FORUMS: list search recent posts

FCPX is Ready for prime time

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Jordan Mena
FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 6:38:34 pm

I'm currently working for a major network that decided to go the FCPX route for creative and finishing in tandem with Resolve.

This was my first opportunity to really run FCPX threw its paces and not only cut but deliver for Air.

i cut 22 promos over 2 weeks with X. Way faster then I could of done with another NLE. All delivered on time or early. What I loved most was how fast I could synchronize clips and use of Roles. Versioning? No problem. Shifting projects over 3 different rooms, no problems. all on an XSAN.

Thanks Apple.

FCPX - learn it!

- J

Jordan Mena | Editor | Colorist | Producer
Los Angeles, CA
jordanmena.com


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 7:31:02 pm

"Promos." Short form. Yeah, its great for that, no question. And it's perfect for many pro workflows. We all get that.

But I have no need to learn it as I cut long form shows for broadcast. Most of the time shared projects with multiple editors. FCX isn't up to that task yet, so I have zero need to learn it. In fact, the push here for long form is with back to Avid, or over to Premiere Pro. Only FCX jobs I see are for casting or web or promo.

Then again, I'm part of the 2% that Apple doesn't care about.

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


Return to posts index

Jordan Mena
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 7:53:07 pm

I got news for you buddy. I have to cut three 30 minute episodes for air starting Monday with 2 weeks for each episode using X. I'm not scared.

- J

Jordan Mena | Editor | Colorist | Producer
Los Angeles, CA
jordanmena.com


Return to posts index


Shane Ross
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 7:58:26 pm

Cool! If it works, great. Whatever tool gets the job done and delivers what the network requires.

Two weeks for 30 min (22:30ish) sounds about right. We typically get 4-5 weeks for our 1 hours. Although because we throw 3 editors at each episode, they get done in about 8-10 days.

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


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 8:10:52 pm

I read a lot of comments on this forum by editors who cut various documentaries, network shows, cable shows etc.

If you are allowed to name the particular shows and episodes -- and I understand if this is not desirable or allowed -- I would love to actually see particular shows cut on X.

There is a vast difference in the needs and quality of various shows. An Aaron Sorkin-written episode of Newsroom shot on multiple Alexas, with tons of fast-paced, over-lapping dialogue ... is very different from a guy in a garage arguing with his son about how to rebuild a motorcycle, documented over several days with HandyCams or DSLRs.

And documentaries, likewise, vary wildly in what needs to be accomplished with audio, with intercutting between un-matched cameras of vastly different quality and look, and managing hours and hours of material, vs ENG or presskit shoots made with far less over-shooting or coverage..

I would love to see various claims supported by examples! If possible.

Doug D


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 8:30:28 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] " An Aaron Sorkin-written episode of Newsroom shot on multiple Alexas, with tons of fast-paced, over-lapping dialogue ..."

I've done those kinds of scenes with X on a indie film I'm cutting. Narrative cutting by one editor isn't a big problem in X.

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "And documentaries, likewise, vary wildly"

True, but these definitely benefit for the keyword/smart collection structure of X.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 8:46:23 pm

[Shane Ross] "Most of the time shared projects with multiple editors. FCX isn't up to that task yet,"

Do you consider FCP 7 to be up to that task? IOW just handing an (tcp 7) sequence/project off to another editor right? Not multiple users cutting the same sequence concurrently right?

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 8:59:15 pm

I have used FCP 6 and 7 in environments where we had multiple users cutting one show, the same episode. Shared media and all that, but the difference is that we all worked from separate project files, but when we needed to combine all the sections, we'd be able to open these separate projects and pull the separate pieces together. Not as elegant as Avid, but it worked very well. Bunim Murray productions used FCP like this for years, on several reality shows, including Project Runway. I used this on a series for Discovery called Surgery Saved My Life, History series called Strange History, ID series called Call 911, another ID series True Crime With Aphrodite Jones, WE show Bad Girls Club. All shows with multiple editors cutting one episode.

And no software allows two editors to cut the same sequence at the same time. Avid allows us to all open the same bin, but the only person who can male changes to the cut in that bin (savable cut) is the first person to open it.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 9:13:56 pm

[Shane Ross] "And no software allows two editors to cut the same sequence at the same time. "

I seem to recall that EditShare's implementation of Lightworks does allow that. It's been a couple of years though, since I checked it out at NAB.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Shane Ross
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 9:15:59 pm

Sounds dangerous, Oliver. Two editors shouldn't be able to make changes to the same sequence at the same time.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 9:17:56 pm

[Shane Ross] "Two editors shouldn't be able to make changes to the same sequence at the same time."

I would tend to agree. As I recall, you had to "refresh" the sequence in order for one editor's changes to update on the other's screen.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 9:41:31 pm

Ha ha, sounds like Google Docs!

Doug D


Return to posts index


Michael Phillips
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 11:13:10 pm

I actually wouldn't have a huge issue with this if it also included the ability to lock of a span that I was working in and treated as such within the greater span or timeline. But without some sort of safety rails like that, it would be a nightmare. Also, a true "live"simultaneous editing would have editors fighting over position and view of the timeline and play head. And while we can generate change lists comparing two sequences, there is no ability to merge edits from two versions of a sequence although I went down that path with a patent years ago with timed management of all edits in a timeline with "use most recent, by user, etc."

Michael


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 9:46:45 pm

[Shane Ross] "I have used FCP 6 and 7 in environments where we had multiple users cutting one show, the same episode. Shared media and all that, but the difference is that we all worked from separate project files, but when we needed to combine all the sections, we'd be able to open these separate projects and pull the separate pieces together."

Yeah, we do the same, in 7 and Pr. I think a big complaint about X is that it's not possible to do that. But... you can do it. It is a little convoluted at the moment, and you unfortunately do have to jump through some hoops.

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:52:02 am

[Charlie Austin] "Yeah, we do the same, in 7 and Pr. I think a big complaint about X is that it's not possible to do that. But... you can do it. It is a little convoluted at the moment, and I'd be very surprised if Apple isn't addressing that. Right now you unfortunately do have to jump through some hoops. Be interesting to see what they come up with...
"


In PPro CC can't you open up a timeline from another project inside your own project and use it as a media source? That's at least something.

I spent a number of years working w/a dozen other editors all sharing media (and FCP Legend project files) on a huge Xsan and it was clunky as hell compared to Avid. I did a lot of the workflow development and project/media management too and the thought of going to something more cumbersome than FCP 7 in that type of environment makes me want to tear my hair out.




Return to posts index


Lance Bachelder
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 5:34:43 pm

I'm cutting a 1 hour docudrama special in Premiere CC and loving it. We just added the GTX 680 to the Mac Pro and so nice to see everything at 100% with zero renders. Weird I was just cutting in a clip the other day and I thought why wold I ever use an Avid again, CC is so much better than I imagined it could ever be after years of early beta team disasters with Adobe. Only thing I that isn't great is audio finessing but it's going to a mix anyway...

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 5:36:10 pm

[Lance Bachelder] "I'm cutting a 1 hour docudrama special in Premiere CC and loving it."

Now you're just rubbing it in ;-)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 1:39:21 am

Sorry Oliver - didn't mean to sound like I was slamming Avid - it wasn't meant that way, I was just thinking about how good CC is and how much I'm enjoying cutting with it and why I would use anything else... unless something better comes along... which might happen this week?

Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 1:47:59 am

I'm digging it too.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 12:08:42 pm

Lance,

Oh, I didn't take it that way it all! I read it more as tied to your recent frustrations with X.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 8:28:15 pm

[Jordan Mena] "I'm currently working for a major network that decided to go the FCPX route for creative and finishing in tandem with Resolve."

Which major network? I'm not seeing that, but I've been busy, so I'm not seeing everything. None of the studios or networks I work for have made that decision. Most of them are either solidly Avid-based, or non-denominational. Maybe we disagree on the definition of a "major network?" I count seven broadcast majors--ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, Telemundo, Fox, and CW--plus a half-dozen very substantial Cable franchises like TBN that deserve to be called "Major," however non-traditionally.

That one of these has now decided to adopt FCP X as its primary promotions NLE is certainly BIG news. So, please, inform us.

Or do I misunderstand? Do you mean a major network has allowed the show you are working on the go FCP X, as opposed to the Network going FCP X?


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 8:49:31 pm

When I started using FCP for broadcast work, I blogged about it, and named the network. That actually was the whole point of the blog, the fact that I wasn't using Avid to cut a broadcast show, but rather FCP. And not only that, but it was one of my first forays into HD. So I blogged about my successes and failures, the challenges of using FCP to cut for broadcast. I named the show, a special called THE MEXICAN AMERICAN WAR, and I named the network, The History Channel.

If I should start using another non-Avid NLE for broadcast, I'll do the same thing. 'Hey, check it out, I'm using Premiere Pro to cut a Lifetime movie!'

So if you are going to brag about using FCX for a 'major network,' can you name that network to add credence to the statement? Or are you prevented from doing that? NDA or something? I haven't blogged lately about the shows I'm on because of just that, NDA. I can say that I am cutting Ancient Aliens, or now a new show called The Curse of Oak Island, and both were for History, heck, I can even say I use Avid. But I can't say anything else.

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


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 9:45:25 pm

Thanks Shane, that's the kind of reference that gives me some context. My wife did some History Channel shows out of Stamford & NYC years ago, also Avid shows.

You're probably right, you end up getting someone in trouble if you get too specific, everything is an NDA now! :)

Doug D


Return to posts index

Jordan Mena
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:22:10 pm

i can't say at the moment. But we create or own content as well as promos for said content. from 5 min BTS to hour long doc dramas. all on FCPX.

Jordan Mena | Editor | Colorist | Producer
Los Angeles, CA
jordanmena.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 10:29:47 pm

Does your demo reel(s) give any hint? :)


Return to posts index

Jordan Mena
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 22, 2013 at 4:12:35 am

No. That was all done on FCP7. I will hopefully have my FCPX cuts up on my website by the end of the year.

