FORUMS: list search recent posts

Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Steve Connor
Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 7:57:14 am

Simple question, I just wondered if there is anyone left on here who thinks it isn't?


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 8:20:57 am

[Steve Connor] "Simple question, I just wondered if there is anyone left on here who thinks it isn't?"

On here? Probably. In general? Yes. By me? No.

Pretty much the same can be said for FCP Legend, PPro, Avid, etc.,. Well, people the 'pro-ness' of Avid really isn't debatable but many would call it an archaic piece of crap stuck in the 90's.


-Andrew


Return to posts index

Mark Smith
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 11:22:14 am

I still hear FCPX is like iMovie, mostly from people who have not cut a frame with X.


Return to posts index


Jim Wiseman
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 11:35:53 pm
Last Edited By Jim Wiseman on Oct 28, 2015 at 11:52:44 pm

Andrew, That's when I was willing to sell Avid. In the '90's. It was actually profitable then. Even bought a dealer demo MC1000 for myself. Not much has changed since then. It's the old "no one ever lost their job recommending the company buy IBM". But it works in the Hollywood environment, and isn't that true no matter what environment you work in? If it works and is "socially" acceptable you will use it. Out here in the larger world we have more choices.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1, Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Pro X 10.2.2, Final Cut Studio 2 & 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.6, Premiere Pro CS 5 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Blackmagic Ultrastudio 4K, Blackmagic Teranex, Avid MC: Mid 2015 MacBook Pro Retina 15": 2013 Mac Pro Hexacore, 1TB SSD, 64GB RAM, 2-D500: Helios 2 w 2-960GB SSDs: 2012 Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz, 24Gb RAM, GTX-680, 960GB SSD: Macbook Pro Retina 2015, i7, 500GB, M370X 2GB: Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 16GB RAM 250GB SSD, Multiple OWC Thunderbay 4 TB2 and eSATA QX2 RAID 5 HD systems


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 11:27:07 am

There are no unprofessional NLEs.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los Angeles


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Greg Jones
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 12:21:18 pm

I think if you use any editing program to make money, it could be considered professional. I own Final Cut Pro X, but haven't used it on any paid gigs. I do know a lot of people that do use it professionally, though. It's a matter of personal taste and what's best for the project. I've used Avid, Final Cut Pro 7, Media 100, Turbo Cube, and Premiere Pro over the years. I'm excited to see where Davinci Resolve goes. For me I've been using Premiere over the past 2 years and love it. If a project comes along where I think Final Cut Pro X would be best suited I wouldn't hesitate to use it.

Greg Jones
D7 Inc
http://www.d7-inc.com


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 12:41:19 pm

To more directly answer that question, in the general mindset of the film and TV industry, yes. That meme continues. This past weekend I was on a post production panel at a film festival. The 30 or so folks in the audience covered a wide range of ages, experience levels and locations. The moderator asked for a show of hands for NLE usage. Avid - 0. FCPX - 2 or 3. PPro - over half. When comments were made about X it was invariably that "no one uses it for professional work", which I promptly corrected. So clearly Apple is failing in how it markets the professional aspects of X.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Rich Rubasch
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 2:00:48 pm

"So clearly Apple is failing in how it markets the professional aspects of X."

Exactly. Perception is half of truth. I don't see Apple marketing the app as a professional product...it is not their messaging. Actually I only get impressions from Apple that they are a mobile device and media delivery company.

Whereas Adobe and AVID are wholeheartedly committed to the professional, broadcast media industry and beyond. That to me strikes the biggest difference between Adobe and AVID and Apple.

More about perception from marketing and messages than the actual software.

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
Founder/President/Editor/Designer/Animator
http://www.tiltmedia.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 2:04:51 pm

[Rich Rubasch] " I don't see Apple marketing the app as a professional product."

This extends to the hardware. The Mac Pro gets no front page web exposure on the Apple site. You have to follow the icon trail to find it. Certainly iMacs and MBP laptops are powerful and useful in a professional environment, but the Mac Pro is the machine designed for pro applications in Apple's eyes. Why not promote it more heavily?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Mark Suszko
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 2:19:24 pm
Last Edited By Mark Suszko on Oct 28, 2015 at 2:20:18 pm

Oliver, I think it's because we're just not that big a market, compared to phones and tablets. Apple likes to use the cachet of Pro Apps from time to time, to give their consumer products the suggestion of power and sophistication. But they don't really think of us as a major market. Rather, we give their consumer products more legitimacy by there being pro apps in general.

Like when SAAB used to sell cars, they made a huge deal out of the fact that the same company makes fighter jets. I loved my SAAB 900 to death, even had a "Jet A Only" sticker inside the fuel filler door and a "Not rated for spins" plaque and Aresti diagrams inside - but it didn't really fly, you know. Except maybe on snow. Great handling in snow.:-)

Pro Apps are big - but the phones and tablets and imacs are several orders of magnitude bigger. When the Discreet Edit system was absorbed by Autodesk, they killed it off without much of a qualm, because Autodesk sold millions of copies of Autocad for every one copy of Edit*6

For every mac pro they sell, Apple must sell several thousand phones.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 2:26:59 pm

[Mark Suszko] "Oliver, I think it's because we're just not that big a market, compared to phones and tablets. Apple likes to use the cachet of Pro Apps from time to time, to give their consumer products the suggestion of power and sophistication. "

I completely get that. But then no one should be surprised if Apple is not viewed as a professional player.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 3:18:37 pm

All the marketing for FCX as a professional editor is being done by FCP.co and others like it. FOCUS cut on FCX....did Apple mention it? That OJ Simpson doc on A&E cut on FCX...Did Apple mention it? They used to push things like COLD MOUNTAIN and other TV shows. My blog was featured as a resource. Now they seem focused on iPhones and iPads. Because that is what makes them money. Focus the marketing on what makes the most money...that's the basic business model.

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


Return to posts index


Shane Ross
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 3:19:05 pm

By the way, I consider it professional.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 3:53:47 pm

[Shane Ross] "All the marketing for FCX as a professional editor is being done by FCP.co and others like it"

Like other things with X, they rely a lot on third parties.

[Shane Ross] "FOCUS cut on FCX....did Apple mention it? That OJ Simpson doc on A&E cut on FCX...Did Apple mention it?"

Yes on "Focus". There's a big "In Action" spread. No on "OJ".

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 4:46:48 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Like other things with X, they rely a lot on third parties."

Well, they made the NLE that they felt suited the needs of a majority of editors, and they were right. It does. But the tools needed to make it plug into the Hollywood workflows weren't included, because, as Philip Hodgetts loves to point out, we are the minority...only 2% of the market. So why cater to us, and then hope that it works for everyone else? That's what they did with FCP 7, and they found that yes, it worked for us, but it required a lot of twisting to make it work for the rest of the editors...the majority.

