FORUMS: list search recent posts

Will FCX be around for a while?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Glenn Payne
Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 3:53:36 pm

Hi guys,
I'm about to invest in a nice imac and I'm planning to use fcx. I'm just wondering what the word on the street is about fcx. I'm willing to dive into the magnetic timeline world, but I'm just hoping to confirm that there aren't any plans to ditch it with a new incarnation of final cut that would void all the time I'm about to put into learning the somewhat different work flow. Thanks!


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 4:32:17 pm

Only Apple knows and they'll never tell. We all thought FCP 7...at least the way FCP was set up in that version...would be around for a while, as it was taking over the TV/Film industry. But then that got the axe and a version that met the needs of the larger base of editors came out. And they all seem to like it. And it's constantly updated, so it seems fine, for now.

Apple did kill Shake, Soundtrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro without warning...so, who knows?

FCX has a HUGE userbase of over 2 million (I don't have proof of this, just word on the street, I'm sure Philip Hodgetts has the actual proof somewhere), making it the most popular editing app out there. So I can't see it going anywhere. But then again, FCP 7 was killed...so you never know.

Also, Apple is lagging behind in high end computer updates...the MacPro was last updated in 2013, the same time that the iPhone 5C and 5S came out...and now we are on iPhone 7. Take that as you will.

I no longer make plans of any longevity with Apple. NO one knows what they are doing, and those that do, can't say.

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


Return to posts index

John Young
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 5:26:17 pm

[Shane Ross] "And it's constantly updated, "

Let's not get carried away.... ;-)


Return to posts index


Michael Hancock
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 5:33:38 pm

It gets major improvements about as often as the MacPro! Oh...wait....

To the OP though - when Apple released FCPX they said they had a 10 year plan. It's 5 years in, so you could reasonably expect 5 more years before they toss it out and start over.

----------------
Michael Hancock
Editor


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 6:35:30 pm

[Shane Ross] "FCX has a HUGE userbase of over 2 million (I don't have proof of this, just word on the street, I'm sure Philip Hodgetts has the actual proof somewhere)"

I think the last official Apple statement was only 1 Million. However, that's been a couple of years at this point and FCPX continues to be a high-ranking app in the Mac App Store. So I think it's fair to presume there are over 2 Million by now. Maybe even more.

But one thing to consider, the bulk of FCPX users probably aren't working editors and many aren't even in actual production and post fields as we usually understand them. In the case of Avid users, which is a much smaller number, I think it's fair to say that the majority use it professionally - or at least need to have a good understanding of it for their job. Premiere is probably in the middle, because a lot of users have it by virtue of being CC customers.

My point is that just because there are a lot of users for the app, doesn't necessarily affect its professional circumstances and development. I think with Apple, most of us have come to understand that when they label something as "pro" it doesn't mean "for the professional user". Merely that the product is for a more advanced customer than the non-"pro" model. Take iPad versus iPad Pro or MacBook versus MacBook Pro as examples. That being said, FCPX certainly is quite a professional product and I'm pretty sure the development team has the professional user in mind for their target customer.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 17, 2016 at 10:11:38 am

[Shane Ross] "Only Apple knows and they'll never tell. […] NO one knows what they are doing…"

So I guess you're implying that others do and have, i.e. you know exactly what they're are up to and what their roadmaps are? Anyone here going to say "NLE xyz is most definitely going to be around and in active development in 10 years!" with a straight face? First and foremost Avid? How exactly is Apple the big exception here, other than for the sake of the usual argument and insinuations? As if neither Avid nor Adobe ever "killed" anything?? :-)))


[Shane Ross] "Apple did kill Shake, Soundtrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro"

Actually, they didn't in fact "kill" any of the above. They stopped development, yes, but all of them work just fine until today. Not even sure how one can say FCP of all things was killed, seeing that it's still alive and doing very well. Shake, Soundtrack, even Color are still alive within FCP X, even if not in their full glory of yesteryear. Redeveloped? Reimagined? Sure. Just like e.g. Aperture was replaced by the redeveloped, reimagined Photo, which will ultimately become far more powerful than its predecessor.

And yes, Apple publicly stated their commitment to FCP for at least 10 years.


[Oliver Peters] "But one thing to consider, the bulk of FCPX users probably aren't working editors and many aren't even in actual production and post fields as we usually understand them."

And still, whilst we're on the subject of conjecture, even if those numbers may well be small compared to the overall user base, I'd say they still easily outnumber the ones that are with Avid. But then I'm guessing our understanding of what qualifies as "pro" or "actual production and post fields" is very different to begin with.

- RK

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


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 17, 2016 at 4:39:30 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "How exactly is Apple the big exception here, other than for the sake of the usual argument and insinuations?"

The difference is that Apple is willing to drop a product that is successful and profitable at the height of its popularity. And without advance warning or a transition plan. Generally that's not true of the others, because they are specifically in that business. Apple is not - at least not as the prime focus of its being.

[Robin S. Kurz] " They stopped development, yes, but all of them work just fine until today"

They stopped development and stopped sales. They also removed existing unsold stock without notice. Then they rescinded that decision to allow limited sales for a while of the complete studio bundle only (no upgrades).

[Robin S. Kurz] " Shake, Soundtrack, even Color are still alive within FCP X, even if not in their full glory of yesteryear. Redeveloped? Reimagined? Sure. "

And you say THAT with a straight face!

