FORUMS: list search recent posts

Is anyone actually using FCPX?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Taron Ghazaryan
Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 4:31:21 am

I know some people here are asking questions about FCPX meaning they're using it. I tried to edit a small project in it and I regret it. What would have taken me 4 hours to do is taking me over 2 days. Simple tasks that were a keyboard shortcut away are now taking forever to do. A cut on multiple tracks, crossfades, multicam switching, organizing clips, layering, etc..

So my question is. Do any of you guys see yourself using this product?


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 5:08:37 am

I'll be using it professionally. It takes time to learn though. Within its limited features it's quite powerful. Don't hand it something outside it's current feature set and understand it's going to take time for the editor to get up to speed.

I'd use it for jobs with AVCHD and mixed sources, file delivery, with enough lead turnaround time that I can make frequent looks at manuals and tutorials if I bump into an issue.



Return to posts index

Tony Silanskas
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 7:15:17 am

I'm with Craig. And am taking a shot with a small project next week. Did some personal stuff this weekend to learn and it's all slowly making sense in a good way. I will say, the organizing of large projects should become much much easier.

tony

http://www.HungryCliff.com


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 1:30:07 pm

[Tony Silanskas] "I will say, the organizing of large projects should become much much easier."

That's how I see it too. I had actually been using Fcp7 with a keyword solution for some time. I had p2flow as a metadata organizer that sent all the info to FCP columns. The Fcp7 interface made searching more difficult. FCPX is going to be a lot easier. Everyone seems to be complaining about a feature I'm really exited for and will use all the time. I don't think people can really grasp what's going on.

I still can't use it on real jobs yet, though. I am sure that will come with time. If not then I guess we move on. For now we sit tight.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 3:33:53 pm

When Apple eventually hooks this into a server and shared storage this is going to be very powerful for facility event, media, etc. management. Sometimes I have to wonder why professionals don't see this potential in FCPX.



Return to posts index

MIke Guidotti
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 4:03:14 pm

As of now scuttlebutt is that shared storage is not in the future for this program. It's a single workstation single editor application from the roots of it's design.


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 4:24:10 pm

[MIke Guidotti] "As of now scuttlebutt is that shared storage is not in the future for this program."

Just curious, where'd you hear that or how do you know?

I mean it might not work right now, but how do you know it was designed as a single user experience?

Seems a little far fetched to me.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 5:04:07 pm

[MIke Guidotti] "As of now scuttlebutt is that shared storage is not in the future for this program."

Stop spreading false rumors. If you can't attribute a reliable source and not another person also spreading rumors then your post is meaningless or a deliberate troll.



Return to posts index

Michael Aranyshev
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 4:34:41 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Sometimes I have to wonder why professionals don't see this potential in FCPX."

I see it. I also see that by the time they introduce multiseat collaborative features it might be irrlelevant


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 5:19:59 pm

[Michael Aranyshev] "I see it. I also see that by the time they introduce multiseat collaborative features it might be irrlelevant"

I can't see it every being irrelevant short of Apple dropping FCPX entirely. People move one way and they move again IF (big if) it's worthwhile.

I see Apple's database/metadata approach begin very powerful and very flexible. I don't think it'll take more than a year to get there (just my guess).

The problem is people can't add FCP7 seats until that point comes since Apple pulled FCP7. That's their big mistake. The one thing Apple can hope for, short of putting FCP7 back for the time being, is that their Server/Shared Storage integration will be so power/affordable that it's easy for facilities to move back.



Return to posts index

Stevo Chang
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 9:45:47 pm

I can see journalists who used to depend on professional editors, cutting out professional editors and editing news clips themselves.

I can also see students and businessman editing together presentation videos for class or a business meeting, thus effectively giving the ax to dedicated in-house A/V departments.

Will this be the end of professional editors and the beginning of bad-editing?

Apple has already shown us they prefer their users to have a limited internet-experience by banning Flash from their iOS devices -- perhaps they prefer presentation videos and newsclips to start with curtain-closing transitions and end with star wipes?

All joking aside, I could see Michael Scott being VERY EXCITED for FCPX.

FCP -- RIP 2011


Return to posts index

David Battistella
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 7:45:23 am

I will use it on at this point in time after determining the following factors:

1. Does this job require me going outside of FCPX ?

If I have to hand the sound or picture over to a sound house or post house then I have to use FCS, Avid or Adobe. If lightworks was on a MAC I might use that.

If I choose to keep a specific project within FCP-X tool set then I will use that.

I like FCPx because I like how quickly shots can be assembled and edited. Sure, it took a day to get used to but like any software it acvomplishes a specific task.

I'm going to use it whenever I can because I believe that within 12 months, many people will have implemented it after Apple answers a few questions.