It was a sound business decision. It just stung a lot of people pretty badly, and leaves a bad taste in our mouth. But I'm over it.

Is it professional? Yup...if you earn money with it and are a professional editor, it's a professional tool. Does it suit the needs of Hollywood features/TV? Nope. not without a lot of help. Alone it BARELY works, and that's if you are a one man band here. It doesn't "Plug in" without lots of help, and that's why many of us elitists types say "nope, not professional."

But, whatever. Why does it matter to FCX users what we think? Is it CLIENTS that are balking at hiring people because they use FCX?

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


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 8:19:17 pm

[Shane Ross] "That's what they did with FCP 7, and they found that yes, it worked for us, but it required a lot of twisting to make it work for the rest of the editors...the majority"

In fairness, a number of the missing items that were in FCP "classic" required licensing outside IP. Apple opted not to do that again.

[Shane Ross] "Is it CLIENTS that are balking at hiring people because they use FCX?"

In some cases yes, especially if they require project compatibility with their own workflows.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 4:47:04 pm

[Shane Ross] "All the marketing for FCX as a professional editor is being done by FCP.co and others like it. FOCUS cut on FCX....did Apple mention it?"

Nope. Not here: http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/

Not at all!


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 5:05:33 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Nope. Not here: http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/"

Ah...that's what I get for not paying close attention to Apple.

I do know that in order for that to work, they needed TONS of on-site help and arm twisting. Just like FCP 3 needed for COLD MOUNTAIN. But hey...if it worked...

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


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 5:39:40 pm

[Shane Ross] "I do know that in order for that to work, they needed TONS of on-site help and arm twisting. Just like FCP 3 needed for COLD MOUNTAIN. But hey...if it worked..."

And just like they needed on Gone Girl? IIRC, they had lots of Adobe help plus guys like Phil and Greg helping them make THAT work properly.

So whats the point? If you have $100 million bucks riding on an outcome - it's inconceivable that you'd want a strong back bench ready to help you.

It's how EVERY movie ever made has been done.

If a Panavision rig on an early Ron Howard film had issues, I'd suspect calling Panavision - or at least guys with lots of Panavision camera experience - would kinda be step one in solving them. So why is that notable in this case?

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


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 5:49:43 pm

[Bill Davis] "And just like they needed on Gone Girl? IIRC, they had lots of Adobe help plus guys like Phil and Greg helping them make THAT work properly. "

Sorry, I didn't know we were talking about Adobe. I'm comparing it to Avid, which is the NLE that Hollywood uses on TV and Features. So much that I wonder why Avid even needs to say "Hey! ALL the Academy Award nominees for Best Picture were cut on Avid!" Well...that goes without saying. And it isn't getting best picture BECAUSE it was cut on Avid...but, OK then.

[Bill Davis] "So whats the point? If you have $100 million bucks riding on an outcome - it's inconceivable that you'd want a strong back bench ready to help you."

That if you have $100 Million bucks riding on a outcome, that I'd prefer to use the NLE that's proven to work, that fits in with all the rest of the machine that's making the movie.

[Bill Davis] "If a Panavision rig on an early Ron Howard film had issues, I'd suspect calling Panavision - or at least guys with lots of Panavision camera experience - would kinda be step one in solving them. So why is that notable in this case?"

THe point is that they would call them WHEN they had a problem. Not have them there every step of the way to make sure it works. But, then again, I'm sure when COLLATERAL was shot with a Phantom camera, one of the first all digital films, the PHANTOM guys were always on set. Same when they shot SW:EP1 with a digital camera.

BUT, in those cases...those people did what they could to make the cameras work for the needs of the filmmakers. "Oh, it needs to do that? OK, when we make the next upgrade we'll add that!" Apple? "Oh, you need to do that? Sorry, we don't care. Look...those guys are making something that'll work...use them. Oh, NOW what do you need FCX to do? That? Whatever, we don't see a need for most of our users to do that. Go find some guy to make an app for you to do that. There are plenty of smart people out there."

It's THAT attitude that keeps me from not really wanting to try to use them for what I do. They don't care about the film industry. If they did, they'd work on features we needed, and not rely on third parties. Then again, Avid is COMPLETELY IGNORING us when we go "we need far better multicam support. Oh, and the way your software deals with stills sucks, can you fix it? No? You think what you have is good enough? Uh...OK. Now, the title tool it... is something you aren't going to even attempt to fix." And they point at a third party solution.

SO Apple is not alone in doing this crap...

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 8:32:15 pm

[Bill Davis] "And just like they needed on Gone Girl? IIRC, they had lots of Adobe help plus guys like Phil and Greg helping them make THAT work properly. "

I think that's a bit of a different situation. Part of the support these large projects need is to optimize the set-up for a shared environment. In "GG" a lot of this fell on Open Drives in conjunction with Adobe to fine-tune the SAN performance and improve response with large projects and Premiere Pro. Adobe also uses this as a learning experience for them to suss out ways to improve the product.

This is an area that Avid has down to a science and why, when a lot is on the line with a large project, most experienced film/TV editors will pick Media Composer + Isis. For better or worse, it's the known and reliable workhorse.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Darren Roark
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 3, 2015 at 6:07:59 pm

[Oliver Peters] "This is an area that Avid has down to a science and why, when a lot is on the line with a large project, most experienced film/TV editors will pick Media Composer + Isis. For better or worse, it's the known and reliable workhorse."

If they could implement something similar to Avid's bin locking in FCPX, it would change some minds in LA. It's the last remaining deal breaker.

The irony is that any AE's worth their weight in salt knows how to easily work around it in a pinch.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 8:26:13 pm

[Shane Ross] "I do know that in order for that to work, they needed TONS of on-site help and arm twisting"

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by on-site help. Folks like Sam Mestman helped, but the operation was largely run in-house thanks to savvy assistants like Mike Matdorff. Unless you know something no one else does, there wasn't really any on-site help from Apple. I should point out that I was doing an indie film at the exact same point in time with no large budget or support, cutting on 10.0.9. A few rough spots for sure, but nothing insurmountable, nor anything requiring any more than a few e-mails to others who'd gone through the path before.

[Shane Ross] "Just like FCP 3 needed for COLD MOUNTAIN."

As has been stated often, "CM" got help and training from DigitalFilm Tree at the start, but much of the edit occurred in Romania without a technical support staff. Certainly no direct on-site help from Apple.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 5:24:12 pm
Last Edited By Andrew Kimery on Oct 28, 2015 at 5:34:39 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Nope. Not here: http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/"

Yup.

