FORUMS: list search recent posts

er, is that it?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Aindreas Gallagher
er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 7:39:05 pm

they had a year right? they put events and projects into libraries - woop do do - they went back to the 7 project container so, they did something with fx plug, allowed you to copy paste keyframes and you can stick footage - only - anywhere, and a bunch of other bits and bobs.

where is the rest of it? fcpx.tv did a wishlist,
http://fcpx.tv/top.html
so there have been lots of wish lists but:

• 01 Number one and still the champ. A scrolling Timeline, stationary playhead option
• 02 Pro Audio features: Audio Mixer with Master Fader, AU plugin inserts, keyframe recording,
• 03 Save and recall customized Window Layouts with moveable individual window panes.
• 04 True Roundtripping/integration with Motion
• 05 Dual Monitor improvement.
• 06 A better dedicated keyframe editor and keyframe options.
• 07 Multiple Color Correction scopes windows open at the same time
• 08 Multi-user editing on the same project at the same time and easier collaboration in Final Cut Pro X.
• 09 Keyframeable color correction parameters.

no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
and no.

what the hell were they doing for 12 months? they built a library container - thats the headline feature?

fcp.co has the headline for this full .1 release:
New libraries, new FXPlug support, custom project frame sizes and many more improvements and performance tweaks.

they had to make custom frame sizes one of the three headline features for a release a year in the making.

isn't it a bit crap? I'm an observer - but isn't anyone more invested in this software a bit disappointed with this? what happened to all that magic they were going to do with roles to aid audio organisation? How many engineers are left working on X now? do we need two hands for the count do you think?

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


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 7:46:32 pm

I hate to say it. But I agree with you. A bit of a disappointment in my book.



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 7:54:52 pm

the thing is I was really and truly looking forward to seeing what apple mojo could do with a long run up.

Its kind of hard to think that this is what anyone had in mind.

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


Return to posts index


Steve Connor
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 8:40:29 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "the thing is I was really and truly looking forward to seeing what apple mojo could do with a long run up.

Its kind of hard to think that this is what anyone had in mind."


Everyone was so happy this morning and now you've gone an put a big downer on the whole thing, I hope you're happy with yourself?

(I do agree with you a bit though)

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 8:49:08 pm

http://www.engadget.com/2013/12/19/apple-mac-pro-2013-hands-on/

They mention that they have already seen it play back 16 streams of 4K in realtime with effects applied!

That has to be good doesn't it?

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:20:15 pm

no for sure, its probably likely to be ridiculous in operation. I'm not sure 16 streams of 4k with effects was first on many software lists. but it is incredible.

it feels like a lot of crazy at an extremely competitive price point. quarter million inferno box from x number of years ago like.

i was just extremely curious to see them tackle other stuff the way they tackled multi-cam. I'm now a little curious about the development resources available, given that release took a year?

not to point out the obvious - but premiere really is going like a cat outrunning a bushfire. realistically, apple would want to show build out ambition pretty soon for X - the fact that they aren't even looking for money anymore is great on one level, but feels kind of weird on a "pro" customer level.

they really don't owe me anything at the current price point. when do we pay for X again?
do we pay for X again? is it at .2 in 2016? how do apple now view ongoing profit (granted miniscule) relative to their timely responsiveness to existing customers needs? when apple isn't bothered asking for any more money?

if that whole vendor performance lever is gone on a customer level, then, mmm er...

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


Return to posts index


Marcus Moore
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 4:46:42 am

It's hard to say at this point if Apple will be motivated to charge for an X update.

If FCPX is getting people to buy a Mac, THAT'S where their profit centre is.



Return to posts index

Vince Sanchez
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 8:10:30 pm
Last Edited By Vince Sanchez on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:11:31 pm

Sad to say but I think this is it for me and FCPX. I've clung to FCP 7 and its never let me down. For the last year, since I've had a fast Mac Pro I start every project by giving FCP X and Premiere a chance. Have always ended up back on 7.
This week I started a multicam project on Premiere and finished it and not could I do everything I needed easily, there were some extras to that made the project shine.
Still missing a lot of things but the workarounds aren't too bad and hopefully they'll be added in. Funny I needed clip markers in the timeline and the next day an update was there and it had... clip markers in the timeline.
Was waiting for 10.1 to give it a try but the only thing they added that interest me at all is join through edits, not enough.
If a really big update shows up someday I'll give it a try but for now its back to Premiere (started with it in the last century).