To some the very fact that the software looks like imovie offends their sensibility as a professional. I try not to get offended by those things. A couple of months ago I put iMovie on my phone and made two little films. Not because I wanted to see what it was like. I'm not so invested in any software that my life and death depends on it because I would never want the stress that comes when a company makes a change the way Apple did.

The one thing I firmly believe is that Apple should provide a free way to migrate older projects into the new software. I completely recognize that need from an archival perspective. That move was irresponsible to the customer base.

Nothing is certain. Ever. A lot of people are reacting towards apple they way they might after a relationship breakup. They feel cheated after being emotionally
invested.

But an investment in apple is a business relationship, not a life partner relationship (although many editors spend more tome with their software than their spouse).

FCPX is a business decision. Emotion can not enter to deeply into it.

Heres how I see it. For 300 dollars I can try a new app by apple. If it doesn't work out it was three hundred bucks and I find the solution I need.

______________________________
Believe me. Everything is a lie.



Return to posts index


Everest Mokaeff
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 11:33:30 am

I'm not gonna use it in full-circle production for there is no way to communicate with other participants: VFX, Sound, Grading. Furthermore, fcpx broke traditional editorial workflow and legit question is Why industry should follow software lead while it should be the other way around. Maybe this is a good idea for home studio to collate five to ten videos per year into 'events'. For a production company this approach looks silly to say the least. I'm looking for developments in this story though I'm leaning towards avid/davinci solution.

Sony PMW-EX3, Canon Mark II 5D, FCS3 in Moscow
http://www.mokaeff.com


Return to posts index

Hector berrebi
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 1:39:02 pm

we used it in our studio on an Internet tapeless project
the keyer is superb and very real-time

we are still learning it, from manual and forums

we're about to start offering a fast courses on FCPX
so spending a lot of time with it

which is not helping me like it more

but i'm starting to accept it. somewhat...


hector

Hector Berrebi
prePost Consulting


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 4:21:25 pm

[Hector berrebi] "which is not helping me like it more"

The more I use it, the more I like it but also the more I recognize how incomplete it is. Lots of little things need to be implemented. In Events Browser, selecting a range on a clip and going to something else and back causes the range selection to disappear on that clip.



Return to posts index


Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 3:10:44 pm

If it had OMF support I'd start using it straight away on smaller jobs - without OMF I can't even think of doing that. And I wouldn't want to think about grading with the obnoxious Color Board so I'd probably export and grade in Color as I used to. But I'm not doing anything with it until (or if) I get a way to export my audio to ProTools.

That said, having finally read through the entire manual in some detail I have to say I get what they are trying to do and I like it. Loads of stuff doesn't work properly in ways that it's hard to guess which would make serious work a bit hairy. This really is a beta version in all but name and price! It galls me more than I can say that I had to pay Apple to test it for them.

But the underlying editing concepts which have taken such flak over here on this forum are really interesting and potentially powerful. And keyword organization is a genuinely interesting breakthrough in project management. There's so much that they need to get right from some really basic standpoints that I can't help thinking it will be a long while before they roll it all out, if they ever do. Most of all they need to start getting away from the underling iMovie architecture which is certainly where the organization nonsense (Projects in particular) has derived from along with pretty much everything else.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 4:18:07 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "There's so much that they need to get right from some really basic standpoints that I can't help thinking it will be a long while before they roll it all out, if they ever do."

Apple has already told various journalists that it will be very fast. That's the point of App Store distribution vs disk and ship for major upgrades. First upgrade should be in about 4 months from what I've read. Of course it might be nice to know what features where coming first but most developers don't like doing that since things can happen and feature priorities can change.

[Simon Ubsdell] "Loads of stuff doesn't work properly in ways that it's hard to guess which would make serious work a bit hairy."

I'm finding everything works so far. It's just that it's very incomplete. I'd really like to know what you're finding doesn't work but that post is better suited to FCPX Techniques forum.



Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 4:25:13 pm

[Craig Seeman] "When Apple eventually hooks..."

The more I think about it, I would be happiest if Apple did next to NOTHING to actually develop these features, and focused on HOOKS for third parties.

I'll give you an example using codecs. Would you rather have (alphabetically I think) ARRI, Canon, Panasonic, RED, Sony and the like making sure that their footage is ready to use natively, with performance that might even be faster than what Apple could do, IMMEDIATELY, every time a new format is released? Or wait for Apple to get around to working it in and maybe not have it work as well as it might.

But Apple has to provide the hooks.

They did this better than anybody else ever has with FXPlug. Look at GPU-accelerated plugs from people like CoreMelt. They not only look and act like native plug-ins, but in FCP 7, they're far faster than anything that Apple themselves came up with, and provide titling, FX, and audio features that Apple never got around to. With products as good as these for such reasonable prices, why would Apple have bothered? I'd hope they wouldn't.

Knowing that Apple can make hooks of that quality, now in 64 bits, I WANT third parties to lead the way with features, while Apple focuses on the core, and the hooks.