All you have to do is go to Apple.com, wonder why there is no software icon on the nav bar, click 'Mac' because that seems like the next best option, wonder again why there is no software option in the Mac section, click El Cap cause you think maybe they put all the software under the OS X header. Nope, realize you were wrong, click back, look at the nav bar again to make sure you aren't overlooking it, scroll down the Mac page because now you are getting frustrated and just aimlessly mousing around, stumble upon FCP X near the bottom of the page, click Learn More, click 'In Action' up at the top and *bam* there is Focus... and 8 other pieces that I'm pretty sure have been there for at least 3yrs.

How could anyone possibly miss finding the In Action section? ;)

There is cold comfort that it's not just ProApps that are getting shoved under the bed. If you go to Apple.com the only piece of software that has a permanent, direct link is iTunes (and that's a link way down at the bottom of the page). Everything thing else links to hardware. El Cap has a link on the main page but it's in the 'new stuff' section so it's transient.

BTW, if I did over look a direct (or at least semi direct) link please point it out to me, because having to do so much digging to get to info about a ProApp is a little sad and I'd love to be mistaken in this case.

EDIT: fixed some grammar, sure they are more problems.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 5:45:06 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "All you have to do is go to Apple.com, wonder why there is no software icon on the nav bar, click 'Mac' because that seems like the next best option, wonder again why there is no software option in the Mac section, click El Cap cause you think maybe they put all the software under the OS X header. Nope, realize you were wrong, click back, look at the nav bar again to make sure you aren't overlooking it, scroll down the Mac page because now you are getting frustrated and just aimlessly mousing around, stumble upon FCP X near the bottom of the page, click Learn More, click 'In Action' up at the top and *bam* there is Focus... and 8 other pieces that I'm pretty sure have been there for at least 3yrs.

How could anyone possibly miss finding the In Action section? ;)"


Now I finally get it.

Apple doesn't LOVE us enough to make this easier.

We so sad.

; (

(Sorry, couldn't resist)

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


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 6:02:13 pm

[Bill Davis] "Apple doesn't LOVE us enough to make this easier."

Close. Apple doesn't make enough money anymore from people buying Pro Apps or Mac Pros to warrant much of a marketing push. Hence the discussion about product visibility between Rich, Oliver, Mark and Shane and my subsequent example of how info about the ProApps is really buried on Apple's site where it used to be much more accessible.

I would be lying if I said I didn't like the times I'd go to Apple.com and see a info about a FCP update gracing the front page.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 6:07:26 pm

[Andrew Kimery] "Close. Apple doesn't make enough money anymore from people buying Pro Apps or Mac Pros to warrant much of a marketing push. Hence the discussion about product visibility between Rich, Oliver, Mark and Shane and my subsequent example of how info about the ProApps is really buried on Apple's site where it used to be much more accessible.

I would be lying if I said I didn't like the times I'd go to Apple.com and see a info about a FCP update gracing the front page.
"


Did Apple ever advertise FCP in the Broadcast & Film trade magazines? I seem to remember seeing adverts for "Classic" FCP somewhere


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 6:10:29 pm

[Steve Connor] "Did Apple ever advertise FCP in the Broadcast & Film trade magazines? I seem to remember seeing adverts for "Classic" FCP somewhere"

I believe so, and they also used to attend conventions like NAB.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 8:35:54 pm

[Steve Connor] "Did Apple ever advertise FCP in the Broadcast & Film trade magazines?"

Yes for "classic", no for FCPX. And they had a large booth for several years at NAB, IBC and other trade shows. Apple no longer does this, since they get a lot of attention naturally through anything they do. Why pay for it in ads? They do however maintain contact with the industry press, just not as publicly anymore.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 7:42:53 pm

Apple.com/finalcutpro is still the website, and has been for a decade.

You have to open the AppStore to look at all the wonderful software offerings.

On the home page of the AppStore you will find Final Cut Pro as a top paid app. From there, you can get to the website.

And if you add Final Cut Pro to the google machine, well, you get there even more quickly.

The point is, Apple has talked about it. The workflow for Focus and the team that brought it together has been around, and it still talking about it. And as far as it not being front and center on Apple.com, well big deal. You can find FCPX quickly if you use a search engine.

How long does it take you to find Gone Girl by going to Adobe.com?


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 3:22:30 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Apple.com/finalcutpro is still the website, and has been for a decade. "


Memorizing specific ULRs and using the App Store are interesting work arounds to Apple's poor site navigation although they have limits (ex. you already need to know what you are looking for and the app store is obviously Mac only).


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 3:27:53 am
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Oct 29, 2015 at 3:28:14 am

FCP is easily found by a variety of methods.

Obviously, FCP is entirely too professional to be on the very consumer and hardware centric apple.com homepage.

amirite?


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 5:10:12 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Obviously, FCP is entirely too professional to be on the very consumer and hardware centric apple.com homepage."

As I quipped in a previous post, Apple just knows that pros are diligent enough that they'll keep going until they find what they need. ;)


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 5:45:14 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "[Shane Ross] "All the marketing for FCX as a professional editor is being done by FCP.co and others like it. FOCUS cut on FCX....did Apple mention it?"

Nope. Not here: http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/

Not at all!
"


That line has been out there for a while that Apple is marketing this product to "prosumers"
but there is no evidence of that in their marketing and never has been that I have seen on their page from day one.

Everything on that page is either top end film making or broadcast TV production with the acceptation of a college, but that is training people to be professionals.


Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 6:12:45 pm

[Herb Sevush] "I still find people who do not and I try to educate them, but the "prefect" roll out by Apple still has consequences."

Thank you for that tip of the hat. LOL I continue to maintain that the rollout accomplished exactly what Apple intended.

Apple never feared "not for pros" label Quite the contrary. It's something they already lived through with FCP. The "FCP is not for pros" drumbeat was relentless for years...until it wasn't.

Sidebar: There's a myth that persists that Avid guys missed the boat, didn't get it, were out of the loop, etc etc -- demonstrably untrue, in a broad way. To the extent that FCP made headway in Hollywood (which has admittedly always been overstated), it was driven by Avid guys. See as just two important examples: Walter Murch, and Mark Raudonis.

I'd argue that Mark was almost infinitely more important, because TV-style workflows are almost infinitely more relevant for the way that most people work in most markets.

I'll further point out that Cold Mountain solidified the idea that FCP was definitely NOT ready for professional use. Avid guys read that book and said, "you gotta be f'in kidding me. No f'in way would I put myself through this"...whereas Mark's experience at Bunim-Murray spread like wildfire -- "THIS is a workflow we can embrace."

Having worked personally with literally thousands of Avid editors, I can assure you that nobody is more aware, or more loudly adamant, about Avid's limitations than Avid guys.

