FORUMS: list search recent posts

Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
David Lawrence
Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 26, 2017 at 11:41:52 pm

Nice piece just posted from Oliver. Check it out:

Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years:
https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2017/01/26/final-cut-pro-x-reflecting-on...

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research

linkedIn: http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
vimeo: vimeo.com/album/2271696
web: propaganda.com
facebook: /dlawrence
twitter: @dhl


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 12:51:41 am

Thanks.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

James Sullivan
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 2:21:47 am

I think you have described the state of FCPX very well. I wish they could make it more collaborative and open. One of my all time favorite things about the original final cut was the ability to render over a graphic I had created in AE and have it update in the timeline when I opened FCP Legacy back up again. I HATE how the new FCP handles tracking media and having some things live in a project while others do not. I have to recut in graphics every time I change something and just that process in itself is a chore. But if you are a single Creator posting to YouTube and all you need to do is top and tail a few takes from a canon powershot then life is peachy.

Handling multiple editors passing around Libraries on a SAN is a freaking nightmare I don't want to ever be held accountable for.

I agree that FCPX and any other NLEs are tools and it is so great when they get out of the way and let us work but I think Apple (bless their hearts) have frustrated a lot of creative people who have been in the game since computers became a thing.

I hope they continue to improve FCPX, it has way more things that need to be tweaked that would make the day to day grind better. I wish we could talk to the team creating it more openly and for them to communicate when updates are coming. (submitting bug reports does not count as two way communication)

Apple is still the only game in town who can create an NLE from the silicon on up and I would love to see a return to some kind of modular hardware system that could let us control what we need when, and when we can afford it. A tiny screen on very pricey when maxed out laptop with ten thousand things daisychained together makes me grumpy and I hope to avoid that particular situation for as long as possible. (I.e. when my 17inch finally dies and funds are available)

I had a crazy thought the other day when I thought about what life would be like if Running MacOS on non apple blessed hardware. I want to do away with hackentoshing and just have MacOS compete with Windows head to head. Why can't I have 128gbs of ram, 48cores of Intelness and five Nvidia cards and MacOS. My next computer is going to be a Windows machine at this point which forces me off of FCP and MacOS too things I am still in love with.

I feel like trying to be a cheerleader for America when the people running the country are no longer on my side. I still believe in Apple, I am just disappointed on how things are moving at the moment and fully recognize I represent a small minority of fussy post people that could break the will of any chipper genius bar newbie in seconds as they look around for their managers in panic.

On the flip side I think it is great that more people are becoming literate in producing videos and that is Apple's fault as well.

onwards,
James



Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 2:33:35 am

Thanks for the comments,

[James Sullivan] "One of my all time favorite things about the original final cut was the ability to render over a graphic I had created in AE and have it update in the timeline when I opened FCP Legacy back up again. I HATE how the new FCP handles tracking media and having some things live in a project while others do not."

I think the fact that NOTHING can be changed about a file, otherwise it CANNOT be relinked is a huge impediment to many workflows. That was a big plus for "legacy". It would baulk and then let you do it.

I ran into this just today. I was working with a split-track submaster exported from X as a source in another timeline/project. I realized two elements had been combined into one audio role, so I needed to go back and assign an extra audio role. Then re-export, which I allowed to replace the first file. Of course, now that submaster source clip was "missing" and X would not allow me to relink, because the attributes had changed (more audio channels the new file). So I imported and cut back over the other. Frustrating.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 3:46:20 am

[Oliver Peters] "I think the fact that NOTHING can be changed about a file, otherwise it CANNOT be relinked is a huge impediment to many workflows. That was a big plus for "legacy". It would baulk and then let you do it."

Yikes! Didn't know about this. That could definitely be a deal killer for many workflows.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research

linkedIn: http://lnkd.in/Cfz92F
vimeo: vimeo.com/album/2271696
web: propaganda.com
facebook: /dlawrence
twitter: @dhl


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 1:52:18 pm

[Oliver Peters] "the fact that NOTHING can be changed about a file, otherwise it CANNOT be relinked "

Oliver, I'm not sure if I'm understanding this statement correctly, but I often will select a photo in the timeline, open the original file in the finder with a keyboard shortcut, drag the file into photoshop, make corrections and save, and jump back into X. Not only do I not have to relink the file but my changes have already updated in the timeline.

I do this because I don't want to waste time correcting a lot of photos that I'm not going to use in the project.

So I'm changing the file drastically in that case with no problem.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 2:30:05 pm

[Tony West] "open the original file in the finder with a keyboard shortcut, drag the file into photoshop, make corrections and save, and jump back into X"

In your example, you aren't changing file attributes. You are changing image contents. In the example I cited, I re-exported a split-track submaster with one additional audio channel. This is a change in file attributes. That was enough to break the relinking. Same would be true if the file length changed.

