FORUMS: list search recent posts

And the lightbulb goes on...

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Quintus Lubbe
And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 7:49:08 am

So, having edited on FCP Legacy for the last 8 years, I finally decided to take the plunge into FCP X about 2 weeks ago and cut a behind the scenes for an upcoming feature.

After hitting a few bumps along the way (which were solved by amazing help from Creative Cow members) because I was still trying to edit with a Legacy mentality, I had the FCP X epiphany that everyone speaks about and I've now realised that FCP X is by far a superior NLE to the current competition.

The edit tools are fantastic and the speed with which I can edit is remarkable compared to Premiere or Legacy.

Other editors in my facility are still on FCP 7 and I can clearly see how 10.1 makes a major difference to my own editing speed.

I am by no means an expert in FCP 10 yet, but a quick word to those still fearing the FCP 10 world. Don't wet your feet. You have to take the plunge completely and when you do you won't be disappointed.

The magnetic timeline is not something to work against, let it work for you, it saves a huge amount of time not having to constantly lasso select and drag your timeline around to close gaps.

The skimmer which I hated at first is absolutely fantastic and really adds a lot of speed to making selects and cutting in the timeline, not to mention the range selection tool. Love that.

I could go on. But see for yourself. FCP 10 will become the standard I'm sure of it.

And this is only the first major update. Remember the days of FCP 3?

P.S. I do not work for Apple. I do support their products.


Return to posts index

Phil Sheldon
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 11:48:09 am

well thats good to hear, thanks for sharing.

i'll be upgrading one way or another this year and after alot of tooing and froing (??) between fcp x and prem i think i'm back with fcp. your post helps confirm this

much appreciated


Return to posts index

Quintus Lubbe
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 11:51:00 am

You won't regret it, I promise!


Return to posts index


Eric Santiago
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 12:28:31 pm

You are right about not dipping your toes with this one.
For me I had to learn it so I can develop a course (evening class) for a part-time gig.
That was days after first release date.
Its just like any other software (or job) where you have no choice but to learn it no matter what your old habits are.

Legacy got me where I am.
The ability to learn new things and not to find fault.

Man I had to move from Alias Power Animator to Maya in a week.
Try that challenge :P


Return to posts index

Craig Shields
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 1:44:34 pm

People always say they are faster. I would still like to see a split screen comparison of two editors editing the same project in PP CC and FCPX.



Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 2:01:36 pm

[Craig Shields] "People always say they are faster. I would still like to see a split screen comparison of two editors editing the same project in PP CC and FCPX.
"


That wouldnt work, unless you cloned someone.

I like to think we are all different animals ;)


Return to posts index


Craig Shields
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 2:58:50 pm

It wouldn't be scientific of course but I think it would be a good head-to-head comparison and show how quickly two good editors flow in the different programs. I would certainly watch it.



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 4:59:23 pm

I don't think you can count keystrokes or even "clock" compare specific functions in many cases.

There are people who have significant experience doing similar projects repeatedly with other NLEs who feel they are getting done ahead of deadlines on longer projects.

Short of someone doing the same project twice (and for obvious reasons even if one were to do that, it wouldn't work as a comparison), doing similar projects on different NLEs can give one person a personal comparison based on their own skill set. One can't even say it's "universal" because these examples are limited to an individual's typical project type (and style).

FWIW I don't see as many people moving from FCP7 to PremierePro or Avid saying they are significantly faster. Maybe because they are significantly similar and people are only making marginal changes in workflow.

FCPX forces a rethink and, for a time, one may be slower…. until "the lightbulb goes on…" There's no "lightbulb" for most people switching to the other NLEs because there's only minor changes in circuitry.



Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 5:27:39 pm

[Craig Seeman] "FCPX forces a rethink and, for a time, one may be slower…. until "the lightbulb goes on…" There's no "lightbulb" for most people switching to the other NLEs because there's only minor changes in circuitry."

In a weird way, cutting mostly in X has made me faster in legacy. ;-) I find myself using shortcuts I didn't really use before I "discovered" them in X. Despite the popular wisdom, and setting aside magnetism, X and 7 work in very similar ways. That said, X lets me work faster. No patching, skimming and clip skimming are the biggies, but certainly not the only reasons. I also ring that it's much easier to layer tons of audio and keep track of it in X. I've built sound beds I wouldn't have kept much simpler in 7 or Pr. I just had to move a project from X to 7. In X, it was... deep, but manageable. In 7? Lets just say that 40+ tracks of audio made up of mostly little 1 second or less SFX is uh... hard to keep track of sometimes... ;-)

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

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


Return to posts index


Joseph Owens
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 11:36:04 pm

[Charlie Austin] "In a weird way, cutting mostly in X has made me faster in legacy. ;-) I find myself using shortcuts I didn't really use before I "discovered" them in X. Despite the popular wisdom, and setting aside magnetism, X and 7 work in very similar ways. "

Sitting beside a very experienced FCP trainer at the Supermeet, lo these many years gone, I was treated to pretty much a running commentary on how all these new "features" of X were just simplifications of techniques that already existed in Legacy. To me, the "trackless" layout was essentially a continuously "re-nested" sequence, that was continuously shoving decisions behind the curtain, where the Might Oz was huffing and puffing to keep track of where all that stuff was being positioned, assigning arbitrary hierarchies (roles?) that the foreground editor at the user interface neither cared for, nor worried about.

You really only have to unpack an X project in Resolve, which tries to unstack all the decisions that are laying latent to realize just how pell-mell the behind-the-scenes structure is being constructed. Like Lucy stuffing too many pies coming down the assembly line into not enough boxes.

At the end of the presentation, I loved his comment... "have they not read their own manual?"

Probably not, in actual fact -- but then again they are building these products for people who are notoriously persistent in their deliberate ignore-ance of accompanying literature.

jPo

"I always pass on free advice -- its never of any use to me" Oscar Wilde.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 11:47:26 pm

[Joseph Owens] "assigning arbitrary hierarchies (roles?) that the foreground editor at the user interface neither cared for, nor worried about."

Well, FWIW, assigning Roles is the job of the editor, and they are, to me, way more helpful than tracks... except visually for now. You can also quite easily put clips where you want them in the timeline. Methods for more finely manipulating the visual layout in the timeline need some work though.

[Joseph Owens] "You really only have to unpack an X project in Resolve, which tries to unstack all the decisions that are laying latent to realize just how pell-mell the behind-the-scenes structure is being constructed."

In my experience, video clips stack just the same in X as they do in anything else. And you really only need to open an audio sequence exported using x2Pro to see how nicely Roles can split out and organize clips for a tracked NLE.

[Joseph Owens] "but then again they are building these products for people who are notoriously persistent in their deliberate ignore-ance of accompanying literature."

Really? Interesting.

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

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


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 11:58:34 am

[Joseph Owens] "You really only have to unpack an X project in Resolve, which tries to unstack all the decisions that are laying latent to realize just how pell-mell the behind-the-scenes structure is being constructed. Like Lucy stuffing too many pies coming down the assembly line into not enough boxes."

On the contrary, I find the data structure of the FCPX edit to be very elegant.

It's hierarchical, so it's different than traditional, absolute, open timelines, but the parent/child relationships that clips can have to each other encodes a bit of editorial intent in a way that's not possible when the data structure simply places clips in absolute time.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index


Tim Wilson
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 4:38:27 pm

[Walter Soyka] " encodes a bit of editorial intent"

You've cracked the code. The "X" in "FCPX" is for "Existential."


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 4:47:51 pm

[Walter Soyka] "It's hierarchical, so it's different than traditional, absolute, open timelines, but the parent/child relationships that clips can have to each other encodes a bit of editorial intent in a way that's not possible when the data structure simply places clips in absolute time."

Strictly speaking it sometimes encodes actual editorial intent but at other times (many) it encodes accidental relationships created without intention.

I think ...

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 4:51:02 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] " it encodes accidental relationships created without intention."