In fact, there was a massive wave of FCP adoption among Avid guys was as the online tool of choice before the new Symphony was available on Mac. The combination of FCP and Final Touch as the online for Media Composer offlines transformed a whole swath of the industry. It opened the door for Apple Color -- ooops -- and made Resolve a compelling business proposition for BMD.


What I still find myself resenting a little is the idea that this forum is somehow the epitome of X nay-saying. My assumption is that Steve, as somebody who is the epitome of someone who does NOT believe that :-) is underscoring the extent to which that's just not true.

There are of course plenty of very articulate, highly professional, well-respected X-philes here.

That said, having read every single post in this and other forums for many years, I think I'm pretty on-track that the dominant profile here is people who are using FCPX for some projects and not for others, and therefore have some clearly, sometimes strongly held thoughts on FCPX's deficiencies.

Their day to day lives as professionals underscore the extent to which the "either/or" position that some people try to put them into is both facile and explicitly, incontrovertibly, WRONG.

And in fact, I'm one of the only people here NOT using X on professional projects, and I was an early and loud voice that it was fully professionally capable option, and for many contexts, the most compelling.

But there can also be the distressing, typically passive-aggressively stated contention that people who have issues, including showstopping issues with X either "don't get it" or haven't used it -- as if it's impossible for a cool-headed professional who HAS tried it and DOES get it might possibly say "Not for me."

Again, demonstrably not true.

Leaving, in the eyes of some X-treme X-philes, a statement like "not for me" to be translated as a combination of "I haven't tried it," "I don't get it," "I think it's not professional," and "I think you must not be professional because you DO like it" --- when not a single one of those might be true.

Okay, that's enough of my whining. LOL



[Oliver Peters] "[Shane Ross] "FOCUS cut on FCX....did Apple mention it? That OJ Simpson doc on A&E cut on FCX...Did Apple mention it?"

Yes on "Focus". There's a big "In Action" spread. No on "OJ"."


I still think that Shane rightly observes a sea-change on Apple's part. The In Action section used to be huge, and spotlighted a lot more than Hollywood. It told the story that FCP used in many professional contexts that have nothing to do with Hollywood.

Especially unfortunate, because the expansion of what "professional" means is the most important part of what has happened in the industry in the past 20 years, and, speaking officially (the ONLY sentence in this post that I'm doing so), we're proud of the role we've played in that.

But for quite some time, Apple has been trending in a number of ways, in a number of markets, to care less about anything but their own agenda. WHICH IS GOOD. I LIKE that, which is why I continue to insist that the launch of X did EXACTLY what Apple wanted to do, which is to say, "It's not you, it's me."



[Andrew Kimery] "All you have to do is go to Apple.com, wonder why there is no software icon on the nav bar, click 'Mac' because that seems like the next best option... Nope, realize you were wrong, click back, look at the nav bar again to make sure you aren't overlooking it, scroll down the Mac page because now you are getting frustrated and just aimlessly mousing around, stumble upon FCP X near the bottom of the page...."

THAT's the thing. FCP and FCS used to be super-easy to find front page. Now, they're just not, even if that's the only thing you're looking for.


[Bill Davis] " it's inconceivable that you'd want a strong back bench ready to help you."

The point being made in many threads is that Apple no longer provides that back bench, and both Adobe and Avid do. Not even just for Hollywood stuff. There are literally DOZENS of Adobe guys posting in forums throughout the COW (okay, just two dozen LOL), and many, many Avid folks here and elsewhere who'll move heaven and earth to help regular shmoes. True for many other companies throughout the COW.

Apple used to do similar stuff, and while primarily LA-NY-ward in FOCUS (see what I did there? LOL), it extended further...but now, is anybody seriously going to argue that Apple is committed to this kind of support in any context?

Which, again, bothers me not whit, and doesn't say anything about Apple's commitment to the MARKET at all.

Commitment to individuals across all markets? Compared to other companies? Several of whom are dramatically stepping up their game? C'mon.




[Tony West] "there is no evidence of that in their marketing and never has been that I have seen on their page from day one."

Well-observed, but I'm not sure that Apple delivering professional software lets Apple off the hook for changing tack away from the trend of increasing customer engagement -- even compared to Apple's

But Steve's original question was whether FCPX delivers the goods. I want to acknowledge Oliver's critical observation that the answer "out there" is still regularly "no" -- and I want to underscore that the answer HERE is largely a combination of "yes, and I think it's the best one "yes, even if it's not for me."

And that's okay with me too.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 9:53:23 pm

[Tim Wilson] "But there can also be the distressing, typically passive-aggressively stated contention that people who have issues, including showstopping issues with X either "don't get it" or haven't used it -- as if it's impossible for a cool-headed professional who HAS tried it and DOES get it might possibly say "Not for me.""

But Tim, that's not been an argument I've EVER read here. I can't recall anyone posting the equivalent of "if you honestly gave it a fair trial and don't find it appropriate for your workflow - you're still a fool for not liking it."

What caused the most push-back was posts alleging it was crappy at something - made by folks who had never gone farther than reading about it or maybe kicking it's tires.

IF it's true that X was designed to work differently than other NLEs - and IF a critic NEVER took the time to understand those differences - THEN I think it's fair to view their criticism as suspect.

No, an editor does not need to be an expert in something in order to criticize it. I'm fine with that. But that's very different than the few guys who constantly came here (and still do) saying it's total crap - who never ever have cut and delivered a single program on it.

I simply think that's both fair and appropriate to point that out.

Just last week, DSW spent multiple posts here arguing that X is somehow deeply lame at audio handling. Then other guys stepped in and indicated that they have absolutely NO trouble cutting audio on it at a professional level.

So what's the truth? Is X crap with audio? Or is it fine with audio except for those who can't or don't want to make it work? And if I have the temerity to write a sentence like that - is that me arguing that I think that those editors are stupid as some here would imply? Or is it actually just objective truth. Folks demonstrably cut pro audio with it - so it can cut pro audio just fine. Period.

For the record, as surprising as this might be to some I never felt Apple had created the PERFECT editing application in FCP X. I did and still do feel that they created a fascinating and extremely useful one that can be of great benefit to legions of people who need to edit video at a professional level - particularly as the digital era evolves and so many non-traditional workflows become ever more popular.

Others can disagree.

But if this thread exposes nothing else, it tells us that there is still a significant disconnect between what the market THINKS X is - verses what it ACTUALLY is.

And I believe that keeping the information here ACCURATE is in the forums best interests.

Opinion? Fine. Fire away. Arguing that it can't do stuff that it actually can do? Like be a part of a professional video with audio workflow that's every bit as valid as any other?