FCPX will allow some differences, but the options are very stringent without the ability to manually override it like FCP7 used to let you do. Plus, I'm not sure whether or not FCPX handles media linking to still images/graphics/photos in a different manner than movie files.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 3:30:28 pm

[Oliver Peters] "In your example, you aren't changing file attributes. "

Yes, I am. I just wanted you to clarify that statement because before

you said "that NOTHING can be changed about a file"


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 4:12:56 pm

Changing file attributes in a graphic file would be things like changing the name, size, file type, color space (RGB vs CMYK), layer structure, etc. Not editing the graphic content within.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Tony West
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 4:23:28 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Changing file attributes in a graphic file would be things like changing the name, size, file type, color space (RGB vs CMYK), layer structure, etc. Not editing the graphic content within."

I know, but that wasn't what you said at first.

You just needed to clarify that's all.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 6:18:36 pm

[Tony West] "I know, but that wasn't what you said at first.
You just needed to clarify that's all"


Correct. I was talking about movie files specifically and ignored other types of files, like graphics, photos, etc. So yes, not as clear as I might have thought.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 6:04:14 pm

[Oliver Peters] "things like changing the […] layer structure"

No. Even that you can do. Only it won't translate well if you e.g. DELETE a layer. But it WILL still work in X. I even have an entire chapter on that in my training.

So it's more limited than with others, yes, but not nearly as limited as some would have you believe.

- RK

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


Return to posts index


Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 10:35:00 am

[James Sullivan] "the ability to render over a graphic I had created in AE and have it update in the timeline when I opened FCP Legacy back up again."

And it still does. Unless of course you changed the name, the location, length or the likes, which would cause the exact same problems in 7 just as well. If those criteria are met, there's absolutely no reason why it shouldn't work. But yes, X is far more stringent when those criteria AREN'T met. But that can just as well be considered a feature, it's all a matter of perspective.

But a certain something tells me that that, too, will "soften up" soon. And actually be expanded. We'll see. 😏


[James Sullivan] "having some things live in a project while others do not."

If that's the case, then you told it to do that. Pretty simple. It's not some random procedure. And you can consolidate everything into a single location, if needed, with the simple click of one little button.


[James Sullivan] "passing around Libraries on a SAN is a freaking nightmare"

Oddly we do that near every day and have quite the contrary take on the matter. It's certainly not perfect (and also extremely hard to do, hence the reason why no one actually does it great in both practice AND price), but as of 10.3 it's even become that much easier. It's no ISIS, but still fast and easy. You just have to follow some very simple and basic rules, many of which you have to follow just as much with pretty much every other NLE. So you'd have to be much more specific for one to understand what it is you mean.


[James Sullivan] "have frustrated a lot of creative people"

And have helped, amazed and empowered a lot of others. I'd even venture to say a lot more than the other way around. And that's actually by not just looking within my own little box.


[James Sullivan] "it has way more things that need to be tweaked that would make the day to day grind better."

For example? Again, being specific is much more helpful for others to follow what it is you're getting at.


[James Sullivan] "with ten thousand things daisychained together"

As opposed to what? Everything hooked up to 10 different ports? Or what is the situation with your 17" exactly? I for one just know that I am absolutely thrilled that I now have all of TWO cables coming from my '16 MBP as opposed to SIX with the '12 one. Can't see how that could be considered a BAD situation, sorry. As far as I'm concerned the USB-C move was a brilliant one that will only get that much better going forward once the various single-port USB-C PC laptops (oh gee, surprise surprise) that have been announced hit the market. Shall we wager how much complaining there will be about them?

[James Sullivan] "My next computer is going to be a Windows machine at this point which forces me off of FCP and MacOS too things I am still in love with. "

Such is life. Though I'd really be curious what it is you think you need 128GB of RAM, 48 cores and FIVE Nvidia cards for… especially right after complaining that the MBP is "pricey". What exactly do you figure that configuration would cost you even as a PC?


[James Sullivan] "and fully recognize I represent a small minority of fussy post people"

You said it, not me. 😄 And that may actually explain a lot to you about the current state of affairs as well, if you think about it for a moment.


[James Sullivan] "it is great that more people are becoming literate in producing videos "

My (previous) point exactly. 😉

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Brett Sherman
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 1:44:24 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "And it still does. Unless of course you changed the name, the location, length or the likes, which would cause the exact same problems in 7 just as well. If those criteria are met, there's absolutely no reason why it shouldn't work."

I do this ALL THE TIME! Works fine. If you want to keep working in FCP X while rendering in AE, just add a "2" or something to the render file. Then when it's done, quit FCP X, rename it to the original filename. Reopen FCP X. Done and done.