[Robin S. Kurz] "Just like e.g. Aperture was replaced by the redeveloped, reimagined Photo, which will ultimately become far more powerful than its predecessor."

Not even close. Apple completely walked away from the professional photography market to focus on iPhone-based photography. They were there before Lightroom and more or less created a genre of software. Then they moved on to mainly consumers, because that's where the numbers are.

[Robin S. Kurz] "And still, whilst we're on the subject of conjecture, even if those numbers may well be small compared to the overall user base, I'd say they still easily outnumber the ones that are with Avid"

There's little evidence of that in the real world. If anything, the numbers are with Adobe at this point, if you go by casual observation. In spite of all the lovely spotlights in FCPco and other sites showcasing facilities using FCPX, those are largely outliers still today.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 5:27:54 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Sep 18, 2016 at 5:29:54 pm

[Oliver Peters] "The difference is that Apple is willing to drop a product that is successful and profitable at the height of its popularity."

Being which product exactly? Certainly not FCP. No idea what the continued "they killed FCP!" &%$ is all about, since they factually did not. Whether one is happy with the changes, agrees with the politics, execution etc. etc. or not is actually irrelevant to the facts.


[Oliver Peters] "Generally that's not true of the others"

Right. Because products such as DS or GoLive etc. etc. etc. were absolutely hated and not used by anyone? :-D Like I said (rather implied)… double standard. And seemingly selective logic as well?


[Oliver Peters] "They stopped development and stopped sales."

So which other product does that not apply to after its latest update/upgrade? I'm really curious. Have any of the other big A's continued development of prior versions of their software? I sure don't know of anything, but am more than willing to be enlightened. And, again, whether one agrees with the tactics or overall execution of any given update/upgrade in any of the cases is irrelevant to the overall point.


[Oliver Peters] "And you say THAT with a straight face!"

Sure I can. The technology of all of the above is factually within FCP X. Even Motion code is (clearly) heavily present.

But to the actual point: are you going to guarantee anyone that any of the big A's will still be around with their current suite of software in e.g. 5 years? No? So how does Apple i.e. FCP X pose some sort of special exception? Because that's the "logic" I'm unable to follow.


[Oliver Peters] "There's little evidence of that in the real world. If anything, the numbers are with Adobe at this point, if you go by casual observation. In spite of all the lovely spotlights in FCPco and other sites showcasing facilities using FCPX, those are largely outliers still today."

Like I said. Whilst on the subject of (pure, unsubstantiated) conjecture…
But then I guess you can show me "evidence of that in the real world", right? :-))

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 5:45:51 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "since they factually did not."

Sure they did. FCP 7 has no relationship to FCP X other than in name. FCP 7 was pulled from the market without advance notice and then returned after outcry on a limited basis. A similar thing happened with Aperture. You can now only have access to Aperture through the Mac App Store, if you had previous already owned it.

[Robin S. Kurz] "Like I said. Whilst on the subject of (pure, unsubstantiated) conjecture…
But then I guess you can show me "evidence of that in the real world", right? :-))"


Take a look around at broadcasters and corporations and compare the amount of installations of Adobe or Avid with FCP X. The numbers don't favor Apple. In fact, when I freelance, I am frequently asked NOT to use FCP X because of project compatibility concerns, as these companies have shifted away from FCP.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 6:51:29 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Being which product exactly? Certainly not FCP. No idea what the continued "they killed FCP!" &%$ is all about, since they factually did not."

They didn't "kill it" but they "end of life'd it" -- a difference without a distinction.

Apple executives did not run to everyone's house and steal their copy of FCP7 in the middle of the night, and the operating system and hardware they produce continues to allow it to run - but yes they "killed it" in the way every reasonable person dealing with software understands the meaning of those words in context. Like a shark, software is either moving or it is dead.

And whether you choose EOL or "killed" there is no other example of a company that was currently producing the biggest selling product in it's niche, and rapidly increasing it's share of market at that time, running away from that success by producing a non-compatible successor. Premier totally re-invented itself when it became Premier Pro but that was because they had failed to achieve FCP's type of success. No pure software company could commit that kind of software seppuku and survive; Apple could because it is a hardware company that makes software as bait. Which is precisely why it is fair and reasonable to worry about their future moves in a way you don't when you look at Avid or Adobe.

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 7:56:12 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] " Shake, Soundtrack, even Color are still alive within FCP X. ... The technology of all of the above is factually within FCP X."

Sounds very interesting if true.

Could you show us some of the lines of code that are shared between these applications and FCP X or reference a reliable source to substantiate this?

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 4:08:01 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "Could you show us some of the lines of code"

Talk about a loaded question. You know full well that I can't. As if lines of code had a precursor along the lines of the following algorithm brought to you by… Soundtrack! or such nonsense.

Talk to an Apple engineer the next time you see one. I did. I'd say about as reliable as it gets.

- RK

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


Return to posts index


Simon Ubsdell
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 4:14:58 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "You know full well that I can't."

You might want to think about not throwing around words like "factually", when all you have is unverifiable hearsay.

[Robin S. Kurz] " Shake, Soundtrack, even Color are still alive within FCP X. ... The technology of all of the above is factually within FCP X."

Especially when your claims are intrinsically improbable.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 20, 2016 at 10:55:06 am
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Sep 20, 2016 at 11:01:50 am

Yeah, Simon, I totally meant they literally copy/pasted code from one to the other. DAMN! Got me! So brilliant. :-))


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 20, 2016 at 11:08:27 am

[Robin S. Kurz] "Yeah, Simon, I totally meant they literally copy/pasted code from one to the other. DAMN! Got me! So brilliant. :-))"

But if you didn't mean that, what did you mean? I'm genuinely interested.