Thanks,
Vince Sanchez
Intel 12 core Mac 2.66
AJA LHi
OSX 10.9
Premiere Pro CC


Return to posts index

Mark Dobson
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 7:58:44 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "but isn't anyone more invested in this software a bit disappointed with this?"

If I'm honest I'm a bit disappointed. And my first impression after this long long wait was - Is that it?

I've no reason to be as there are substantial improvements on the Event side of life, in fact the Event / Project divide is a thing of the past, but in reality this all feels like a beefed up maintenance upgrade, it's nearly all under the hood improvements.

But if this major engineering update really works we will all feel the benefit as we work through new jobs in the new year.

Huge improvements for those that need to share their work with a team, and quite a few nifty editing tweaks, but still that slight feeling you get when someone gives you a present that you don't really like but you don't want to upset them and ruin the party.

But maybe this is finally where FCPX should have been at it's launch and now the developers can concentrate on really improving it.

And for me as long as it provides a stable, reliable editing environment I'll be happy I guess and the fact that this is a free upgrade certainly helps.


Return to posts index


Rick Lang
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 8:06:30 pm

May be disappointing in the number of functional feature changes, but the other thing that we can’t judge yet is the performance changes that were touted prior to release. Perhaps those changes are real but yet to be realized as they were done specifically to take advantage of the new Mac Pro hardware.

Rick Lang

iMac 27” 2.8GHz i7 16GB


Return to posts index

Helmut Kobler
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 8:21:14 pm

Maybe all the under-the-hood improvements for Mac Pro support took a while. I hope so.

-------------------
Los Angeles Cameraman
Canon C300 (x2), Zeiss CP.2 lenses, P2 Varicam, etc.
http://www.lacameraman.com


Return to posts index

Sam Comer
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 8:28:05 pm

Almost like the Facebook model of "updates" - "We thought these things would be cool to do. You might like them. Maybe some of them will be something you need. Stuff you REALLY want? Meh. Boring."


Return to posts index


Steve McGarrigle
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 8:26:51 pm

Yeah - you've kinda got a point there. Now that the dust is settling and I'm looking down the list of new features have to agree with you. I thought The playhead and audio features would be there for sure. There was enough people making enough noise about this surely to have got noticed.
My opinion is they messed up real bad with the initial release of FCPX - i mean we know they did right? but further down the road i think they realised that the fundamental underlying structure and foundations of FCPX just weren't adequate. It was essentially "A house built on sand' - prone to corruption and "not ready for prime time" consequently it would seem they have had to spend all of there time rewriting the organisational structural basics yet again instead of implementing all the stuff users actually wanted.


Return to posts index

Mitch Ives
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 8:34:44 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "isn't anyone more invested in this software a bit disappointed with this? "

Yes, after a year, one expects a bit. Your list covers a lot of it.

At first blush, there is a lot to like, but then you realize that a great deal of that is giving you back things that you lost in FCP7... so it's hard to count those as progress.

For big shops, this looks like a great deal. For the rest of us, I'm a bit underwhelmed if I'm being truly honest... but I've only been with it for a awhile today. Perhaps I'll feel differently later. There does appear to have been some polishing of things.

One has to assume that this was a lot of "under-the-hood" stuff, in preparation for some real upgrades. Hopefully the speed on a new MacPro will be something to look forward to.

To me, this looks like what the first release should have been. I hope Apple some serious additions coming in the very near future... and not a year from now. Right now it feels like a lot of garage cleaning and rearranging and not much in the way of new paint...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 8:55:28 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "• 01 Number one and still the champ. A scrolling Timeline, stationary playhead option
• 02 Pro Audio features: Audio Mixer with Master Fader, AU plugin inserts, keyframe recording,
• 03 Save and recall customized Window Layouts with moveable individual window panes.
• 04 True Roundtripping/integration with Motion
• 05 Dual Monitor improvement.
• 06 A better dedicated keyframe editor and keyframe options.
• 07 Multiple Color Correction scopes windows open at the same time
• 08 Multi-user editing on the same project at the same time and easier collaboration in Final Cut Pro X.
• 09 Keyframeable color correction parameters."