That being said it would be nice if there was a "Replace Media File" function, so you could force a file replacement. It could refuse to do it if the length is different.

--------------------------
Brett Sherman
One Man Band (If it's video related I'll do it!)
I work for an institution that probably does not want to be associated with my babblings here.


Return to posts index

Mark Dobson
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 4:00:53 pm

Great article Oliver.

Always a well considered unsanctimonious voice on this forum.

I've been using it from day one and in the intervening period have cut everything our company has produced on it. That's broadcast quality, educational, training and corporate work. The fact that I'm still using it must say something. I depend on it to make my living.

But yes, even on 10minute productions, on a top end iMac, things get sticky. I still get the spinning wheel, I still get the broken cmd z undo fault, these are what might be called unforced errors. Sometimes I even have to do a force shutdown on my machine.

But despite these problems I have enough faith in the software to continue using it on time sensitive jobs. I know it will deliver eventually. When things are running smoothly I love FCPX and the fact that I can, together with occasional trips to Motion, produce all the supporting graphic components within the application.

But whether I'd recommend FCPX to someone else is another question.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 7:03:09 pm

Thanks for the kind words.

[Mark Dobson] "But whether I'd recommend FCPX to someone else is another question."

Therein lies the rub. FCPX is not for everyone. My son is in his early 30s. He's a highly technical guitarist and is doing some YouTube videos. I've cut the first few for him in X, but now he wants to do them himself. He knows DAWs well and is currently a heavy Logic Pro X user. You would figure him to be in the target demographic, yet the iMovie/FCPX construct is baffling to him. He's a much better match for Resolve, which does what he occasionally needs and is free. And its track-structure makes sense to him.

A lot of folks here taught the advantages of owning (Apple) versus renting (Adobe); yet from an accounting standpoint, if you are a small production company up to a large enterprise, renting/subscription makes more sense. OTOH, if you are a single user who occasionally edits - such as a director or DP who sometimes cut their own stuff - then FCPX is likely a better choice - if they can wrap their head around the approach.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 7:30:46 pm

[Oliver Peters] "A lot of folks here taught the advantages of owning (Apple) versus renting (Adobe); yet from an accounting standpoint, if you are a small production company up to a large enterprise, renting/subscription makes more sense."

Interested in your thinking here.

Is there a small business or bulk rate in play? Outside that, $20 a month (single App subscription) seems like it crosses over the $300 cash price of X per seat in just 15 months regardless of how many seats you are seeding.

After that, no matter how you slice it you're paying more to edit.

One can surely deduct subscription fees from their taxes, but just as easily deduct the price of X - so I'm missing the thinking behind the advantage.

Can you help me understand it better?

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 7:57:01 pm

[Bill Davis] "Interested in your thinking here."

First of all, if you correctly interpret Apple's licensing, a business with multiple users on edit stations doing commercial work is not eligible for the 1 owner/multiple systems license that many of us operate under. I know many here do it and Apple tacitly looks the other way, but from a legal standpoint the business license is 1 software license per machine. So it's not $299 divided by however many machines your have, but rather $299 times the number of machines you deploy it on. Apple does offer larger licensing deals, including large enterprise arrangements, which is what many universities use, for example.

Adobe offers 3 types of licenses - single user, team and enterprise. A single user can deploy the software onto 2 machines running simultaneously. Team counts are one machine per user and the number of users is determined by how many you subscribe for. The larger enterprise accounts are handled differently, including the fact that software is locally deployed by the enterprise's system administrator, not via the cloud on every machine.

Even at that, you could still argue of course, that owning FCPX is cheaper than renting Premiere Pro. However, from a business POV, there's absolutely no value to software ownership as an asset. If you sell the business, the software installed on the machines has no tangible value. Therefore, purely from an accounting standpoint, there's an advantage to renting and where that expense is tallied. Just like your utilities bills, web hosting services, etc.

The installation access to immediate and current upgrades is pretty much a level playing field between Apple, Avid and Adobe now, but it isn't with every app. For example, if you use software that has a regular upgrade cost for the next greatest version, then it means adding that cost into the annual budget and going to the well each time to request the money to make the upgrade.

[Bill Davis] "One can surely deduct subscription fees from their taxes, but just as easily deduct the price of X - so I'm missing the thinking behind the advantage."

I don't believe that it applies the same way. In one case you are paying for a product. In the other, a service. But I could be wrong.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Gabe Strong
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 8:04:49 am

Sorry Oliver but you are actually incorrect. You can deduct the cost of FCP X from
your taxes just as you can deduct the cost of a subscription. It may
be done in a different place.....but you can use the section 179 deduction
to deduct the entire cost of FCP X. Directly from the IRS website.