Jordan Mena | Editor | Colorist | Producer
Los Angeles, CA
jordanmena.com


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 8:38:09 pm

I am interested in how you do versioning of your short pieces? Do you use compound clips, multiple projects, etc?

Doug D


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 8:57:34 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "I am interested in how you do versioning of your short pieces? Do you use compound clips, multiple projects, etc?

Doug D"


Not the OP, but I just duplicate the project and continue. Some folks use CC's as well... Personal preference I guess, same result... :-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 9:54:44 pm

Charlie:

I ask because when I versioned using duplicate projects, my folders grew geometrically. Perhaps I have a faulty setting in Preferences.

--

In Legacy, I just Duplicated a Sequence, and of course it was easy to have multiple sequences opened as tabs in the Timeline, and cut & paste between them.

Unsure if there is a logical way to do a similar process in X.

--

I did learn that you could create CC's and version them, "Reference New Parent Clip" and begin working on the new one.

In this workflow, I will have a Project called something like "PeaceJam Conference Workbench" and when I decide to save a version, I make the cut a compound clip, then Reference New Parent which creates a copy, number that v2. I delete v1 CC from the Timeline or "workbench" and drop in v2, begin my revisions.

Thus I have dated, numbered CCs in the Event Library, but only the current version will be sitting on the Project timeline, or "workbench" in mid-edit.

I have no idea if this process is vulnerable to disaster, as I haven't had one yet! :)

Doug D


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 9:59:39 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "I ask because when I versioned using duplicate projects, my folders grew geometrically. Perhaps I have a faulty setting in Preferences."

Don't include the render files. Also if your sequences include compound clips, then you are duplicating all of those extra clips AGAIN under-the-hood.

In my experience, compounds should be completely avoided at all costs, except for effects nests and the like. These have ramifications later, like when you try to dupe+used clips to create a "consolidated" event.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:07:02 pm

[Oliver Peters] "In my experience, compounds should be completely avoided at all costs, except for effects nests and the like. These have ramifications later, like when you try to dupe+used clips to create a "consolidated" event."

Agreed. CC"s work fine, except when they don't. I know a lot of people have requested easier versioning.
-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:23:48 pm

Yikes! Thanks Oliver & Charlie, I am forewarned.

Oliver, are you going to write a book, Phil Hodgetts-style, on your NLE comparisons and/or FCPX experiences?

Too time consuming, no doubt. We'll just have to keep reading the blog!

Doug D


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:33:17 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "Yikes! Thanks Oliver & Charlie, I am forewarned."

You'll be fine, though as Oliver points out, CC's can cause trouble when consolidating Events etc. So... don't do that. lol

It's probably worth your time to turn final versions of your cuts, if they're CC's, into projects just to be safe though. Particularly before updating to whatever new versions of X appear... CC's were not really designed to do what a lot of people are using them for... They work, but there can be... issues...

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Douglas K. Dempsey
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:48:56 pm

Thanks Charlie.

As for those of us using CCs for things they were not designed for ...

To quote Spinal Tap, "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever."

Doug D


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 11:49:00 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "Oliver, are you going to write a book"

LOL. No, but thanks for the vote of confidence.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:07:21 pm

[Douglas K. Dempsey] "I ask because when I versioned using duplicate projects, my folders grew geometrically. "

You can make folders in the Project Library. For my versioning, I typically have a few working sequences, and then a folder marked "zOld" and put older cuts in there.

You can even quit FCPX, Make a new folder in the Final Cut Projects folder, drag a few Project folders in to it, launch FCPX, and FCPX will have the exact same organization with folder names in the Project Library.

This way, I can drag multiple Projects to the zOld folder. Something you can't do in the FCPX project library.

This makes me think that one day, FCPX folders are going to get "packaged" one day.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:15:08 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "You can make folders in the Project Library. For my versioning, I typically have a few working sequences, and then a folder marked "zOld" and put older cuts in there.

You can even quit FCPX, Make a new folder in the Final Cut Projects folder, drag a few Project folders in to it, launch FCPX, and FCPX will have the exact same organization with folder names in the Project Library.

This way, I can drag multiple Projects to the zOld folder. Something you can't do in the FCPX project library.
"


I do the same thing. Works quite well. Remembering to not include and/or delete render files is kind of a PITA though.


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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:20:26 pm

[Charlie Austin] "I do the same thing. Works quite well. Remembering to not include and/or delete render files is kind of a PITA though."

Yes.

I go back and forth.

As someone that needs to maintain archiving I really appreciate how tidy the FCPX file system is. You can move things to different machines very easily, including render files, and everything just relinks so easily. Or you don't even need to relink, it just works, even if it's a new drive with a new name, etc. It's very handy for archiving, very handy for restoring, very handy for moving things around en masse.

Then there are days where I'm like, "F*ck!! If FCPX would just allow to put the render and Proxy Files where I want them!!!!"



'Scuse my language. It's Friday afternoon.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:59:17 pm

'Live it. Love it. Know it."

Bill, I've looked at FCX three times since it came out, and cannot see how I will benefit from it. But my biggest stumbling block is the editing interface. I don't like it, it doesn't work for me. I didn't see why that needed to change. But, that's me, I'm becoming a dinosaur apparently.

When I first looked at FCP...back at version 2, I saw it as a great inexpensive tool that finally allowed us to edit side projects without having to plead with our employers to borrow the company Avid after hours. Then V3 came along and added a lot more things, and solved many issues I had with Avid. Then v4.5 solved more, and I jumped ship.

FCX doesn't solve any issues I am having, and in fact adds a stumbling block. Editing with it is so vastly different that any muscle memory I have is gone. FCP 7, ADOBE Premiere Pro, Avid MC...all have the same basic editing style and toolset so I can easily move from one to another without being derailed too much. Those basic tools, and the other features do all I need. Where something doesn't work on Avid, Premiere does it well, so I go there.

FCX gives me nothing I need, it isn't seeing much of any use in projects I work on, so I see no need to learn it. That might change, it might not. But i dont see any reason to learn FCX unless a job requires it. And at this time, the prospect of that happening is very very slim.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 12:00:24 am

[Shane Ross] "FCX doesn't solve any issues I am having, and in fact adds a stumbling block"

I think this article is apropos about now ;-)

http://provideocoalition.com/kmcauliffe/story/do-the-professionals-care-abo...

Honestly, though, I've been cutting a lot of professional work on X for the past 2 years. I like a lot of it and it has been holding up on the indie film I've been cutting. Yet, when I think about the complexity of a project like the feature film "Rush", I find it inconceivable that cutting such a film with X would be a very smooth process.

I realize Apple (and most of the proponents here) couldn't care less, but that's an example where X simply isn't the right tool. It doesn't exhibit an interface and underlying architecture that scales to that level. At least not from my experience with it.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Ty Vann
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 4:10:35 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I think this article is apropos about now ;-)

http://provideocoalition.com/kmcauliffe/story/do-the-professionals-care-abo....."


The guy who wrote that obviously doesn't like and use FCPX, but it's no excuse for such a misinformed and biased piece.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 4:45:45 pm

[Ty Vann] "The guy who wrote that obviously doesn't like and use FCPX, but it's no excuse for such a misinformed and biased piece."

He is addressing what he sees regarding the adoption by established facilities in Toronto. I believe that part is accurate and echoes the experience of others outside of Toronto.

Actually I'm not sure what you consider inaccurate. He is largely taking to task the Supermeet presentation by Larry Jordan, which has received tons of criticism in this forum as well.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 5:10:52 pm

[Ty Vann] "The guy who wrote that obviously doesn't like and use FCPX, but it's no excuse for such a misinformed and biased piece."

Exactly how is it misinformed? I don't see it.

And biased? Its an opinion piece. Its supposed to be biased; that's what opinions are. I'm guessing you only think its misinformed and biased because you don't like his opinion, which you are, of course, welcome not to like, but I have to tell you:

Kevin Mcauliffe ("The guy") has been around a long time, offering a lot of insight (and free tutorials) about his NLE experience, so his opinion interests me quite a bit more than your vague dismissal. Now if you can point out exactly where he is misinformed, I might be interested in listening.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 6:48:28 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Its an opinion piece. Its supposed to be biased; that's what opinions are. "

Agreed, though the reactions to peoples "opinions" about X (Bill, I'm looking at you!) engender similar reactions among those who disagree. (and sometimes from people who *do* agree lol) If Kevin wrote the same piece about MC or Pr, he'd get the same reaction, just from different camps. ;-)


[Chris Harlan] "Now if you can point out exactly where he is misinformed, I might be interested in listening."

I think his observation that no *big* facilities have switched to X, is correct. In Toronto and elsewhere. But really, a lot of those big Post facilities never switched to FCP Classic either, at least places that finish stuff. They tolerated FCP. I think the biggest sticking point for facilities, at least the ones I know of that are interested in X (yes, there really are some of those...) is collaboration. The whole Project/Event dependency dance you need to do now. If that changes, I think people will take a closer look. The timeline change is also a biggie, but at the end of the day it's just a timeline into which you cut things. SHIFT-1,2 or 3 then Q, W, E, or D. There. Now you can edit in the magnetic timeline. Your welcome.

All facetiousness aside... What bugs me about Kevin's piece is that are a few things that are just pure conjecture stated as facts:

At the end of the day, there is one reason that FCP7 became FCPX.  Apple doesn't care about editors and editing.  They care about phone sales.

Right. That's why they spent a not insignificant amour of time and money to create an entirely new Mac Pro. to sell phones.

They don't care that we don't have audio mixing (Soundtrack Pro), DVD creation (DVD Studio Pro), Color Grading (Color).

Soundtrack Pro = Logic (admittedly a WIP, but you can see where they're going.
DVD Studio Pro - Yes, EOL, but apparently Adobe doesn't care about this either, and Avid never did.
Color = For the majority of users, what's in X is very good, much better than the old FCP. If you need more, Resolve is free. Why would Apple want to compete in that space anymore?

In FCP's heyday, MC facilities were switching their facilities over to FCP, and it had Avid (and Adobe for that matter) reeling!  Today, no post facility using Media Composer has said "The features in FCPX completely blow away what's in MC right now, we must switch all of our edit stations over!"

