FORUMS: list search recent posts

Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Steve Connor
Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 11:13:03 am

Considering how fast Resolve and PPro are evolving, I have to say I'm a little disappointed that the pace of FCPX development seems to be slowing. I know Bill will say it's great as it is and that is true in some respects, but if I'm honest I thought that we'd see a lot more features added.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 11:51:34 am

If you think the pace of development has slowed for FCP X, spare a thought for the pace of development of Motion, where Apple have moved over to geological time frames ;-)

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Michael Phillips
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 12:54:15 pm

Do you think that Motion becomes part of FCPx at some point, and one might think (hope) that the lack of standalone development is about integration development?

On a similar note, you just have to think that Blackmagic will be integrating Eyeon Fusion into Resolve at some point in the future, and Fusion has some great graphics functionality - not to mention compositing, etc.


Michael


Return to posts index


Bret Williams
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 2:21:00 pm

Why not throw HitFilm 3 into the mix? It's basically a little inexpensive Smoke.

I'd agree it has slowed to a crawl. Other than a few niceties, there was nothing last year. Just file management. And before that, a year ago, we were having this exact same conversation.

With Motion, sure they're could be some high end stuff added, but I'm not making use of what all has to offer as it is. Kinda like PS, AE, Illustrator and such. I haven't really outgrown the likes of my old CS5 versions.

The biggest problem with FCP X: It has increasingly with every version become a resource hog. Get a free memory meter and watch it just eat the memory. Just scrubbing potential effects in the browser will eventually do it. But it'll start to lag way before memory is gobbled up. There are some serious resource management issues here. It needs some sort of internal overhaul. Bill can love it all he wants. But when you ask it to actually do something other than logging and cuts and dissolves, it really sucks in performance.


Return to posts index

Mark Suszko
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 3:28:57 pm

I think what we see with FCPX is that the way forward is externally developed modular plug-ins that hook into a central app framework, rather than Apple re-building the underlying code from scratch every time they upgrade. This is the fastest way to get more new functions added as demand drives them. The burden on the FCPX dev team then is to keep it all working in harmony.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 4:27:59 pm

Don't claim to be an expert, but it seems everything is tying into the built in Motion framework, which is tying into FCP X. So sometimes you have an app (mflare, mobject, etc) running on top of a full copy of motion, on top of a full copy of FCP X.

Maybe FCP X development isn't slower than I'd like, but just FCP X is slower than I'd like.


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 4:16:52 pm
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Oct 30, 2014 at 4:19:01 pm

I have a feeling that Yosemite will bring a lot of functionality. It has been a long wait, to be sure. Apple seems to be building a pretty big framework in order to hang third party development off of it. It is taking a while to get there, but I think it's getting there. I also think Apple still has a few tricks up their sleeves as well.







I have been having a lot of fun in fcpx, more fun than any other NLE I've used in the past. Our office has switched to 10.1.3 almost exclusively. I finally feel comfortable enough with the Library system to start and maintain an archive of past projects, and 10.1.3 has been as stable as fcpx has ever been.

Simon is making some wicked plugins, Hawaki Style is a real blast, and I don't find X to be a resource hog, but I am editing on a tube with mostly ProRes/XAVC iFrame material. Even editing on a laptop is surprisingly good. I can get a whole lot of work done inside of fcpx that I wouldn't do in 7 or any other NLE without another application or two.

Apple has a lot of irons in the fire these days. I'm not sure my best interests and their best interests are as aligned as they once were, but that's the way it goes.

Pr CC is sitting on our machines waiting to be used if the need arises.

Of course I'd like some more updates, and I'd really like some UI tweaks, but all in good time.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 4:24:33 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Simon is making some wicked plugins, Hawaki Style is a real blast, and I don't find X to be a resource hog, but I am editing on a tube with mostly ProRes/XAVC iFrame material."