[Robin S. Kurz] " Shake, Soundtrack, even Color are still alive within FCP X. ... The technology of all of the above is factually within FCP X."

Let's take Shake. Which parts of Shake are "factually" "still alive within FCP X"? It's quite a bold claim.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index


Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 20, 2016 at 11:10:54 am

No, you're of course right Simon. I made it all up. My bad. Just "hearsay".


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 4:35:07 pm

There's no one who actually knows who can or would tell you that. You're only going to get conjecture and speculation in any online forum. I would say you have at least another 5 years - hopefully more. It's anyone's guess after that. That being said, even if development stopped today, the app would continue to work, so it's a pretty low risk. That machine would also be fine with Media Composer, Premiere and Resolve, should you need to jump ship. It never hurts to be as fluent in as many NLEs as you can be.

Ultimately it depends on the type of work you do. If you freelance professionally and have to be able to interchange with other shops and freelancers using compatible project files, then you'll find that in the greater world out there, few others are running FCPX. It's strong in pockets, but not overall. OTOH, if you are a casual user or a one-man-band without the need to share project files, then it really doesn't matter what you use, so the time investment in FCPX will pay off for you.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 5:25:30 pm

I very, very much doubt it's going to get discontinued any time soon. Besides that, it's easy to learn!

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


Return to posts index


Herb Sevush
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 6:50:20 pm

[Tom Sefton] "Besides that, it's easy to learn!"

Only if your a newbie, according to some. Apparently experienced editor's brains are too full of other, older stuff to take advantage of it's ease. Like a file drawer they have only so much room in their noggins and once filled up it takes time to make space for the new. "It's so easy, it eluded me."

Or so I've heard.

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 8:06:28 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Or so I've heard."

From a couple people. Who are wrong. ;-)

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

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Tom Sefton
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 8:23:28 pm

Turn off your mind, relax, and float upstream.

It's easy if you try!

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 17, 2016 at 2:42:16 pm

Don't get me started about this.
I spent two hours last night in the phone with a Producer/Editor friend just back from a shoot who wanted to "edit" on her long flight back home.
But as usual, they did at least half a dozen dumb things on the shoot that will make things harder for them to get to work fast. (Turn in poorly labeled finder copied shot files in folders each with 8 embedded audio tracks, only two of which are useful? Really?)
She's in her first six months into X and still ALL she wanted to do was slap things into multi cams and start cutting away.
Over and over I had to pull her back into rejecting the 70% of the overall footage she'll never need to see again - proper prep - disabling all the camera audio tracks to isolate the lavs - and setting up her Roles assignments properly.
For her "editing" has been exclusively what happens AFTER you get things in a timeline. In X, it's ALSO how you prep for metadata flow.
More than anything else, for me this is why it's usually easier to train newbies in X. You don't waste all that time constantly saying "STOP - before you do what you're used to doing - if you do THIS stuff first everything will work so much BETTER!"
Newbies X KNOW they need to learn things systematically. Old Pros just want you to show them how to do what they already KNOW how to do - the way they they want to keep doing it - using the new tools.
Yes, it's unfair to some old school editors who adapt brilliantly to the new system. But it's also a very real thing IME.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 17, 2016 at 4:17:38 pm

[Bill Davis] "ALL she wanted to do was slap things into multi cams and start cutting away."

Yes, how terrible to want to start editing right away, oh no, anything but that.
I can definitely see how X became the speed king.

I'm just kidding here, you quite correct that proper up front prep will make everything faster later on.

But that goes for every editing system ever invented, up to and including learning the proper techniques for hanging your film in a bin.

I'm working on an article about video production that highlights the role of the script supervisor - the unheralded hero of post production. Not paying for an experienced script person is the surest way to go over budget in post that I know of.

And since it's experienced editors, not newbies, that understand the importance of proper organization and preparation, I don't see how this would be a hinderance to learning to work in X, but the key word in that opening phrase is "editor" - a producer is not an editor, no matter how many shows they've helmed, and pushing keys and making selects does not an editor make.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 17, 2016 at 5:08:47 pm

[Bill Davis] "Over and over I had to pull her back into rejecting the 70% of the overall footage she'll never need to see again - proper prep - disabling all the camera audio tracks to isolate the lavs - and setting up her Roles assignments properly. For her "editing" has been exclusively what happens AFTER you get things in a timeline. In X, it's ALSO how you prep for metadata flow. "

There's probably more to the story, but aren't you simply supplanting one working method with another? After all, there's little or no difference in time between - a) assigning favorites and rejects and then slapping the favs into a timeline to fine-tune, versus - b) slap everything into the timeline and cut out the garbage. Both processes take the same amount of time and both require that you review the footage.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 17, 2016 at 6:03:14 pm

[Oliver Peters] "but aren't you simply supplanting one working method with another? "

Telling people that X is a completely "new way of editing" is a pet peeve of mine. (what is a peeve anyway??) It's not reinventing the process, as a editors we are doing the same thing in X as anything else. Watching the footage, making selects, organizing it all, and then cutting pieces together. As Herb pointed out, getting all your stuff organized and prepped to cut is something you need to do no matter what you're cutting with, from flatbeds to an editing app on your phone. What X offers, IMO, is a different, and easier way of doing the same thing. The Browser, Collections, metadata goodies are great of course, but to me, the things that set X apart from everything else are:

The Timeline- being able to just cut stuff in and move clips around without any thought at all as to whether it will collide/overwrite/screw up anything that's in your cut is a huge advantage.