'Essentially, Section 179 of the IRS tax code allows businesses to deduct the full purchase price of equipment and/or software purchased during the tax year. That means that if you buy a piece of equipment or software you can deduct the FULL PURCHASE PRICE.'

Now there are some restrictions. You are limited to $500,000 in Section 179 deductions
in any given year. But this notion that there is some sort of tax deduction
'advantage' to a subscription over a full purchase is just incorrect.

Gabe Strong
G-Force Productions
http://www.gforcevideo.com


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 1:27:01 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Jan 28, 2017 at 1:29:48 pm

[Gabe Strong] "You can deduct the cost of FCP X from your taxes just as you can deduct the cost of a subscription."

I didn't say you couldn't deduct it. I do that, too. I did say this: "I don't believe that it applies the same way. In one case you are paying for a product. In the other, a service. But I could be wrong." But I didn't mean that to imply that you couldn't deduct it.

And maybe there's really no difference from a tax standpoint. However, in some companies, setting up a payment for an ongoing service is an easier lift than for purchasing a product. Plus, how does this work in other countries? I don't know.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 2:00:09 pm

[Oliver Peters] "However, in some companies, setting up a payment for an ongoing service is an easier lift than for purchasing a product."

Funny you should say that, since that has been the number one reason that the University I work at and various other post houses I know would have gone with CC, but ended up going exclusively with FCP X for that exact reason: CC is a huge pain for them to administer in comparison. Never mind the ongoing cost which is much harder for them (the University i.e. schools in general) to get approved. So at least for them it was the complete opposite.

FCP X is a one off, done. Turn on auto-update and you're not even bothered with that anymore.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Gabe Strong
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 4:09:38 pm

Well ok but you also said
If you are a small production company, up to a large business,
subscribing makes more sense for accounting and tax purposes.

I just don't think that's true. It doesn't make 'more sense.' You can
deduct the costs of either one. There is no advantage at all and
neither one 'makes any more sense.' They are both a tax write off.
I guess if you are a company who is making a lot of money, CC may
be better as you are spending MORE and therefore you have a BIGGER
write off, maybe that's what you meant??

Gabe Strong
G-Force Productions
http://www.gforcevideo.com


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 1:28:07 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Even at that, you could still argue of course, that owning FCPX is cheaper than renting Premiere Pro."

You could. Because it is. 😛


[Oliver Peters] "If you sell the business, the software installed on the machines has no tangible value. "

Only that you still own FCP X after that, no matter what. Business or no business. You can't sell an Apple ID nor does it go down with the company. And really, if you drove your company into the ground BEFORE that piddly amount could even be written off? Then I think you have entirely different issues and aren't to worried about $299. 😄 For example the $600 a year you just lost on CC expenses and, in comparison, are left with nothing to show for it. 😏

I'm certainly not up to speed on U.S. tax code, but it must be weirder than I thought if spending $3000 over five years makes for the smarter move and better business sense than spending $300. I sure know it isn't anywhere here.

- RK


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 1:33:49 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Only that you still own FCP X after that, no matter what. Business or no business. You can't sell an Apple ID nor does it go down with the company. And really, if you drove your company into the ground BEFORE that piddly amount could even be written off? Then I think you have entirely different issues and aren't to worried about $299. 😄 For example the $600 a year you just lost on CC expenses and, in comparison, are left with nothing to show for it."

The point isn't about licenses. Even if you can transfer the licenses to the new owner, software has no value in the sale. Not in the same way as hard assets, like computers, tape decks (in years past), furniture, etc.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 2:06:18 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Even if you can transfer the licenses to the new owner, software has no value in the sale. "

Sorry if I find that to be a very weak point. Especially when we're talking about a measly $299 and in light of what costs one is confronted with otherwise in this industry. Merely having to pay a one-off and be done with it is a huge advantage in my book. And from what I've been hearing, there a LOT of people that despise the whole subscription scheme for a whole plethora of other reasons as well on top. So I for one can't see any advantage whatsoever, no matter how contrived. But that's for people to decide for themselves. I just think the whole sub-nonsense will end up biting Adobe (and others) in the backend sooner or later. We'll see.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 1:38:37 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "I'm certainly not up to speed on U.S. tax code, but it must be weirder than I thought if spending $3000 over five years makes for the smarter move and better business sense than spending $300. I sure know it isn't anywhere here."

Think of it as essentially the same rationale as leasing rather than purchasing. I realize the low cost of Apple software skews the equation, of course. Let's take X out of the discussion for the moment. If the comparison is purchasing Adobe apps versus subscribing to Adobe CC, then the numbers are a bit different and renting is more easily justified.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 2:18:39 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Let's take X out of the discussion for the moment."