That's the best part! Keeps you on your toes. ;-)

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

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


Return to posts index


Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 5:25:00 pm

[Charlie Austin] "[Simon Ubsdell] " it encodes accidental relationships created without intention."

That's the best part! Keeps you on your toes. ;-)"


Indeed!!

I was just making the point that X's clip connections encode editor intentions in only quite a mild sense - only some of the clip connections actually relate to conscious decisions on our part.

It's not yet reading your mind. That comes in the next update ;-)

Seriously though, you do sometimes (and sometimes often) have to reassign clip connections because they are actively not reflecting what you you had in mind. Not a criticism, just as observation.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 5:46:38 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Seriously though, you do sometimes (and sometimes often) have to reassign clip connections because they are actively not reflecting what you you had in mind. Not a criticism, just as observation."

Agreed. Particularly when copy/pasting clips, or dragging out heads/tails. The original connection point is kept, and not necessarily where you want it to be. Never a dull moment! lol

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

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 5:59:22 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Agreed. Particularly when copy/pasting clips, or dragging out heads/tails. The original connection point is kept, and not necessarily where you want it to be. Never a dull moment! lol"

Actually, much as I like clip connections and all the benefits they bring, they can often work out creating similar orders of complication as you had when you didn't have the magnetic timeline.

Every NLE is going to have something that slows you down - it's just in X's case those things are completely different, indeed frequently opposite, to the things that slowed you down in Media Composer or wherever.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 5:57:13 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "I was just making the point that X's clip connections encode editor intentions in only quite a mild sense - only some of the clip connections actually relate to conscious decisions on our part."

As usual, I doubt we disagree much.

The software does exactly what you tell it. Primary, secondary, connection -- to whatever extent you consider the role of the clip when you cut it in, and choose how you cut it in accordingly, some intent is captured in a way that cannot be true with traditional timelines.

Also, I think it's common and even somewhat necessary for the relationship a clip bears to other clips in the storyline to change as the edit evolves.


[Simon Ubsdell] "Seriously though, you do sometimes (and sometimes often) have to reassign clip connections because they are actively not reflecting what you you had in mind. Not a criticism, just as observation."

I'd agree with that.

Adjusting clip connections is the new track patching.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 6:05:52 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Feb 5, 2014 at 6:14:59 pm

[Walter Soyka] "As usual, I doubt we disagree much.

The software does exactly what you tell it. Primary, secondary, connection -- to whatever extent you consider the role of the clip when you cut it in, and choose how you cut it in accordingly, some intent is captured in a way that cannot be true with traditional timelines."


Indeed, I wasn't really disagreeing - just riffing a bit on your theme.

My point was actually that the software doesn't necessarily do exactly what you tell it.

If I add a connected clip at a certain point in time I don't necessarily want to establish a relationship with the primary storyline, but rather I might well want to be creating a relationship with other connected clips that are congregating in that region.

For example, if I've got a connected music track and I want to add a connected sound effect to coincide with a particular musical moment, I'm not choosing to create a relationship with the primary storyline, but rather with the music.

I only mention it because I often run into that sort of situation ...

The ability to connect to something other than the primary storyline at will would of course change that completely. But it's not there at the moment.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 6:31:06 pm

"[Walter Soyka] "The software does exactly what you tell it. Primary, secondary, connection -- to whatever extent you consider the role of the clip when you cut it in, and choose how you cut it in accordingly, some intent is captured in a way that cannot be true with traditional timelines.""

Thinking about this some more - and this is going to start to sound like one of those conversations we used to have two years ago with David L. - I can encode intentions in a conventional NLE that FCP X is unable to encode.

My example of syncing up a sound effect with music at a particular point in time is an example of an intentional "connection" that can only be encoded in FCP X in the context of connecting to the primary storyline.

It absolutely refuses to encode my actual intention if the two clips are both connected.

Conversely in a traditional timeline those kinds of "connections" are being encoded for the simple reason that the "connection point" is time - and not another clip.

It's a shame to have lost that ability in return for a much more limited tracking of my intentions.

Not that I'm complaining - it's just a trade-off that you either embrace or you don't.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 6:40:31 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Thinking about this some more - and this is going to start to sound like one of those conversations we used to have two years ago with David L. - I can encode intentions in a conventional NLE that FCP X is unable to encode... It absolutely refuses to encode my actual intention if the two clips are both connected. Conversely in a traditional timeline those kinds of "connections" are being encoded for the simple reason that the "connection point" is time - and not another clip."

It's a nuance, but the traditional timeline doesn't relate the two clips to each other. I think this captures less intent because that original intent would have to be reiterated (not redefined) in some timeline maneuvers to preserve the original implicit relationship between the two clips.

You could do this in FCPX with the Giberti method.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 6:51:58 pm

[Walter Soyka] "It's a nuance, but the traditional timeline doesn't relate the two clips to each other."

I would argue that it does - in a sense. It relates them to each other by virtue of them coinciding in time and the timeline being non-magnetic they will stay where they are all things being equal.

The FCP X timeline removes that "connection" by insisting on a singular point of connection with the primary - which over-rides all other implicit "connections" such as the one I am describing.

Time is a very powerful "connection device" in the context of a traditional NLE that isn't there in X.

I would also suggest that the fact that X's connections are always singular (only to the primary) imposes significant limits on its ability to encode my intentions. That was the point I was trying to make.

(As always just arguing cos it's interesting, not to be critical of X. It's all snakes and ladders - I don't think X or any other NLE offers you only ladders with no snakes.)

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 6:58:47 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Time is a very powerful "connection device" in the context of a traditional NLE that isn't there in X."


Yes it is, if you want things to stay where they are put and use time as a "connection device" then simply use a slug in the primary and connect everything to that. I often use this method to edit.

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 7:25:47 pm

[Steve Connor] "simply use a slug in the primary and connect everything to that. I often use this method to edit."

Indeed. but it doesn't really answer my observation.

Which was that you can't connect two connected clips to each other and not to the primary.

And often it would be handier if you could - or even connect multiple connected clips to each other and not the primary.

As always just an observation not a criticism.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 7:32:03 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "And often it would be handier if you could - or even connect multiple connected clips to each other and not the primary.
"


I use compound clips if I need to do that.

[Simon Ubsdell] "As always just an observation not a criticism."

and your observations add considerably to the quality of this forum :)

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 7:39:53 pm

[Steve Connor] "I use compound clips if I need to do that.

Indeed - and I'm really overstating how much of an obstacle it is. It's not really an obstacle at all.

I was really just responding to Walter's point about how X "encodes the editor's intentions" in its implementation of connected clips. I just wanted to observe that it's only some of your intentions some of the time.

At other times it "encodes" things that are not your intention at all.

And then again it doesn't have a way of encoding explicit intentions such as lining up connected clips with each other but not with the primary storyline.

But mostly it's pretty darn handy.

[Simon Ubsdell] "As always just an observation not a criticism."

and your observations add considerably to the quality of this forum :)"


Not at all sure they do, but thank you ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 7:34:59 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "And often it would be handier if you could - or even connect multiple connected clips to each other and not the primary."

Multiple primaries and arbitrary clip connections would both be powerful features. Magnetism, more magnetism, and tracks, all together.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 7:42:54 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Multiple primaries and arbitrary clip connections would both be powerful features. Magnetism, more magnetism, and tracks, all together."

Indeed they would and we've been talking about such things for two years!

Whether it's actually feasible is another matter.

And whether Apple have any intention of giving us that kind of box of delights I'm not at all sure.

I'd love to see that though - that would be fun.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 7:52:43 pm

With the tilde control, do you need multiple connected clips anymore? Or arbitrary connections?

I don't look at connected clips as connecting to the primary only, you can also connect it to time, since the primary storyline controls time for the most part.

Since we can now lock the secondary clips in time with tilde, having multiple connected clips doesn't seem as necessary, does it?