They never said that in FCP's "heyday" either. They said, "well, it can do most of what we need, but more importantly, look how cheap it is! We'll take it!"

Learn it as well as you can, but make sure you also know Media Composer and Premiere Pro CC just as well,

Complete agreement there, especially for freelancers.

as the day is coming where Apple could very will just flip the switch, and leave everyone in the dark.

The day is coming when Avid could very well go out of business. The day is coming when Adobe isn't making money and could very well EOL their Video apps. The end is near!

In the grand scheme of things... what was the point of this piece? Honestly, at this point who cares what NLE "everyone" uses? It's trivially easy to swap a sequence in and out of X, FCP 7, and Pr. MC is kind of an outlier here, but it's doable. They all do the same thing. They all do some things better than the other. Some are easier, some are harder, depending on what your needs are. What is it about X that sets people off so much? That's an opinion piece I'd like to read...

Eventually, some "name" editor will cut a "Hollywood Feature" on X. Then we get to listen to people's opinions as to why that doesn't matter. I can't wait! :-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 7:48:05 pm

[Charlie Austin] "[Chris Harlan] "Its an opinion piece. Its supposed to be biased; that's what opinions are. "

Agreed, though the reactions to peoples "opinions" about X (Bill, I'm looking at you!) engender similar reactions among those who disagree. (and sometimes from people who *do* agree lol) If Kevin wrote the same piece about MC or Pr, he'd get the same reaction, just from different camps. ;-)
"


Yes, I DO get that, and have no problem with him vigorously disagreeing with Kevin's opinion, but dismissing an opinion as biased is a bit absurd. Its not about sides.

[Charlie Austin] "All facetiousness aside... What bugs me about Kevin's piece is that are a few things that are just pure conjecture stated as facts:
"


Fair enough.

[Charlie Austin] "But really, a lot of those big Post facilities never switched to FCP Classic either, at least places that finish stuff. "

By 2009, I don't know of any Post facility in LA that didn't offer FCP. And a lot of promo companies were using it exclusively, or at least seriously. Will it be the same with X by 2018? Maybe.


[Charlie Austin] "At the end of the day, there is one reason that FCP7 became FCPX.  Apple doesn't care about editors and editing.  They care about phone sales.

Right. That's why they spent a not insignificant amour of time and money to create an entirely new Mac Pro. to sell phones.
"


There are a lot of reasons that Apple may have created a new Mac Pro that have little or nothing to do with what they think of or care about video editors. And, of course, some that say they do. I'm not sure which I believe. What we can agree on, though, is that the new Mac Pros will make up only a very tiny sliver of Apple's earnings next year, and that phone sales will preoccupy the company.


[Charlie Austin] "In FCP's heyday, MC facilities were switching their facilities over to FCP, and it had Avid (and Adobe for that matter) reeling!  Today, no post facility using Media Composer has said "The features in FCPX completely blow away what's in MC right now, we must switch all of our edit stations over!"

They never said that in FCP's "heyday" either. They said, "well, it can do most of what we need, but more importantly, look how cheap it is! We'll take it!"
"


I disagree. There was a two/three year stretch--say 2006-2009--where the features of FCP beat the crud out of the decaying Media Composer 2.8. There were so many things I could do on FCP that just could not be done on an Avid, and a lot of people were noticing. You couldn't even reposition an HD frame in an SD timeline. "Center cut" was the only option. Avid's own forums were full of long-term editors bemoaning how far behind Media Composer had fallen behind. That's when FCP actually began to surge. So, yes, I saw some of what Kevin is talking about.

[Charlie Austin] "Complete agreement there, especially for freelancers.

as the day is coming where Apple could very will just flip the switch, and leave everyone in the dark.

The day is coming when Avid could very well go out of business. The day is coming when Adobe isn't making money and could very well EOL their Video apps. The end is near!
"


Quite true. Any one of these puppies could easily fly away.

[Charlie Austin] "Eventually, some "name" editor will cut a "Hollywood Feature" on X. Then we get to listen to people's opinions as to why that doesn't matter. I can't wait! :-)
"


I not quite ready to replace "probably" with "eventually," but yes. I'm looking forward to the coming release. I'm very curious about what's there.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 8:00:59 pm

[Chris Harlan] "I not quite ready to replace "probably" with "eventually," but yes. I'm looking forward to the coming release. I'm very curious about what's there."

The inevitable "Cold Mountain" moment. That, of course, partially happened because the Coens preceded Murch to FCP (and with Apple hand-holding in their case). While, there are certainly features being cut now on X, the Coens appear to have given the nod to Premiere Pro, so we'll see. I suspect, someone of note is already evaluating - if not already using - X, so it's likely to be a matter of timing and competing press releases.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Ty Vann
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 7:28:54 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Exactly how is it misinformed? I don't see it.

And biased? Its an opinion piece. Its supposed to be biased; that's what opinions are."


Some opinions are more informed then others, therefore less biased (i.e., more fair, if you want a definition).

How is it misinformed...? See Mr Austin's post above or the posts at fcp.co. Overall the article is a reactionary piece, more appropriate for 2011 than 2013. Do professional editors care about FCPX? Apparently Mr McAulife's type of professionals don't care. And anyone else who cares about FCPX, the thousands of editors out there using FCPX to make a living, don't count.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 7:58:45 pm

[Ty Vann] "Some opinions are more informed then others, therefore less biased (i.e., more fair, if you want a definition).
"


Kevin's got a lot of experience, and you may disagree with his take, but I believe he's probably pretty well informed on the Post scene in Toronto, and has a fairly clear eye to what is and what is not being incorporated there.

[Ty Vann] "ow is it misinformed...? See Mr Austin's post above or the posts at fcp.co. Overall the article is a reactionary piece, more appropriate for 2011 than 2013."

I agree. Charlie had some interesting bones to pick. Sorry if I came across harshly. We are all passionate about these issues.


Return to posts index

Jordan Mena
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 22, 2013 at 4:15:41 am

I use the project Library. Something I have grown fond of. I am very organized. I like to keep a creative cuts folder. with an Archive subfolder or old cuts. Once that cut has been approved I create another folder called "Onlines" in which I remove the scratch audio and lay the mix and final grfx in. Then I create a "masters" folder to version spots out. I stopped creating compound clips only because they can get a little wild. It depends on the editor. If it works for you go right ahead.

Jordan Mena | Editor | Colorist | Producer
Los Angeles, CA
jordanmena.com


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:01:04 pm

Happy to hear anyone's story of their tools and how they work in their situation. But "FCPX, Learn it"?
Please.

Tim


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:04:43 pm

It's that comment that prompted my response. If that wasn't said, I'd have left well enough alone. We all know FCX is good and used in many pro environments. But "learn it?" I have no reason to

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:37:15 pm

[Shane Ross] "It's that comment that prompted my response. If that wasn't said, I'd have left well enough alone. We all know FCX is good and used in many pro environments. But "learn it?" I have no reason to"

Everyone has a right to their workflows and opinions and they're all good.

But it's also become clear from the past two years of debate here, that since X truly did re-invent some of how NLE operations can be expected to happen - it is to an extent HARDER to switch to it if you're still simply re-enforcing your traditional NLE habits every day.

You may never need to do what X does really well. But if you ever decide that you CAN benefit from it's strengths - I truly expect you will find it harder to adapt to the longer you wait to open your thinking up to the new processes.

It's a judgement call. Just like everything else.

Nobody HAS to use X.

But it's interesting how those who do - "mostly" seem to return after the learning curve praising how much it's transformed their speed and efficiency - and how well its working for them.

Not all - but most.

Something to consider is 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

TImothy Auld
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:44:10 pm

[Bill Davis] "Something to consider is all."

Yes, absolutely. And I am. But "FCP X, Learn it"? Again, please.

Tim


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 12:06:59 am

[TImothy Auld] "Yes, absolutely. And I am. But "FCP X, Learn it"? Again, please.

Tim
"


But why does that bother you?

You'd expect any Raiders fan to say "the Raiders rock!" and everyone accepts that for exactly what it is. Someone who's a fan of something publicly acknowledging that.

So WHY is it that when a FCP-X "fan" says "learn it!" which is, after all, just a public expression of an individuals experience and enthusiasm - NOT something that's going to be enforced on anyone else - it becomes so important to deride the opinion?

I just don't get that.

As rabid a supporter of X as I've been here, you've NEVER heard voices here being extremely derisive about anyone using AVID or Premier or Vegas. Occasional bad experiences, sure. But not push back when somebody likes those, right?

But since day one - there HAS been a vocal group who just can't let any positive opinion about X go un-challenged.

That just seems weird.

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

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:14:42 am

[Bill Davis] "As rabid a supporter of X as I've been here, you've NEVER heard voices here being extremely derisive about anyone using AVID or Premier or Vegas. Occasional bad experiences, sure. But not push back when somebody likes those, right?"


Weren't you quite recently referring to Avid as AVOID. I believe, if memory serves well, that you were. Maybe you should think of taking the ALLCaps off of never.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:27:43 am

[Chris Harlan] "
Weren't you quite recently referring to Avid as AVOID. I believe, if memory serves well, that you were. Maybe you should think of taking the ALLCaps off of never."


Nope. Unless it was a literal typo, I've never, ever done that.

I have no more quarrel with X's competitors than I do with people who like to eat roast beef sandwiches with mustard rather than the mayo and horseradish I prefer. (Actually, sometimes I even sneak in a little ketchup - but I'm nuts that way!)

I only get grumpy when people say X does NOT work well. Never when they say their software of choice does.

I still have trouble seeing quotes as "scare quotes" and seeing the ALL caps I've used for emphasis for 40 years of typing as shouting - but I acknowledge that it's my flaw - nobody elses.

And I'm working on it.

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

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 4:49:48 am

[Bill Davis] "Nope. Unless it was a literal typo, I've never, ever done that."