Embedded Components- much easier to deal with than separate A/V. And you can of course separate these if you want.

Roles- Also huge, particularly for audio versioning, and I feel like there are some very powerful possibilities that remain untapped here.

Compound Clips- Nested clips on steroids, and also have some cool potential.

Motion Templates and Compressor Bundles- Create these in Motion and Compressor, load them into X, done. You can share them with other users who don't have the apps which is very cool. Compressor bundles don't get enough press IMO. Having the ability to make a preset where you can create a 2k, 1080p, 720p and SD version of a cut with a couple keystrokes in the NLE is very nice. You could do all that and also upload a cut to YouTube, Vimeo and Facebook at the same time. Whatever deliverables you need... 1 command, no other apps needed.

Filmstrip View- Nothing else compares to this, it's an enormous timesaver.

The Skimmer- love this thing, especially clip skimming.

Live A/V effects previews, and the quality and ease of the built in audio and compositing.

Timeline Index- I'm not sure people get how useful this is. I mean, you can do basic editing from the index if you wanted to.

Anyway.... I could drone on and on... My point is that X is an NLE, and like any NLE, you should use all the tools it offers to get your material ready to edit. What keeps me hooked is all the other stuff that really isn't in anything else. Makes my life much easier. :-)

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

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 17, 2016 at 6:21:28 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Telling people that X is a completely "new way of editing" is a pet peeve of mine. (what is a peeve anyway??) It's not reinventing the process, as a editors we are doing the same thing in X as anything else."

Exactly, it also peeves me


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 17, 2016 at 6:29:45 pm
Last Edited By Charlie Austin on Sep 17, 2016 at 6:33:27 pm

[Steve Connor] "Exactly, it also peeves me"

But what is a peeve?!?! And why would you have it as a pet? Anyhoo... To me, telling editors that to use X you need to relearn how you edit, your process, is both counterproductive, and incorrect. You need to learn how the app works, and then use all the cool stuff in it to make your job easier, which it does if you let it. You don't need to change your process, whatever that is, at all, just adapt.

I do agree that trying to make X work like Premiere, or Premiere to work like Media Composer, or Media Composer to work like Final Cut 7, is an utter waste of time. They're all the same, but different. Each has great features that the others don't. I will say though, if I had to choose a "base" NLE onto which I would bolt all the best stuff stolen from other NLE's, it would be FCP X. ;-)

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

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 3:00:51 pm

[Charlie Austin] "Telling people that X is a completely "new way of editing""

I'm pretty sure that I never have. If anything, then I have said it is a completely "new approach to editing". Which it is. And a far better one at that.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Charlie Austin
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 3:13:27 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "I'm pretty sure that I never have."

I was generalizing, but I hear "new way of editing" a lot. Either explicitly, or implied in the "relearn how you do things" sense. You *do* need to learn how the App works, and how to use all the unique features but honestly, editing is editing right?

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

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~"It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools."~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~"The function you just attempted is not yet implemented"~


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 3:21:29 pm

I think the "new approach" or "new way" of editing quotes can put some switchers off. In reality I still edit the same way as I always have when using FCPX, the new tools that it offers makes that process quicker and more fun.

I can see how Bill's approach to Editing in FCPX, where the Edit is substantially done in the prep work, is an advantage in FCPX, however the the speed in which you can look through your footage with the skimmer often negates the need for careful logging!


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 3:39:03 pm

[Charlie Austin] "I was generalizing"

So was I. ;) I didn't mean to imply you meant me specifically.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 7:35:11 pm
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Sep 18, 2016 at 7:49:56 pm

[Charlie Austin] "
Telling people that X is a completely "new way of editing" is a pet peeve of mine. (what is a peeve anyway??) It's not reinventing the process, as a editors we are doing the same thing in X as anything else. "


The thing is, I don't remember anyone EVER arguing this.

I remember in the early days constantly saying things like "Editing in X is different than what you might be used to."

And one reader can read the word "editing" in that and think about operating the software - and another person reads the same sentence and reads the same word as referring to the sequencing of ideas. The term itself has more than one use. We all know that.

But considering how often what I said back then got instantly filtered through the very active opinion lynch mob of the day - I'd argue none of these word issues were actually driving the problem. if people were mentally inserting "completely" before the word "different" - that would not have surprised me one bit.

I've come to believe that real problem of those days were hurt, fear and insecurity. With a not insignificant overlay of moderate corporate warfare involved, too. On all sides.

Change is hard.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 5:05:58 am

Oliver,

I actually think a part of the process IS different in this way.

Virtually everything about the mechanical processes of the storyline - except the magnetic reactions that anyone can learn in a week - are pretty much the same NLE to NLE. Not exact, for sure - and constructs like the timeline index and Roles and even X's specific Share system take study - but they are all at least somewhat similar to what any editor might expect to need to learn to do in any NLE. They make at least some historic senseto my thinking, if not the X implementation of them.

I'm not sure the keyword and tagging and hide/reject system is in the same class.

Maybe editors with more experience than I have with other systems can school me here, but I've never seen an NLE with a front end organizational system that's bolted directly into the interface that has the simple power that this one does.

I've been working with it for nearly 5 years and I'm still learning new tricks and techniques to improve my results with the various types of projects I find myself doing.