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 8:01:09 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Since we can now lock the secondary clips in time with tilde,"

And with the magical tilde-shift-release chord, you can turn off connections without the need to hold the key down, and edit away just like the olden days. ;-) Until you press tilde again to "re-connect".

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

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 8:20:38 pm

[Charlie Austin] "And with the magical tilde-shift-release chord, you can turn off connections without the need to hold the key down, and edit away just like the olden days. ;-) Until you press tilde again to "re-connect"."

I'm absolutely not saying that there aren't lots of exciting ways to edit with connected clips. I love connected clips as much the next guy.

What I'm saying is that you can't establish a connection between a cluster of connected clips other than how they relate to a singular clip on the primary.

Often one creates a really nice cluster of audio that doesn't necessarily tie to a single point in the timeline - this is especially true if you are sound designing something around a music track.

Yes, you could put the music track or some other defining element in the primary and have it lock to that, but that's not necessarily as flexible as you might like.

I'm not talking hypotheticals - this is stuff that I find that it would be nice to be able to do when I'm editing since so much of what I do is driven by sound design. Perhaps rather more than is typical, which is why it probably sounds as though I'm talking nonsense.

Of course, I can make it work in any number of different ways and none of it really makes a huge difference. But it is a form of limitation.

Rather than an unalloyed magnificence.

No NLE is perfect, even this one. All of life is a compromise of some sort - it would be so dull if it weren't.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 8:34:18 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "I'm not talking hypotheticals - this is stuff that I find that it would be nice to be able to do when I'm editing since so much of what I do is driven by sound design. Perhaps rather more than is typical, which is why it probably sounds as though I'm talking nonsense.

Of course, I can make it work in any number of different ways and none of it really makes a huge difference. But it is a form of limitation.

Rather than an unalloyed magnificence."


Not magnificant!? How dare you! lol I'm in complete agreement with you by the way. And I think it's likely we do the same sort of insane "piles of sound linked to arbitrary bits of other sound or video" type of editing. If we could choose to connect things to a secondary storyline or the Primary I'd be happy. Music in a secondary with the ability to connect things to that rather than the primary would be very nice.

Interestingly, the "music track" thingy in iMovie is basically an invisible secondary connected to the first frame of the timeline. Dunno what it means, but if iMovie is the stalking horse...

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

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 8:50:58 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Music in a secondary with the ability to connect things to that rather than the primary would be very nice. "

You see, I'm not crazy - there is someone who understands what I'm talking about ;-)

Yes, something like that would be very nice indeed.

What would be even nicer is the ability to layer in the secondary storyline which would make some music editing a lot neater. Secondaries are perfect for music - but oftentimes a crossfade just won't cut it.

[Charlie Austin] "if iMovie is the stalking horse..."

iMovie has always been the stalking horse - it's just it's taken all this time for people to come around to the notion.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 9:04:27 pm
Last Edited By Charlie Austin on Feb 5, 2014 at 9:11:41 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "What would be even nicer is the ability to layer in the secondary storyline which would make some music editing a lot neater. Secondaries are perfect for music - but oftentimes a crossfade just won't cut it."

You can kinda sorta do that now by expanding the audio (or components) on adjacent clips and dragging handles out. Works great for A/B cuts... throw C into the mix though and it requires piling another storyline on.

Better, and I've suggested this, would be the ability to expand a compound clip in place, or something like that. Or invisible compound clips, similar to the iMovie music secondary "track" but with ability to add additional lanes.

Despite the fact that it's sort of limited now, if you let your imagination run wild a bit, the possibilities of ridiculously cool ways to enhance secondaries, compound clips, audio components etc. are kind of mind boggling. For now... workaround city... ;-)

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

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"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: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 9:11:49 pm

This really is just like we were talking about 2 years ago.

"in-line" Compound clip expansion, or multi-layered secondaries.

[Charlie Austin] "Or "invisible" compound clips, similar to the iMovie music secondary "track" but with ability to add additional "lanes"."

The iMovie track was shown in a really early version of Larry Jordan training for FCPX. It was later ammended as the track isn't in FCPX. I thin it might have even been called a "Soundtrack".


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 9:23:54 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "This really is just like we were talking about 2 years ago."

Yep. Hopefully Apple is happy with the foundation now, and can start exploring the possibilities of some of this fancy new stuff. :-)

[Jeremy Garchow] "The iMovie track was shown in a really early version of Larry Jordan training for FCPX. It was later ammended as the track isn't in FCPX. I thin it might have even been called a "Soundtrack"."

It really is just a secondary pinned to the first frame of the timeline, so we do still have it, we just have to make them as needed. Now, inline collapsible CC's... that would be fun. :-)

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

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 10:00:57 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Feb 5, 2014 at 10:05:01 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "This really is just like we were talking about 2 years ago.

"in-line" Compound clip expansion, or multi-layered secondaries."


Are we any nearer it happening?

Just because we can imagine really cool ways of improving this, it doesn't necessarily mean that Apple are going to implement them. Or that they are even possible to implement given the fundamental architecture.

Would be great if they actually listened to us about the design of this thing but I'm not entirely convinced that that's the way they do things.

Still, I'm on the hoping team too,

Although if in-line compound clip expansion if the solution I'm not sure I'm that keen. Way too cumbersome for me, I'm afraid.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 5, 2014 at 5:11:49 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Strictly speaking it sometimes encodes actual editorial intent but at other times (many) it encodes accidental relationships created without intention. I think ..."

Fair. If you edit intentionally and within the FCPX mental framework, then FCPX's structure captures some information about your intent.

If you don't, then magnetic maneuvers must be terribly confusing occurrences.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Jason Jenkins
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 6:03:28 pm

[Craig Seeman] "I don't think you can count keystrokes or even "clock" compare specific functions in many cases."

I found that picking out selects in Premiere requires a substantially greater number of keystrokes than it does in FCPX. When you know you don't have to be working that hard, it gets old really quick.

Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production... with style!

Check out my Mormon.org profile.


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 6:09:40 pm

[Jason Jenkins] "When you know you don't have to be working that hard, it gets old really quick."

I share that sentiment. :-) There are myriad things that, once you get use to doing them in X with way less effort/clicking/dragging etc, become quite tiresome when done in other NLE's. Not an indictment of other NLE's by the way. There are things they do better than X. For me, the X timeline is just more fluid, warts and all...

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

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


Return to posts index

Craig Shields
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 8:19:27 pm

[Jason Jenkins] "I found that picking out selects in Premiere requires a substantially greater number of keystrokes than it does in FCPX."

How so? Just curious. Can you describe how you go about the process in FCPX?



Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 9:38:40 pm

[Craig Seeman] "FWIW I don't see as many people moving from FCP7 to PremierePro or Avid saying they are significantly faster. Maybe because they are significantly similar and people are only making marginal changes in workflow."

I think going to FCPX certainly forces the user to rethink their methods in a way that going between FCP7, PPro and Avid MC do not. Many people will try to shoehorn in their 'tried and true' methods of working into Avid, Legend and/or PPro even if it's counter productive. All though we should always hit the 'refresh' button when learning new NLEs FCPX is really the only one that forces us to do so so completely.

W/regards to speed, a couple months ago I started a project on PPro CC (it's what the shop used, though I'd barely done more than open the software) and just thanks to the improved tools over FCP7 (multicam, native editing, etc.,) I was able work much faster than if I had been using FCP7 (or Avid MC). Maybe since I didn't have to struggle to reach the 'eureka!' moment I was less inclined to share my experience as there weren't really any obstacles of note to overcome before I saw in increase in productivity?

With regards to Avid, I've worked on shows where I just don't think it's possible (or at least not pragmatic) to cut them on any other NLE so in those cases I'm not making speed comparisons in my head because I don't think there's anything to compare. lol As an example, one of the show's I'm talking about is a multi-editor setup (8-10 editors and a couple of AE's) sharing media on an ISIS, using a traditional offline/online workflow (finishing is done out of house) and each project contains about 30,000-35,000 pieces of media. No, I'm not exaggerating. The editors have access to all media from all previous seasons so the amount of footage just keeps going up. Surprisingly Avid's search tool is pretty responsive given how much data there is (typically returning queries in a few seconds).

