its really odd series of clip collision/moving behaviors is sometimes downright maddening. A ripple delete should ripple the whole timeline. Sometimes, it doesn't.

There are merits to the magnetic timeline, the secondary storyline function, to ability to group a series of clips the way I want, be able to move sections of the timeline that I want to move.

Also, the Event Browser in FCPX is so much better, so much more accessible, so much more visual and dynamic, and the quick text search is invaluable.

I could also really use a timeline index in this FCP7 project as there is going to be a lot of conform at the end of this particular piece. It would be so simple in FCPX to assign a temp role to the conform shots, or filter them by a preset keywording rule I have setup, select them all with the index, and do what I need to do.

I can finally access my data with data, and not a rigid structure of hallways, folders, and shelves.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 7:00:39 pm

So given all that why are you cutting it in FCP Archaic?

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 7:24:52 pm

[Herb Sevush] "So given all that why are you cutting it in FCP Archaic?"

It's like NTSC. Gotta drag that legacy.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 7:50:02 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "It's like NTSC. Gotta drag that legacy."

And yet there's something you mentioned that is really "legacy" that's in FCPX that's great value.
I also like the timeline index. Growing up in linear editing, I missed the ability to scroll through an EDL list and select the shot I want to go to. While FCPX timeline index offers so much more, It's nice to see a feature like that return.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 7:06:08 pm

[Craig Seeman] "People are often put in the position of "keystroke counting" to prove speed. For many people it's more about being able to process information faster."

Many other people are put off by lines like "it's 10 times faster" which would indicate that you could do a weeks work in a single afternoon. I agree that hearing someone detail how he saved a full day out of a five day schedule is a lot more effective.

Death to hyperbole !!

(I don't mean you Aindreas.)

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 7:42:02 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Many other people are put off by lines like "it's 10 times faster" which would indicate that you could do a weeks work in a single afternoon."
[Herb Sevush] "Death to hyperbole !! "

I absolutely agree. Craig's experience is real world comparative. It seems he finished what might be 5 days work in 4. That would be 20%. And this is for a given type of project, not necessarily applicable to all projects. We get to see context and comparison in this case.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 9:35:12 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Many other people are put off by lines like "it's 10 times faster" which would indicate that you could do a weeks work in a single afternoon. I agree that hearing someone detail how he saved a full day out of a five day schedule is a lot more effective."

Agreed.

I don't particularly care about keystroke counting. Some things may take more, some things may take less.

I also don't care about "feels faster" -- I only care about actually faster.

Craig is quantifying a 20% schedule improvement. He's (presumably) quite experienced and knows how long a job should take. If he estimates completion in five days and finds he can get it done in four, I'm listening!

Rather than considering the time differences for performing specific tasks, I'm more interested in understanding the time differences for the general phases of editorial: ingest, logging/organizing, rough cut, fine cut, revisions, audio, color, effects, finishing, re-versioning, output.

Personally, there are pieces of each of the major NLEs that I'd like to cherry pick for each of these buckets to form my perfect and beautiful Franken-editor -- and I think it would end up being pretty heavily influenced by FCPX.

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

David Powell
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 11:24:19 pm

I can say from experience that right off the bat, FCP X is faster at importing non-native media than say Avid and FCP 7 and seems to have a superior playback engine. I just finished a 3 cam multi shoot and finished the whole project with even optimizing or using proxy media on a 2011 imac i7 16g. It also seems to render fx and output quite a lot faster than Avid though, there is a major issue with corrupt frames currently on exports.

Once you actually start working on the timeline it is far slower for trimming than Avid (fcp 7 trimming sucks as well imo). If you know how to use avid properly there are a lot of timeline features that are sorely missed and just could not work with the clip connected paradigm.

As cool as the multi cam editor is in X, it doesn't allow you to matchframe to the original clip which is a real pain. I also hate the fact that I can't have floating bins/keywords or thumbnail view.

Also features like "find gap/flashframe are important to me and are missing. Therefore I don't think it could be said that X is "faster" overall than A or Z, but it can be for certain task or media. I think it kills on Avid/FCP for DSLR editing and the Proxy/Original media that switches with a checkmark is awesome.

I would never want to offline cut a narrative in X though over Avid. IMO this is where the joy of editing is and X takes it away.

So to sum up I would say X is faster at everything up to where you start cutting. If I worked as an Editor with AE's prepping the project, I'd never want to use it, but for certain jobs that I have to do everything it can be quite faster to load in and just start cutting.