Heresy I know, and frustrating as all get-out until the features that Apple has indicated are coming (multicam, XML, etc.) actually show up, but the focus on foundation rather than features for this first release may be what excites me most.

Note that I have no comment on how Apple has managed this, their commitment to pros, blah blah blah. It's not that I have an opinion and won't share it for political reasons. I really don't have one. Anyone who will ever read this knows more than I do. I'm just saying that I can imagine this working itself out in a pretty interesting way.

Of course, my opinion is worth the amount of money I make using FCP, which is zero. But I was both an editor and a developer, so my perspective on the value of lean development to maximum experience is different than most.

Hooks, baby. I'm saying it's all about the hooks. Get that as right in the future as FXPlug, and the possibilities are very nearly endless.


Return to posts index


Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 4:36:26 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Apple has already told various journalists that it will be very fast. That's the point of App Store distribution vs disk and ship for major upgrades"

I think for me the issue is that there is a mountain - no, a Himalayas - of stuff that needs addressing which means that however fast the updates come it will still take a good long while till it all settles down comfortably, as I am increasingly thinking it will.


[Craig Seeman] "I'm finding everything works so far"

I shouldn't have said that - I agree that it all works, although it does have a beta-like bugginess to it which means quite a few random crashes for me a least, but there are loads of things (see the Techniques forum) that don't work remotely as well as we have reasonable justification to expect they should. Lots of sketches for ideas that will probably come good, too many things that are still cobbled together from iMovie builds (Projects!!!!!!!), I think it is reasonable to say.

But overall, and I'm risking my life saying it here, I'm starting to be a fan and am impressed by the potentiality of so much that we're seeing as much as by what's already implemented.

Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 5:10:13 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "But overall, and I'm risking my life saying it here, I'm starting to be a fan and am impressed by the potentiality of so much that we're seeing as much as by what's already implemented."

The way you feel is perfectly normal according to the Kubler-Ross model.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kübler-Ross_model

Sounds like you are almost at acceptance. You shouldn't feel like you re putting your life on the line.

I have not downloaded and installed FCPx yet as I haven't had time to build a clean Snow Leopard boot disk to do so quite yet. As soon as that's ready, I will start to play with it. From what I have seen and read, I am very eager to start learning the building blocks. The organization is something that I have been dreaming about. I hate bins. They are nothing but jail cells for your footage. On a lot of my projects, the media gets completely maximized, which means the footage can take on different roles. What if I organize my footage by day in a bin? That means I have to know what day the footage was shot on. Wen working on a project for six months, those days start to lose their meaning. What if I organize by location? Meaning a shoot was in California, Arizona, Chicago and London. That means my footage is locked in those locations, but it tells me nothing about the rest of the footage.

If there's parity in between those locations, meaning we shot a manufacturer in Chicago and a manufacturer in Arizona that both build widgets, I can now search for Chicago Widgets, Arizona Widgets, or more importantly, I can search for Widgets. If I am looking for a particular shot, I don't have to remember, was that shot in CA or AZ? Or London? Or What day did we shoot that again?

Let's say it was a three camera shoot. I can now search for other angles without having to go look in the bin. I can simply search for InterviewName B Cam. I also hope I can append a tc number to that. So if I need the c cam of a particular interview to cut to, I can search for InterviewName C Cam 10:23:45:23 and the angle will show up right where I need it to be to add to the timeline. I could do on and on about how this keyword functionality will make for easier editing.

I have been using P2 metadata like this extensively for a number of years now. Fcpx will make it even easier to aggregate and sort all of this data (I rely on FCP7s columns currently which is rather limiting). In my opinion, it should just be a big pool of data. There's no need to arbitrarily segregate your media in folders as media can have properties that apply this AND that, not just this OR that. This is the biggest paradigm shift for many. Myself, I welcome this functionality with open arms. Just have to wait and see how it goes with more connectivity with other post-prod systems and hardware, but my feeling is that will come in due time.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Is anyone actually using FCPX?
on Jun 26, 2011 at 5:28:39 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "it will still take a good long while till it all settles down comfortably,"

It depends on how far along the coders are. Some company have multi teared developed such that while this version is being readied, others are already well into developing the next release. We'll probably know in about 4 months when the next update happens.

[Simon Ubsdell] "Lots of sketches for ideas that will probably come good,"

I agree. For example, Scopes look excellent but they had no ability to be configured and no way to have it default to something other that it always opening on histogram I believe.

It seems like a skeleton for an excellent NLE but they need to do a lot of work.


[Simon Ubsdell] "But overall, and I'm risking my life saying it here, I'm starting to be a fan and am impressed by the potentiality of so much that we're seeing as much as by what's already implemented."

Myself as well. I think Apple's biggest mistake was strategic. There should have been a year long transition where both FCS and FCPX were available so people would have time to learn while Apple has time to implement features.



Return to posts index

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