Huh? That's what the whole discussion is about, no? Relative costs. Not the products themselves.

As I said, the difference between three HUNDRED and three THOUSAND dollars over a exemplary timeframe of five years.

If we're talking products and not costs and Final Cut Pro X or PPro isn't an option either way, then the entire discussion is moot.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 2:43:02 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "As I said, the difference between three HUNDRED and three THOUSAND dollars over a exemplary timeframe of five years."

Naturally if we go down that route, then Resolve (at free) becomes the best option.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 5:54:06 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Naturally if we go down that route, then Resolve (at free) becomes the best option."

Exactly. Only that was never a part of the discussion. 😏

- RK


p.s. no idea what's going on here, but I'm only getting email notifications of maybe HALF the responses here. Extremely annoying. Only seeing this one, as many others, by pure coincidence. 😒 Oh well.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 6:27:00 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "no idea what's going on here, but I'm only getting email notifications of maybe HALF the responses here"

Same here. And not just this thread. A COW issue, I guess.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 6:29:02 pm

[Oliver Peters] "And not just this thread. "

Yes. Completely thread independent. 😕

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Mark Dobson
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 8:49:22 am

[Oliver Peters] "A lot of folks here taught the advantages of owning (Apple) versus renting (Adobe); yet from an accounting standpoint, if you are a small production company up to a large enterprise, renting/subscription makes more sense. OTOH, if you are a single user who occasionally edits - such as a director or DP who sometimes cut their own stuff - then FCPX is likely a better choice - if they can wrap their head around the approach."

FCPX is remarkably good value. A one off payment with substantial updates every year or so. ( However I have bought 3 new Apple computers in that period as well)

When I think back I can't help but feel that Apple would have been better off to launch FCPX in tandem with FCP 7, rather than giving FCP 7 it's EOL. And I also feel that the software was released too early, that we were all participants in a large beta programme. The difference in functionality in FCPX from the day it was launched to now is staggering, for me I'd like to experience less crashes and hiccups, but the whole concept now works.

I do sometimes think about switching to Adobe, their software is brilliant and I subscribe to their photographic apps, but I just couldn't face unlearning all the techniques and workflows I've built up with FCPX, let alone discarding the huge investment I've made in plugins etc. Apple, like Sony have done with their large sensor cameras such as the FS7, have really started to listen to user / customer feedback and that, after the last 6 sometimes very painful years, is encouraging.


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 5:26:54 pm
Last Edited By Robin S. Kurz on Jan 27, 2017 at 6:05:17 pm

[Brett Sherman] "If you want to keep working in FCP X while rendering in AE, just add a "2" or something to the render file. Then when it's done, quit FCP X, rename it to the original filename. Reopen FCP X. Done and done."

Actually, you can even re-render whilst working in FCP. The file will simply go offline until it is finished. After that it'll reconnect itself as soon as the new "eligible" file is there.

Obviously altogether more difficult if your media is managed in the library.


[Brett Sherman] "it would be nice if there was a "Replace Media File" function, so you could force a file replacement."

Agreed. Ultimately, it should work as it did in 7. Yell at you, but let you decide whether to do it anyway or not and put that file in the replacement list in italics.

The reasoning behind the stringency is fairly simple. The average user (those without our super-superior "pro" expertise) has no clue what even the smallest difference can or will do when replacing, therefore potentially messing up an entire project irrevocably. And gee, guess who's fault it is then? Not THEIR'S. Never ever. Look at how many posts there are even here, where you just facepalm thinking "If only you went to the trouble of at least learning even the most basic basics and not completely overestimate your superior "pro" status in this world, we wouldn't be having to listen to this 'problem' xyz." 😏

- RK

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


Return to posts index

James Sullivan
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 6:34:27 pm

Robin,

Thanks for responding to my rant. I have been waiting for some projects to clear before upgrading my OS to where I can use 10.3 as a lot of my hate was addressed in that update. (Libraries on a NAS Wahoo!) I also would like to take a moment and re humble myself as I have never claimed to know how to do everything nor would I want to consider myself superior in any way. This is why I frequent this particular forum because there is so much knowledge lurking in the wings and I am always up for something new. (Except when I have producers behind me barking orders)

[James Sullivan] "having some things live in a project while others do not."

If that's the case, then you told it to do that. Pretty simple. It's not some random procedure. And you can consolidate everything into a single location, if needed, with the simple click of one little button.

On this point I want to argue that if I inherit a poorly managed project because this choice was overlooked by somebody not thinking at the time it would become a problem and has for me in the past. I have also noticed that having FCPX
manage media on a weaker computer forces content to be copied into the project, bloating the size of it, where as on a more powerful newer mac the very same media would have been left external. This just bugs me.