Seriously there must be something horribly wrong with my system then. And many others. I have the top o the line 2012 27" imac with 32gigs. Upon boot there are 26 gigs available. Launch X and there's 24-25. Seems pretty good. But then browse some of Simon's effects like mLogo or heaven forbid some mobject templates from the broswer and suddenly you're dropping gigs of available RAM as fast as the app is bogging down. And if you put a motion template in the timeline and adjust, scrub etc it's the same issue. Suddenly your available RAM is being calculate in megs instead of gigs. And that's with one app open, FCP X. It needs a memory top off amount. To leave memory for other apps. Or to ditch memory when appropriate like when an app is launched. That's how it's supposed to work. But X doesn't let go of memory until you quit. And it'll keep grabbing it until - crash.


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 5:05:59 pm

[Bret Williams] "But then browse some of Simon's effects like mLogo or heaven forbid some mobject templates from the broswer and suddenly you're dropping gigs of available RAM as fast as the app is bogging down."

Hi Bret

I'm afraid you've got me mixed up with the Szimon (sp?) who runs motionVFX. I have nothing to do with mObject or mLogo or any of their products or the company. They make terrific products and you should take up the performance issue with them as I'm sure they'd like to hear your concerns.

You can find my plug-ins at Hawaiki or Tokyo.

You should also check out my Motion Tutorials if you have a moment - they are quite good, at least in the opinion of quite a few of my subscribers.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index


Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 5:10:34 pm
Last Edited By Simon Ubsdell on Oct 30, 2014 at 5:11:21 pm

So just for clarification these are the details of the team at motionVFX:

http://www.motionvfx.com/about_us.html

Who is motionVFX?

MotionVFX is a registered trademark of a company called MotionVFX, which is created and owned by Szymon Masiak.
Szymon is very well known in computer graphic industry and has been working in it for over 20 years in areas like computer games, commercials and major motion pictures.

MotionVFX is based in Poland and here is full address and the name of our company:

MotionVFX Szymon Masiak
Bielska 11
43-340 Kozy
Poland

You may contact us via our official Support Channel at support (at) motionvfx.com

(PS. I have never been to Poland, though I would like to some day ...)

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 5:13:43 pm

Ya'll both rock.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 5:12:10 pm

I thought Jeremy was referring to Szymon. I never spell it right either. But looking back he was referring to you. But the point is the same. All these people making cool stuff. But it all seems to suck up the RAM. Any thoughts on performance? AE sucks up RAM too just with RAM previews alone, but they have a nice little purge function that I use constantly.

I have watched some of your tuts. You're a Motion genius. One was way over my head. The one about green screen in motion by subtracting this channel from that.... way above my pay grade. I was having trouble with a key at the time but keylight came to the rescue in AE as it usually does.


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 5:20:46 pm

[Bret Williams] "I thought Jeremy was referring to Szymon. "

I wasn't although motionVFX makes good stuff, too.

I was referring to Mr Ubsdell. I am having a good time with the truly useful plugs.

This page, and then scroll down to Hawaiki, and Tokyo.

Also, 20% off right now, just sayin'

http://fxfactory.com/products/

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 5:59:58 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I wasn't although motionVFX makes good stuff, too."

I'd second that absolutely - I have huge respect for the quality of what they put out, and not a little envy at how good it is sometimes ;-) Lots of clever, hard-working and talented folks on that team, for sure.

[Jeremy Garchow] "I was referring to Mr Ubsdell. I am having a good time with the truly useful plugs."

Thank you very much :)

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 7:28:09 pm

[Bret Williams] "I have watched some of your tuts. One was way over my head. The one about green screen in motion by subtracting this channel from that.... way above my pay grade."

Don't be discouraged by that one - it was a bit on the advanced side, I'd readily admit.