Perhaps an editor who does the same type of work day after day or year after year finds one way to tag and access their work and sticks with it. But I have at least a dozen distinct strategies that I use regularly for different types of work. And I refine within those for each new challenge. It's part of what keeps my editing excitement high with X. How can I use these database tools to make my work easier for this gig. That's where each job begins for me. It's fun!

YMMV

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 12:40:26 pm

[Bill Davis] "But I have at least a dozen distinct strategies that I use regularly for different types of work."

That was my point. The way FCPX works is superior for some types of projects and generally equal for others. For example, in a simple one-person, two-camera interview, there's no disadvantage to simply going straight to the timeline and working there. OTOH, if you have soundbites from several dozen people in different cities and are trying to compile a story from these, then FCPX's tagging structure has clear advantages. And even there, some editors might still feel they are faster working directly in the timeline from the start. It's entirely a personal thing.

[Bill Davis] "I'm not sure the keyword and tagging and hide/reject system is in the same class."

Other NLEs do this too. What's unique about X is that it can be done based on ranges within a clip, not merely the whole clip. Although one could argue that you can use subclips to do the same thing. Apple has also provided a more fluid keystroke command structure than found in other NLEs.

The other thing that's different - although sort of exists in other NLEs, too - is that, since the keyword collections are simply metadata filters, a clip can appear in multiple keyword collections. They aren't tied to a specific bin (without subclipping). Unfortunately, IMHO, this also often makes the main Event a complete mess, because every clip appears there. This is usually a disadvantage when match-framing.

And so - pros and cons with either approach.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 1:10:52 pm

X definitely should know somehow which keyword collection the clip came from when match framing. F should take you to the keyword collection it came from and shift F to the source in the event.

_______________________________________________________________________
http://BretFX.com Plugins & Templates for FCP X Editors & Motion Graphics Artists


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 3:33:02 pm

[Bret Williams] "F should take you to the keyword collection it came from and shift F to the source in the event."

Seeing that any given clip can belong to any number of keyword collections, how could that possibly work? How is FCP supposed to know which of e.g. FIVE different keywords assigned to a clip you prefer??

Once in the event you can choose which keyword is relevant to you, so it's a two in one. No changes needed.

And the key obviously would have to be something else other than just plain F. ;)

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Bret Williams
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 4:15:41 pm

Seems you could easily add a small bit of data to the clip in the timeline that details WHAT keyword collection it was added FROM. IOW simply reproduce the browser state at the moment of addition to the timeline. Maybe it was a search, smart collection, favorites, or keyword(s) collection. But to bring up that state would be really helpful.

_______________________________________________________________________
http://BretFX.com Plugins & Templates for FCP X Editors & Motion Graphics Artists


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 3:35:35 pm

[Oliver Peters] "there's little or no difference in time between - a) assigning favorites and rejects and then slapping the favs into a timeline to fine-tune, versus - b) slap everything into the timeline and cut out the garbage. "

Sorry, but the difference is HUGE. Not even close to the same from a (globally) organizational standpoint.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 5:49:00 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Sorry, but the difference is HUGE. Not even close to the same from a (globally) organizational standpoint."

We'll have to agree to disagree. In the context that I stated, there is no difference in time and effort nor functional result. I say that as someone who does precisely a lot of this kind of work and uses FCPX along with the others, depending on circumstance. And yes, I use favorites/rejects when the approach is warranted.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 18, 2016 at 3:31:45 pm

[Herb Sevush] "[Tom Sefton] "Besides that, it's easy to learn!"

Only if your a newbie, according to some. Apparently experienced editor's brains are too full of other, older stuff to take advantage of it's ease. "


It is commonly said that novices learn FCPX easily, implying that experienced editors have ingrained, difficult-to-change habits. While there is an element of truth to that, overall the novice experience is misleading.

More likely novices learn to do simple things in FCPX easily and don't encounter the difficult parts -- else they wouldn't be novices. By contrast an experienced editor by necessity will immediately tackle J and L cuts, media management, multicam, etc. I'd like to see the novice who can figure out how to stabilize edited multicam clips on the timeline in FCPX.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 6:19:34 am
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Sep 19, 2016 at 6:23:16 am

[Joe Marler] "By contrast an experienced editor by necessity will immediately tackle J and L cuts, media management, multicam, etc. I'd like to see the novice who can figure out how to stabilize edited multicam clips on the timeline in FCPX.

Wouldn't we have known during prepping our clips for Multicam editing that we should apply stabilization (or have the AEs do it!) via Open in Timeline) before our multiclips are created?

Part of the X zeitgeist for me was to learn to engage my editors brain prior to the storyline stage to think about candidate processes that I can globally apply to clips early - so I get the benefit of more "perfected" resources in all my subsequent uses.

Heck, to me that's what X's Reject Functionis all about. Perfecting resources for further use.

And in that same spirit, any shakey clip that needs to be stabilized in my current program - would just need to potentially be stabilized again for the intro, flashback or part two of a series if they showed up there - so rather than thinking "in the timeline" I'd likely prefer to correct it once upstream on the source and then it's done for all global uses.

Color, sound, stabilization and more can become part of prep - just like keyword application - and doing so drives lots of backend efficiency.

A small part of learning to think of an X workflow on it's own terms.

BTW I do these things all the time still (find myself still solving workflow challenges in X with non- X thinking.) but when I think it through later and can suddenly see how the database or a metadata manipulation can make things easier- I try to stop doing it the old way and re-condition my thinking.