And have helped, amazed and empowered a lot of others. I'd even venture to say a lot more than the other way around. And that's actually by not just looking within my own little box.

On this I completely agree. But not having every been forced to edit with tracks. And not being forced to control where things land creates some messed up looking timelines that again when I inherit a project, makes me grumpy.

[James Sullivan] "it has way more things that need to be tweaked that would make the day to day grind better."

For example? Again, being specific is much more helpful for others to follow what it is you're getting at.

The ability to cut from a compound clip and have it use the original media.
The ability to bake a multi clip so that when it goes external it plays well.
Way way bigger keyframes.

The ability to make very very very small proxies so that drive space can be saved. Exporting longform shows is faster to compress and export with the super powerful computers we have. I know that offiline online is dead at this point but god it is still useful.

Such is life. Though I'd really be curious what it is you think you need 128GB of RAM, 48 cores and FIVE Nvidia cards for… especially right after complaining that the MBP is "pricey". What exactly do you figure that configuration would cost you even as a PC?

Have you seen what Octane render can do? That is why Five Nvidia cards are on the wishlist.

I used the word pricey but what I really meant was, for only 16GBs of ram. I love the size of the new laptop and I am glad that I did not buy any thunderbolt anything until they decided to go to USB C. Cost has always been relative in the sense that the systems I use make me money so I am ready to spend money on a nice system. But I am a owner operator of my business and any misstep I make on gear means I get to live on a park bench. Right now, building a bespoke PC will let me have the tower that can handle editorial, motion graphics, and really really really nice 3D renders. I just reserve the right to complain when I get a virus and all the parts I got from Newegg don't work together nicely.

I use a lot of different software and cannot have 8 separate systems configured for each specific task. I need FCPX to be my NLE while I choose to run out to AE, Protools, Photoshop, Mocha, Cinema4D, Resolve, for all their goodness.

I should also explain that my laptop is in my bedroom hooked up via ethernet to my shared storage. My main workstations are out in my studio. When I have to money and the laptop dies I will most likely get the new laptop maxed out and use it with the fancy LG monitor they collaborated on. Again I am still on team apple I am just grumpy and have the wonderful set of tubes we know as the internet to vent a bit.

Thanks for taking the time to listen,

James



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 11:36:50 pm

[James Sullivan] " I have also noticed that having FCPX
manage media on a weaker computer forces content to be copied into the project, bloating the size of it, where as on a more powerful newer mac the very same media would have been left external"


Huh? I have never seen this as an automatic function, except for certain media types. Maybe it just coincided with the types of machines you were using. Can you elaborate?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 12:15:14 pm

Very weird… I only became aware of your post after Oliver answered to it, because somehow I'm not getting every third or so email i.e. response. Rather buggy forum apparently…

[James Sullivan] "I have also noticed that having FCPX
manage media on a weaker computer forces content to be copied into the project, bloating the size of it, where as on a more powerful newer mac the very same media would have been left external. This just bugs me. "


Double-huh? For Final Cut Pro X it is completely irrelevant if the media in IN or OUT of the library. The only thing that counts towards performance is the I/O performance of the disk it resides on. As with any and every NLE on the planet.


[James Sullivan] "I tried bringing in 4K from a Sony F5 on my ancient 17" laptop and it had to copy and manage the media whereas at work where we have trash cans they just let everything sit where it is. "

I'm sorry, but Final Cut Pro X most definitely does NOT decide by the machine it's on whether media you are importing has to be copied or not. That's ridiculous. Whether it needs to be copied depends exclusively on where it's coming from and in some cases what wrapper the original is in, in which case the subsequent behavior is the exact same on every single Mac, period.


[James Sullivan] "And not being forced to control where things land creates some messed up looking timelines that again when I inherit a project, makes me grumpy. "

Wait… so you're blaming Final Cut for someone else's shoddy work??


[James Sullivan] "The ability to cut from a compound clip and have it use the original media. "

What media exactly do you think it's using?? I don't get it. And then there's always the ability to split a CC up again in the timeline. So I have no idea what you mean.


[James Sullivan] "The ability to bake a multi clip so that when it goes external it plays well."

"When it goes external"? What is that supposed to mean?


[James Sullivan] "The ability to make very very very small proxies so that drive space can be saved."

E.g. whittling over a TB of footage down to roughly 150GB is by far enough for me. Especially considering the ridiculously low prices for disk space nowadays…


[James Sullivan] "Exporting longform shows is faster to compress and export with the super powerful computers we have."

Huh? How is that not a given??


[James Sullivan] "I am glad that I did not buy any thunderbolt anything until they decided to go to USB C."