My list would be long. But very different. Stuff like flattening multi cam. Proper match frame. Scrubbing in the event viewer. Multiple browser windows or tabbed keyword collections. Tabbed open projects too. Ganging.

1- couldn't care less. Avid did this and it was the first thing I shut off.
2 - would be nice, but the last thing on my mind. I know others differ.
3- It'd be nice, but even in 7 I tended to set up windows and leave them.
4-YES.
5-They actually screwed it up worse in this version. I put events on the second monitor, and now they keep flipping back to the first. Even without the mavericks new multi display support on, doing alt+tab to FCP doesn't always work. You don't always end up with the event and timeline. Course this might be the mavericks update that screwed this up.
6-The did add in copy and paste keyframes. FCP 7 did not have this ability. So, I give them a kudos here. Seems to default to no easing in/out in my first tests. But still, compared to adobe, it falls very short.
7-It'd be nice. Not high on my list. And I love my scopes, but still. There's hot keys to switch between the scopes you know.
8-I think they've made a big step in that direction
9-Would be nice. But I've never keyframed color correction. Masks, yes. Tracking masks would be great.


Return to posts index


Andy Field
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:11:26 pm

I'm in the disappointed camp -

the number one reason we avoid FCPX is audio mixing and key framing....I can't see how editors prefer rubber banding and manually adding keyframes when you can simply created them in real time with a software mixer to easily fineness ducking music and nat sound....weaving a nice mix under narration without stopping everything and breaking out the pen tool.

This is a breeze in Avid, Premiere and FCP 7 - and still a headache in X.

The new libraries getting back to an understandable and media-manageable file structure is nice as is some of the other improvements.

No round trip to motion is another deal breaker - in Premiere - using it daily with Audition, Photoshop and After Effects.

This is all from an editor who loved Apple products and the FCP Suite...and desperately wanted to love this program (hey it's cheaper and no subscription) But after a year on Premiere - it's nearly bullet proof - virtually no rendering...takes any native format - and outputs multiple formats simultaneously in background while you continue to edit...and Adobe adds enhancements virtually every month (two this month alone - although one was a big bug fix)

Come on Apple - stop looking down the ice to where you want the puck to go.....and you'll lure lost editors back into the fold

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:25:47 pm

In Avid I keyframed. In 7 I keyframed. Always tried the automated tools but didn't feel they were very precise. Oops! Too quiet, try again. Oops, too late, try again. All that for a couple clicks to get it exactly the way I wanted. And in X the range tool makes it ridiculously easy. Draw a range, drag down. Plus, I can actually keyframe the raw adjustments looking at the waveforms since they adjust. Just saying, audio key framing is much better than 7. But if you liked the automation, then I guess not.

I like Premiere, but I keep running into issues there too. There's something to complain about in every NLE. Especially legacy. It's support for formats was it's biggest downfall in the end. Not it's features. Not being able to mix formats and timebases, and all the transcoding!


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:41:58 pm

[Andy Field] "the number one reason we avoid FCPX is audio mixing and key framing....I can't see how editors prefer rubber banding and manually adding keyframes when you can simply created them in real time with a software mixer to easily fineness ducking music and nat sound....weaving a nice mix under narration without stopping everything and breaking out the pen tool.
"


I' ve never liked live mixing. Especially software interface mixing. Maybe I'm not good at it, or maybe people think they are better at it than they actually are. :) I find FCP X's rubber banding exceptionally fast and easy. The realtime waveform feedback is a boon too. And you don't need the pen tool, just Option-click. Also Ctrl +/- to adjust overall clip level. Now if there were a control surface with faders, I might give it a shot. But still it requires you to predict the future.



Return to posts index


Mitch Ives
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 3:28:04 am

[Brett Sherman] "I' ve never liked live mixing. Especially software interface mixing. Maybe I'm not good at it, or maybe people think they are better at it than they actually are. :) I find FCP X's rubber banding exceptionally fast and easy. The realtime waveform feedback is a boon too. And you don't need the pen tool, just Option-click. Also Ctrl +/- to adjust overall clip level. Now if there were a control surface with faders, I might give it a shot. But still it requires you to predict the future."

Should have tried a Mackie Control Unit in FCP7. It kicked ass! Used the hell out of it... every day!