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 11:39:31 pm

[David Powell] "As cool as the multi cam editor is in X, it doesn't allow you to matchframe to the original clip which is a real pain. "

Totally agree with you on that one.


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 11:55:38 pm

[David Powell] "As cool as the multi cam editor is in X, it doesn't allow you to matchframe to the original clip which is a real pain. "

Totally agree with you on that one.



[David Powell] "So to sum up I would say X is faster at everything up to where you start cutting. If I worked as an Editor with AE's prepping the project, I'd never want to use it, but for certain jobs that I have to do everything it can be quite faster to load in and just start cutting."

Im working with AE's the project is fully prepped, I walk in and just start cutting. This is where I find the speed and creativity, right there in the timeline.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 12:04:49 am

I tend to agree with David. I like moving things around using the magnetic timeline when it's a matter of coarse arrangement, but trimming in X drives me up the wall. Especially when I really need to trim asymmetrically. I also don't like the transition bug. That's where (depending on the situation) you add a transition and later remove it and it trims the media.

My question for Craig, though, is how do you deal with show length? When I've worked in broadcast long form, I have frequently had to go through the show and make minor trims to get the duration to length. To do that you really need to see the read-out of the sequence duration in order to see the cumulative effect of those trims. How did you handle that?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 12:21:38 am

[Oliver Peters] " but trimming in X drives me up the wall"

I simply don't understand that, I find the trimming in FCPX awesome, fast, intuitive, fun, creative I simply don't understand how one finds it anything other. Each to their own I guess.

Length!!!! You get to the end of the edit and its 20 sec too long. Ok cut 20 sec out somewhere I cant see how X differs to any other NLE. The networks are not going not broadcast something 4 frames too long or short. 30mins on the BBC is between 28:20 and 29:30 same sort of leeway with an hour.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 12:42:56 am

[craig slattery] "I simply don't understand that, I find the trimming in FCPX awesome"

I tend to find it finicky, especially when you try to trim a clip with a dissolve. The context of what the cursor latches onto is very touchy. The 2-up view goes away if you try to trim by the keyboard. Once you create a split edit, you can no longer trim both the audio and video at the same time. I simply prefer FCP 7's, Premiere Pro's and Media Composer's methods of trimming. It's an area that hopefully new versions of FCP X will address.

[craig slattery] "Length!!!! You get to the end of the edit and its 20 sec too long. Ok cut 20 sec out somewhere I cant see how X differs to any other NLE. The networks are not going not broadcast something 4 frames too long or short. 30mins on the BBC is between 28:20 and 29:30 same sort of leeway with an hour."

That's not the case in the US. Not only does the show have to be to time (to the second), but so do show segments. Generally you can't get there by trimming out 20 seconds. It's more like 1/2 a second here or there in 40 places throughout the show. Timing has to be rounded up to the nearest whole second in drop frame time. This often means adjustments that you make throw off where the fades-to-black happen going in and out of commercial breaks, requiring additional adjustments.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:48:30 am

[Oliver Peters] "That's not the case in the US. Not only does the show have to be to time (to the second), but so do show segments. Generally you can't get there by trimming out 20 seconds. It's more like 1/2 a second here or there in 40 places throughout the show."

I still don't see the problem.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 2:10:34 am

Maybe I'm misunderstanding something about total time but in FCPX isn't the
xx:xx:xx total
at the bottom grey bar accurate?

As you trim that changes according to update total time.
Granted that doesn't give you segment time which is critical when placing station break slugs.
If you make a selection/range it'll show you that on the bottom as well though.



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 2:21:37 am

[Craig Seeman] "Maybe I'm misunderstanding something about total time but in FCPX isn't the
xx:xx:xx total
at the bottom grey bar accurate?"


You are right and I tend to overlook that. My bad. I guess I'm missing a nice fat timecode window that's more sophisticated than that or the TC viewer in the center toolbar. I don't see these as huge problems, just nuisances that aren't as good yet as in other NLEs. For me there are still other issues, like the inability to zoom into the viewer filmstrip or the ability to advance within the filmstrip by keypad entry. Or the lack of a visual relationship to the total timeline when you've zoom in the project timeline. Hopefully they'll come.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 8:43:07 am

[Oliver Peters] "like the inability to zoom into the viewer filmstrip"

Oliver I had the same issue with the inability to zoom into the viewer filmstrip. I couldn't understand why that feature was not available. But in actual fact you don't need it. Again because I find trimming in the timeline a dream, I don't ever do any detailed selection in the viewer, its a waist of time. Im sorry if this may sound patronising, but folks still hankering for features they loved in Legacy or Avid just aren't there yet.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 2:00:03 pm

[craig slattery] "I had the same issue with the inability to zoom into the viewer filmstrip. I couldn't understand why that feature was not available. But in actual fact you don't need it."