But there have been quite a few since that are much easier to get to grips with and are quite fun to do. This recent one, despite looking at some pretty unusual techniques, has proved particularly popular:







Since all my tutorials are project-based (rather than dealing with just a specific tool or technique), there are usually quite a few extra hints and tips that emerge along the way that can be useful to discover - I think.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo-uk.com


Return to posts index


Walter Soyka
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Nov 3, 2014 at 2:42:12 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "I have a feeling that Yosemite will bring a lot of functionality."

FCP X is a fantastic demonstration of what a developer can build on top of Macintosh frameworks. AV Foundation, Core Animation, Core Data, Core Image, Core Video, Quartz (hereafter referred to as "Core Quartz") -- a lot of FCP X's low-level functionality is really provided by the OS.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

David Mathis
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 6:05:54 pm

[Michael Phillips] "Do you think that Motion becomes part of FCPx at some point, and one might think (hope) that the lack of standalone development is about integration development?"

Building a custom effect in Motion for use in FCP X later, does make Motion a part of FCP X in that regard. I have always felt that the two should be separate applications, trying to go with a one size fits all approach does not always work.

[Michael Phillips] "On a similar note, you just have to think that Blackmagic will be integrating Eyeon Fusion into Resolve at some point in the future, and Fusion has some great graphics functionality - not to mention compositing, etc."

I think the two applications should be separate. Not everyone will need to do high-end compositing. This could make for a more complex interface and likely introduce more bugs to troubleshoot, just my two cents.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 8:05:00 pm

[David Mathis] "I think the two applications should be separate. Not everyone will need to do high-end compositing. This could make for a more complex interface and likely introduce more bugs to troubleshoot"

Couldn't agree more. Which is also the reason they will never integrate more than they already have (in the sense "all-in-one"), which is actually quite considerable already. They'll certainly integrate more, just on their own and stay separate. Fortunately.

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index


TImothy Auld
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 8:29:31 pm

Over the last few years I have used X on a few projects that fit and it performed well - stability issues aside - in limited circumstances. But just the way command Z selectively performs is enough to keep me from ever thinking of using it in any sort of long form situation. If Apple is really headed somewhere good with this then I will follow. But I don't see it happening. They just don't seem to be looking to address complex workflows. And they also seem to making a small fortune not doing so.

Tim


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 10:06:08 pm

[TImothy Auld] "And they also seem to making a small fortune not doing so."

Ironically, they're obviously making it from people that in fact see that they're headed somewhere more than just good. Somewhere that others are apparently not willing or able to follow. Oh well. Go figure. But I guess we'll just take your word for it. ;-D

- RK

____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

TImothy Auld
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 10:56:21 pm

As well you should.

Tim


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 31, 2014 at 2:06:05 am

I hate it when old posts from 2 years ago spontaneously reappear on this forum. Somebody should check into it. Some bad html or something.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 30, 2014 at 10:35:46 pm

[David Mathis] "I think the two applications [Resolve and Fusion] should be separate. Not everyone will need to do high-end compositing. This could make for a more complex interface and likely introduce more bugs to troubleshoot, just my two cents."

This is a totally valid point of view, but I might characterize it as somewhat traditional.

I think there's enormous creative value in the convergence of color and compositing, and I think that working in editorial context for both is of increasing importance.

(In fact, I might go so far as to argue that color is a specialized subset of compositing from a technical if not artistic standpoint, but that could be a conversation for another time.)

NUKE STUDIO might provide a model for a way to incorporate Fusion into Resolve while minimizing interface complexity for those who aren't interested in its feature set.

Going forward, I think separate apps will work best if the developer can move all the apps onto a shared data structure: one editorial timeline as the hub to which contributions may be made in context by the specialist spoke applications. Eliminating the concept of interchange as we know it now, making it totally invisible and seamless within a suite, and enabling non-linear collaboration would be a great next step for improving post workflows.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 31, 2014 at 8:32:23 am

[Walter Soyka] "Going forward, I think separate apps will work best if the developer can move all the apps onto a shared data structure: one editorial timeline as the hub to which contributions may be made in context by the specialist spoke applications. Eliminating the concept of interchange as we know it now, making it totally invisible and seamless within a suite, and enabling non-linear collaboration would be a great next step for improving post workflows."