I wonder if I'll be collecting Social Security before Apple ever gets serious about this.

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:54:04 pm
Last Edited By Richard Herd on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:56:27 pm

[Andy Field] "the number one reason we avoid FCPX is audio mixing"

To me, "audio mixing" means compression and limiters, and X's are very superior. I'm not sure how you mix audio, but in 7, I used STP, in CS6 I use Audition, but in X there is no need to leave the NLE, for compression and limiters. They are very clean and amazing, combined with Compound Clips the workflow produces outstanding results, with flexibility, and speed.

If to you, "audio mixing" means key framing the audio levels, I would point you to those other tools (in any software you care to use): compression and limiters. There's also more fancy-pants type of compression like side-chaining; it's a series of skills and techniques worth investigating.

EDIT: Definitely curious about your audio workflow.


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 10:39:09 pm

audio mixing is adjusting levels - compression etc is sweetening that can be done in or out of most NLE's - it's the mixing that's a nightmare in FCP X - you use slider pots in ever other NLE BUT FCP X - Premiere, AVID, FCP 7 - all have real time recordable mixing keyframes - it could not be easier.

Fiddling with the pen tool to get a little audio spike here - a soft music up and under in a narration break (yes you can do range selection in this, I know...but it removes the fineness of a smooth audio mix.

again - i can't see how an editor would prefer to stop, key frame, stop, keyframe every single little audio mix when a real time keyframe recording mixer does it in one easy pass

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 10:47:27 pm

[Andy Field] " i can't see how an editor would prefer to stop, key frame, stop, keyframe every single little audio mix when a real time keyframe recording mixer does it in one easy pass
"


i tried it once very late at night in a suite to get stuff done in premiere 6 - it was a bit of a revelation. just the feel of it as were. even with software sliders. I thought I'd quite like a wacom for it the next time.

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


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 11:48:58 pm

there are outbord mixers that work with most NLE's but we've never had a problem getting an accurate mix with any of the software real time mixers..but I come from old school radio where we did it on large boards so that's comfortable for me.

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Brent Cook
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 11:21:37 pm

[Andy Field] "audio mixing is adjusting levels"

Audio mixing is WAY more than just adjusting levels. Mixing is adjusting levels, skillfully adding compression, limiting, EQ, distortion, reverb, etc, etc, etc. all for the purpose of making multiple tracks of audio sound "good" together.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 12:23:39 am

[Andy Field] "it could not be easier"

Easy is important but output quality matters more, of course.

Audition's spectral frequency display is a fancy piece of software -- like magic for fixing it in post. If anyone hasn't used it, do it today. <--underline, bold, all-caps.


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 11:20:34 pm

[Richard Herd] "To me, "audio mixing" means compression and limiters, and X's are very superior. I'm not sure how you mix audio, but in 7, I used STP, in CS6 I use Audition, but in X there is no need to leave the NLE, for compression and limiters. They are very clean and amazing, combined with Compound Clips the workflow produces outstanding results, with flexibility, and speed."

I think Andy already answered this... the difference between mixing and sweetening. But I wanted to add that Premiere also has very good built in limiters/compressors (iZotope's Multiband compressor comes to mind)... along with EQs, reverbs etc. Where Premiere is more advanced (imo), is in it's ability to stack channel effects, and to route those channels to multiple sub mixes (mono, stereo, 5.1, adaptive). This allows you to build up very complex mixes fairly easily. I think the only other NLE with better audio capabilities is Vegas.

Shawn



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:30:28 pm

god no - I didn't come up with the list - I pasted the fcpx.tv list from the link I gave bud.

I'm nowhere near qualified to breakout a checklist. as a half assed mograph-ish editor the only bit there I ever paid proper attention to was keyframes, those I found highly problematic.

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


Return to posts index

Mitch Ives
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 3:24:49 am

[Bret Williams] "9-Would be nice. But I've never keyframed color correction. Masks, yes. Tracking masks would be great."

Shows how different we all are. I used the hell of of that... until of course FCP X didn't have it. I've been begging for it since the first release. I guess Apple only cares about things that are sexy, not things that you really need...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 5:11:09 am

And I've been screaming for copy and pasting Keyframes since FCP 1.x in 2000, and today they added a half assed "oops, did we forget this line of code?" version. It's lame, but it's something. Keyframing sucks in X and even more so in legacy.