I don't miss it much, but I sometimes want to get tight on the audio and don't find the FCP X precision adequate on the source side for audio. The simple fix would be to have the clip "open in timeline", make your marks and have those "stick" in the clip. They don't at the moment. I'm simply not the type to toss it rough on the timeline and then constantly trim. Different styles of working.

[craig slattery] "but folks still hankering for features they loved in Legacy or Avid just aren't there yet."

I understand what you are saying, but some of these features will come, because they are needed in certain workflows. The argument that there is one and only one way of working (the current X way) is not good enough if an editor wants to adopt X. The beauty of other NLEs is that there's more than a single way to do any given task. I'm sure that more of that will come over time with X as well. At least I hope so.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 12:18:28 am

Well,

I agree with your central contention, Herb.

But two things.

First, back in the early days, the fact that X has the "work with thumbnails IMMEDIATELY, then transcode Optimized and Proxy as needed" saved me personally WELL over 10 times the amount of time from "start" to "getting stuff done" when I switched from Legacy to X in the beginning. So I personally feel that in the area of "starting line" productivity - a 10x timesaving over Legacy was a vast understatement.

Second, just day before yesterday, I got a call from the agency folks using a pair of voiceovers I'd recorded to promote a high end golf accessory. The project is for a division of one of the the HUGE japanese manufacturing firms familiar to everyone - folks at corporate were having problems viewing the finished spots and my contact knew that I'd just taken digital delivery of the final video files from the West Coast agency with my VOs in place. So they asked me if I could transcode the ProRes 422 HQ files into something to email to them and what would be the best format for the widest compatibility?

Since I'd just put the spots on an X timeline, I asked them to hold a second and used the X Share menu to dump the spots to my Vimeo Pro account, (literally a 1-step process in X directly from the timeline) made a quick password-protected Portfolio while we were continuing our conversation (another 45 seconds) - and emailed the client a link to the portfolio all while I was still on the phone. They forwarded that link to their clients and within literally 3 minutes , the spots from my X timeline were being watched by anyone around the world the agency wanted to send the links and passwords to.

Time saved by me being an X user? Judged agains their original request of burning and shipping off a DVD? - days. And even just time saved over transcoding and emailing or using YouSendIt to distribute it would easily fit that 10 to 1 time savings.

So the 10 to 1 concept isn't baseless. It (like everything else) needs to be contextualized.

There are areas and operations where X will save an editor way more than 10 times the effort - and yes, plenty of areas where it can easily take significantly LONGER to use X to do something that can be done more easily in another tool. And the less practiced the X editor, the LONGER it will likely to take someone to do things because they simply haven't done their re-orientation and new process learning.

That's the truth of the matter. What X does well, it often does REALLY, REALLY well. And where it fall short - it falls short. Only the individual editor can know which will be true for them - but the other truth is that until an editor actually learns to operate it properly, it's impossible to really fully grasp how it MIGHT enable time or effort savings.

This thread is growing because Craig has clearly gotten to a place where he sees the value built into it for the tasks that he needs to accomplish.

All that says is that the tool is capable. Not perfect, not ideal, but capable of high level work and of doing that work very efficiently.

Which some of us suspected for quite a while now.

It's good to see more and more confirmation of those facts.

And it's exciting to see where X will go as it keeps developing!

But wholesale dismissal of the idea of X being a "high efficiency" editing solution is going to be a harder and harder case to make - when more and more qualified editors are willing to support that idea.

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

Herb Sevush
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 6:45:59 pm

[Bill Davis] "First, back in the early days, the fact that X has the "work with thumbnails IMMEDIATELY, then transcode Optimized and Proxy as needed" saved me personally WELL over 10 times the amount of time from "start" to "getting stuff done" when I switched from Legacy to X in the beginning. So I personally feel that in the area of "starting line" productivity - a 10x timesaving over Legacy was a vast understatement."

So a 2 week job could be done in 2 days? That's a lot of transcoding. Let's assume that's true, it's merely an argument for any of a number of NLE's over Legacy - PPro, Avid, Edius, FCPX - they are all "edit anything on the timeline editors." This ability is not what makes FCPX unique although the lack of this ability is what makes FCP Legacy archaic for many people. But not for me. Very little, less than 5%, of anything that hits my timeline is from P2 or DSLR or HDV or anything other than ProRes 422, so like you I start editing the moment media is copied to my hard drives.