Nope. Not acceptable to my mind. Not when folks are out there creating programs with it that end up on movie and TV screens just like all the other NLEs.

All that said, thanks for continuing to give us a place to argue this stuff. It's still such fun to play here!

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 10:53:21 pm
Last Edited By David Roth Weiss on Oct 28, 2015 at 11:02:49 pm

[Bill Davis] "Just last week, DSW spent multiple posts here arguing that X is somehow deeply lame at audio handling. Then other guys stepped in and indicated that they have absolutely NO trouble cutting audio on it at a professional level.

So what's the truth? Is X crap with audio? Or is it fine with audio except for those who can't or don't want to make it work? And if I have the temerity to write a sentence like that - is that me arguing that I think that those editors are stupid as some here would imply? Or is it actually just objective truth. Folks demonstrably cut pro audio with it - so it can cut pro audio just fine. Period."


Jeeze, how many times are you going to dig yourself into the same hole Bill? Please see my earlier response to your similar overblown and patently false statement you made prior:

[Bill Davis] "Allegations like someone saying that you can't cut professional soundtracks because it's somehow "crippled" relative to other NLEs", that too is a a complete mischaracterization of that conversation. While I admit to absolutely hating the entire magnetic timeline both in concept and in practice, I never said it was crippled, never said it prevented anyone from getting their work out the door. In fact below is my summary on the topic:

[David Roth Weiss] "I would have to say in summary that, currently Adobe's implementation is in fact the better and more accurate approach to sub-frame audio editing that better emulates the sub-frame editing capabilities of a DAW. This doesn't mean that FCP X is for amateurs, or that editors using X can't produce excellent work, including audio editing and mixing inside FCP X, only that in a fair comparison of both apps, at this point Adobe has the more advanced implementation of audio editing. To be fair, it's also more expensive... But, also to be fair, with that added expense, the user also gets access to an even better audio editor (Audition), and the entire suite of additional apps as well."

Does that really sound close to: "X is somehow deeply lame at audio handling?" What's lame are your feeble attempts to win the debate by fabricating complete BS to defend yourself when your best arguments don't hold water.

Oh, and BTW, at the risk of being redundant, in that same post I also wrote: "In addition, as a journalist by trade, when I make a mistake or quote someone else who made a mistake, I print a retraction, because I own my words once they go to print. That's not something you typically do Bill, and if you'd like I'll point that out in spades, but I have every confidence that I won't need to, because though this post is clearly deserving of a Bill Davis retraction, I won't be holding my breath."

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los Angeles


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 4:30:33 am

[David Roth Weiss] "only that in a fair comparison of both apps, at this point Adobe has the more advanced implementation of audio editing."

BS.

Your view of "audio editing" in your example is one I reject as woefully narrow. I spent two decades in radio and audio editing and have completed more than 500 audio only projects as a radio commercial producer and voice talent. I can just as easily make the case that the management and editing of audio files in X is far superior to its competitors because an editor can not only do precision editing that is functionally so close to what can be done in Its competitors that it doesn't matter - AND it can ALSO manage scads of alt readings and takes seamlessly via keywording - and THEN move to timeline construction where I have most of the same tools you do. And subsequent to that editing, I can attach dozens of alternate keyword tags and alt mixes via Roles and do more versioning (in a fraction of the time) I could when working in a traditional timeline like those I used in FCP Legacy. I've retired ProTools et all, and now do ALL my audio work directly in X. It's wicked fast, efficient, and employees all the Logic AU plugins that have made that program an audio professionals favorite.

I see all of that as a HUGE audio advantage for FCP X.

See? Right up there above you pontificate that your tool clearly "wins" and X loses - but do that by personally picking a narrow competitive criteria. Which I happen to reject.

And so it goes.

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 6:45:43 pm

Nice try Bill, however, having cut my eye teeth in Hollyweird from the age 20 as an audio engineer, mixer, and sound designer (before there was such a title, much the same as Walter Murch), for film, television, and radio, my audio bonefides trump your own. Though I must say, you definitely have a great face for radio.

Meanwhile, I'll give you credit for consistency, you certainly do try to play the database card at every opportunity - it's about as significant in this discussion of as is your belly button lint, but feel free to hang on to it if you feel it's your only lifeline.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los Angeles


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 30, 2015 at 12:50:50 am

Calm down David.
Your Hollywood credentials let you talk about Hollywood issues. Particularly Hollywood "colorist" issues which is where your IMDB listing shows that you actually have professional expertise. You want to stake your claim to actually being a Hollywood Sound Pro have at it. But I thought you were working at ProMax last I heard selling systems? Was I mistaken. Not that that's any issue. Work is work and I totally understand that anything that pays the bills legally is worthy of respect. It's just hard to see how either of us is in a position to try to trump the other about Audio issues in general. We both have the years in. You did Hollywood. I did broadcast radio and then wrote magazine columns for a decade. So what? And why bother, really? What I know about is sound for video in FCP X and you don't. What you seem to know about is sound for video in Premiere Pro and I dont. I don't talk about how well or not Premiere Pro does things - cuz I don't know that. And you clearly don't know very much about how X actually does things - so why don't we just speak knowledgeably about what we actually know about - and leave the comparisons of the two to people who are crazy enough to use both? Too sane?
Or are you claiming that you actually know both well enough after that one project you described? Cuz if you are, then you are a whole lot smarter than I am - because 30 projects into X and I'd barely gotten past mediocre. I'm now 150 plus in, Apple Certified, and I'm still building additional expertise with every gig I deliver.

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


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 11:23:50 pm

[Bill Davis] "But Tim, that's not been an argument I've EVER read here. I can't recall anyone posting the equivalent of "if you honestly gave it a fair trial and don't find it appropriate for your workflow - you're still a fool for not liking it."
"


Opps!!! The quote above is just more fabricated BS... Or, if it's perhaps senility setting in, then I do sincerely apologize.

Does the following statement sound even remotely familiar, or even close to the "equivalent" you now deny no one "EVER" wrote?

[David Roth Weiss] "And, just as one does not have to jump off a cliff to know it's not right for them, no experienced editor has to become fully proficient with an app to know its not a good fit for there needs. I made the decision after just three edits... I later went back and cut a project with X, and arrived at the same conclusion. Does that make me somehow deficient?"

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los Angeles


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 4:01:13 am

"Later I cut a project..."

I stand in awe at the awesome depth of your experience David. Maybe I'll cut "a project" in Premiere Pro so I can then speak with similar authority about its workflow as well.

And thanks for taking the time to properly school me in the correct path to expertise. Maybe now you'll be generous enough to share your X custom keyword strategies from that project with me so I can improve my workflow? I'd be all ears.