Return to posts index

Mathieu Ghekiere
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:05:58 pm

I have to agree a bit.

I'm a happy FCPX user and that hasn't changed. It seems Apple did plumbing work now and if performance is a lot better and stability too, that's important. X is already one of the fastest NLE's out there.
And there ARE some very welcome feature updates and some of them ARE big.

But feature wise, after a year waiting, I expected more. I can only hope that this upgrade clears the way for another quick round of feature updates.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:16:08 pm

Not much to add to all this except after something like 14 months I expected a bit more new and improved features. 14 months must have been a major challenge doing all that under the hood work apparently.

In about 10 weeks we'll have some bug fixes.
Another 10 weeks beyond we may finally get a few more features.
Looks like NAB or so before they add new features.
Sigh.



Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 9:22:01 pm

If Craig's disappointed, then this is another Apple belly flop....no one's been more enthusiastic about seeing the FCP X glass half full. Seriously Craig..I feel for you.....I know you're invested in making this program work for you....and really am glad for the folks who like and use it...just wish it gave us what our team wants and needs.

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Loren Risker
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 10:09:14 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "• 09 Keyframeable color correction parameters."

Bring in your favorite color tools as effects from Motion, then you can key frame any color parameter you like.

-------------
OutOfFocus.TV - Original series, music videos, mini-docs.


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 10:42:26 pm

we keyframe color correction all the time - someone passing in and out of "autogain" camera shot - to even lighting over time - a snap in other NLE's - I haven't tried it in X so don't know - but from comments it appears not possible yet

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

John Heagy
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 11:32:57 pm

Feature wise it is sparse, but I have to say Apple really ripped it apart and rebuilt the foundation. This is something I never thought they would do. They essentially abandoned the separate project/event paradigm and contained everything in a single project folder called a "Library". A nod to us large facility operators that what benefits for us will benefit all. Almost exactly a year since my "Events: Good or Bad" post and it seems Apple saw the light.

Unfortunately Apple's latest Chess move has us in check and we'll need to move our Xsan to 10.9 before I can update our clients in order to really test FCPX 10.1.

John


Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 11:23:03 pm

It's strange indeed that after such a long time Final Cut Pro X is still not where it could/should be.

Perhaps all engineers that are working on FCPX have now started working on logic X? From what I've read here: http://www.gearslutz.com/board/logic-pro-x/892289-logic-pro-x-10-0-5-out-no...
Logic seems to have gotten a massive update! (very happy about it but haven't had time to play around with it)


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 11:36:05 pm

Apparently sending from FCPX to Logic now works! I've tried a couple of things and it seems to be more reliable

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 19, 2013 at 11:59:05 pm

ah that's kind of great to read - it really sounds like they did get christmas.

still - you'd think the FCP7 prairie herd really are about to finally move. they have to right? you'd also think apple would have worked quite a bit harder to signal them.

on some level this full .1 update reads -

"hello, we got the entire organisational structure wrong three years ago, we have now completely altered it. that largely represents this .1 upgrade. end of message"

you'd honestly think apple don't have as long as apple think they have to get back into any kind of driver's seat.
If they don't shift their asses and iterate, this is going to be perceived as pages. with don't care no pay updates.

listening to the ripple training guys there going on about crossing events with libraries and entering other countries as the metaphor went, I was struck by the thought - who the hell cares about this. why does anyone care about this?

how is this release signalling FCPX to the broader editing world? and if its solely for the FCPX guys, how is FCPX going anywhere?
does this .1 release have even a single new feature that would draw anyone's attention coming from the competition?

through edits? project containers?

a bit ranty, but how did apple fail to come up with a single noteworthy advance to a disinterested observer?
after 14 months by craig seeman's count?

ech.

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


Return to posts index

Erik Lindahl
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 12:24:29 am

As a facility still running primarily FCP Legacy and testing FCPX and Premier Pro for various projects, FCPX 10.1 sound interesting.

The new library structure is a huge improvement. It really fit our structure far better and I have a hard time seeing any real down side to it.

It performance is better - also a huge plus. FCPX has been in my testing amazing in speed but also very "switchy" in its performance. Some task where 10-100X slower than FCP Legacy, others the opposite.