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but:

"OK, here you go. Both AVOID and PPro can't "satisfy" my now required "deliverable" of a NLE that leaves your work connected to an on-line output file so I don't have to waste endless time doing "work-arounds" in order to refresh a public copy of a newly produced video directly from the NLE "

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/57447

I can't see how that's a typo, but I'll grant that that might be a Freudian slip.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 11:07:19 pm

[Chris Harlan] "I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but:

"OK, here you go. Both AVOID and PPro can't "satisfy" my now required "deliverable" of a NLE that leaves your work connected to an on-line output file so I don't have to waste endless time doing "work-arounds" in order to refresh a public copy of a newly produced video directly from the NLE "

http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/57447

I can't see how that's a typo, but I'll grant that that might be a Freudian slip."


Why do I suddenly feel like a politician?

OK, I'm exposed. Busted. Found out.

Out of my couple of thoustand posts - I guess I once posted what is obviously a snarky response (See the lead line there...: "OK, here you go.) to someone baiting me. And I guess that must forever define who I am.

Remember that thread title: 10 great Premier Pro CC tips for FCP 7 Refugees?

Maybe I need to sit down and write "Amazing FCP-X timesavers built into software you can OWN for angry Creative Cloud Refugees." and post it in the Adobe Forums. I'm sure nobody would push back even a little at that.

___
(BTY, using your reference I looked back at the post that generated my piqué.
IT was a lovely little personal snipe at me by Herb. To wit:
[Bill Davis] " It's admittedly a difficult time. Just less so for the editors who find it easier to change direction if they so choose."

The idea that X is supported by the daring adventurous few is but one of the many myths you keep repeating to make yourself feel important.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
____

So I think meeting a bit personal attack snark with a tablespoon of countering snark is a huge sin.

You know you could also have gone back to count the other hundred times I've referenced AVID or Adobe with fairness and respect? - nope, too difficult? OK then.

Next time I PROMISE (with caps) to add some kind of "snark alert tag" to anything I write like this when in a heated discussion to protect myself from your personal blowback.

Would never (ever) want to imply that folks in this forum would go cherry picking quotes to try to diminished someone's views. Cuz that would be...like - well. Something.

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

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 12:05:00 am

Now Bill, you know I'm basically cool with you having called Avid AVOID, right? You just did an all caps NEVER and I happened to remember the exception. It was a setup that I could just not resist.

Frankly, I've quite enjoyed some of your discussions lately.


Return to posts index

Braden Storrs
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 11:30:17 pm

My experience going from FCP 7, then to Premiere, then to FCP 10 is that FCP 10 is worth learning because it it will save you massive amounts of time, aka you can make more money. Especially on long form projects which is what I've used it the most for. There are a few reasons for that. Once you really learn the program you can edit faster because of the timeline mechanics and the ridiculously powerful playback engine that cuts out almost need to render at all (depending on your hardware of course). Exporting is twice as fast as any other NLE I've seen. Some of the biggest time savers though come from the organizational system for media and projects. It is designed for organizing massive amounts of data (long form projects). The media manager in FCP X is by far the most advanced design I've seen with the greatest flexibility while working inside the NLE. The Event to Project relationships, Metadata tagging system, Key Wording, Roles system, Smart Collections, Favoriting system, multiple retainable In/Outs, Compound Clip system, three type customizable Marker system, and then the Timeline Index to keep track of/search for it all. There's more but you get the point. It is very easy to share projects between editors but there are still a few advancements needed in the project sharing/archiving department for sure. The Multicam system is brilliant (and adobe is trying to rip it off as much as possible with each update).

I can't understand how editors/producers can afford not to use it (other then just not understanding the advantages) in some way in their workflows just for the time saving/organizational reasons.

I'm totally fine if people want to use their favorite tool of choice for editing, or have to use another NLE because a studio mandates it. I just have the benefit of having used used three NLEs pretty extensively and I can't imagine how anyone could work as fast on the others as you can in FCP X. I can't speak to Avid but it hasn't been known for having a speedy workflow since 1994.

Interesting article about FCP X being used on a Hollywood feature film being shot in Bulgaria:

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/1225-fcp-x-in-bulgaria-a-new-definitio...

If you care to see the Multicam in action here's a great example for you. This is just one way to do it. There a couple syncing features he doesn't cover but it is still impressive:







Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 12:25:29 am

Braden, in that article he says FCX is used to cut the EPKs for the film, not the film itself. The film itself is being cut on Avid. He mentions that the Avid editors from the movie were looking and scoffing at FCX. But then he mentions that he was headed back to the states to set up a feature that planned on using FCX.

If shot tapeless and delivered tapeless for digital projection, I think FCX would most likely be fine.

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


Return to posts index

Braden Storrs
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 12:44:51 am

That's why I shared it. It shows FCP X using it's strengths to manage vast amounts of media on large projects, like I talked about.

As far as cutting of the movie goes I didn't get quite the same message. It didn't really state who was doing the cut for the movie. I am curious to see exactly what the Avid team was doing though. I think FCP X would be faster for cutting but at that stage it doesn't really matter as much. Any of the main NLEs are capable of cutting. It's the tools around the timeline that make the difference these days. I just don't see why they would build an organizational footage network in FCP X and then render it more or less useless (except to use it as an external reference) by editing in Avid. They might as well have done the whole thing in Avid.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 12:58:16 am

[Braden Storrs] "That's why I shared it. It shows FCP X using it's strengths to manage vast amounts of media on large projects, like I talked about. "

Not really. They are talking about EPKs. That's significantly different than the post pipeline on a feature, even though you are potentially working with the same footage.

[Braden Storrs] "I just don't see why they would build an organizational footage network in FCP X and then render it more or less useless (except to use it as an external reference) by editing in Avid."

Two different departments. Happens all the times. I see plenty of broadcast operations with Avid for news and FCP/Premiere/Other for creative services/promos.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Braden Storrs
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 1:03:48 am

Ok that makes sense. Though the quote from the article reads: "...your system is immediately going to be put to use editing EPKs for a major motion picture, and eventually handle editorial for that studio’s films moving forward."

So it states it will be used for cutting the films, though maybe not that one.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:25:38 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Braden Storrs] "I just don't see why they would build an organizational footage network in FCP X and then render it more or less useless (except to use it as an external reference) by editing in Avid."

Two different departments. Happens all the times. I see plenty of broadcast operations with Avid for news and FCP/Premiere/Other for creative services/promos.
"


Yes. I'll second that. Trailers, promos, epks and sizzles come from completely different departments, and often, different companies within larger companies.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:48:09 am

But then it still leaves the ultimate question...

What is it about the way X works that makes it either incapable or even more difficult for feature work?

I know that a "it's great for short form, but that's it" idea has formed around it. But right here, folks pop up all the time saying they're doing long form with it and it's just not a problem.

Most of the early "it gets slow if you...." stuff has kinda faded away. And I suspect that with the new hardware and optimization on the horizon, that might completely disapper. if so, what's left as the Achilies heel?

Many argue that it's audio flexibility isn't polished enough. And I can see the validity in that for the some users for now - and I know that's not trivial. But it's not like there aren't workable second system solutions available..

But what about it's handling of video makes it a poor choice if a filmmaker decides to do the audio finishing via traditional double system and sync after picture lock?

Really, I'm not saying it's ideal, just wondering what it needs to do that it doesn't do?

It's hard to argue image quality, since the software itself can handle high-rez with aplomb and most of us have found it holds original footage quality astonishingly well - compositing and rendering stuff like transitions or dissolves with very high precision and beautiful output.

It has it's 305 plus basic editors keystrokes built in - (and complete keyboard customization on top of that) that once learned, let you navigate and cut fast. It employes all the basic editing traditions from J cuts to cutaways, et al - with ease. You can stack clips, top and tail stuff, insert, overwrite, slip slide,, replace and nudge by frame to your hearts content.

Plus, and this is MAJOR for me. It's kinda astonishingly crash resistance. Not that it never crashes, just that if it does - it typically puts you back with even your last pre-crash keystroke totally intact!

It's kind amazing in that way. I can't even remember the last time I lost a single element of my work while editing in X.

So where are the big issues that remain unresolved?

I'm honestly curious.

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

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 5:29:25 am

[Bill Davis] "Really, I'm not saying it's ideal, just wondering what it needs to do that it doesn't do?
"


From what I see, it comes down to two primary features that make X excel at other things.

First, its timeline does not present as a good a map of the project as other NLEs. The timeline stores layers of material, both audio and visual, related to each shot in an easily indexable, understandable way--a way that is highly visual to everyone working on that area of project. It functions not only as a timeline, but also as a chart or map to the project. The fluidity with which X is able to move chunks of material is gained by sacrificing elements of this chart/map aspect.

Second, while the metadata indexing elements of X are terrific, there is a point--especially with shared media--where traditional binning is preferable for organization and control. Dividing up bins to share work--for both security and clarity--is, from the perspective of the project, arbitrary. The metadata does not need to know that Bob has access to this but not to that, and that Sally can see all of those clips but not alter them, and that this section of the timeline is temporarily being removed to another machine. Traditional binning becomes a manageable record of those things, especially when you are assigning temporary attributes that might be reversed the very next week or day.

Now, there may be a time when metadata usage and coordination is so slick that both of the above situations can be better managed by something like X--where updated metadata can be externally charted and permissions can be granted with the granularity of something like Active Directory, but were not there yet. Personally I would find that very exciting--to have an editing tool as agile as X that was also able to create complex charting and gatekeeping, and I think that's where we are going, whether with X or something else.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 12:58:48 pm

[Bill Davis] "What is it about the way X works that makes it either incapable or even more difficult for feature work?"

I'll answer that in broad strokes, since I'm in the middle of tweaking the cut on a feature in X. At this stage I'm working on the whole film (by reels) with everything in one master event. All clips are synced using Sync-N-Link-X, which embeds the audio into the clip and is not an FCP X Synchronized Clip. I am working with ProRes Proxies created in RedCine X Pro from RED camera files. I have about 2,000 source clips to deal with.

I like the fact that I am dealing with 5-7 source mic tracks on all clips and they are collapsed into the clip. Easier to deal with on the timeline than any other NLE. Unfortunately harder to deal with if you want to break those apart and move them around. As a result, I am simply avoiding nearly everything to do with temp audio mixing and will pass this along to the ProTools sound designer/editor/mixer. Working with split edits/sound overlaps is very easy and X is one of the better NLEs in that sense, except that standard trimming features are sub-par. For example, no trim-window display with keyboard trimming. No asymmetrical trimming. (Forget the precision editor - it's a toy.)