There are certainly aspects of FCPX that sound very appealing (like auditions) and maybe this year I'll come across a project that will allow me to jump feet first into X.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 1:19:14 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "maybe this year I'll come across a project that will allow me to jump feet first into X."

I'd suggest a swan dive.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 5:20:23 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I'd suggest a swan dive."

How about a cannon ball? That's more in line with my diving abilities.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 5:23:08 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I'd suggest a swan dive."

[Andrew Kimery] "How about a cannon ball? That's more in line with my diving abilities."

I tried for a swan dive, but it came out more like a belly flop.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Mark Raudonis
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 6:42:36 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "a multi-editor setup (8-10 editors and a couple of AE's) sharing media on an ISIS, using a traditional offline/online workflow (finishing is done out of house) and each project contains about 30,000-35,000 pieces of media. No, I'm not exaggerating. "


Bingo!

Anyone care to address this with a head to head comparison? Where are all the examples of shared workflow at this scale?



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 7:25:30 pm

[Mark Raudonis] "Bingo!
Anyone care to address this with a head to head comparison? Where are all the examples of shared workflow at this scale?"


Bacause FCPX is well known for functioning in an ISIS like environment!

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 8:39:01 pm

[Steve Connor] "Bacause FCPX is well known for functioning in an ISIS like environment!"

That's kinda the point is it not? When people talk about how much faster their process is using FCPX and question why others are still using FCP7 or clunky old, it-came-from-the-90's Avid MC it's because of reasons like this. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but in these types of situations FCPX is currently a non-starter is it not?

And it's not like X necessarily has to be as good as Avid in a large, multi-editor environment it just has to be good enough. I think Avid offers the best experience by far when it comes to environments like that (especially from an AE's perspective) but Mark and his team helped legitimize FCP Legend years ago by successfully switching their facility from Avid to FCP.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 8:55:05 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "That's kinda the point is it not? When people talk about how much faster their process is using FCPX and question why others are still using FCP7 or clunky old, it-came-from-the-90's Avid MC it's because of reasons like this. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong but in these types of situations FCPX is currently a non-starter is it not?"

You're correct of course, but everyone in this thread has been talking about their own workflows, not other peoples and none of those workflows have been multi-user.

FCPX is still new and has a long way to go in that area.

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 2:47:07 am

[Steve Connor] "You're correct of course, but everyone in this thread has been talking about their own workflows, not other peoples and none of those workflows have been multi-user."

Craig brought up other workflows, which got me taking about my workflows (which includes multi-user) which got Mark asking about multi-user (because that relates to his workflows too).

For people that don't own X the only thing we can do is ask experienced X users how it fares in this scenario or that scenario to gauge if it might work for us or not.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 9:19:52 pm
Last Edited By Aindreas Gallagher on Feb 1, 2014 at 11:02:37 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "That's kinda the point is it not? When people talk about how much faster their process is using FCPX and question why others are still using FCP7 or clunky old, it-came-from-the-90's Avid MC"

I'm getting existentially sartre style tired of people saying that X is a new form of three times the speed fun. that we somehow don't get. Surely the point is that there are hundreds of thousands of editors who have extensively kicked the tires and walked away. That kind of explains the current scenario.

"Although over the past year the controversy surrounding FCP X has largely died down as the software has improved immensely, most editors still haven’t given it a fair shot and have either stuck with FCP 7, moved to Premiere Pro, or in some rare cases have gone back to Avid."
http://noamkroll.com/fcp-x-just-got-its-big-break-on-a-100000000-studio-fea...

its the not given it a fair shot part that has to stop - a lot of us have extensively tested it. The idea that we should undergo some six month trip into the jungle where we forget every other editing system, all the understood rationale, and emerge from the brush singing FCPX is completely ludicrous.

that was never going to happen.

gigantic numbers of reasoned people, FCP people for god's sake, from experience, do not agree with it as an editor system.
I'm no great shakes but I personally don't agree with it.
it is not the fcp of ten years ago in the wings waiting to swoop in. it just isn't. There isn't a single bloody job in london for it. And london is heaving with editing jobs across all levels.
the problem is that it is what it is. it is very unlikely that there are the engineering resources available to radically reshape it, and ginormous numbers of editors have near completely written it off. hundred million dollar movie or no.

there is no seismic shift coming. it's too esoteric a system. And it just took them a year to come up with a library container. FCPX relative to any major market share shot its bolt with 10.1

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 11:12:03 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "FCPX relative to any major market share shot its bolt with 10.1"

I know you would like to think that's true, but sadly it's not. It might be years away from broader acceptance but it's not going to go away any time soon.

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 11:28:42 pm

steve honestly - there never was a chance. apple effectively tried to create a crazy editing pyramid in the jungle. that we would all wander off to.

it was never going to happen. X isn't an entrant to the current market.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 1:52:04 am
Last Edited By Steve Connor on Feb 2, 2014 at 1:57:21 am

Maybe not the market you're in at the moment Aindreas, but there's an increasing amount of traffic around the various FCPX forums, which means there is an expanding user base. Might not be TV & Film yet, but it's definitely selling.

For example, there's a Facebook FCPX group that has over 2,600 members and is increasing in size every day.

Plus the fact that Adobe seem to have handed Apple a present by bringing in the rental model, I think FCPX is here to stay, so you'll have to get used to people like the OP telling everyone how fast it is!

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 3:53:52 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "There isn't a single bloody job in london for it. And london is heaving with editing jobs across all levels."


I don't know about over there but just seems like the trend is, give me the footage and I will cut it in MY suite.

If that's the case, (and it is with many) It doesn't matter much to that editor what's posted on a board in London, or anywhere else.


Do you think after a major studio cuts a feature in X nobody else will follow?

It will just be that one film?

That doesn't seem plausible to me.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 3, 2014 at 9:25:06 pm

[tony west] "I don't know about over there but just seems like the trend is, give me the footage and I will cut it in MY suite."

no sure absolutely - then bash away. doesn't happen that often over here. a lot of my stuff is corpo and tends to be on site.

Although BBCWW are apparently going premiere and throwing anywhere into the mix too. bit down the line tho - but that will allow offsite editing pretty broadly if adobe can get it working with 10Mbs connections. even for people not willing to activate longterm subscriptions - 50/60 quid per gig to activate the edit system offsite is pretty cheap to access the anywhere system.

[tony west] "If that's the case, (and it is with many) It doesn't matter much to that editor what's posted on a board in London, or anywhere else."

It kind of does though - there is a penalty committing to FCPX that is unlike other edit systems - not least because every single person who goes through the months required to acclimatise says repeatedly that they feel uncomfortable and out of their flow using FCP classic, premiere or avid.

Given absolutely no jobs are posted requiring it, and there are none - the issue goes back to the primary problem: why do you get into the weeds with a completely non-standard edit system for no visible return?

an apple driven, massive publicity splash for a hundred million dollar film harnessing X might change that a bit tho eh?

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


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 3, 2014 at 9:56:49 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "he issue goes back to the primary problem: why do you get into the weeds with a completely non-standard edit system for no visible return?
"


I hear you. There is no real reason for you to change at this point. You are getting paid on tools you like, and If a X jobs comes your way I'm sure you go do it.

I think there will be a return down the line. I just can't see it going away.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 3, 2014 at 11:08:41 pm

[tony west] "I think there will be a return down the line. I just can't see it going away."

neither can I tbh. part of me wouldn't mind at all getting dumped into an X job. It needs to start appearing this year realistically, if it doesn't it almost has be toast. - I'm the only one I know across directors, shops, fellow editors etc. that actually has the thing paid for and playing with it - it's really hard to overstate the absence in london, (or the bits of it that I understand) - its a basic issue -

if no one sees it, no one is going to start considering using it, and as it stands, if I start talking about 10.1, the dot, the library, you name it - the thing does not exist. people basically stare at you.