[Bill Davis] "Since I'd just put the spots on an X timeline, I asked them to hold a second and used the X Share menu to dump the spots to my Vimeo Pro account, (literally a 1-step process in X directly from the timeline) made a quick password-protected Portfolio while we were continuing our conversation (another 45 seconds) - and emailed the client a link to the portfolio all while I was still on the phone. They forwarded that link to their clients and within literally 3 minutes , the spots from my X timeline were being watched by anyone around the world the agency wanted to send the links and passwords to.Time saved by me being an X user? Judged agains their original request of burning and shipping off a DVD? - days. And even just time saved over transcoding and emailing or using YouSendIt to distribute it would easily fit that 10 to 1 time savings."

This is an example of "button counting." Yes, for this one part of a project you probably saved 5 minutes, however workflow inabilities, like the inability to match to the master clip from a multiclip, might make the overall project time much longer than doing a similar project in Legacy. This is why the only time comparisons I find relevant are those for completion of a project end to end. Such and such a project used to take me 20 days, I now find I can do it in X number of days. If the project is defined and I can elate to it, then I can relate to the time savings.

As for the specific example you gave of posting your sample within 3 minutes, I can tell you that exporting and sending out a file by Yousendit takes a heck of a lot less than 30 minutes. Less than 10 would be more like it. Still an advantage for X, but nothing near 10x1.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 12:27:52 am

[Herb Sevush] "Death to hyperbole !! "

hey - craig easily gives the most concrete value case for FCPX - he actually spells it out - the workflows he has posted already in various responses strongly argue that it works like six guns in in his use case. but it is a use case.

In a way I think thats the point - FCPX has highly delineated use work cases. they are just not my own. I hanker after parts of it quite badly - mostly footage interrogation, and effects masking handling.

no more than craig - this ins't trumpet blowing - but say I was at this -

http://bit.ly/VveFCo

Its about one of the best bins of footage I've ever had to date - as the man says, when the BTS is shot on alexa - you know the air is rare.

I found I would have killed for the idealised FCPX footage interrogation. The footage dump across france and italy was genuinely gigantic.

FCPX represents a true short circuit in footage interrogation.

that aside however - there is simply no way in which the FCPX timeline is not geared directly towards craig's workflow - loose, malleable, always shifting, but always boiling down to one thing out of IV and b-roll.

there is no way that is not the sweet spot for FCPX.

It is not my sweet spot.

the FCPX timeline is just not a broad use case timeline - failed ripple, collisions, they are the price of basic gravity - it is equivalent to the mac barking at you with an alert - the idea that that collision should be removed as a warning in editing is the equivalent of saying that you would not like to be told your leg is about to be sawed off.

it is not a weakness and I am beyond sick of people defending apple for having removed basic awareness from the editor for the environment they are in.

sitting with security in a real fundamental timeline is sitting secure in a real timeline. It's not an affectation.

If Apple choose to optionally re-introduce the actual timeline that lies beneath their gimmicks, then possibly they have an editing system.

And while we are at it:

As craig will testify - FCPX is a dead letter in london.

As a last kick - UNIT - who have produced near all the UK-EU localisations for Apple's ad's, and who were famed for being an apple house, who had a combination lock to get into the apple work suites - are now running avid suites in parallel as we speak.

how in the hell is this software going anywhere when no one will install it?

Again - I'm not being mean here - craig could post two times a day with a BBC header - this is completely unused software in London.

for valid reasons. the timeline is nuts. What am I doing with tilde key? de-magnifying something?

honestly, apple are scrabbling with the tilde key connection break - but that timeline is nuts.

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


Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 12:42:02 am

Exactly 20 paragraph breaks. Excellent.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 12:58:07 am

Come on: I argue this software doesn't work john. at least not as an actual thing. Not on the ground. Apple have like, four guys on a website, and it really is dead in london.

but please carry on.

best etc,

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


Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:30:27 am

If the stars align correctly, I will have a very elaborate counterpoint on Monday morning.

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


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:09:42 am

[John Davidson] "Exactly 20 paragraph breaks. Excellent"

That made me laugh out loud. Very funny


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:34:59 am

all of London looks forward to your FCPX post house Craig :)

we are completely sure it is going to be a world beater mate.

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


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:43:26 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "we are completely sure it is going to be a world beater mate."