Part of the stage I'm in is quickly finding and reviewing alternates and making client-supervised changes. Match-frame is a joke, because you cannot match to any clip where you have detached audio. The event library filtering is very fast and works well. When you do match-frame, you can't do it inside a collection. The app bounces you out to the full event, so instead of looking through a handful of clips, you now have 2,000 to wade through. Whenever you open the full event or the project library (now with many versions) it takes a long time to load - as in 'get a cup of coffee' long.

The collection structure is inadequate for working on large projects, because you can never fully avoid going out to the full event at some point, thus you slow down the process. All browser sorting is single-column, so if you sort on the scene column, the takes are often out of order. You are limited to one notes column for entries, so you end up cheating by using other columns for user info.

Now, I'm sure the reply will have to do with multiple PIOPs (pure junk), smart collections (not worth the effort) and favorites (sometimes useful). I get that, but it just doesn't really work well when you try to apply it in this situation. Then there's the inherent double-edged sword of the application itself. In order to make skimming work, a lot of info has to buffer into RAM and that takes a lot of time, hangs up the application frequently and slows you down a lot of times. Usually, when you start in the morning, if you give it time to load everything, then it tends to behave for several hours. Then it's best to quit and restart to clean out the brain of the app.

On the plus side (I work in the list view with dual screens), it's nice to quickly toggle up or down through the event list and quickly see the context of that clip in the filmstrip and identify whether it's the shot I want. No need to load it into any viewer and scrub through like other NLEs. The downside is that there is no way to zoom into that source clip, if I want to zero in on a single word to make in/out points. It's geared to the editor slamming it coarsely to the timeline and then fine-tuning.

Comparable-sized (and larger) Media Composer and FCP "legacy" projects I've cut (on lesser machines, BTW), have never caused these sorts of issues for me. YMMV. OTOH, skimming is nice along with other benefits, so it's a trade-off and each editor simply has to pick their poison. Nevertheless, seeing what I see on this project with 2,000 clips that are merely ProRes Proxy, I would be reluctant to double or triple the load and do it with high-res media.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 4:45:31 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Match-frame is a joke, because you cannot match to any clip where you have detached audio. "

Seriously?!


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 4:47:04 pm

[Chris Harlan] "Seriously?!"

Yes. At least as it pertains to these clips with embedded double-system audio.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 4:49:08 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Yes. At least as it pertains to these clips with embedded double-system audio.

- Oliver"


That has not been my experience, and I use, and detach audio, from master clips with embedded multichannel audio in pretty mu ch everything I do. What are these clips?

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 4:52:44 pm

[Charlie Austin] "That has not been my experience, and I use, and detach audio, from master clips with embedded multichannel audio in pretty mu ch everything I do. What are these clips?"

Beats me. Hasn't worked right from day one on this project. These are master clips with embedded double-system sound. The embedding is done either manually (open in timeline) or via Sync-N-Link X. When I detach the audio on a connected clip and try to match frame it just makes an error noise.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 5:13:41 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Beats me. Hasn't worked right from day one on this project. These are master clips with embedded double-system sound. The embedding is done either manually (open in timeline) or via Sync-N-Link X. When I detach the audio on a connected clip and try to match frame it just makes an error noise."

That's an odd one. As I said, it always works for me... just for giggles I just synched a clip, cut it in as connected, detached audio, and it matched back just fine. Apples to oranges probably, but it seems like somethings f-ed up in your how your event(s)/project is tracking media. I can imagine what a giant PITA that must be...
-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 5:18:51 pm

[Charlie Austin] " just for giggles I just synched a clip, cut it in as connected, detached audio, and it matched back just fine."

I don't doubt that the particular Event might be at fault. BUT... If that's the case, it re-enforces the concern about trusting FCP X to a large, long form production. And yes, there are people I can bug. Although I'm waiting to see what X.1 brings upon us. ;-)

One other thought is that this issue could be directly related to Sync-N-Link X. Something wonky under the hood for all we know. That's another danger of X - relying on third party developers. IA is great and very responsive, but in the end, it allows Apple to avoid responsibility for certain workflows.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 5:48:17 pm

Question to happy FCPX users - do you really care if FCPX is used to make Hollywood movies?

I don't.

Steve Connor

There's nothing we can't argue about on the FCPX COW Forum


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 6:03:27 pm

[Steve Connor] "do you really care if FCPX is used to make Hollywood movies?"

I do, because it means there's a viable toolkit that affects some of the types of projects I work on.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 8:04:36 pm

[Steve Connor] "Question to happy FCPX users - do you really care if FCPX is used to make Hollywood movies?

I don't."


That's the thing, right there. What makes it special, makes it less useful in a highly specialized environment, and making fit that environment will, of necessity, make it less special.

The blockbuster movie thing is a fine PR goal, but I would be even more impressed if it were used for open heart surgery.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 8:20:15 pm

[Chris Harlan] "but I would be even more impressed if it were used for open heart surgery."

I'm really not supposed to say this, but I heard the next version of X will, in fact, be able to perform surgery. It will require a new Mac Pro, an unreleased version of OS X, a lot of Thunderbolt cables, and a Medical degree. But it mostly works.

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 9:47:33 pm

Leaping to register: http://www.bleeding-edge-editing.com

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

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 1:40:43 am

[Charlie Austin] "I'm really not supposed to say this, but I heard the next version of X will, in fact, be able to perform surgery."

Exactly what part of Nondisclosure Agreement do yo not understand?!


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 1:45:51 am

[Chris Harlan] "Exactly what part of Nondisclosure Agreement do yo not understand?!"

Wait, I was supposed to read that thing?... lol

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 5:48:56 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I don't doubt that the particular Event might be at fault. BUT... If that's the case, it re-enforces the concern about trusting FCP X to a large, long form production. And yes, there are people I can bug. Although I'm waiting to see what X.1 brings upon us. ;-)"

Still, it seems that there's something unusual going wrong with your event. I haven't heard of anyone experiencing your symptoms, and I'm sure it's be posted everywhere if it was a common problem, so I'm pretty sure they'd like to know. It might be worth at least running it by them.


[Oliver Peters] "One other thought is that this issue could be directly related to Sync-N-Link X. Something wonky under the hood for all we know. That's another danger of X - relying on third party developers. IA is great and very responsive, but in the end, it allows Apple to avoid responsibility for certain workflows."

Sure, but to be fair, X does a good job internally synching clips. IA just adds more bells and whistles (in a good way). Not to say X does everything in the app, it doesn't. But that not just X really... If every NLE did everything perfectly, apps like PluralEyes would never have come into existence.

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 6:02:17 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Sure, but to be fair, X does a good job internally synching clips. IA just adds more bells and whistles (in a good way). "

Actually it doesn't. It creates Synchronized clips with timecode reset to 0. Not useable.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 6:49:41 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Actually it doesn't. It creates Synchronized clips with timecode reset to 0. Not useable."

Point taken. Hopefully that will change...

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 6:13:31 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Still, it seems that there's something unusual going wrong with your event."

Actually, I was just able to reproduce it on a completely different system with different media.

1. Take an MOS clip, Open In Timeline, connect an audio track to it.
2. Edit that modified clip as a connected clip or a storyline clip to the project you are editing and then detach audio.
3. Delete/remove the dangling connected audio from the timeline.
4. Match-frame attempts on that clip will now fail.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 7:01:45 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Actually, I was just able to reproduce it on a completely different system with different media.

1. Take an MOS clip, Open In Timeline, connect an audio track to it.
2. Edit that modified clip as a connected clip or a storyline clip to the project you are editing and then detach audio.
3. Delete/remove the dangling connected audio from the timeline.
4. Match-frame attempts on that clip will now fail."


Interesting. I just performed the same steps and It did something odd in the process.
-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 7:24:39 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Interesting. I just performed the same steps and It worked, but did something odd in the process. It's possible I have a different version of X than you though, you on 10.0.9?... In any case off to report it to Apple . :-)"

Beats me. OS 10.8.5 and FCP X 10.0.9 on both machines that I have seen this with. Otherwise, completely unrelated media and everything else between the two. So, no "cross-contamination" in any way. It's all 1920x1080p/23.98 media - various ProRes flavors. And yes, I have reported it.

What do you mean by "something odd"?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 7:34:28 pm

[Oliver Peters] "What do you mean by "something odd"?"

Just... odd. :-)
-------------------------------------------------------------


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Braden Storrs
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 1:01:46 am

That's why I shared it. It shows FCP X using it's strengths to manage vast amounts of media on large projects, like I talked about.

As far as cutting of the movie goes I didn't get quite the same message. It said in the article: "...your system is immediately going to be put to use editing EPKs for a major motion picture, and eventually handle editorial for that studio’s films moving forward." I am curious to see exactly what the Avid team was doing though. I think FCP X would be faster for cutting but at that stage it doesn't really matter as much. Any of the main NLEs are capable of cutting. It's the tools around the timeline that make the difference these days. I just don't see why they would build an organizational footage network in FCP X and then render it more or less useless by editing in Avid. They might as well have done the whole thing in Avid.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:44:08 pm

[TImothy Auld] "Happy to hear anyone's story of their tools and how they work in their situation. But "FCPX, Learn it"?
Please."


A bit militant, yes. I'm also interested in some clarification over a show or production company at a network vs. the entire network. Situation one, I can easily understand; situation two would be quite a surprise.

Oh, what the heck:

Avid. Learn it.

I mean, Premiere Pro. Learn it.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 18, 2013 at 10:44:51 pm

Life. Live it!


Return to posts index


Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:16:42 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Life. Live it!"

I was thinking:

Sex. Have it.


But, the way this weekend is shaping up, that's not happening.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 12:34:14 am

[Jordan Mena] "FCPX - learn it!"

[Jordan Mena] "I got news for you buddy. I have to cut three 30 minute episodes for air starting Monday with 2 weeks for each episode using X. I'm not scared!"