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


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 8:09:24 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I completely get that. But then no one should be surprised if Apple is not viewed as a professional player."

IMHO Im the only one that cares if it is.
If I have to convince others its their loss.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 4:18:25 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Why not promote it more heavily?"

Maybe Apple assumes pros are diligent enough to keep clicking until they find what they need? ;)


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 1, 2015 at 5:02:45 am

The Mac Pro is long in the tooth. When it first came out it got attention and promotion. And they did mention FCP X as an app of choice for it.

"Apple's radically redesigned pro desktop launched on December 19, 2013, bringing Intel's Ivy Bridge E Xeon processors, dual AMD FirePro graphics chips, and fast PCI Express-based flash storage."

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

Phil Lowe
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 16, 2015 at 6:14:13 pm

"Why not promote it more heavily?"

Because iPhone, iPad, iPod, and iMac - all of Apple's consumer products - are what made it all its money. Why actively promote what is, in essence, a niche product when you're rolling in dough from all your consumer gagdets?

The day Apple pushes us all to edit on iPads is the day I sell this MacBook Pro I just bought.


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 16, 2015 at 6:52:28 pm

[Phil Lowe] ""Why not promote it more heavily?"

Because iPhone, iPad, iPod, and iMac - all of Apple's consumer products - are what made it all its money. Why actively promote what is, in essence, a niche product when you're rolling in dough from all your consumer gagdets?
"


Gruber has some insight on this.

https://daringfireball.net/2015/11/what_goes_up


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 4:17:25 pm

[Greg Jones] "I think if you use any editing program to make money, it could be considered professional."

I draw a distinction between the person and the tools. For example, a long time ago I cut weddings for an event videographer that worked on the more... affordable... end of the spectrum and I used iDVD to author the DVDs for the clients. He shot for a living, I cut for a living, so by that metric we were both professional, but I'd never consider iDVD a professional grade DVD authoring application even though I used it to make money. For my needs at the time it was fine, though I'm sure many people who had more exhaustive needs would not have found iDVD adequate (and eventually I went to DVD SP as my needs were no longer met by iDVD).


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 4:14:07 pm

I consider it as professional as any other NLE. I still find people who do not and I try to educate them, but the "prefect" roll out by Apple still has consequences.

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


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 6:27:37 pm

Do you make a living using it? Then it's professional. The debate is silly - if it works for you, great...if not - there's a number of other good choices. I use it occasionally for things other NLE's don't easily offer (mostly 3rd party effects) but cut everyday on Premiere Pro because it offers what i need for audio mixing and ease of use between AE and Audition

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Andy jackson
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 6:48:03 pm
Last Edited By Andy jackson on Oct 28, 2015 at 7:49:02 pm

I could never understand anyone when they said they had the latest professional editing system, be it avid or fcp.

When i started out in non linear editing I was using Ulead Mediastudio 2.5 and upgraded to 5 when it arrived.

This software was shunned as professional as was videostudio pro but they did what i required at a cheaper cost than Avid or FCP.

They could cut, dissolve etc. All the basic requirement for me to make a living.

It is your skills that count not always the software used.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 6:59:17 pm

[Steve Connor] "Simple question, I just wondered if there is anyone left on here who thinks it isn't?"

Of course but...
It depends on many third party assets
Personally I don't mind that but what it does mean is that for someone considering "professional" work they need a research assistant to put togther all the components. I think this actually hurts most in the less glamours "pro" markets such as corporate and very small shops where Apple's lack of marketing makes it very difficult to find the third party tools needed by many of the purchasing decision makers.

While most of the discussion here points to Feature Film and Broadcast, there's not much marketing in the wider "pro" market either where FCPX may be well suited. In fact there's not much FCPX marketing anywhere. It's not like they're pushing it to the Event or Corporate market, not even the "consumer" market.

Or perhaps, we're entirely wrong. FCPX still seems to be the Top Grossing program in the App Store and ranks Sixth in Top Paid apps. Since this is Apple's sales vehicle for programs, they may consider the App Store their best and most appropriate marketing tool. A business goes there to get OmniPlan and they'll find FCPX.



Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 10:01:08 pm

All of the NLEs discussed here are professional. Some of the lesser discussed ones like Vegas, Edius & Lightworks are too.

They are all aimed at certain segments of the market and have strengths & weaknesses depending on the type of job, the level of collaboration and perceived 'standards'.

And of course there is personal preference and what works for an individual. Thank goodness there is choice and rabid fans of all systems so we can have robust discussions around those strengths and weaknesses.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 28, 2015 at 11:43:59 pm

[Steve Connor] "I just wondered if there is anyone left on here who thinks it isn't?"

Sure. Me. The keyframing system being in the shape it is after a half decade is an utter joke.

It's like a version of the William Gibson line about the future:

The future is already here – it's just not evenly distributed

You'd say - "FCPX's non-professional nature is there, it's just not evenly distributed."

It's the original curate's egg. Some of it is incredible, but please grant that the keyframing system is a mind boggling horror, unaltered after half a decade, which means that either its casual users don't realise they're going through hell, or Apple doesn't care to listen to their screams from hell. Either way, it's ridiculous.

And then there was the twelve month plus major feature pause that was triumphantly answered with a nineties 3D bevelled chrome type system. Followed by a massive horn fart and shocked silence.

FCPX is a looney little Apple project. Pray they don't alter it any further. The next update will probably include major feature live photo iOS snippet publishing.
It's la la land software. You're all at the mad hatter's party.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 12:23:17 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "[Steve Connor] "I just wondered if there is anyone left on here who thinks it isn't?"

Sure. Me."


I think that was a given


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 12:29:37 am

tell me you disagree about keyframing. Look at that.

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 12:33:50 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "The next update will probably include major feature live photo iOS snippet publishing. "

I'd expect nothing less.

I can't argue with you, Keyframing in FCPX is by no means great


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 5:01:55 am

Great? Heck no.

But certainly functional. I keyframe values in X all the time. It was a pain to learn to do effectively (kinda like proper track patching for successful audio import in other NLEs maybe?) but it gets the job done.

The essential is just learning where the linear vs eased switch is - and living with the tiny keyframing interface - things I don't enjoy - but like a zit on your kids forehead - remarkably easy to overlook while you wait patiently for the problem to go away.

; )

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 12:24:59 pm

At the risk of tossing fuel on the fire of the audio discussion...



Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 1:04:53 pm

[Oliver Peters] "At the risk of tossing fuel on the fire of the audio discussion..."