And 90% of those people were and are FCP. that's kind of the take home. I really don't think apple have fully internalised the level of rejection.

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


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 3, 2014 at 11:22:15 pm

This sort of mirrors my experience in the Los Angeles market. I think it would take a real fan with real power to bring it on a network show, as the general consensus seems to be: FCP X is for consumers, and therefore isn't even part of the conversation anymore. I know editors who've bought it to edit their daughter's wedding videos with, but it never enters their conscience that it could be used for more than that, because they're so accustomed to using Avid at work.

Chris


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 3, 2014 at 11:39:37 pm

it is about to get some deadly serious fans in the shape of six editors working iMacs on a warner brothers lot apparently. that could go a distance.

the issue is more the complete rejection of X by the FCP base? It's nearly three years in, and most of the bigger places over here are six months past mouthing the word premiere.
In the end, Apple themselves decided to produce a system that has no continuation from FCP. Adobe ate that for supper, and they are likely going to win.

even with the apple push (and four engineers working on it), X is probably vegas for OSX at this point.

really, really good audio plug-ins tho.

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


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 12:17:22 am

I'll be interested in hearing how it goes on the Warner Brothers project.

Chris Conlee


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 12:19:15 am

who isn't?

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


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 12:35:44 am

Honestly? Probably just about EVERYBODY, except for those on this list.

Chris Conlee


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 12:56:03 am

I haven't a clue really.

either way, apple need to generate substantive market visibility before the end of year - that'll be year three ending in the cold - they're not sitting in the wings of avid with FCP ten years ago.
this just is not that market. people are calling it this year - and no one is calling FCPX so far.

FCPX can't just sit there waiting for the world to somehow come to it. It's not happening.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 3:33:54 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "even with the apple push (and four engineers working on it), X is probably vegas for OSX at this point. "

I'd say it was probably PPro from a couple of years ago!

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 4:16:49 pm

[Steve Connor] "I'd say it was probably PPro from a couple of years ago!"

The similarity between X and early PPro is strictly about market penetration, and even there it's not very strong.

The Vegas comparison, market penetration aside, seems to me more apt.

Like X, Vegas tried a non traditional approach to timeline editing because it stated life as a DAW. It was in some ways superior to most NLEs, especially in audio and EFX, but never caught on because it's paradigm was so different, although it's cult of adherents love it. Sound familiar?

Lance should be the one to weigh in on this one, because of his experience with Vegas.

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


Return to posts index

Quintus Lubbe
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 4:16:54 pm

Sorry, but I don't think that that is a fair or accurate statement...


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 4:18:53 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] " X is probably vegas for OSX at this point. "

Great line. Do you think Apple will use it at NAB?

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 4:27:12 pm

[Herb Sevush] "[Aindreas Gallagher] " X is probably vegas for OSX at this point. "

Great line. Do you think Apple will use it at NAB?"


I would argue that FCPX market share is already considerably higher than Vegas has ever been

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 4:41:25 pm
Last Edited By Craig Seeman on Feb 4, 2014 at 4:54:37 pm

[Steve Connor] "I would argue that FCPX market share is already considerably higher than Vegas has ever been"

Additionally Apple and third party Professional hardware and software video developers are much more motivated to move into various professional arenas. Even if it's not immediately "there" yet, the forces pushing it in those directions are incredibly strong and sustained.



Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:06:23 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "X's total sales to date have surely got to exceed sales of all other NLE's ever produced combined - times a large factor.

Market share within the conventional film and video industries is a whole other matter, surely?"


One might venture that X is a leading NLE in the "non professional" market. Probably well ahead of Vegas there.

Another would be that while X is still a "curiosity" in the "Pro" markets it may well be a "tire kicked" more often than any other single NEL. Each tire kicker is a potential convert, if not now, later.

Unlike Sony, it would seem Apple is much more highly motivated since FCPX use can be a factor in Mac sales and allegiance.

That Apple spent so much development time on changing the library system vs more glossy features, would seem to indicate they are certainly looking at share use situations.



Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:14:16 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Unlike Sony, it would seem Apple is much more highly motivated since FCPX use can be a factor in Mac sales and allegiance."

Absolutely - Sony's inability to market many of their potentially world-beating products is now the stuff of legend.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:08:58 pm
Last Edited By Franz Bieberkopf on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:11:17 pm

[Steve Connor] "I would argue that FCPX market share is already considerably higher than Vegas has ever been"

[Simon Ubsdell] "X's total sales to date have surely got to exceed sales of all other NLE's ever produced combined - times a large factor."


Steve, Simon,

... based on what?

The Dave Dugdale breakdown places it as the most popular NLE of the last decade (in terms of tutorials), and the third most popular tool for users of his site.

"Tutorials online numbers:

Sony Vegas pro tutorial 41m
premiere pro tutorial 34m
final cut pro tutorial 17m
Avid Media Composer tutorial 892k
Grass Valley Edius tutorial 35k"



http://www.learningdslrvideo.com/nle-market-share-breakdown/



It seems to me that the "bottom-up" revolution in NLEs could well be Vegas.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:30:09 pm

Simon,

You do realize that the numbers I posted weren't from his user survey answers?

But, rather, let's instead assume that all his charts and numbers are utterly unreliable - a not unreasonable position.

[Simon Ubsdell] "X's total sales to date have surely got to exceed sales of all other NLE's ever produced combined - times a large factor."

This is an absurd statement that comes across as grandly myopic.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:48:15 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "This is an absurd statement that comes across as grandly myopic."

It's called comic exaggeration for rhetorical effect. Apologies for being flippant.

My point was simply that volume of sales and market share in the professional NLE arena don't necessarily correlate.

I suspect on no reliable grounds that FCP X has had huge sales to the wider population - a population that is vaster by many magnitudes than the tiny professional editing community - that don't necessarily reflect its penetration or lack of it in the professional market.

That's all.

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Franz Bieberkopf
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 6:04:44 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "My point was simply that volume of sales and market share in the professional NLE arena don't necessarily correlate."

Simom, Agreed.

[Simon Ubsdell] "I suspect on no reliable grounds that FCP X has had huge sales to the wider population - a population that is vaster by many magnitudes than the tiny professional editing community - that don't necessarily reflect its penetration or lack of it in the professional marke"

It might be (we just don't know), but iMovie (to take one example) is likely more widely used (not least because of the iPad) - so if your point is about the value of widely used software, iMovie is proabably a better example. When you don't restrict yourself to Macs (which, after all, are still a small fraction of sales), the picture of which NLEs get used, and how, becomes more complex still.

Franz.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 6:12:22 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Feb 4, 2014 at 6:14:00 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "if your point is about the value of widely used software"

I wasn't making any point at all about value, sorry if it came across as though I was.

I'm entirely agnostic here ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:51:52 pm

[Franz Bieberkopf] "It seems to me that the "bottom-up" revolution in NLEs could well be Vegas.
"


Who knows? I'm sure lots of people use it, I've just never met one

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:56:17 pm

[Steve Connor] "I'm sure lots of people use it, I've just never met one"

Our very own Lance Bachelder is/was a user and proponent of Vegas, which is why it would be good for him to weigh-in here. If you mean you've never met one in person, well just sub in "FCPX" for "Vegas" and the same is true for me.

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:41:24 pm

[Steve Connor] "I would argue that FCPX market share is already considerably higher than Vegas has ever been"

Which is why, in my previous post to you I said the comparison was "market penetration aside."

Now, you can argue that market penetration trumps everything else, which is fair enough, but I still find a similarity between Vegas and X, much like I always found a strong similarity between Motion and X, in terms of how a novel approach to an established workflow can face serious traction issues, even with Apple behind it.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:50:27 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Which is why, in my previous post to you I said the comparison was "market penetration aside."