I have various TBo peripherals and now USB-C. Nothing has changed the least. Everything is still in use in the exact same way it was before. In fact I have been able to go from SIX to TWO connection to/from my computer for much less cost as with the "old" TBo. So, again, I have no idea what relevance (in a negative sense) USB-C has in that context.


[James Sullivan] "I need FCPX to be my NLE while I choose to run out to AE, Protools, Photoshop, Mocha, Cinema4D, Resolve, for all their goodness. "

Do it all the time. Is it the best possible C4D machine? Of course not. But if it were a substantial part of my work, I most definitely would get a tricked out PC for it.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 5:29:57 pm

Ageed,

But this was curious to me:

“If you were running the Adobe suite on a top-level PC with high-end Nvidia cards, performance would definitely shine over that of the Macs.”

Followed later by:

"On a recent on-site edit gig at CES, I had to cut some 4K ARRI ALEXA material on my two-year-old Retina MacBook Pro. Premiere Pro couldn’t hack it without stuttering playback, while FCPX was buttery smooth. Thus FCPX was the axe for me throughout this gig."

I was kinda hoping that what would follow that paragraph was examples of where the Adobe suite approach “running on a top-level PD with high-end Nvidia cards,…” would "definitely shine over" what the Macs could produce - but you moved directly to the hardware debates and never articulated which aspects of Premiere Pro running on top hardware were superior in your experience.

Can you be a bit more specific about that?

If somebody spends the money for a fully tricked out system on the PC side (what the hardware fanboys are trumpeting these days!) where can they expect the biggest real-world editing performance gains to show up?

And with your experience in both systems, are the gains marginal, or significant? Thanks.

Also thanks for another well-written and well-considered article!

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 27, 2017 at 11:51:01 pm

[Bill Davis] "Can you be a bit more specific about that?
If somebody spends the money for a fully tricked out system on the PC side (what the hardware fanboys are trumpeting these days!) where can they expect the biggest real-world editing performance gains to show up?"


I'll try. I don't work directly with too many PCs. One of my clients is running Dell towers with all media on a SAN. Performance with Premiere is comparable to a new iMac with Thunderbolt storage. When I've done reviews of some PC products, I've had more real-time with more layers than with Mac towers. This is largely due to more high-powered GPU options, specifically CUDA-enabled NVIDIA cards. Adobe is optimized for CUDA, so they get better performance here. More real time, faster rendering.

Here's an example from 2 1/2 years ago:

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2014/09/19/hp-z1-g2-workstation/

Because you can still use towers, you can populate them with RAIDed SSDs and really hot-rod the system in ways that are no longer possible on the Mac side. But that does come at a cost. A fully-loaded, top-of-the-line Z-series HP tower workstation is going to cost more than a decked out trash can Mac. In short, a heavy After Effects user would be happier with the PC machine and would see a difference in render times. A Premiere Pro user is less likely to see as big of a huge difference.

Oliver

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


Return to posts index

James Sullivan
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 2:30:45 am

Oliver,

I tried bringing in 4K from a Sony F5 on my ancient 17" laptop and it had to copy and manage the media whereas at work where we have trash cans they just let everything sit where it is.

I also was forced to copy avchd footage for another project. Because the audio and video were separate for that camera FCPX forces the copy as I guess it has to wrap everything together for it to behave well for editing. I then went out and got Editready and made prores and ingested that instead.

I love that FCPX is up to date on all the new formats and wierd camera card folder structures as getting footage into Legacy was getting to be a major pain.

James



Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 1:18:44 pm

[James Sullivan] "I tried bringing in 4K from a Sony F5 on my ancient 17" laptop and it had to copy and manage the media whereas at work where we have trash cans they just let everything sit where it is. "

Weird. I've never seen that behavior. Are you doing anything different with the media? For example are you taking media direct from the card in one case, but removing the media from its package container in the other?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 3:23:06 am

Understood. Thanks for the clarification.

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 12:32:03 pm

[Oliver Peters] "you can populate them with RAIDed SSDs and really hot-rod the system in ways that are no longer possible on the Mac side."

So you're saying that you can get (and of course need) MORE than the near 2TB/ps read/write that I'm getting on my "Mac side" internally (single SSD) as well as the near 3TB/ps with an external SSD RAID?

Wow. Okay.

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 12:37:14 pm

But then, by the looks of things, PCs and PPro actually need that additional astronomical IO to keep up, yes.













😜
[scnr]


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 31, 2017 at 9:29:24 am

[Robin S. Kurz] "But then, by the looks of things, PCs and PPro actually need that additional astronomical IO to keep up, yes."