(what was that just there - james cagney?)

[Shane Ross] "So if you are going to brag about using FCX for a 'major network,' can you name that network to add credence to the statement? Or are you prevented from doing that? NDA or something?"

[Jordan Mena] "i can't say at the moment. But we create or own content as well as promos"

wait -this was in Larry jordan's presentation right? this is one of the big six, its like a hundred million dollar production? all is about to be revealed at a hollywood big six studio all networks press conference as an "X- Learn it!" banner unfurls overhead just before the hans zimmer bhhhrammms blast through the speakers scattering the terrified editor morons who like a good tracked interface. In someone's fantasy anyway.

I'm sorry - that's bad. very much looking forward to the next X release - some pundits think its in the october end apple event as a nuclear tube hardware 4K demo.

do hope it is. one way or another this release is baking nearly a year?

I'm presuming its tracks all the way of course.

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 1:46:28 am

Out of idle curiosity, outside of the audio mix where I fully appreciate that tracks are a comfortable convention that lots of audio folks are extremely comfortable with - I'm a little confused by how feature folks use lots of video tracks?

Aren't the effects shots pre-composited? Isn't cutting a standard hollywood film mostly just assembling the scenes with the art and precision that any good editor has to understand?

I mean I don't see a lot of feature films with stacks of titles, picture in pictures, multiple windows and other stuff that regularly used to build stacks and stacks of tracks in my Legacy work - and that I now used connected clips to accomplish in X.

Is there something complex on a hidden level that happens with the visual edit, per se, of a feature film that is escaping me?

It kinda seems to me that an EPK with all sorts of interviews, behind the scenes stuff, and fancy schmancy graphics might be a lot more complex an edit than "the feature" itself - or am I just ill-informed?

Audio complexity I totally get. The feature film as a complicated timeline? Not sure I get that.

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

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 1:54:08 am

[Bill Davis] "I'm a little confused by how feature folks use lots of video tracks?"

Visual and juxtapositional organization within the timeline. Take a look at these two frame grabs from two of Walter Murch's timelines.

http://digitalfilms.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/df_pf_4_lrg.jpg

http://digitalfilms.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/df_hg_6.jpg

Part of this vertical separation is to organize different camera formats, VFX, etc. He also uses something he calls QuickTime "skinning". What it boils down to is this. He exports a self-contained file and places it on an upper track. This becomes less taxing on playback. Then when he makes changes, he break open that section and makes changes in that area. What it effectively gives you is a visual plot that represents a type of "visual change list".

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Michael Phillips
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:17:40 am

There tends to be a belief that feature editors just have simple timelines - what Oliver has shown is pretty average - I have seen less and more complex. The timelines on Lord of the Rings were just crazy. And from an organization perspective, I have mentioned on other forums, "Alice in Wonderland 3D" had over 5000 bins in the one shared project.

Many features are screened in process, and I have seen NRG screenings done directly out of an Avid timeline. The amount of previz, correction, etc. is getting more and more dense, not to mention the multiples in storage being shot with digital compared to tape and film.

Michael


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 5:53:39 pm

[Michael Phillips] "There tends to be a belief that feature editors just have simple timelines - what Oliver has shown is pretty average - I have seen less and more complex. The timelines on Lord of the Rings were just crazy. And from an organization perspective, I have mentioned on other forums, "Alice in Wonderland 3D" had over 5000 bins in the one shared project.

Many features are screened in process, and I have seen NRG screenings done directly out of an Avid timeline. The amount of previz, correction, etc. is getting more and more dense, not to mention the multiples in storage being shot with digital compared to tape and film. "


This where I think FCPX helps. If you look at Oliver's screen grabs of Murch's timeline (and I have been lambasted over this opinion a few years ago when Oliver kindly posted these before) many of those tracks are duplicitous.

The stems, the stereo audio, SFX, anything that has multiple channels of audio gets collapsed down to one object. If you need to explode it, you can, if you need to hide a channel, you can, but that doesn't mean you have to see it on the timeline. Granted, FCPX isn't perfect on the visual organizational part of this, but they are working on it.

Same for the Star Trek grab. All of that could get condensed if you want it to. FCPX does need color labeling, no doubt about that.

My point is, FCPX does simplify some of those complexities. It's not perfect and needs more work, but as far as controlling large amounts of data in a fell swoop, FCPX seems to be purpose built for it.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 6:18:12 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "The stems, the stereo audio, SFX, anything that has multiple channels of audio gets collapsed down to one object. If you need to explode it, you can, if you need to hide a channel, you can, but that doesn't mean you have to see it on the timeline. Granted, FCPX isn't perfect on the visual organizational part of this, but they are working on it.

Same for the Star Trek grab. All of that could get condensed if you want it to. FCPX does need color labeling, no doubt about that.

My point is, FCPX does simplify some of those complexities. It's not perfect and needs more work, but as far as controlling large amounts of data in a fell swoop, FCPX seems to be purpose built for it.
"


I agree with a lot of that, and being able to collapse it would be terrific. The problem is consistency--the ability to instantly find, among the SFX, the three tracks of foley, as opposed to the other five tracks of SFX, as opposed to the dialog tracks, as opposed to the temp music score, etc. If I know that all foley is on track 18-24, throughout the cut, than I can find it immediately, anywhere, anytime. Color-coding would probably be enough for me, as I usually work with 18-24 audio tracks, and only five major categories which sometimes gets extended to eight. Would it be enough for a major film? I don't know, but my guess is that it would be too confining.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 6:22:02 pm

You can label audio components with a title.

ALso, if you take the time to add Roles to the Audio Components, you can have a Role to select them all (or highlight them all).

Currently, this is a bit tricky in FCPX, but it can be done, and hopefully, will get better.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 6:28:28 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "You can label audio components with a title.

ALso, if you take the time to add Roles to the Audio Components, you can have a Role to select them all (or highlight them all).

Currently, this is a bit tricky in FCPX, but it can be done, and hopefully, will get better.
"


I'm not saying it can't be done. Its just not as clear, and the question for anyone individually, is how important is that clarity vs. the value that the magnetic timeline brings. For me, in my work, once I can navigate using audio on a timeline, that particular stumbling block goes away. My guess is that, for something far more complicated, it would not.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 6:24:31 pm

[Chris Harlan] "The problem is consistency--the ability to instantly find, among the SFX, the three tracks of foley, as opposed to the other five tracks of SFX, as opposed to the dialog tracks, as opposed to the temp music score, etc. "

While I agree that the X timeline needs stronger organizational options, I actually find that - if you set your roles properly on import - doing what you say above is actually easier than with track layout. Just select the Role/Subrole in the index and it's instantly visible in the timeline. I actually find it easier to pick out little clips than using tracks.

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 6:39:34 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Chris Harlan] "The problem is consistency--the ability to instantly find, among the SFX, the three tracks of foley, as opposed to the other five tracks of SFX, as opposed to the dialog tracks, as opposed to the temp music score, etc. "

While I agree that the X timeline needs stronger organizational options, I actually find that - if you set your roles properly on import - doing what you say above is actually easier than with track layout. Just select the Role/Subrole in the index and it's instantly visible in the timeline. I actually find it easier to pick out little clips than using tracks."


I think the roles highlight thing is great. Its one of the things X has that nothing else does. Where it falls short for me, though, is the overall map of the timeline, seeing everything in relation with each other, being able to take in the visual complexity at a glance, and then to navigate by it. For me, its like looking at a score, and I can see things in the composition. And, this is undoubtedly a personal preference, but I like that there is a consistent geography that becomes part of muscle memory. Music is down, dialog is up, SFX are in between. I start heading in that direction before I'm even looking. As I think about it, that sense of location may be the reason that I will always continue to prefer tracks. That hadn't occurred to me until just now. Funny the things we learn, being here.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 6:55:15 pm

I was editing the other day with another editor and director over my shoulder.

The other editor had never messed around with FCPX and he had, what I call, an internet bias.

The director was floored by the feature when I dragged a range, the audio scrubbed with it. This makes selections so much easier and faster. You can actually hear what you are selecting. He also loved how fast the editing was with top/tail and the magnetism.

At one point, i was moving around some scratch VO. I put a piece from the head of the timeline, towards the end, and I put it on top as it was easier to put it up there and keep it out of the mess of crap that was below the timeline which was other audio, music, and a bunch of deselected secondary storylines that were "saved" but disabled ideas that I may go back to. The VO I was looking to replace/modify was in the primary.

The editor asked if I had just put audio above the video. I said, yes, and if you look closely, I have video below the primary, too. he said, "Wow. It's just a canvas, man."

So, to each their own. Some see a canvas, some see a lack of a score.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 7:08:13 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "The director was floored by the feature when I dragged a range, the audio scrubbed with it. This makes selections so much easier and faster. You can actually hear what you are selecting. He also loved how fast the editing was with top/tail and the magnetism.
"


Yes, another feature I am jealous of.

[Jeremy Garchow] "So, to each their own. Some see a canvas, some see a lack of a score.
"


We always come back to this somehow, don't we? I wonder if this is actually one of the principal aesthetic dividing lines in X preference. I know it is for David Lawrence, and I'm pretty sure it is for me, but I wonder how true that holds up across the board?


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 7:15:44 pm

[Chris Harlan] "We always come back to this somehow, don't we? I wonder if this is actually one of the principal aesthetic dividing lines in X preference. I know it is for David Lawrence, and I'm pretty sure it is for me, but I wonder how true that holds up across the board?"

You may be on to something... Nice thread here, insults and esoteric theories. :-)

How cool would it be to have a "sort" menu for the timeline. Want a "score"? Click a button and boom! it's all split out. Turn it off if you don't want it and use the canvas style "blob". (my current preference). The exciting thing is that I think this is probably quite possible...

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 7:19:49 pm

[Charlie Austin] "How cool would it be to have a "sort" menu for the timeline. Want a "score"? Click a button and boom! it's all split out. Turn it off if you don't want it and use the canvas style "blob". (my current preference). The exciting thing is that I think this is probably quite possible...
"


Oh, yes. I agree. That's very doable. And would be terrific for me. I don't need to see the core all the time, and would probably totally dig switching into canvas mode.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 7:32:12 pm

[Chris Harlan] "I don't need to see the core all the time, and would probably totally dig switching into canvas mode."