Ive got plenty of clients, but Ill admit its hard to find good editors


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:59:36 am

yes of course, that's tough - nevertheless - we all look forward to the new dawn.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 12:43:09 am

It's very re-assuring to have a fresh rant from Aindreas, they're getting much rarer nowadays.

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


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:20:20 am

Can I just start by saying, Nice one Aindreas, but honestly I don't know what the hell you are talking about.
Im looking at that clip and Im afraid that's exactly the same sort of stuff Im cutting together. In fact Im looking at that and its a no brainer.
As for FCPX dead in London, are you in London? The tide has turned, trust me.


Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:22:20 am

Perhaps more apropos, the tilde has turned!

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:31:59 am

The assertion that somehow FCPX is only good for narrative or loose edits is misinformed to say the least.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:46:05 am

[craig slattery] "As for FCPX dead in London, are you in London? The tide has turned, trust me."

Please. trust is not an issue. I'm in London too. That piece got post in Smoke&M. Resolve for the pictures.

kindly describe any FCPX on the ground.

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


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 8:25:13 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Please. trust is not an issue. I'm in London too"

We should catch up, you will only get Smoke and Mirrors down at Smoke and Mirrors.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 12:13:15 pm

no no -

lets try it again Craig: outside of the editing facility you say you are about to open - what changes in London regarding FCPX are people supposed to "trust" you on?

what are you talking about?

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


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 13, 2013 at 3:27:51 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "lets try it again Craig: outside of the editing facility you say you are about to open - what changes in London regarding FCPX are people supposed to "trust" you on?

what are you talking about?"


4 months ago, as far as I knew, nobody at the BBC was using FCPX. I'd been banging on about how good the software was, so I felt its was time to put my money where my mouth is, ie cut a proper paying job in the software or shut up about it. Now, I'm pretty experienced, I've been doing this for a while and frankly people know me and I'm in demand. I knock back work every week and not just at the BBC. I'm pointing this out, because experienced editors like myself can afford to take on a challenge and look a bit stupid if it all goes tits up. Younger freelance guys and girls just starting to build their careers don't really have that opportunity.
As you are know, I have shared my experience with FCPX here on the Cow. We started with a short item for The Culture Show that went well and I continued to use X for the remainder of last year whenever we had the opportunity to use it. We’ve now taken it a step further for 2013, I'm cutting specials, and items and by March 27 we aim to be stitching and onlining the weekly program in X. That equates to about 8 hrs of proper telly between now and the end of March.
Ive been told there are now 7 other editors at the BBC also cutting in X, In both London and Bristol. The fact is, we are seeing the green shoots, folks that thought I was mad, and people that had said straight out that "this is not professional software” are now taking notice. Producers and directors are very keen, the brilliant guys at the village that were only too happy to set up my suite are delighted with the results. We post our audio at Halo and they have been extremely helpful making the transition, because I imagine they recognize this will continue to grow, I don't think there is any doubt about that anymore.
For the past two years, It was right and appropriate that legacy users continued to use FCP7 because if 'it aint broke' there is no need to fix it. However, FCP7 is on life support and soon, very soon I suspect, Apple will finally flick the switch. Ie if you want to run the latest mac on the latest OS then you will not be able to install or run FCP7. So where are those legacy users going to go? Some folks will head back to AVID, not so much Adobe, because if you were going to go down that road my guess is you would be down there already. That opens the door for FCPX
The general consensus is that Apple botched the launch of FCPX, but I actually think they played a blinder. The early, higher profile figures that jumped ship in the first few days are starting to look a tad silly, and a bit old fashion. We work in an industry that is innovative and cool, I like to kid myself I'm a bit like that. Not someone set in my ways and peeved because my beloved Apple kicked my arse into learning something new. Proper serious television is being created in FCPX . Ok, Aindreas down at Smoke & Mirrors it's a different story, this is not their thing, although I imagine making money is. For facilities like The Farm, Halo, Clear Cut, and every other shop around London, when the Beeb stop requesting FCP7 dry hires my guess is that more and more requests will be for FCPX. Within this thread, Kenny, whom I didn't know, is cutting a special for our show in Scotland. He said he would have liked to cut in X had he known he could, hopefully because of a handful of experienced editors now using FCPX, others will feel confident to join in.
So when I say ‘trust me’. Im not saying 'trust me there are loads of people here in London already using FCPX', Im saying, Trust me there will be'.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 13, 2013 at 1:39:57 pm

so you're talking about yourself. and a handful of other editors you were "told" about. not to be mean Craig, but I cannot imagine there is a reader left on the cow that is not aware that you are a freelancer who works on a magazine programme for the BBC.