It is awesome that Jonathan Morrison can give Linus Tech Tips a shout out. I would like to give a shout out of my own : )







Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 1:16:57 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "So you're saying that you can get (and of course need) MORE than the near 2TB/ps read/write that I'm getting on my "Mac side" internally (single SSD)"

I avoid putting media on the internal boot drive as a general rule.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 28, 2017 at 1:52:26 pm

[Oliver Peters] "I avoid putting media on the internal boot drive as a general rule."

But then that wasn't your point either. It was that you can "really hot-rod the [PC] system in ways that are no longer possible on the Mac side", not where to store one's media.

But okay… so what about the external solution? No word on that? I'm just trying to understand what it is that is "no longer possible on the Mac side". Or are you suggesting that putting everything you have inside your machine is the much more preferable configuration?

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 29, 2017 at 7:40:32 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Or are you suggesting that putting everything you have inside your machine is the much more preferable configuration?"

Sorry. Just saw this. Threading issue again. Yes, to some people it is.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Robin S. Kurz
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 30, 2017 at 5:45:05 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Threading issue again."

I know. Wrote this (what feels like) two days ago and am only getting it myself now also. 🙄 This forum needs some serious updating (aside from that issue).


[Oliver Peters] "Yes, to some people it is."

Which? Makes no sense to me whatsoever. Even if you're NOT working with others (in which case it makes even less sense), having everything cooped up inside a single machine it just nuts. Aside from that having absolutely NO performance or other advantages (anymore), if that ONE machine goes down you're screwed twice over even if you have a perfectly working machine right next to it. Especially if it doesn't support INTERNALS as the original does. What are you going to do? Have everything external from the get go, then it's a simple UNPLUG and PLUG and you back in the race within minutes.

A realization that the guys from "Adobexit" appear to have had as well, if for other, but probably even MORE valid reasons… understandably:

"We went from having numerous internal drives in one large workstation PC to relying solely on many (USB 3 and Thunderbolt) external drives. This meant that we could collaborate on projects easier by sharing hard drives, and also we could have a simpler workspace with smaller computers and hard drives. We can now also work on a project at our studio and take a thunderbolt drive home in case I need to work over the weekend, whereas before I would have to have copies and duplicates of media, making it much more difficult to keep track of projects and media."

And I still don't know which pimping isn't possible "on the Mac side" either. 😏

- RK

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 30, 2017 at 6:36:26 pm

[Robin S. Kurz] "Which? Makes no sense to me whatsoever. Even if you're NOT working with others (in which case it makes even less sense), having everything cooped up inside a single machine it just nuts."

You asked if some people would prefer this and I answered, yes, some people would. I think it comes down to the cleanliness of the installation. Right now, to expand Apple computers you often end up with a lot of peripherals hanging off of them. I recently worked a job next to a designer/animator. He was doing everything on a MBP with an outboard GPU in a separate chassis. In theory it worked. And when it did work, it worked well. But definitely not without its issues.

[Robin S. Kurz] "A realization that the guys from "Adobexit" appear to have had as well, if for other, but probably even MORE valid reasons… understandably:"

I read that article, too. It's a matter of preference. Most of my clients work that way, too (multiple external drives). Most are trying to move away from that into something more organized, including with shared storage systems.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

andy patterson
Re: Final Cut Pro X – Reflecting on Six Years
on Jan 31, 2017 at 9:17:05 am

[Robin S. Kurz] "Which? Makes no sense to me whatsoever. Even if you're NOT working with others (in which case it makes even less sense), having everything cooped up inside a single machine it just nuts. Aside from that having absolutely NO performance or other advantages (anymore),"

You can create an internal RAID for a lot less than an external RAID.

[Robin S. Kurz] " if that ONE machine goes down you're screwed twice over even if you have a perfectly working machine right next to it."

How so. You can store the data that is on the internal RAID to single SATA drive. You could also use an external RAID with an internal RAID for back up. What if the external RAID crashes? Nothing is 100% safe.

[Robin S. Kurz] "Especially if it doesn't support INTERNALS as the original does."

They have external enclosures that house internal hard drives.

[Robin S. Kurz] " Have everything external from the get go, then it's a simple UNPLUG and PLUG and you back in the race within minutes."

Unless the external RAID crashes.

[Robin S. Kurz] "And I still don't know which pimping isn't possible "on the Mac side" either. 😏"

Can you add an SD card reader to the Mac Pro without external wires dangling? Can you ad a Blu-ray burner without wires dangling? Can you back up to a single SATA drive without wires dangling? Can you ad USB C ports to the Mac Pro? Can you add a USB 3.1 PCIE card to the Mac Pro? Can you add a 16 core 32 thread AMD CPU to the Mac Pro? The video below will let you know what a generic ATX computer can do that the Mac Pro, iMac or Macbook Pro cannot. Not everyone will want a generic ATX computer but then again not everyone wants a Mac Pro.







Return to posts index

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