We shall see where it all ends. 10.1 feel much more thought through. Yes, there are features I'd hope to see but now I can give the app yet another test for real.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 12:30:33 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I'm an observer"

The actual business model is develop a product to a certain level and have customers send in feedback. Why spend money developing features customers don't want. It's even better, when those "beta-testers" are paying to test the software and send feedback to developers.

10.1.01 is where I come back to X, till then I'm happy in my dual boot 10.6.8 FCP7~mavericks-CS6 hybrid world. Not sure I will make it to the CC unless the corporation pays for Adobe Anywhere, which I'm pulling for -- on Windows! A new world for sure.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 12:37:24 am
Last Edited By Franz Bieberkopf on Dec 20, 2013 at 12:43:28 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "where is the rest of it?"

[Craig Seeman] "In about 10 weeks we'll have some bug fixes.
Another 10 weeks beyond we may finally get a few more features.
Looks like NAB or so before they add new features."





"As long as I breathe, I shall fight for the future, that radiant future in which man, strong and beautiful, will become master of the drifting stream of his history and will direct it towards the boundless horizon of beauty, joy and happiness!"

[…]
"It seems as if the new century, this gigantic newcomer, were bent at the very moment of its appearance to drive the optimist into absolute pessimism … [It thunders]: "Death to Utopia! Death to faith! Death to love! Death to hope!" in salvos of fire and in the rumbling of guns. "Surrender, you pathetic dreamer. Here I am, your long awaited future."

"No," replies the unhumbled optimist: "You -- you are only the present."


~ some selections from Lev Davidovich Bronstein (Trotsky), January 1901
http://www.trotsky.net/trotsky_year/on_optimism.html

Franz.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 1:03:57 am

BIEBERKOPF.

not bad there. five year plans without the need for capitalism sticks are tricky mind you. people appear to get lost.

software as a gift from the mighty barely remembering their former lowly selves is likely to run wrong.

that is a tricky entity to partner with for paychecks.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 3:06:26 am

It does seem odd that this is the direction 10.1 took. The change to Libraries is about as clear of an admission by Apple that the original direction was wrong.

There are very few apps that I've seen, which were designed from scratch, that have gone through such changes, especially under the hood. Clearly an indication that ProApps is just as much at the mercy of Apple engineering as outsiders. To some extent, they appear to be winging it.

It does seem as though this past year was wasted, because they had to re-architect the product for the hardware and OS - and, because they've had to address concepts that customers have rejected. Doesn't give me any warm and fuzzy feeling about how predictable FCP X will be in future versions.

Honestly, I'm not sure what everyone is expecting, though. This is Apple, we are talking about. The direction won't change. No tracks, non-functional audio mixing, an island when it comes to the rest of the pro world. These things will not change.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Mitch Ives
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 3:35:46 am

[Oliver Peters] "It does seem odd that this is the direction 10.1 took. The change to Libraries is about as clear of an admission by Apple that the original direction was wrong.

There are very few apps that I've seen, which were designed from scratch, that have gone through such changes, especially under the hood. Clearly an indication that ProApps is just as much at the mercy of Apple engineering as outsiders. To some extent, they appear to be winging it."


Doesn't instill a lot of confidence in spending $6-10K on a new MacPro does it? I really thought they would hit one out of the park and make us all want to buy MacPro's. Shows what I know...

Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.

"Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things." - Winston Churchill


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 8:14:52 am

The fallacy of thinking we video folks are what drive anything. Saw a report quoted two hours ago from Cult of Mac (I think) that said orders seeking actual shipped Mac Pros already slipped from delivery in Dec to delivery in February.

Methinks the robots in Austin will be very busy for a long time to come.

If the machine/software combo lands and actually chews through video like a rabid beaver - the details won't much matter. Most actual video editing isn't all that complex. Just painstaking and tedious. If the combo makes it less so, that's the big win.

We tend to argue the sizzle here.

The steak is what banishes the hunger.

FWIW.

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


Return to posts index

Peter Gruden
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 8:05:37 am

[Oliver Peters] "No tracks, non-functional audio mixing, an island when it comes to the rest of the pro world. "

I think you are right, but if you think about it, audio tracks are not directly compatible with FCPX metadata system. For example, roles and tracks could send the same clip to different output buses.