I'm glad you like FCPX, I agree its very useful for quick cut magazine shows - but one freelancer swallow does not a spring make. there is only so far you can leverage repeatedly posting about when the show you cut freelance for is going to broadcast its next episode.

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


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 13, 2013 at 8:55:37 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "one freelancer swallow does not a spring make"

Yes but from little things, big things grow.

[Aindreas Gallagher] "there is only so far you can leverage repeatedly posting about when the show you cut freelance for is going to broadcast its next episode."

Ha ha, I’m trying to boost our viewing figures. That said, we do have a cumulative audience in the millions, Ok our numbers are nothing like ‘Strictly Come Dancing’ but perhaps repeated posting does have some leverage over youtube clips with a couple of 100 hits. Besides I want to share the love, and I’d hate to see a young guy like you get left behind.


Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:01:16 pm

Hear no evil, see no evil, say lots of evil.

We're like roaches. If you see one, there are a hundred hiding out of sight.

I seriously doubt anyone in their right mind would share real world use in this forum at this point. It's like the New York Post of forums.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:32:51 pm

[John Davidson] "Hear no evil, see no evil, say lots of evil.

We're like roaches. If you see one, there are a hundred hiding out of sight. "


well of course, that all sounds completely sane and reasonable.

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:20:36 pm

you mean a part of the BBC schedule receives those viewing figures, but I am utterly certain your editing, and the use of FCPX was critical.
Please feel free to keep declaring to any and all that you do indeed currently cut freelance for a BBC magazine show, but I fear you will grow hoarse and damage the old larynx.

As to youtube viewing figures - well indeed - early days however, if we are going to begin wrapping ourselves in viewing figures that have absolutely nothing to do with us - I, in your terms, got over one hundred and fifty thousand views for putting together this piece in FCP and AE -

http://bit.ly/ij90iN

that said - a good cat video can go higher.
It goes without saying - I would never lay claim to that viewing figure, even using the royal "we", [craig slattery] "we do have a cumulative audience in the millions, Ok our numbers" ... because that really would be embarrassingly self aggrandising.

In any event, as ever, good luck with the FPCX based post production facility you are about to pull the trigger on, literally any day now.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:39:43 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "Please feel free to keep declaring to any and all that you do indeed currently cut freelance for a BBC magazine show, but I fear you will grow hoarse and damage the old larynx.
"


Pot, kettle black .....again!

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 13, 2013 at 9:54:27 pm

no, I pretty carefully couched my response. Craig, as a freelancer, is wrapping himself, and FCPX, in the BBC flag like no one's business, to the point where you would be curious whether the BBC, with complex long term goals, would be completely comfortable being institutionally advertised for specific software in this fashion.

I gave a youtube viewing retort, because he called it, but Steve, only insofar as both examples are absolutely invalid - they both rely on large brands completely outside the editor.

In effect I am beginning to wonder at Craig's actual goals here, particularly given his repeatedly stated desire to set up a post facility, leveraging FCPX.

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 13, 2013 at 10:02:56 pm

I think I'm starting to suspect that there's a 300 level Psych course somewhere at some US university where the professor has assigned monitoring this group as homework.

(Student A) Look, right there is another example of from Poster Y who has to pathologically defend FCP-X like it was a their honest to god biological offspring...

(Student B) Exactly! Now I wonder how long it's going take for before poster X - who clearly can't emotionally tolerate anyone to say anything remotely positive about it - to pop up and question the credentials, breeding and intellectual acumen of anyone who argues that it might be useful for ANYTHING ... fascinating stuff!

(Professor) So, lets discuss which are the closest matches to each of these personality types using the diagnostic evaluations in DSM V...

Just sayin.

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

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 13, 2013 at 10:30:22 pm

well, at least this forum is good for something right?

just to add there Bill - given heritage and personal belief, breeding is a phrase I am unlikely to introduce into any conversation.

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 14, 2013 at 3:05:14 am

Here's a culture show for ya.:-) Many millions saw this. Possibly billions! LOL

Cut on FCPX, onlined on an Avid of some flavor. Honestly, other than the nice clean picture, the effects in the offline looked better...There are some great plugins for X... Groundbreaking? Nope. Not gonna win a key art for this. ;-) But it was all over TV and the intertubes, and it was cut on X. Fast. ;-)

Little New Year



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


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


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 14, 2013 at 1:28:08 am

That footage and cut looks beautiful brother.