I agree. And there's something about FCP X that's always made me think about that concept. I have a vivid, possibly delusional imagination... :-) In any case, can you spot it?



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

~ 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

Brett Sherman
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Oct 31, 2014 at 12:30:09 pm

The connected clip structure of FCP X opens up a lot of possibilities if Apple chooses to pursue them. It would be possible to have different "views" of the same timeline. One for clip editing (the current one), another one for audio mixing (where visually, audio would be split off the video into tracks based on roles and with a role "mixer"), another where video keyframing would be primary. Also I'd love to be able to "explode" a compound clip within the timeline, work with it, and "implode" it once I'm done. There would also be possibilites of a Motion project basically being a special sort of compound clip where you have Motion-style arrangement of clips and can swap and trim them within the FCP X interface.

But maybe I'm a dreamer too. I'm not sure Apple is down this road or even realizes the possibilities at this point. However, it is one of the clear advantages of a linked timeline.


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Nov 1, 2014 at 4:20:23 pm

Hit film actually works in that way for compositing. It has a little after effects like app built in. I just played with demo of 2. It was a horrible editor, but decent compositor.


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Nov 3, 2014 at 2:37:50 pm

[Charlie Austin] "I agree. And there's something about FCP X that's always made me think about that concept. I have a vivid, possibly delusional imagination... :-) In any case, can you spot it?"

Are you talking about the Window > Final Cut Pro item in the screenshot, suggesting that it could eventually contain other apps as well?

If so, I do fear you might be reading too much into it. Mac OS uses MDI (multiple document interface), and is highly document-centric. Most applications on the Mac platform are capable of opening multiple documents, each in a separate window, simultaneously. The title of a window is usually the name of the document, and the entries under the Window menu would be use to show which document was active in an application (via the checkmark), and to activate a different one (by selecting its menu item). Open a couple of documents in TextEdit to see what I mean.

FCP X, though, only supports a single window/document, named "Final Cut Pro" -- so this is what appears in the Window menu.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Nov 4, 2014 at 11:14:32 am
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Nov 4, 2014 at 11:14:56 am

Something that keeps me hoping interface-wise, is this odd little pop-up that has been there since day one, but inactive. A retracted idea after initial implementation? Or one (still) in development waiting for something else before being activated? Hmmmm...



____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Nov 2, 2014 at 7:33:53 pm

[Steve Connor] "Considering how fast Resolve and PPro are evolving, I have to say I'm a little disappointed that the pace of FCPX development seems to be slowing. I know Bill will say it's great as it is and that is true in some respects, but if I'm honest I thought that we'd see a lot more features added."

Just another way they are copying Avid.


Return to posts index

Keith Hamm
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Nov 2, 2014 at 10:07:04 pm

I wouldn't hang my hat on any Apple products. They don't have a poor track record of maintaining "professional" products.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Nov 3, 2014 at 9:28:31 am
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Nov 3, 2014 at 11:29:28 am

[Keith Hamm] "They don't have a poor track record of maintaining "professional" products."

Wow... you're actually right, they don't. Well spotted.

(there's something to be said about trying to troll with the most tired and worn meme and still blowing it. :-)))))

- RK


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Nov 3, 2014 at 2:13:59 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Well spotted.

(there's something to be said about trying to troll with the most tired and worn meme and still blowing it. :-)))))
"


HA! I just saw that. Very funny....

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


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Is FCPX development slower than you'd like?
on Nov 3, 2014 at 10:09:19 am

[Keith Hamm] "I wouldn't hang my hat on any Apple products. They don't have a poor track record of maintaining "professional" products."

Maybe so, but might as well run with this one while we can. Oh, and ask Avid DS users how their "professional product" was supported, promoted and maintained....

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


Return to posts index

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