I think the only way this would work is if tracks would override the roles where the parameters cannot be combined, just like groups override some track parameters. It still could be a potential mess.

What I would really want is a solid AAF export to Pro Tools and Nuendo, just like the old OMF in FCP 7 was.

Audio in any video app (except Vegas) is a crap. I wouldn't mix the simplest project in any of them, so I don't really care about it. And I know I can't expect them to be perfect and they will never be. But you should at least have the direct connection to the outside world.
FCPX indeed is an audio island, although a very nice island.



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 8:18:37 am

I regularly export AAFs from FCPX to Protools and now there's XML to Logic Pro. FCPX might be an island, but there's a bridge and a ferry to get you off of it!

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Peter Gruden
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 12:12:24 pm

[Steve Connor] "I regularly export AAFs from FCPX to Protools and now there's XML to Logic Pro. FCPX might be an island, but there's a bridge and a ferry to get you off of it!"

Yes you can export AAF with X2Pro or Automatic Duck (not sure if it still works), but it should be part to the program like in Premiere or Avid. But yeah, X2Pro is the solution for the time being.

XML to Logic is fine, but you don't see Logic in post or film studio that often.



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 4:45:41 pm

[Peter Gruden] "FCPX indeed is an audio island"

What about you? Do you key frame the volume?


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 4:39:59 pm

[Oliver Peters] "non-functional audio mixing"

This has come up a few times.

Are you key framing audio volume?


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 6:13:22 pm

[Richard Herd] "Are you key framing audio volume"

Sometimes yes, sometimes, no. In FCP X I used range-based levels. In Media Composer, Premiere Pro, FCP 7, Soundtrack Pro and Audition, I usually write automation passes.

The big mixing complaint in X for me is that you cannot apply track-based effects nor do anything interactive that would typically involve busing. In X, this requires compounds, which I find useless for mixing. For example, the simple process of applying a limiter across the whole mix by adding it to a master bus, isn't available to you in X.

I often find, with complex mixes in X, that I do one of 2 things: 1) Mix in X, export an AIFF, run it through SoundForge Pro for "mastering" and then re-import; or, 2) XML it to STP or Audition for more surgical work.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 7:16:38 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Mix in X, export an AIFF, run it through SoundForge Pro for "mastering" and then re-import;"

Ah, you're using SF on the Mac. How do you like it?

Shawn



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 21, 2013 at 12:56:40 am

[Shawn Miller] "Ah, you're using SF on the Mac. How do you like it?"

I like it a lot. I use it mainly for processing and mastering and some simple editing. With SF, I like that I can use third party plug-ins, too, like Waves and that you can build effects chains that can be applied as presets. Of course, you can do that in Audition, too. Another alternative is iZotope RX3 Advanced, though it's not a file editor.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 22, 2013 at 1:37:50 am

[Oliver Peters] "[Shawn Miller] "Ah, you're using SF on the Mac. How do you like it?"

I like it a lot. I use it mainly for processing and mastering and some simple editing. With SF, I like that I can use third party plug-ins, too, like Waves and that you can build effects chains that can be applied as presets. Of course, you can do that in Audition, too. Another alternative is iZotope RX3 Advanced, though it's not a file editor."


That's good news. I was curious to know if anyone on this forum would even try it. It's a good application, I hope others will give it a chance. :-)

Shawn



Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Permanent Revolution. Or: The Need For Another Five Year Plan
on Dec 20, 2013 at 9:51:35 pm

[Oliver Peters] "2) XML it to STP or Audition for more surgical work."

The tools available in the spectral view is actually hard to believe. The side chain compression is simple.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: Audio Mixing
on Dec 20, 2013 at 6:36:57 pm

[Richard Herd] "Definitely curious about your audio workflow."

[Richard Herd] ""non-functional audio mixing" ... This has come up a few times."

Richard,

Since you've asked a couple of times, I'll add my thoughts on two aspects which I don't think have been addressed fully.

The first is that an audio mixer interface allows you to make fine and ongoing adjustments while listening - it is the immediate response / feedback model. The importance of this can't be overemphasized, and it is a fundamentally different approach to sound. It actually doesn't necessitate thinking about keyframes or clips at all (except to know your tracks) - the software takes care of that aspect - and allows you to listen and react and focus on the sound in real time. The volume-mapping ends up looking much more complex (because it is) but the actual workflow to achieve it is simple, intuitive, and direct.