Lovely piece, thanks for posting. Cione is obviously a very talented guy, and except for the line "I've never seen an NLE offer as much with the sound side" very informative. If indeed he's never seen this ability elsewhere then I can only suppose that he hasn't tried looking. Ppro could accomplish the same thing without having to create compounds - just by using the track mixer. I did have to chuckle a little bit at his use of the term "magnetic timeline" when he opened up the track -- as though he was doing something that any timeline in history couldn't do as easily. Also notice how the various music clips jump lanes at cut points even though it's the same instrument (look at 1:57) - that must be fun to work with in a large piece. However it does demonstrate the fact that FCPX has all the tools necessary to create wonderful sound - not better tools, just different tools. As always it's up to the user to find the tool he prefers.

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 4:08:36 pm

Voice One: See - Final Cut Pro X is just too different for me to learn and use.

Voice Two: See - Every OTHER software also does everything that X can do!



Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 4:11:43 pm

[Bill Davis] "Voice One: See - Final Cut Pro X is just too different for me to learn and use.
"


Exactly which voice said this?


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 5:10:48 pm

You're probably right Steve.

I should have written that first line as "They've RUINED Final Cut by making it TOO different. I'm pissed."

I shouldn't post first thing after a long night. ; )

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


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 5:15:09 pm

[Bill Davis] "You're probably right Steve.

I should have written that first line as "They've RUINED Final Cut by making it TOO different. I'm pissed."
"


Bill, they're just windmills :)


Return to posts index


Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 5:30:39 pm

(Just for fun entering screaming "hair on fire" mode...)

JUST WINDMILLS! JUST WINDMILLS!!!!

Dude, windmills help the Dutch feed their whole freekin' nation for a big chunk of history!!

Whole careers and LIVES depend on windmills!

If you don't know the PAST, how can you prepare for the FUTURE!! HOW can you dismiss the importance of Windmills. (starting to froth at the mouth now) Plus WIND POWER. Windmills are going to be the salvation of society

Not to mention providing an antagonist for Don Quixote - which made a LOT of money for some folks on Broadway years ago...

(catching breath and calming down finally)

; )

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 4:34:43 pm
Last Edited By Herb Sevush on Oct 29, 2015 at 4:37:59 pm

[Bill Davis] "Voice One: See - Final Cut Pro X is just too different for me to learn and use.

Voice Two: See - Every OTHER software also does everything that X can do!"


Apparently Bill, your hearing voices. You might want to have that checked out.

But if your referring to my post, I will try to make it clear enough for you to understand without the aid of voices. It is my contention that you can do the same things, although not with the same tools, with all modern NLE software, which is why they all earn the sobriquet "Pro" - Avid, Edius, Vegas, Ppro, FCPX, FCP 7, Lightworks - you could cut a feature or any other type of media with any of them. Each would have strengths and weaknesses that differ from the others, and it is in matching those strengths to an editor's own workflow preferences that choice is found.

As to why I don't personally use FCPX, the answer is the same as for Vegas or Lightworks - at the moment I don't see a compelling reason to switch. There's nothing you've ever described with X that makes me want to invest the time and energy - other than Audtions, which alone is still not enough. It doesn't sound, from all the descriptions I've heard, that it suits my personal editing preferences. Neither does Avid by the way, and at least there I do have compelling professional reasons to learn it. Still I've avoided Avid for the past 20 years - a mere 5 years of avoiding FCPX is just a trifle compared to that.

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 5:12:51 pm

Defined by the company we *don't* keep?

I can accept that.

It's the way millions upon millions operate.

Nothing wrong with that.

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 5:16:22 pm

[Bill Davis] "Defined by the company we *don't* keep?

I can accept that."


This is a little delphic for me, I think you might still be hearing voices.

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 5:36:35 pm

[Herb Sevush] "This is a little delphic for me, I think you might still be hearing voices."

Voices are welcome.

I like voices.

And have learned that voices are actually troubling are NOT the ones that you KNOW are inside your head - they're the ones that you believe are coming from an unseen party that's real - but actually not real at all.

Which I believe uncomfortably describes a growing chunk of the "paid agenda post" internet stuff in the modern era. ; )

Oh well.

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


Return to posts index

Phil Lowe
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 29, 2015 at 12:31:49 am

Voice One: See - Final Cut Pro X is just too different for me to learn and use.
Voice Two: See - Every OTHER software also does everything that X can do!


Those aren't mutually exclusive statements. Some NLEs - while every bit as capable as others - implement the features in their UIs in a far more user-friendly way.

FCPX went so far as to change the entire paradigm including industry-standard naming conventions. Apparently, FCPX seems to be aimed at getting iMovie users to upgrade rather than getting Avid or Adobe users to convert.

So while virtually every NLE can do the same things, Apple decided to make crossing over to FCPX more difficult for those already entrenched in a traditional editing paradigm.

IMHO, it was stupid and unnecessary.

That doesn't make FCPX less "professional", only that fewer pros already heavily vested in other software are as likely to abandon what they already know and use professionally.


Return to posts index

Mark Smith
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 29, 2015 at 1:29:48 am

The lit of vocabiulary changes for X is pretty short if you want to think of it that way.
Also X upadted the now all but defunct film editing paradigm to the digital age, with a huge emphasis on leveraging organizational aspects of the editorial process.. There are significant advantages to using X the way its menant to be used.
You might want to start with CHarile Austin's post about "Don't fight the magnetic Timeline". Charlie probably cuts a different way than you do but its worth a look.


Return to posts index

Phil Lowe
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 29, 2015 at 2:56:36 am
Last Edited By Phil Lowe on Nov 29, 2015 at 3:30:53 am

Thanks. I actually hate the magnetic timeline, but then, I'm used to arranging the elements of my pieces at various places on the timeline and dragging and dropping them where I want them, not where some Apple engineer thinks they should go. It would at least be nice to have he option to turn it off. The magnetic timeline is something someone completely new to any kind of editing might find comforting. I find it very limiting and extremely frustrating.


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 29, 2015 at 4:18:59 am

You do have the option.
Just use the position tool - clips will stick where you put em. The insert edit will put a clip where the playhead is.
Connect edit will put a clip where the playhead is connected/not on the primary timeline.

In no way do you not have command of where your edits should go.

And magnetic alignment is very ergonomic for a very high percentage of rough cut edits.

Tracklessness has its pros and cons and for me was the much greater learning curve.

Snapping was more or less a form of magnetism. When I'm doing a rough cut I pretty much want the timeline to be a unified sequence and magnetism makes it really easy to change the order of that sequence. If I want to leave a gap I just use the position tool.

I find any interface frustrating when I don't know how to use it. Particularly if i already knew how to navigate using different software that had the same purpose. And the constant learning curve I think is becoming counterproductive.

Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 30, 2015 at 1:56:43 am

[Oliver Peters] "At the risk of tossing fuel on the fire of the audio discussion..."