It's kind of ironic though, it's much like the theme of the first video Apple did to intro X

Alexa, and crane car shots.

I like yours better, but to tell you the truth, if I didn't know I would have no idea what that was cut on,
unless you told me.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 14, 2013 at 1:52:36 am

yeah - thats completely true - this piece could have completely been cut on FCPX. Bar the music (which doesn't make sense since the final cut is all out of the live orchestra stuff - bunch of stuff got changed) that said i've tested, FCPX is highly tricky with multi-part music pieces.

however _ and as ever, until apple do better than a tilde key negation, until apple produce a real timeline, they are not supposed to be a professional editing software provider.

we are supposed to lead this. to some degree. A lot of people agree on the footage organisation, I agree whole heartedly on the post production and masking, apple need to find a way to normalise people's perception of the timeline.

It might not need full track re-introduction - but they have to get away from where they are.

there is absolutely no way apple are not going to be swallowed alive and dead in paid work in the next 12-18 months unless they at least reshape perception of the timeline in FCPX. They need to persuade broad groups that it is viable and advantageous.

because it is literally dead as door nails right now - that bit is true.

almost no one outside of me and Craig own licenses. Don't listen to craig.

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


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 14, 2013 at 2:23:18 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "They need to persuade broad groups that it is viable and advantageous."


Agreed.

I had a couple of documentary directors over the other day to lay down some VO

I'm showed them some things on X before we got started.

One said to me "I've heard nothing but bad things about it but I've never laid eyes on it until now"

They both were pretty impressed with the tagging and what not. They both can cut a little but not like you.

I could see them starting a doc in X and then trying to take it to somebody like you are some of these other talented folks on here.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 14, 2013 at 2:32:15 am

no no mate :) I'm literally just argumentative - don't extrapolate.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 14, 2013 at 2:37:05 am

I think we should start a pool on the exact date Aindreas does his first paid FCPX Job.

BTW is it snowing in London yet?

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


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Feb 25, 2013 at 11:48:48 am

This is all so dull. Go back to FCP 1 thru 5. Everyone was saying the same thing. Anyone who used it was unprofessional. And then Mr Murch used it on Cold Mountain and suddenly all these Avid editors were also FCP editors too.

Anyone wo takes so much time to discredit software like FCP X looks like they are scared of change to me.
Also might there be a hidden agenda. Soho has a lot of money tied up in Avid software and hardware but look at the hardware these facilities are running?

Quite old kit innit?


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 1:05:52 am

I turned to the director and said, ‘why do YOU think we have achieved so much in such a short time?’ He said, ‘I think its because its so visual, you really fell like you are in it’.
And that’s what I have been experiencing since we started the trial in X. Its unlike any other NLE, the way it affects you tonally and visually. I will post my workflow later today, but just briefly, Ive been using projects in the same way as I use sequences in FCP7 and the instant visual reference to material that you have already worked on, ie cut down is brilliant.

[Mark Dobson] "I was just wondering how you deal with interview material.

Do you fully transcribe?

We split interviews into sections by creating favourites and then type a synopsis for each favourite.
"

We basically listen to the interviews and marked out the various subjects. The Early days, old work, new work etc. I created new projects for each subject and as we go through the interviews we add other contributors talking about the same subject to the existing projects. When we start to edit the material down I would firstly duplicate the project to retain a long cut of each subject. All the while I will be cutting angles in the multicam fine tuning the interviews as we progress. I find trimming in the timeline extremely fast, so I throw the material into the projects very roughly. The beauty of creating the projects is that the material is aways visually available when you click back to the project library. You can skim and listen to the cuts before deciding to open the project. In this edit Ive done the same with the actuality sequences and montage sequences in that Ive cut them in their own projects. To be honest, I knew in this special there was quite a bit of actuality, which without blowing my own horn too loudly, is what Im credited as being quite good at, but Ive not cut actuality in X before. Ok, I had to think it through, but once I was into it, again its so fast, I powered through about 5 actuality sequences that will probably never make the cut because we have miles too much material.


Return to posts index

Mark Dobson
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 6:32:53 pm

[craig slattery] "We basically listen to the interviews and marked out the various subjects. The Early days, old work, new work etc. I created new projects for each subject and as we go through the interviews we add other contributors talking about the same subject to the existing projects. When we start to edit the material down I would firstly duplicate the project to retain a long cut of each subject."

Thanks for that Craig.

It's always really interesting to find out other editors approach their workflows.