One of the reasons I like the magnetic timeline, and this is totally subjective, is the fact that I can (mostly) see all my clips on screen while i'm cutting. Despite the fact that I've always been a huge proponent of an organized timeline - former mixer and all that - in actual day to day work in "score based" NLE's, I was never much concerned with where a specific element went, just that it fit in the "window" I could see without needing to scroll the timeline up and down. I hate vertical scrolling when I'm cutting. And, since I generally have dozens of layered audio elements, clumping them all together with as little empty space as possible is my goal. I might have 48 or more tracks when it's all split out for finishing, but when i'm cutting it's all crammed into 24 so I can work with it. X does that for me. And I never have to split it out for a mix, I just let X2pro do it for me. It's kinda awesome... ;-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 7:23:33 pm

[Chris Harlan] "We always come back to this somehow, don't we? I wonder if this is actually one of the principal aesthetic dividing lines in X preference. I know it is for David Lawrence, and I'm pretty sure it is for me, but I wonder how true that holds up across the board?"

For me, I find that if I go through and do the organization of the audio up front as much as I possibly can, i have to think about it less and less during the edit. Every time I add a clip to the timeline it is fairly organized. The only thing I have left to do is turn on and off channels that I need or don't need, which is easy enough in FCPX.

This method is certainly not for everyone.

I do think that some more visual organization is needed. There is a need to put a clip in a stacking order and stay there, or, like you mention, simply bury the music track at the bottom of the timeline and stay there.

It is the hardest thing to get over when coming from a tracked system. I can understand why people might not like it, and yes, it might be a major stumbling block because it is so different.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 7:03:13 pm

[Chris Harlan] "For me, its like looking at a score, and I can see things in the composition. And, this is undoubtedly a personal preference, but I like that there is a consistent geography that becomes part of muscle memory. Music is down, dialog is up, SFX are in between. I start heading in that direction before I'm even looking. As I think about it, that sense of location may be the reason that I will always continue to prefer tracks."

I totally get that, it's exactly how I look at a timeline in Legacy or Pr etc. I guess all I'm saying is that, using X as my main axe on a daily basis lately, I actually find it easier, in many ways, to "read" a timeline now. Roles, Clip index, clip skimming, clear waveforms and clip names, all come together in a way I wouldn't have expected when i first got into it. I hope it'll improve. some sort of vertical sorting order, and maybe user color coding (though I feel that's less necessary now), will make this thing second to none in that regard. IMO of course. ;-)

I guess it's like reading anything. English (Fixed Tracks) makes perfect sense, and I can at least sound out other languages that use the same alphabet. Arabic, Hebrew or Chinese (FCP X) looks like total gibberish. But once you get familiar with what all the squiggles mean, it's as easy to read as anything else.

That's my tortured analogy of the day. You're welcome. ;-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:18:23 am

[Oliver Peters] "He exports a self-contained file and places it on an upper track. This becomes less taxing on playback. Then when he makes changes, he break open that section and makes changes in that area. What it effectively gives you is a visual plot that represents a type of "visual change list"."

I used to do that all the time.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:22:22 am

Yes, I get that. Walter is notorious for his process. Those zillion clips remind me of the zillion 3x5 cards he used before he went NLE. But that's just a particular style. I'm not convinced that other feature editors have timelines that look anything like that.

Be interesting to see what Thelma Schoonmaker, or Dan Lebenthal's timelines look like wouldn't it?

I wonder if they'd be more similar to Mr. Murchs or more divergent?

After all, even if you have 50 video layers, all the audience is seeing is the one on top unless you're doing some kind of composite.

It could be argued that by employing great whopping stacks of connected clips - you could make X look pretty similar. But why?

I totally understand that to some folks, sitting down surrounded by stacks and stacks of parts bins represents the very most comforting and efficient way to assemble any sort of gizmo.

But it's also kinda cool to be able to type two keystrokes call up a picture of all the parts similar to the one you're thinking about using right now - and have the other thousand parts stay hidden until you decide you need to work with them.

It can be argued that if you're looking for a hand gesture, it might be "inspiring" to also see cars and eyes and the surrounding buildings - and that "might" trigger something for the creative editor. Maybe. But it's also possible that when you want a hand gesture - being able to DRILL DOWN to just your choice of hand gestures might be every bit as satisfying.

If you see my point.

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

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 5:16:03 pm

[Bill Davis] "Yes, I get that. Walter is notorious for his process. Those zillion clips remind me of the zillion 3x5 cards he used before he went NLE. But that's just a particular style"

BTW - he still uses that method and so do many other feature editors. It has nothing to do with an NLE and in fact augments the process. The scene card idea wasn't created by Murch, but he does get very detailed about it. It's a great way to get the 30,000-ft view of how the story is shaping up. For example, if you look at the wall of cards and change the order from Sc 50, 51, 52 to Sc 51, 50, 52 - or drop Sc 51 entirely - you know right away what the impact will be on the audience's understanding and interpretation of the story. In the end, it is ONLY about story and the software either helps or hinders in putting it together.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 10:07:26 pm

[Oliver Peters] "In the end, it is ONLY about story and the software either helps or hinders in putting it together.

- Oliver"


Totally granted.

But it's also hard to argue that everyone learns their process in the context of how not just their organizational thinking - but the tools they've had access to - work. So it's fair to note that any editor coming from a long established workflow with entrenched muscle memory is going to have a more difficult time breaking and re-learning new practices than someone who doesn't have those.

There's nobody I respect more than Mr. Murch. When he was gracious enough to sit and chat with me at NAB a few years ago his dedication not just to editing, but to trying to understand the fundamentals was nearly as impressive as the almost infinite patience he exhibited in doing a nearly endless after Supermeet sit and talk with young editors wishing to chat. He's a class act. But I suspect (without any evidence to support it other than presumption) that he'd be the first to say that getting too stuck in the tools isn't always the cleanest path to the results as everything is changing around the industry. His physical cards may remain, or may get supplanted. And the monolithic timeiine with it's broad, comforting display that's delighted editors from an era where that was the only option - may not be the only or even the best way to move forward.

After all, pretty hard to bring a "wall of cards" on the airplane if you need to work on something during a long flight.

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

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 10:19:51 pm

[Bill Davis] "After all, pretty hard to bring a "wall of cards" on the airplane if you need to work on something during a long flight"

The point of the cards is not for the editor, but also for the benefit of director, writer, producers and various parties involved. There's no way these folks have the same direct understanding of how changes in an edited sequence relate to the flow of the story. I think you are hung up on the cards being tied to organizing media in the software. They are completely unrelated.

Murch has also been a big proponent of building all the metadata from dailies into a big Filemaker database. See image:

http://digitalfilms.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/df_hg_5.jpg

He would love to see this sort of thing integrated into an NLE. So, philosophically, I doubt he has a disconnect with how FCP X function, aside from the editing UI.

Here are the cutting rooms from the last two films.

http://digitalfilms.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/df_hg_7.jpg

http://digitalfilms.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/df_pf_5_lrg.jpg

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 1:36:23 am

I know this is a long thread but I just wanted to add my experience from my first FCPX edited job sent to me for sound post. Being the first I let the editor know that I required an X2Pro AAF and to test it a week out from the deadline.

Nothing. The night before I was told I would get stems from roles as wavs. Hmm not happy. Then next morning an AAF on my ftp. So X2Pro was reluctantly purchased but the lite version. Tried everything to load the AAF including FCP7 via Auto Duck, Premiere CS6, Audition, Lightworks, Avtransfer even da Vinci. Slow loads, files offline and not the correct timeline. In desperation I requested the stems from roles option be sent and just for laughs I tried After Effects. Well blow me down it loaded and I was able to bounce it to Premiere and then make an OMF. Phew we got there but the timeline was a mess spread out over many tracks. Clips certainly not nicely assigned to tracks via Roles as expected.

So before I rush off to say X is ready after two years for prime time, I would like to do some more testing. The reluctance of the editor to shell out for software, the need to buy a third party solution to make basic deliverables... all the broken record comments I have been making were unfortunately bang on on the first outing.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 1:49:46 am

[Michael Gissing] "Tried everything to load the AAF "

What DAW do you mix on?

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 1:56:59 am

Fairlight. To buy the AAF option costs $500, something I am reluctant to buy as I don't need anything that an AAF offers over OMF which is solid


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 2:39:41 am

[Michael Gissing] "Fairlight. To buy the AAF option costs $500, something I am reluctant to buy as I don't need anything that an AAF offers over OMF which is solid"

Gotcha. FWIW, X2Pro only officially targets ProTools, but it works real well with Logic, and I think Nuendo. There are a few other apps that will open X2Pro AAF's, I guess AE is another one... lol

I wouldn't use the LE version for anything professional. No control over Role arrangement (though it does group them) and no ability to trim clips with handles. It sounds like a case of wrong tool for the job, and operator error. I imagine an OMF out of FCP 7 or Pr from these guys would have looked just as messed up, but who knows.

I know it's immaterial, but I've had great success with X2Pro. Flawlessly organizes tracks based on Role, nicely trims handles, and opens right up. It really sounds like, software issues aside, whoever prepped/cut this messed it up.

The fact that OMF isn't part of X is a valid critique. But I don't think X2Pro was the problem here based on my experience.

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 3:10:01 am

[Charlie Austin]"The fact that OMF isn't part of X is a valid critique. But I don't think X2Pro was the problem here based on my experience"

I did advise, based on comments here, that they get the full version. Of course the money they saved was blown by my extra time sorting it. The Marquis people did contact me a while back and ask if I wanted to beta test AAF with Fairlight but I just don't want to pay for AAF. In time I guess I will be forced to but I already have lots of options to read AAF and convert. Never had AAF issues in the past with all software options that I tried. Almost all clients produce working OMFs so it is a FCPX specific issue for me at this stage hence posting here.