I see no fuel here. As expected with any NLE you can record and mix to picture and add effects. All through he is stressing that it is nice for a DIY editor to be able to do it all in one place and he also doesn't say that other DAWs are not needed. If he needs MIDI, then an NLE will not do the job.

I can see that X is a big improvement over Legend as expected but as Herb says Pr and others can do the same task.


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 30, 2015 at 2:37:20 am
Last Edited By David Roth Weiss on Oct 31, 2015 at 9:18:44 pm

[Michael Gissing] "I can see that X is a big improvement over Legend as expected but as Herb says Pr and others can do the same task"

I think that encapsulates the FCP part of the video... But, what blows my mind is Michael Cioni himself. Damn, that guy is one of the most impressive people on this planet. I'll bet he doesn't struggle with too many learning curves.

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist & Workflow Consultant
David Weiss Productions
Los Angeles


David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 30, 2015 at 2:58:31 am

[DRW]"But, what blows my mind is Michael Cioni himself."

Yes talented man. I wonder if he can do woodwork as well.


Return to posts index

Mark Smith
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 1, 2015 at 6:17:30 pm

Can anyone here mouse and click their way through some complex audio filters faster than Michael Cioni?


Return to posts index

Jim Wiseman
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 30, 2015 at 5:23:30 am
Last Edited By Jim Wiseman on Oct 30, 2015 at 5:28:37 am

Thanks, Oliver. That Michael Cioni piece was truly mind opening. I, for one, can see the advantage of the magnetic timeline, and of course the filters in that piece. Really beautiful.

Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1, Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Pro X 10.2.2, Final Cut Studio 2 & 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.6, Premiere Pro CS 5 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Blackmagic Ultrastudio 4K, Blackmagic Teranex, Avid MC: Mid 2015 MacBook Pro Retina 15": 2013 Mac Pro Hexacore, 1TB SSD, 64GB RAM, 2-D500: Helios 2 w 2-960GB SSDs: 2012 Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz, 24Gb RAM, GTX-680, 960GB SSD: Macbook Pro Retina 2015, i7, 500GB, M370X 2GB: Macbook Pro 17" 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 16GB RAM 250GB SSD, Multiple OWC Thunderbay 4 TB2 and eSATA QX2 RAID 5 HD systems


Return to posts index

Jason Jenkins
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 4:04:54 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "The keyframing system being in the shape it is after a half decade is an utter joke."

A few good plug-ins cover a multitude of sins.

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

Check out my Mormon.org profile.


Return to posts index

James Ewart
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 20, 2015 at 10:00:09 am

[Aindreas Gallagher] "It's la la land software. You're all at the mad hatter's party."

What I love most (and I do enjoy your prose - you may be in the wrong game even) but after all these years you still feel compelled to remind us of our errant ways.

I DO kind of get that. I know that feeling."How could they possibly not realise what fools the are being?"

It's Richard Dawkins syndrome. I absolutely empathise.

But when it comes to keyframing I get by okay and like the fact that once you've added one, FCPX understands what you are doing and adds the rest of the for you. Sometimes I do get in a bit of a muddle I confess - I've aways blamed myself to be honest.

I don't do much in the way of compositing and I rather prefer keyframing in X to legacy. So at the risk of causing people to snigger and guffaw at my ignorance, what exactly is the issue with keyframing (in a nutshell) that you so dislike please?


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 20, 2015 at 11:00:47 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "It's la la land software. You're all at the mad hatter's party."

Damn. I guess I need to give back that big fat check my client just cut for the gig I did all on FCPX. Darn.

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


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Oct 29, 2015 at 10:25:54 pm

Nope. It's doing things for us at the moment that none of the other NLE can do, at a very small price, that works on multiple machines from one license and at a speed that is hugely impressive. After we ironed out a minor glitch with the Red workflow plugin it's now a very powerful tool.

However, keyframing sucks!

Co-owner at Pollen Studio
http://www.pollenstudio.co.uk


Return to posts index

Scott Parker
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 18, 2015 at 2:48:19 pm

Wow what an interesting thread.

From my side, I have been both very pleased with FCPX and hating it to the very core. It does a lot well, but drops the ball in some key areas (some mentioned in this thread). I am just finishing a series of documentaries on FCPX and will be glad to see the back end of it for a while, but I look forward to v 10.3

For the next feature doc I am cutting, I had the producer go with AVID. I have found AVID to be more reliable and suitable for my style of work.

That being said, I will continue to use FCPX for short projects and look forward to it maturing. It's a good and affordable tool, but at this stage I'm not a big fan.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 18, 2015 at 3:00:18 pm

[Scott Parker] " I have been both very pleased with FCPX and hating it to the very core. It does a lot well, but drops the ball in some key areas (some mentioned in this thread)"

Care to fill some details of the good and the bad as you see it? Just curious. Thanks.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Scott Parker
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 18, 2015 at 4:10:52 pm

Well, I hesitate to get too far into it. Somebody will call me out over some damn thing.

I really like the magnetic timeline, getting away from the source/record monitors and the way you can scrub tiles. That's a really nice improvement for my workflow. This is the best part of the application for me.

The trim functions are great, especially the way FCPX seamlessly expands the clips for trimming. I like that.

It's not expensive, so that's a plus.

Motion stabilization works nice and is very handy to access.

Write to primary storyline: it automatically adjusts all your audio trims and I really like that feature.

Some of the things I've disliked (and a few I've outright hated)

I don't like the lack of customization of the workspace. I work on 2 monitors and I would like to also resize the browser window.

I'd like to be able to open two events at once, in their own windows.

Speaking of events, I can't possibly say how much I dislike the nomenclature Library, Event and Project. This has caused no small degree of unnecessary frustration working with my partners.

On several occasions, FCPX has automatically loaded a project without me doing anything. I ended up making revisions to the wrong version at one point, causing a few hours of headaches. This is flaky.

There is no consolidate option. Oh I mean there is but Apple has decided that consolidate now means something different from what it used to mean. I'm in the middle of that mess right now, dealing with huge amounts of data because there is no simple way to do an actual consolidation (and I know the workarounds possible, like with Resolve, but it doesn't work with h.264 codecs right now)

So those are a few carps. As I stated in my earlier post, I look forward to v 10.3. If anyone's planning on jumping on me for whatever reason because I've criticized FCPX, save it. I just wanted to reply because this is a thoughtful and helpful thread.

Thank you.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
on Nov 18, 2015 at 4:23:26 pm

[Scott Parker] "Well, I hesitate to get too far into it...."

Thanks for posting, since I asked. Some of these issues are addressable with some workflow changes and some are just the way it is. I doubt a potential 10.3 would change many of these items.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

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