Now, you can argue that market penetration trumps everything else, which is fair enough, but I still find a similarity between Vegas and X, much like I always found a strong similarity between Motion and X, in terms of how a novel approach to an established workflow can face serious traction issues, even with Apple behind it.
"


Didn't notice that caveat - In that case I agree!

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 12:54:20 am

[Chris Conlee] "This sort of mirrors my experience in the Los Angeles market. I think it would take a real fan with real power to bring it on a network show, as the general consensus seems to be: FCP X is for consumers, and therefore isn't even part of the conversation anymore. I know editors who've bought it to edit their daughter's wedding videos with, but it never enters their conscience that it could be used for more than that, because they're so accustomed to using Avid at work.
"


It is like deja vu all over again. Discrete Edit, Fast, Media 100 (which was great in it's day) were all phased out by FCP by the time version 4 came out. It was only four years old by then, and FCP X is only two and a half years old now. It wasn't really until 2005 where I was working 50/50 Avid/FCP jobs while an assistant. FCP took time to mature and become trustworthy and as for how far FCP X has come in two and a half years it's a good sign.

Whoever said on this thread "Once you realize how much harder you are working it gets old quick" hit the nail on the head. When I am forced to work on other systems, all the steps necessary to even begin editing are really tiresome. In the fifteen years working with different NLEs, I just like FCP X better.


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 1:08:52 am

Well, believe it or not, I'm actually quite agnostic when it comes to computers AND nonlinear editors. I've run so many on Amigas, Windows, and Macs, that I honestly don't care, as long as the software has the tools I need to do the job. I'm watching Lightworks closely, because I like its console and some of its workflow is pretty slick. But I also LOVE Media Composer and don't see myself getting completely away from it in the feature and episodic worlds.

I've gotten fairly used to FCP legacy over the years as well, and it's perfectly fine. I played with FCP X and honestly didn't get it. But I'll probably play with it some more; maybe when I go on hiatus I'll pick it up and play with it some more. We'll see.

In the meantime, I think competition is good, and if folks are finding this tool does what they need, and they like it better, then that's a wonderful thing in my book.

Chris Conlee


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 10:09:54 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "As an example, one of the show's I'm talking about is a multi-editor setup (8-10 editors and a couple of AE's) sharing media on an ISIS, using a traditional offline/online workflow (finishing is done out of house) and each project contains about 30,000-35,000 pieces of media. No, I'm not exaggerating."

The new library structure introduced in 10.1 just over a month ago makes that type of collaboration possible. You can make a library that points to that many files. A doc I am working on has over six thousand mixed format files and I am able to pass a library over dropbox to the other editor with no problems. 10.0.9 and older FCP X would slow down if the event had more than two thousand clips. Since bringing the doc over from FCP7, I've been able to find clips much faster after tagging everything. The more tagging I do as I go, the easier it is to find what I'm looking for.

I'm going to make a massive library that points to 30K+ clips and see how well it performs.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 2:52:18 am

[Darren Roark] "I'm going to make a massive library that points to 30K+ clips and see how well it performs.
"


Certainly report back how that goes as being able to hold a huge number of clips w/o slowing to a crawl is certainly one piece of the multi-user workflow I mentioned previously.


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 4:18:40 am

As a non scientific test, I made a copy of my library and then duplicated the events x6 so it has about 36K clips, so far so good. I'll have to find enough projects to have 36K different clips. That could take a while.


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 3:28:52 pm

[Andrew Kimery] " I'm talking about is a multi-editor setup (8-10 editors and a couple of AE's) sharing media on an ISIS, using a traditional offline/online workflow (finishing is done out of house) and each project contains about 30,000-35,000 pieces of media."

Organization of files is X's strength. For me, the more files I have to work with the more I would want to use X

If the reports are true about Focus being done in X I'm looking forward to hearing them discuss their workflow. That should answer a lot of questions.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 10:08:27 pm

[tony west] "Organization of files is X's strength. For me, the more files I have to work with the more I would want to use X"

I'm not worried as much about the organization as I am about the overall effectiveness of X in large, shared storage, multi-editor environments. I'd love to pick someone's brain that's very experienced in this type of workflow and someone that's very experience in X to see where it excels and where it lags behind.

[tony west] "If the reports are true about Focus being done in X I'm looking forward to hearing them discuss their workflow. That should answer a lot of questions."

Me too. I'm always interested to see how other people do things.


Return to posts index

Chris Conlee
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 3, 2014 at 5:13:50 am

[Craig Seeman] "FWIW I don't see as many people moving from FCP7 to Avid saying they are significantly faster. Maybe because they are significantly similar and people are only making marginal changes in workflow."

Actually, I'd say that Avid Media Composer is a pretty radical rethink for most people coming from legacy, too. It took me about a month to come to terms with the "Avid Way," but once I did, I never looked back.

Chris


Return to posts index

Quintus Lubbe
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 4:59:34 pm
Last Edited By Quintus Lubbe on Jan 31, 2014 at 5:00:45 pm

"People always say they are faster. I would still like to see a split screen comparison of two editors editing the same project in PP CC and FCPX."

Having edited in Legacy and Premiere Pro, I can vouch for the fact that it is faster. Premiere, is very similar to FCP 7 in many regards and follows the same workflows. The workflows in FCP 10 are just completely different.

Not to mention, I've not had to hit the render shortcut once. That on its own has saved me hours.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 5:05:42 pm

I've had a couple of major event videos that I've been editing every year for the last 18 years so I have a very good handle on how long each show takes, using FCPX has certainly been faster and easier for me.

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 3, 2014 at 3:22:00 am

[Quintus Lubbe] "Having edited in Legacy and Premiere Pro, I can vouch for the fact that it is faster."

So how fast is it when you come to a section that needs to go to Motion (or AE)for some work? I haven't worked with an NLE that doesn't have a connected Compositor in almost 15 years. So what's your workflow there - create an XML of that section of the timeline, import in motion, connect media, export finished video, re-import into X and then do the whole dance all over again if you need to make a change. Is this the kind of speed your talking about?

Every NLE has strengths and weaknesses, the only thing that matters is how well they match up with your particular workflow. Talking about speed without specifying workflow is meaningless.

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


Return to posts index

tony west
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 3, 2014 at 2:26:36 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Talking about speed without specifying workflow is meaningless."

To this pont here is what I like,

I like being able to pick up an entire section in the time line, say....interview, video and their audio, graphics, b-roll and sound of b-roll and music, and drag that whole huge chunk down the timeline and drop it in another section as the timeline moves out of the way and adjust to all that in seconds.

That's something I love. When the client comes in and wants a change, (and they always want
a change : ) It's a snap.

The connected clip style allows for moving huge sections quick and easy. To some people that's not that important. To me, that's a strength.


The no send to Motion is kind of a wash since they put all the logic tools inside X now and you save time with audio and those color templates. That's something I figure they will add at some point anyway like they did when people complained about no multi cam.

I also like to hover over an effect to show the client what titles or a look will look like before I do it.
But this can lead to more time because they sometimes want to see more looks because they can hahaha


I want the skimmer on everything.
I will take all the tools that X has and wait for then to add more. It's getting better and better.

This is all old news : ) People have posted their favorite tools since the forum started.


Return to posts index

Chuck Pelini
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 3:05:42 pm

[Quintus Lubbe] "I had the FCP X epiphany that everyone speaks about and I've now realised that FCP X is by far a superior NLE to the current competition."

This is exactly how I felt since I jumped in at 10.0.3. I still work with FCP legacy, Avid (cringe) and Premiere on various projects, but FCPX is by far my favorite.


Return to posts index

Neil Sadwelkar
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 6:22:10 pm

Actually after working in FCP X, when one has to go to Avid MC (even ver 7)... That feels really sluggish.

-----------------------------------
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India


Return to posts index

Winston A. Cely
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 3:16:41 pm

It's been a while since I've been to the forums here. I switched main careers to a high school art teacher (this is my first year), so I've been swamped with getting my masters, and all the paperwork that goes with being a first year teacher. I still do some small editing projects and hope to continue as an editor during summer vacation, but I digress....