I am in awe of those of you who can bounce around between the NLEs and keep your heads on straight about gaining and losing capabilities all the time as you switch. I imagine that would drive me nuts!

FWIW

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 6:50:07 am

[Bill Davis] "And in that same spirit, any shakey clip that needs to be stabilized in my current program - would just need to potentially be stabilized again for the intro, flashback or part two of a series if they showed up there - so rather than thinking "in the timeline" I'd likely prefer to correct it once upstream on the source and then it's done for all global uses.
"


If you've got a 15 camera shoot of a 90 minute performance, then there is no way you are going to go through each camera and find out which shots might need stabilising should you decide to use it in the edit.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 1:01:13 pm

[Bill Davis] "Wouldn't we have known during prepping our clips for Multicam editing that we should apply stabilization (or have the AEs do it!) via Open in Timeline) before our multiclips are created?"

This is so wrong it's scary. Stabilization is something to be applied sparingly in that it often doesn't work the way you expected and it changes the composition of the entire clip it is applied too, even if the fault you were seeking to fix is in only one place.

Imagine a 5 minute CU clip of a pot being put on a stove, ingredients added, and then the pot being taken away and in the middle of that shot there is a camera bump. This is one angle of a 5 camera multicam group.

According to your suggestion we should stabilize this whole shot before even knowing if we need that angle at the time of the camera bump.

What would happen to that clip if we tried that - well first the stabilizer would go a little crazy when the pot was brought into the frame as it sought to stabilize the moving pot, then it would settle down into a much tighter framing for the length of the clip in order to fix the bump, during which time it might or might not go a little wacky as a hand enters and leaves the frame with the introduction of each ingredient, and finally the shot would go wacky again as the pot was removed from the frame because the stabilizer would be trying to keep the pot stable at the expense of the stove around it.

So in order to stabilize something that might get used you ruin every other part of a shot that will more likely be needed. And I haven't even mentioned the amount of time you'd be wasting stabilizing good portions of the shot.

Or to quote from Apple -

https://support.apple.com/kb/PH12564?locale=en_US

"Note: These operations act on whole clip selections, not on range selections. To get the highest-quality and fastest results, isolate the problem section by cutting the clip with the Blade tool in the Timeline. Then apply the correction to just the video footage that needs correcting."

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 4:00:08 pm

[Herb Sevush] "well first the stabilizer would go a little crazy when the pot was brought into the frame as it sought to stabilize the moving pot, then it would settle down into a much tighter framing for the length of the clip in order to fix the bump"

Nope. At least not with my stabilizer, since it has dynamic scaling. If nothing is being stabilized, nothing is being scaled. Not a thing scary about it. See: Lock & Load.


[Herb Sevush] "the amount of time you'd be wasting stabilizing good portions of the shot"

Again, nope. Happens in the background. I don't care how long it takes. But yeah, not a workflow I would recommend using the standard stabilizer.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 4:39:10 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Nope. At least not with my stabilizer, since it has dynamic scaling. If nothing is being stabilized, nothing is being scaled. Not a thing scary about it. See: Lock & Load."

The thing that was scary was having this conversation in the first place. I don't have to "See: Lock & Load" since I own it and use it, along with other stabilizers, since each has their strengths and weaknesses. First of all Bill was talking about working with the native stabilizer in FCPX. Second, even with the key framing available within L&L stabilizing entire clips before creating your multicam is simply bad practice, which you seem to agree with later in your post.

[Robin S. Kurz] "But yeah, not a workflow I would recommend using the standard stabilizer."

So does this mean you would recommend doing this WITH L&L? Do your really stabilize all your clips before creating multiclips? Or is this simply another case of you being argumentative for no reason?

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 4:44:28 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Sep 19, 2016 at 4:45:25 pm

[Herb Sevush] "So does this mean you would recommend doing this WITH L&L?"

If they needed it, sure. Don't see why I wouldn't. With the standard stabilizer you'd have the scaling issue, which is why in its case I wouldn't.

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 5:09:15 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "If they needed it, sure. Don't see why I wouldn't."

So every time you're going to make a multiclip you routinely check each clip and if they have so much as a bump you apply L&L just in case you might need that moment stabilized - are you saying that is your workflow?
Talk about waste - the amount of time wasted in reviewing your clips far exceeds any possible time spent tweaking a PPro multicam for frame size problems.

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 5:11:21 pm

If you say so.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 20, 2016 at 1:39:52 am
Last Edited By Bill Davis on Sep 20, 2016 at 1:50:23 am

[Herb Sevush] "This is so wrong it's scary. Stabilization is something to be applied sparingly in that it often doesn't work the way you expected and it changes the composition of the entire clip it is applied too, even if the fault you were seeking to fix is in only one place."

Dang it. I forgot again that everyone else is supposed to work like you guys. And think like you guys.

I'll change everything I do now, because I've finally realized that everyone shoots 14 cameras and follows steaming shaky pots in kitchens whilst clinging to a technique that's usefull sometimes - but I use it always cuz We X editors are just that dumb.

Seriously, OF course there are types of gigs where any one particular strategy will fail.

And hopefully a thousand others where it will succeed.

And knowing the difference is what experience is all about. Herb, you still have NO experience with X. So keep focused on how it will never do what you want it to do. And for sure keep telling the guys that use it daily - how it works - cuz that's fun to read. I'm sure that will remain comforting for at least another five years for you.