It was definitely a case of new workflow blues. I have not had similar from Pr or FCP7 OMfs from the same people or pretty much anyone for many years. I would love it if the X2Pro people gave an OMF option to make the export much more universal and solid to all NLEs. There is advantage in EOL software.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 3:20:45 am

[Michael Gissing] " I would love it if the X2Pro people gave an OMF option to make the export much more universal and solid to all NLEs. There is advantage in EOL software."

Agreed. I wish I was a programmer type nerd,as it seems like something one could make a few bucks from... Though I think there's some sort of licensing fee to support OMF, maybe just rumor...

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 3:34:48 am

[Michael Gissing] "So X2Pro was reluctantly purchased but the lite version"

90 more dollars would have solved all of this.

I am sure that they probably spent that much on some whiz bang plugin to get lens flares and trackers, templates and glows.

I've had really good success with x2pro and it has more capability than Legend and OMF, even if it can't be read in as many places.

I wish the developers would make an fcpx consolidation tool.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 3:44:46 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "I wish the developers would make an fcpx consolidation tool."

Bug them about it... I have. :-)

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


~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 6:38:47 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "I wish the developers would make an fcpx consolidation tool."

Bug them about it... I have. :-)

Therein lies an irony. Fairlight reads FCP7 XMLs and so I had the option of consolidating just audio with handles, making an XML and it opened in Fairlight. It even opened a flattened video track if the codec was right. If FCPX could consolidate just audio media, I am sure many DAWs could with minimal effort open a FCPX XML. That way all the AAF licensing nonsense could be bypassed and there would be a solid workflow from X to lots of other NLEs and DAWs.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 1:54:26 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Bill Davis] "After all, pretty hard to bring a "wall of cards" on the airplane if you need to work on something during a long flight"

The point of the cards is not for the editor, but also for the benefit of director, writer, producers and various parties involved. There's no way these folks have the same direct understanding of how changes in an edited sequence relate to the flow of the story. I think you are hung up on the cards being tied to organizing media in the software. They are completely unrelated."


I would also add that if you are talking about a blockbuster feature film--nobody is taking the project to work on an airplane. The scale is much different. Project size, team coordination, security. People aren't sitting in first class chopping up chunks of The Avengers. And security wouldn't even allow that for promos. That stuff is going in safes at night, and isn't allowed off the premises of wherever it is being worked on. Its a very fanciful notion to suggest that anybody would be working on something like that on a long flight.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 20, 2013 at 10:49:40 pm

[Oliver Peters] "The point of the cards is not for the editor, but also for the benefit of director, writer, producers and various parties involved. "

Then I have to take issue with what I see in your own posted photos.

Neither space, and particularly the one in the second photo - strikes me as set up for anything even remotely suitable for constant colaboration with "directors, writers, producers, et al."

Clearly (particularly in the second posted photo) the workspace is INDIVIDUAL - with literally NO room for anyone other than the specific editor to benefit from the posted notes without obstructing the view of the working editor.

I can see in the first photo enough room for something like short "walk-through" project conferences with other principals, but I see no note surfaces or chairs or similar work enablers in play that would make that edit environment suitable for anyone but the editor to be engaged in constant on-going collaboration.

Perhaps Walter, at this point in his career, can make stakeholders stand to give him their input. I could certainly see that.

But I don't find either of those photos indicative of the kind of collaboration everyone here is always harping about.

It looks to me like the totally sensible workstation of a person in command of the "edit" as an individual.

Exactly the type of edit situation where X's database tools should very potently thrive.

My 2 cents. Opinion and supposition only.

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

Oliver Peters
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 12:40:24 am

[Bill Davis] "Then I have to take issue with what I see in your own posted photos.
Neither space, and particularly the one in the second photo - strikes me as set up for anything even remotely suitable for constant colaboration with "directors, writers, producers, et al." "


You've never seen a feature film cutting room, then. They are almost all like this. Don't equate a cutting room with an edit suite in a standard post facility. Most are ad hoc rooms set up in a rented office somewhere.

For grins, take a look at the image on this page:

http://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/a-moment-to-pause/

That's a room I've cut several films in. That's me collaborating with the director, writer/lead actor and line producer. Real comfy ;-)

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 21, 2013 at 5:12:06 pm

But Oliver, that is exactly what I expect a colaborative edit suite to look like. Somewhat larger (dedicated post house) or smaller (News style) space.

The editor in front, editing. and a place behind for the producer or other collaborators to spread out documents and make/take phone calls and contribute. Exactly the "collaborative style editing suite type I've been working in since I started as the narrator/voice talent of a local TV shows more than 25 years ago.

Sorry, but Walters workspace is NOT all that typical of where true collaborative editing happens, to my eye. His space is more a wonderfully scaled up version of the tiny "producer/editor/shooter" bays in TV stations where one person is expected to do it all.

With his skill set, obviously he doesn't need anyone "directing" his efforts as an editor, and I'm sure the execs and others drop by to confer as required, But I didn't see the "director/producer" bridge seen in your pic or in most high level edit suites I've worked in during my career.

Whether or not that says anything about shifts away from the old school "strictly collaborative" model to the currentlyfashionable "preditor" model where we're increasingly asked to multi-task on our projects, I'll leave for others to figure out.

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 is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 7:13:44 pm

[Bill Davis] "But it's also kinda cool to be able to type two keystrokes call up a picture of all the parts similar to the one you're thinking about using right now - and have the other thousand parts stay hidden until you decide you need to work with them.
"


it's really hard to argue with that. magic bins that form based on a scene, take, or character keyword, or any combination of all the above is quite the notion.

caveat that I know utterly nothing about feature narrative organisation. tags are killler tho. they just are.

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


Return to posts index

Nikolas Bäurle
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 3:45:27 am

Feature length can be cut with X without a problem, like in Avid and Premiere, I just don't see the issue. yes, there still are workflow issues with shared storage that need resolving, but there seem to be enough companies making it work, when they want to make the move.

Here in Germany, there is still very little high end work going on with X, but the few that are doing it, like Knut Hake with the show Danny Lowinski. ok, its the only example i can know of right now in Germany, but still, someone is making it work, and likes it.

I make my money in TV, internet, commercials, but my background is film, i still shoot low budget shorts, get called to help out starting filmakers, who can't pay, shooting 2 hour long plays in multicam or work on projects with friends, like the 60 minute experimental i finished last year. Its nothing out of the ordinary, very, very low budget, but its full of fx, fast edits, lots of recorded audio and fcp sound fx library stuff, mixed footage, very badly recorded location sound. of course the director is a painter, its experimental so the filmcrowd avoids it, even I rarely watch art videos or films perhaps some Matthew Barney or Bill Viola once in a while. But on this particular project i was able to work much faster than 7, even though it was more work than the previous experimental 45 min and 60 min we edited on 7.

A long timeline is a long timeline, whats the difference if its low budget or high end? isn't the issue what computer and storage solution I use to get the software working smoothly with whatever footage i use, at times it requires third party software, but hasn't that always been the case to a certain degree, especially when new formats come out?

I've worked and played with X almost every day for the last two years, I still freelance as an Avid and FCP7 editor, currently i have to use Avid and FCP7, and it looks like I'll be making more money on Legacy than X for some time to come, i use what I get hired for. I still prefer X, and I've actually used it.

When someone tries X a few times and doesn't like it it really seems to be a matter of taste, at least in the discussions I've had at work. And i still hear the not good for features or Apple is leaving the promarket, when i ask for specifics its usually silence and turns into an it looks like imovie argument.

In most cases editors don't need to change, so there's no point in learning it if nobody is going to use it for a while, and most editors get hired for their editing skills primarily, the using software skill is secondary. Its important to know how to edit certain formats or styles.

As a freelancer its always good to know more than one NLE.

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



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:20:21 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "(what was that just there - james cagney?)
"


Full on grapefruit in the face to all non-Xers.


Return to posts index

Michael Phillips
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:44:33 am

Here is a timeline from Star Trek:
http://www.evanschiff.com/bd/articles/5-1-temp-mixes-on-star-trek-into-dark...

These timeline examples tend to be deeper into the cut where previz editing has been replaced by the first versions of the effects as they come in. Those can start accumulating into the dozens. But before that it would be some or all the elements to create the effect as the editor has selected, timed and created the overall relationship to be sent to the VFX artists. You are starting to see "outsource" effects type worflows as with Eyeon Fusion where the complexity is done in Fusion, but the renders and such can be happening at the same time and pop right into the "container" on the timeline.


Michael


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 2:55:49 am

Well, that's the 5.1 surround mix.

That kind of audio complexity for an effects laden movie is kinda given.

It seems like form the responses, that editors have developed a process where they simply toss any and everything including multiple versions of each into the timeline as a giant scratch pad.

And that's totally cool.

All X brings to the party is the ability NOT to necessarily have to slap a thing on the timeline in order to efficiently work with it.

Essentially you have the Event Browser as an "On Deck" area that remains accessible but hidden - probably just like a tabbed alternate timline in Legacy that you can pop into as a source.

The difference, of course, is that you can't search and find in those alternate Legacy tabbed timelines - you have to KNOW where the goodies are.

Or maybe I just used it poorly.

Since it's no longer being sold it's a moot point, I guess.

And so it goes.

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

Michael Phillips
Re: FCPX is Ready for prime time
on Oct 19, 2013 at 3:13:13 am

[Bill Davis]: Well, that's the 5.1 surround mix.

Scroll down to the graphic under SHOWTIME to see a version of the original timeline. They aren't mixing 5.1 in the timeline, they are editing effects that may or may not be used by the audio post team. I have had complex 5.1 in simple picture edits - it does not need to an effects laden film.

As far as why FCPx is not being used on features such as this, everyone will have their own reasons. For me, a fundamental one (of many) is ScriptSync - the ability to see all coverage in context of the script, directly access any line, compare reads of one or all dialog, etc. is key to finding those moments that make the story.

Will FCPx be used on such a feature one day? Why not? If it could do it now, I am sure someone would do it - and perhaps they are. I could see someone like Billy Fox or Angus Wall giving it a shot.


Michael


Return to posts index

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