My main reason to comment is that I had to learn FCPX to teach a small class back when it was first released. I could see right off the bat the power that was lurking in it's depths, despite all the missing functionality it had at the time. I've never looked back. Granted, I've not had the opportunity to cut broadcast shows on it (yet), but at this point you couldn't pay me enough to go back to old fashioned NLEs. It's great to see others here are finding it as fast AND effective as I do.

Winston A. Cely
Editor/Owner | Della St. Media, LLC

17" MacBook Pro | 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7
4 GB RAM | Final Cut Studio 3 | FCPX | Motion 5 | Compressor 4

"If you can talk brilliantly enough about a subject, you can create the consoling illusion it has been mastered." - Stanley Kubrick


Return to posts index

Andre van Berlo
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 7:04:52 pm

I find it interesting to see an experienced editor feels the same as I do (not so experienced). I had to learn editing to create videos for my students because I don't have the $$ to have someone edit for me. I've spent years learning and started in Premiere Pro Cs5. Once FCPX came out i gave it a try for a month, going back to premiere was funny enough like going back in time. It felt unnatural to me suddenly eventhough it was where I started.
Premiere Pro feels very technical and eventhough I'm not stupid in that regard I just don't have the time to learn all of it. I felt that X was partially made for people like me, it works really intuitive. At the moment I fly through my timeline, what used to take 4hrs now takes 1,5-2hrs... quelle difference...


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 8:27:16 pm

I think that the idea of looking for objective quantification of how much faster X is by counting keystrokes or putting up a timer somewhat misses the point. Even if "faster" means nothing more than "it feels faster and it drives me less crazy," wow, wouldn't you take that trade-off in a heartbeat? That your work FEELS faster?

Maybe even more fun? I know that I often choose driving routes that are longer, just because I feel better when I get where I'm going. Qualitative measures can at least as important as quantitative ones, no?

And hey, sounds like maybe it objectively too. Thanks for the reports. :-)


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 8:34:17 pm

[Tim Wilson] "it feels faster and it drives me less crazy,"

I think that's it really. Who knows if it's quantifiable, and really... who cares? When I go from X to 7 or Pr, especially if it's the same sequence, I find myself cursing the app a lot. That's not to say I don't curse X... I do. I just curse it less. ;-)

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

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"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: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 8:41:51 pm

[Tim Wilson] "Maybe even more fun? "

Or more creative.

In creative cuts, it allows you to swap things around and back on the timeline with near zero penalty. It also, with some of the editing functions like Auditions, allow you to store many more options of clips in the timeline itself, and when you want to review those options, you simply flip the Audition and a new take presents itself. Because of the magnetic timeline, you don't lose your relative timings, and if you need to go back to the original cut, you simply chose the previous clip in the Audition. You don't have to duplicate a timeline three times to see three different options. And if you ever want to see those options again, perhaps days and weeks from now, those options are still there, in time, in your timeline inside of the Audition clip.

This feature alone is quantifiably faster, and much less destructive and redundant.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Jan 31, 2014 at 8:47:47 pm

And as I read my own explanation, hard to describe on paper.

Basically, Auditions allow you to store multiple takes in one clip.

You can simply flip through takes, and the timeline adjusts to new timings. Any edits or timing changes you make to the take also gets saved with that take, so one Audition clip can have many timings.

Since the timeline is magnetic, it simply adjusts to the timing of the new take, and all relative timings around the clip stay in place.

To get back to where you were, you simply select the original take. There's no 45 levels of undo, no duplicate working timelines, just a keyboard command to get back to the original take.

If you need to review those takes again, much later in the edit, they are still there in the Audition. It is very handy.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Atilio Menéndez
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 4:06:49 pm
Last Edited By Atilio Menéndez on Feb 1, 2014 at 4:08:13 pm

I also love auditions. And not just individual takes but *entire scenes* can be stored within a clip and be auditioned (as compound clips). You can then easily flip between different edits of a scene, compare them, see how these fit in their context, etc., and the timeline adjusts automatically. The different scenes happily live together in an audition, creating no "clutter" and making experimenting and later reviewing your work very easy.

This has always been one of my favorite features and one I use it a LOT, but surprisingly it is almost never mentioned.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 8:00:43 pm

Flipping between auditions almost always crashes my system. But I haven't tried it in awhile.


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 7:07:42 am

[Tim Wilson] "Maybe even more fun?"

Zing! Love creating a lower third title in Motion for use inside of X which is a huge time saver. Besides it is fun, which is most important.

I really don't miss Premiere Pro that much now. At least with X you get a great value and there is no drain my wallet every month plan to deal with. I mean subscription model. :-)


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 10:18:27 pm

Excellent post! I find many things much faster, not to mention easier in the current version. I love the amount of effects packed in here which can save money. Yes, there are some plug-ins that do come in handy but the current version has a nice set.

My only real complaint at the moment is that you can not keyframe color correction which is sometimes necessary. That and the lack of "Send To Motion" command. In reality these complaints are minor in nature. I use Resolve should color correction get complex.

The only thing about Motion is the lack of a parent feature and no expressions. Sure parameters are useful but expressions are much more powerful, not to mention flexible. Then again for the price Motion is a very solid piece of software and really comes in useful. Being able to create a title, lower third or effect saves a huge amount of time.

I find the new project management to be top notch. Bins and stuff would be nice but the current version, at least in my opinion, really has better tools to organize your projects.


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 10:44:22 pm

[David Mathis] "
The only thing about Motion is the lack of a parent feature and no expressions. Sure parameters are useful but expressions are much more powerful, not to mention flexible. Then again for the price Motion is a very solid piece of software and really comes in useful. Being able to create a title, lower third or effect saves a huge amount of time."


I agree with that. This is the main reason I have been using Motion less and less. It used to be so easy! I hope they bring that back. I do like the way you can make your own plugins and bring them back to FCP X, but I'd much rather have the round trip back. It's the only major advantage CS/CC users still have and it's easier to get an FCP X project in to AE than Motion.


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 11:25:59 pm

[Darren Roark] "It's the only major advantage CS/CC users still have and it's easier to get an FCP X project in to AE than Motion."

What is the best way to do this? I remember that there is some application that will handle the task but don't know what the name of it is. Very interested in it.


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 1, 2014 at 11:30:45 pm

You can use Assisted Editing's Xto7 and it will make an XML that can be imported into AE. Then in AE, use the File > Import > ProImport Ae menu.

There is also clip exporter that works for basic straight cuts but I haven't used it in a while.


Return to posts index

Quintus Lubbe
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 8:06:33 am

Wow, I didn't realise that a simple post about the joys that I have found working with X would turn into what can only be described as a robust debate, which is brilliant.

Reading through all the posts has given me even more of an insight into other editors workflows, so thanks to everyone for the great information.

Plus, I've also had a good laugh at some of the posts!!!

I think regardless of anyone's particular workflow or own post production needs, it certainly seems as though FCP X is here to stay. I think that there are too many editors who have changed over for it not to.

And why not? With another NLE in the post production environment it only encourages all the other NLE's to up their game and give us continually improving products, so in the end, regardless of your NLE of choice, everyone will benefit.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 2:54:26 pm

Working on X and then going back to Premiere, FCP7 or Avid reminds me a lot of when I was beta testing early Softimage|DS versions. DS seemed so much faster, fluid and intuitive (and fun). Going back to those older software packages felt like cutting with pointed sticks and rocks. Having done an Avid project recently (MC7.something) if felt like I had my hands tied too.

I don't think being able to handle a 30,000+ has any great meaning to the broader visual storytelling marketplace. As a spot, promo, agency cutter it certainly holds less weight for me when choosing a software to work on. Broadcast and film are a niche that may well be best suited (right now) with Avid and Premiere and thats totally cool.