Enjoy those months.

Heck, maybe I'll join in and tell you all the things I imagine other software doesn't do based on how well I don't understand IT! It'd be FUN for everyone! Really.

; )

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 20, 2016 at 6:45:23 am

[Bill Davis] "And knowing the difference is what experience is all about. Herb, you still have NO experience with X. So keep focused on how it will never do what you want it to do."

Maybe, but his point about stabilising an ENTIRE long clip is valid, many actual FCPX Editors WITH experience think that the lack of stabilisation and other features on multicam clips is a deficiency.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 20, 2016 at 1:50:40 pm
Last Edited By Herb Sevush on Sep 20, 2016 at 2:01:08 pm

[Bill Davis] "Seriously, OF course there are types of gigs where any one particular strategy will fail."

This whole sub-thread started when Joe commented on what he perceived as a shortcoming with FCPX's implementation of multicam. Then, because you can't have anybody criticize your little baby, you gave him a "strategy" that only fits a narrow range of "gigs" - and now your all sensitive about it. In Ppro you can do it your way, my way, or anybodies way - there is no compromise necessary, but you can't acknowledge that so you have to come up with a lot of nonsense.

[Bill Davis] "I'll change everything I do now, because I've finally realized that everyone shoots 14 cameras and follows steaming shaky pots in kitchens whilst clinging to a technique that's usefull sometimes - but I use it always cuz We X editors are just that dumb."

I'm sorry your intimidated by the idea of shooting pans in a kitchen -- such an elitist thing to do. Would you like my example better if I talked about turds in a toilet bowl shot with 2 iPhones - same result.

[Bill Davis] "Herb, you still have NO experience with X. So keep focused on how it will never do what you want it to do. And for sure keep telling the guys that use it daily - how it works - cuz that's fun to read"

And you apparently have limited experience with stabilizers and how they work - and how they often don't work. And the guy that was complaining about how X works wasn't me - Joe is an X editor. And nothing is more fun to read than you blowing your stack as you try to explain why X editors aren't really pure enough to comment on the software they use because they don't have the Bill Davis certificate of sycophancy.

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


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 2:16:41 pm

[Bill Davis] "Wouldn't we have known during prepping our clips for Multicam editing that we should apply stabilization (or have the AEs do it!) via Open in Timeline) before our multiclips are created?

Part of the X zeitgeist for me was to learn to engage my editors brain prior to the storyline stage to think about candidate processes that I can globally apply to clips early - so I get the benefit of more "perfected" resources in all my subsequent uses. "


That procedure can be a good idea for initial color correction. It is a lot easier to apply once to the base clip than to try and match dozens of little cut up clips on the timeline. However even in that case the final edited clips often need tweaking from a color and exposure standpoint.

Unfortunately doing stabilization or optical flow smoothing doesn't work well on the base clips because it's just too compute and time-intensive to run, and the final edited clip affects the fine-tuning parameters chosen.

The FCPX deficiency in how stabilization, optical flow and tracking plugins work is a dark, dirty corner of the product. Hopefully that will be fixed in the next version. Newbies to FCPX learn the product quickly at a superficial level because they're not encountering things like that. They are likely not even doing split edits the "FCPX way". They are mostly only tackling easy things. The magnetic timeline helps them, and the concept of the skimmer, event browser and even range-based ratings are logical and intuitive -- especially to someone who hasn't used a track-oriented editor.

Once the newbies progress to more advanced things, it becomes very hard indeed, and in some cases like these multicam behaviors, it is much harder than Premiere.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 2:23:54 pm

[Joe Marler] "The FCPX deficiency in how stabilization, optical flow and tracking plugins work is a dark, dirty corner of the product."

? ? ?
What does that mean? Care to elaborate?


[Joe Marler] "and in some cases like these multicam behaviors, it is much harder than Premiere."

Couldn't disagree more. Recently had to do a multicam with CC and it was a painfully frustrating, convoluted, unintuitive mess in comparison. If there's one thing FCP X does better than anyone else, then that is multicamby a long shot!

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 3:19:36 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Recently had to do a multicam with CC and it was a painfully frustrating, convoluted, unintuitive mess in comparison"

Like many complex things, CC multicam can be unintuitive depending on the nature of your materials. What precisely were you having problems with?

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 3:56:37 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Like many complex things, CC multicam can be unintuitive depending on the nature of your materials."

Exactly. Inconsistent and unintuitive.

My first and foremost problem was, that I (unknowingly, since it has never been anything I needed to even think about before) combined footage with varying resolution. That lead to anything that was smaller than the largest clip getting a big nasty black border around it. W… T…? Took me ages to figure out. And the list grew from there…

Had that happened with a multicam in FCP X (which it actually couldn't, even if you tried) a simple double-click and rescale in the angle window would have fixed matters in seconds. Not with CC... Adobe is apparently only worried about winning the "Longest Feature List" contest, not usability. Oh well.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 4:19:27 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "My first and foremost problem was, that I (unknowingly, since it has never been anything I needed to even think about before) combined footage with varying resolution. That lead to anything that was smaller than the largest clip getting a big nasty black border around it. W… T…? Took me ages to figure out."

I think most Premiere users will find it quite surprising that you couldn't easily work out how to deal with this. It really isn't rocket science.

Imagine the scorn you would heap on a FCP X user for showing comparable ineptitude!

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 4:38:38 pm

[Simon Ubsdell] "I think most Premiere users will find it quite surprising that you couldn't easily work out how to deal with this. It really isn't rocket science."