The second aspect is that with the addition of control surfaces, you can affect more than one track at once. I suspect if/when Apple adds some sort of ipad interface or mixing solution, there will be glorious testimonials about how important "multiple controls at once" are; until then, it's keyboard shortcuts, one at a time.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 4:51:52 am

One update that's not on that list that surprises me is the save/versioning enhancements- which was addressed.

Along with FCPX's automatic saving, the autosave vault has returned. While "Snapshots" allows you to do multiple named "saved states" of the same project file, pretty much eliminates the need for endless duplication of projects.



Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 9:27:55 am

I concur - underwhelming to say the least. Performance is much better but that was really a fix, not a new feature.

Premiere CC it is - even with the much loved subscription...

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 10:17:19 am

[Lance Bachelder] "Premiere CC it is - even with the much loved subscription...
"


What were you hoping FCPX would add that would tempt you away from CC?

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 1:10:17 pm

I think there are two possible scenarios at play. The first is that this is a bit of a reboot. It fixes some design mistakes, changes the architecture to be in line with the new OS and hardware, and adds a few features along the way. Adding back autosaves is less a response to video needs and more in line with what Apple has done in other tools, like Pages and Numbers.

The second possible scenario is that Apple has been on a dual path. That, in fact, this version has been a lot longer in development and has been engineered in parallel with the "original" FCP X. In that scenario, FCP X prior to this was a stopgap beta that was a placeholder until this version came along.

The real concern, now that Apple has decided software updates are free, is that there is no external driver for feature improvements. The "rapid updates" mantra is nothing other than marketing spin. For all we know, there are very few engineers actually working full time on FCP X software development.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 1:42:59 pm

[Oliver Peters] "The real concern, now that Apple has decided software updates are free, is that there is no external driver for feature improvements. The "rapid updates" mantra is nothing other than marketing spin. For all we know, there are very few engineers actually working full time on FCP X software development."

On your first point, IF Apple has decided that you'll only ever need to buy FCPX once (and I don't think we can make this assumption just on this release), and updates are free in perpetuity- then the driver for Apple is most likely hardware. If Apple can sell customers a Mac (from a few thousand to higher-end MacPros) every few years), I think that more than makes up for $299 every 2-3 years.

On your second point- with the OS oriented (let's not forget that this couldn't' have been released any earlier than Mavericks) structural changes to the database, those foundational changes may have prevented/delayed more surface work. Alex4Ds iMovie blog posts certainly point to LOTS of features under development in the code that were not there in 10.0.9. Plus, with the quick slipping of dates, it certainly seems like this release of FCPX was waiting on the MacPro, rather than the other way round. Weeks, or perhaps even months.

Finally, the info I've heard is that the FCPX team is not reduced in size from what it was 3-4 years ago.



Return to posts index

Lance Bachelder
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 5:21:49 pm

I guess I still fantasize about interface flexibility and customization, optional tracks? A source viewer that actually has functional reason for being. Just one new feature that would have everyone talking... but nothing... yet...

I get it - everyone is editing wrong and Apple is going to teach us how to do it right - maybe I'm just an old dog...

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


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 5:47:53 pm

Project versioning "snapshots" is it for me. Plus the puck on clips being a soft select- meaning you can just start working away at any clip with translation/crop/cc/retiming without having to manually select anything. That will save me loads of time.



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 6:06:48 pm

[Lance Bachelder] "I guess I still fantasize about interface flexibility and customization,"

Haven't you noticed that Apple has systematically eliminated user customization of the UI in nearly all of its products?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Daniel Frome
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 1:34:39 pm

Yes, nevermind other meaningful features, thank God they made it dual-gpu aware, because this is always the top priority of editors everywhere.


Return to posts index

Marcus Moore
Re: er, is that it?
on Dec 20, 2013 at 1:46:21 pm

I'd hesitate to guess that this is the second time in 2 years that FCPX development has been at least somewhat guided by hardware support. Last year with the 10.0.5 Retina release for the rMBP at WWDC, and now for the new MacPro. While both of these are nice, I wonder how much further along things would be in other areas if Apple hadn't had to align with those hardware releases.



Return to posts index

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