I will say that I have never seen students who have never edited before take to a software so quickly. Apple got something very very right in it's redesign, making the process easier for a wider variety of editors (whether we like that or not).

sw

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 2, 2014 at 10:14:58 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "I don't think being able to handle a 30,000+ has any great meaning to the broader visual storytelling marketplace. "

Who said it did? I think it's weird that people are so fixated on that specific number like I threw down a gauntlet or something.

People were talking about why they choose they tools they do and I tossed out a situation where I think Avid is still better than X, Smoke, FCP Legend and PPro. If there are people running X in large shared storage, multi-editor environments please let me know 'cause I would love to see how they do things.


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 3, 2014 at 5:35:43 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Who said it did? I think it's weird that people are so fixated on that specific number like I threw down a gauntlet or something."

Relax. It's just a reference point in this thread.

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 3, 2014 at 5:56:33 pm

[Scott Witthaus] "[Andrew Kimery] "Who said it did? I think it's weird that people are so fixated on that specific number like I threw down a gauntlet or something."

Relax. It's just a reference point in this thread."


I get Andrew's point though. He put out an ACTUAL number, based on his ACTUAL work. I think maybe some people heard it as a ridiculous, rhetorical number because it's too big to sound anything but condescending. LOL

Which of course, it isn't. There are tools that are optimized to work with projects like that, others that aren't. Andrew was doing what Herb rightly observed is essential for conversations like this, being specific about workflow. And, for that matter, work.


[tony west] "This is all old news : ) People have posted their favorite tools since the forum started.
"


The fun of debating for its own sake notwithstanding, the reason that the forum is still going so strong is that people are coming to X for the first time every day. Or maybe they tried it earlier, found it a poor fit for whatever reason, but as X evolves and a new job comes along where it fits just right -- well, that's when the lightbulb goes on.


In that sense, there's no such thing as old news. The software, the projects, the people trying to manage them -- all of them are in constant motion. They won't always align...but when they do, well, that's when the lightbulb goes on.

That's why threads like this are among my favorites. They point to this fundamental truth about the plasticity of experience.

On the flip side, some aspects of this can never be in motion, like the size of Andrew's projects. By definition, each will be bigger than the last -- but Andrew is still open to hearing that X is NOW up to a task that, in the beginning, was universally agreed it was NOT.

If that's the case. Maybe it's not.

So, X is changing, projects are changing, people are changing, which means that every conversation ever had in this forum will happen again...will NEED to happen again....because the more things change, the more they change.

Unless they don't, because they can't.

Yr pal,
Timmy

Tim Wilson
Vice President, Editor-in-Chief
Creative COW


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 2:17:37 am

[Andrew Kimery] " If there are people running X in large shared storage, multi-editor environments please let me know 'cause I would love to see how they do things."

Can we walk this back a step?

FCPX, dare I say, is more like FCP7 than ever when it comes to structure. Sure, you have to use your imagination and pretend Libraries are FCP7 Projects, Events are FCP7 Bins, and Projects are FCP7 Sequences.

Yes, there are other considerations to think about in media management (FCPX Optimized and Proxy files being in the Library and nowhere else at the moment), but even with those limitations, there are some really easy media management options in FCPX for a shared environment, and it stems from being Library based.

FCPXML has come forward a bit. It can cause a bit of Event duplication, but if you use intermediate Libraries, you can avoid a lot of it.

So, while it's not perfect, I am wondering at least from a sharing standpoint, what is so different about FCPX and FCP7? I would think that if you can generate FCPXMLs, or can send a Library to someone on the same network, it is very similar to how FCP7 would work in that each editor is an island unto themselves.


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 3:15:24 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Yes, there are other considerations to think about in media management (FCPX Optimized and Proxy files being in the Library and nowhere else at the moment), but even with those limitations, there are some really easy media management options in FCPX for a shared environment, and it stems from being Library based."

Funny thing, when I prep a long form job that will be cut in FCP 7 I prep it in FCP X. I just make sure that create optimized is on, sync all the footage, then use Xto7 to send the stringouts. Once in 7 I can make bins pretty easily using the timelines. It's so much easier than waiting for compressor batches. Then I wonder, why don't they just cut in FCP X? But I get it, people are comfortable with what they know.

I think it will take a bit of time for the new "library" aka "project" structure of 10.1 to gain trust.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 10:32:08 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "So, while it's not perfect, I am wondering at least from a sharing standpoint, what is so different about FCPX and FCP7? I would think that if you can generate FCPXMLs, or can send a Library to someone on the same network, it is very similar to how FCP7 would work in that each editor is an island unto themselves."

I've never used FCP Legend on as large a scale as I have Avid so I can't make '7 to X' workflow guesstimate. To be honest, even on the smaller scale that I used it on (12 editors, 60TB Xsan, mostly a mix of daily web content and a weekly cable news magazine show) it was such a PITA that I'd never choose to use on bigger projects like I mentioned previously. Obviously people like Mark Raudonis and his team (as well as others) figured out how to use FCP Legend effectively in large scale facilities and my hat's off to them.

When I was using FCP Legend in a multi-editor environment we made it work (ex. we never missed a deadline even when turnaround on the TV show was just 48hrs on occasion) but it was never what I would call smooth nor elegant. We were obviously shoehorning FCP into a role it wasn't very well suited for. After 5yrs of that I ended up back on Avid on a reality show and the difference was night and day. I was giddy as a school girl being back in Avid's multi-editor environment. Sure Avid still treats stills as video, the FX mode is horribly antiquated and resolution & frame rate are set at the project level (WTF Avid, it's 2014!) but there's nothing I'd rather use currently than Avid + ISIS if I'm doing something like a big reality show (ScriptSync is also ridiculously useful).

In the next day or so I'm going to write up my basic big project, Avid multi-user workflow and spin this discussion off into it's own thread to see how you guys would try and use X to tackle a similar scenario. My initial assumption is to agree with Steve Connor that X has a long way to go in this regard but I'd still like to get an idea of where X is at.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 3:30:52 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "In the next day or so I'm going to write up my basic big project, Avid multi-user workflow and spin this discussion off into it's own thread to see how you guys would try and use X to tackle a similar scenario"

Great idea, there is often a lot of good discussion here about how FCPX might and does function in a multi-user environment.

Avid clearly leads in this area at the moment

Steve Connor

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: And the lightbulb goes on...
on Feb 4, 2014 at 5:22:19 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "I've never used FCP Legend on as large a scale as I have Avid so I can't make '7 to X' workflow guesstimate. To be honest, even on the smaller scale that I used it on (12 editors, 60TB Xsan, mostly a mix of daily web content and a weekly cable news magazine show) it was such a PITA that I'd never choose to use on bigger projects like I mentioned previously. Obviously people like Mark Raudonis and his team (as well as others) figured out how to use FCP Legend effectively in large scale facilities and my hat's off to them."

That's kind of what I was getting at and glad you backed it up. While FCP was super flexible in XML and relink workflows, it really was no where near what Avid can offer.

FCPX at least stand a better chance, but it certainly needs a bit more work. If Events could be read only, it would go a long way to compete.

[Andrew Kimery] "I was giddy as a school girl being back in Avid's multi-editor environment. Sure Avid still treats stills as video, the FX mode is horribly antiquated and resolution & frame rate are set at the project level (WTF Avid, it's 2014!) but there's nothing I'd rather use currently than Avid + ISIS if I'm doing something like a big reality show (ScriptSync is also ridiculously useful)."

Avid, at it's very heart, is an offline system, and besides what used to be M100, probably has the best offline/online workflow (AMA aside).

[Andrew Kimery] "In the next day or so I'm going to write up my basic big project, Avid multi-user workflow and spin this discussion off into it's own thread to see how you guys would try and use X to tackle a similar scenario. My initial assumption is to agree with Steve Connor that X has a long way to go in this regard but I'd still like to get an idea of where X is at."

Thanks so much for chiming in. It's always good to heat however people are using anything successfully and why.

We are not large scale by any means, but 10.1 is very very close, even though I don't like some of the organizational changes within it.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

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