A lot of the interview material I use is heavily edited to compress meaning, get rid of hesitation, remove 'ums and ers', generally get the best out of people, so the newly designed compound clips come in useful, edited passages become compound clips in the event browser.

I look forward to watching your programmes as they roll out.

Mark


Return to posts index

Paul Jay
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 4:50:28 pm

Awesome! System/storage specs would be nice.


Return to posts index

craig slattery
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 11, 2013 at 5:50:53 pm

[Paul Jay] "Awesome! System/storage specs would be nice."


We use a Mac Pro 2.66 Ghz 6-core with 24GB ram and ATI Radeon HD5870 graphics card. Latest Mountain Lion OS and FCPX 10.0.7. We also use Event Manager and X2PRO. We have two Apple LED Cinema Display, 27" flat panels. Not sure what we use to get to the external HD Monitor either AJA or Kona. We are standalone at the moment not connected to the Xsan. We transfer rushes from the xsan to the standalone via Thunderbolt drive. I will post my workflow a little later, just putting my toddler in the bath. Nice to be home instead of the edit.


Return to posts index

Kenny Park
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 2:39:17 pm

Great post, Craig, but I admit to a pang of jealousy. I'm cutting a 60 minute Culture Show special in Glasgow right now on Avid; I never dreamed that doing so on FCPX would be possible. Jealous, but glad the tide (tilde) is turning, as you say.

I did manage to cut four 60 minute music shows for BBC about a year ago (I pounced when multicam and broadcast monitoring appeared), but I was working at a facility where I had a modicum of clout —it was an indie rather than the BBC itself.

Anyway, I cut those to 59 minutes to the frame in FCPX just fine. Like you, I'd never imagined that there could be an issue here.

So, as one who finds FCPX a delight, glad that I might soon get to work with it more often.


Return to posts index

Nikolas Bäurle
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 12, 2013 at 7:57:40 pm

FCPX will establish itself as a great software. These discussions remind me of the time back in 2001 when I decided to start using FCP 2.0. At the time I was working for one of Germany's top commercial directors. He adopted FCP, and we cut everything on miniDV, and exportet EDLs. Das Werk, where he did the finishing hated FCP, but they had to deal with it.

A small postproduction I work for has been using FCPX for over a year now. We had problems at first, of course FCPX was to blame, very slow rendering. But I kept on telling them to check their harddrives. A week later their Raids broke down. After that everything worked fine.

At another somewhat bigger Postproduction I work for, the Chief Editor hates FCPX but she only tried it a couple of hours. She even claimed FCPX would never establish itself. This comes from an editor who only knows FCP Legacy, doesn't like Premiere and hates Avid, for whatever reason, probably since working fx in Avid is pretty tedious. But she's a very good editor. However I believe, like in many cases she doesn't want to have to adapt to something new. A conversation with her (originally in German):

She "Nik, FCP7 won't die, don't worry."

Me "Really..."

She "You can't edit features length films on X, I tried it out."

Me "Danni Lowinsky is edited on FCPX and Knut Hake just finished his second feature on it"

She "On X?"

Me "Yeah."

She "Aha...."

This is what I experience a lot, editors not using it have the biggest opinions, especially if they've never used FCP Legacy.
For what I do, I don't miss anything from Legacy. Magazine, Feature, Experimental, Music Videos, Industry, works great.

Craigs experience at BBC is quite refreshing to me. I also work at DW-TV in Berlin. Wish they had the same attitude BBC has. But this year they want to try and get rid of most Soundtechnicians and Editors for news and features and have journalists and translators do everything themselves. Write edit speak. On a really crappy VPMS system, which is actually used to move sequences around. It can only do hard cuts and sound dissolves. And sofar it takes longer and the sound is horrible.

I'm sorry for this long rant... :-)

Nik

http://www.nikedit.com

"Always look on the bright side of life" - Monty Python



Return to posts index

Brooks Tomlinson
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 14, 2013 at 8:07:42 pm

For organizing the media and getting the first cut done, there is nothing faster than FCPX, and I have used them all. Where I find it falls down is in the end part, tweaking, revisions, and project duplications , then finally archiving.

For me, it was like you lost all that speed you had at the start, and actually starts to take longer.

I will be interested to see how the blog about the whole process goes.

Brooks Tomlinson
"I dream in 32bit float"


Return to posts index

John Davidson
Re: FCPX proving to be very fast
on Jan 14, 2013 at 8:08:07 pm

Thanks - I think you'll like our versions solution.

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


Return to posts index

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