Thanks for the additional brilliant and exemplarily constructive insight.

Of course the fact that the room I was in whilst trying this was also filled with roughly TWENTY part and full-time Premiere users, all of which were equally stumped, makes that claim that much more hilarious. Thanks for the hearty chuckle.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 4:54:39 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Of course the fact that the room I was in whilst trying this was also filled with roughly TWENTY part and full-time Premiere users, all of which were equally stumped, makes that claim that much more hilarious. Thanks for the hearty chuckle."

Where some see unintuitive complexity others see a useful tool free to deal with complex usage.

As for the issue of dealing with multiple frame sizes:

In the "Create Multicam" dialogue box there is a section labeled "Sequence Preset." The default is "Automatic" and if left unchanged PPro will use the frame size of the largest sized clip in the group to create it's multicam source. However you can over-ride the default and choose any frame size and rate you want.

Once your multicam source is created you can open it in a timeline, select any or all tracks and choose either Set or Scale to frame size (more options, more complexity, more choices) for any offending camera angles and all those nasty black bars will go away.

So now you can have any sized source sequence you want and all the tracks within the sequence will be full frame.

As for the 20 premiere users who could not figure this out, I would suggest you hang out with better editors in the future, you will learn more that way.

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


Return to posts index

Simon Ubsdell
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 5:07:49 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Once your multicam source is created you can open it in a timeline, select any or all tracks and choose either Set or Scale to frame size (more options, more complexity, more choices) for any offending camera angles and all those nasty black bars will go away."

Or indeed simply use the Motion tab of the Effect Controls for each track to set the size, which is exactly the workflow that Robin describes for FCP X ... ironically.

Simon Ubsdell
tokyo productions
hawaiki


Return to posts index

Joe Marler
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 10:32:29 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "[Joe Marler] "The FCPX deficiency in how stabilization, optical flow and tracking plugins work is a dark, dirty corner of the product."
? ? ?
What does that mean? Care to elaborate?


You'll note there is no stabilization option for multicam, just like there is no optical flow smoothing, no Audition option, nor will a tracking plugin like CoreMelt's SliceX work on multicam. In fact SliceX throws an error saying "cannot be used with multicam clips. Please switch to the angle editor and process the angle videos separately".

What they really mean is you must backtrack and find the exact range in the base clip that corresponds to the edited MC clip, then blade that range, apply the effect then jump back to the MC clip and examine it.

The same thing applies with stabilization and optical flow smoothing. In general the procedure is:

1. Select clip on timeline
2. Shift+F to locate clip in event browser
3. CMD+1 to select event browser
4. Note clip begin/end time code and write them down
5. Double-click on clip in event browser to open in angle editor
6. In angle editor press CTRL+P and type in the timecode you wrote down
7. Blade that section of the clip, the apply stabilization
8. Return to main timeline
9. If stabilization needs adjusting (parameters aren't available in Inspector for MC clip), then do it all again.
10. Repeat entire process for every MC clip requiring stabilization, optical flow, or tracking

In Premiere, the procedure is:

(1) Apply stabilization to edited MC clip -- that's it

Apple is very fortunate that Adobe has not done an "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ad for things like this. In an area where Apple claims ease of use, this is utterly embarrassing.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 11:54:04 pm

[Joe Marler] "In an area where Apple claims ease of use, this is utterly embarrassing."

One reason why FCPX should have a function to flatten a multicam timeline, like other NLEs.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Scott Witthaus
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:39:52 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Only if your a newbie,"

Wrong. If you're an "old-bie" FCPX can still be learned very easily. The tough part is to let the old way go and use the software the way it was designed. Don't try to learn FCPX by forcing your old Premiere or Avid habits or mindset on it. That is a recipe for frustration

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


Return to posts index

Glenn Payne
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 16, 2016 at 10:23:43 pm

Thanks so much, everyone! Especially for the speedy replies. Sounds like it should be around for the next few years at least so I'll probably give it a go. Now I just need to find a beefy used imac (at a reasonable price) and I'll be good to go. Thanks!


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 19, 2016 at 8:43:48 pm

Something that doesn't get mentioned much - you can edit an Oscar winning production on virtually anything - Imovie -FCP 10 Premiere - Avid - Edius ..Resolve. Some have more convenient bells and whistles but there's hardly a thing you can do in one that you can't make happen on the other.

Working at a Television Network and on independent productions, i've had to learn them all - have my preferences, but whatever they put in front of me, i'll use to create.

So whether FCP 10 lives on doesn't matter as much as you're ability to use them all.

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 20, 2016 at 4:27:57 am

By the way...

Since everyone has conviententy ignored your original question, I thought I'd actually answer your question directly.

Apple publicaly said in 2011 when they released the FCP X re-code that they had a 10 year plan for it.

My personal bet is that since it's the only software that's truly pushed the innovation bar very far recently - it's got a whole lot more to contribute to the industry.

Creator of XinTwo - http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Will FCX be around for a while?
on Sep 20, 2016 at 4:40:04 am

[Bill Davis] "Since everyone has conviententy ignored your original question, I thought I'd actually answer your question directly."

Quite a few of us didn't...and replied early on. Things just got lost in the shuffle, which tends to happen here. But we did answer, with our speculations, or non-speculations. No need to get huffy (not the bike!) about it.

:)

Maybe a little Schwinn...but not Huffy.

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


Return to posts index

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