APPLE FINAL CUT PRO: Apple Final Cut Pro X FCPX Debates FCP Legacy FCP Tutorials

Re: Range-based keywording: unique to FCP X?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

Respond to this post   •   Return to posts index   •   Read entire thread

Bill Davis
Re: Range-based keywording: unique to FCP X?
on Apr 3, 2012 at 9:43:14 pm

[Michael Hancock] "Then it's poor design. Avid media is handled by a database too, and it can generate detailed reports of your sequence and bins showing you where that footage lives. What's the point of having a database with all of this information being tracked by the software if it's being held hostage by that same software? This is exactly what these databases are good for - tracking assets and giving that information to the editor."

I understand that this is how you see it. I see it differently. I use X nearly every day for all my editing. It's capabilities have made me feel like I'm using a much better editing tool than I've had during my last 10 years as an FCP-Legacy editor.

I've never edited with Avid. (or Premier or Vegas for that matter) so I'm not qualified to compare them. If such a comparison is important to you - then talk to others.

I'm qualified to talk about my personal experiences transitioning from Legacy to X for my full time work as a corporate video producer/editor who typically creates and edits 30-100 or so projects in an average year.

I know there are plenty of high volume shop or TV station editors who might edit that many projects in an average month - or even one massive project in a ear that has a budget that dwarfs my aggregate total by orders of magnitude.

That's the point. I'm not arguing that X is the right tool for every editor in every situation. Just that it works amazingly well for editors like me.


[Michael Hancock] "So all projects have to be online all the time? Even for a one man shop that's silly. When I was the only production guy at a small ad agency I would work on 20+ clients in a year, complete hundreds of commercials/videos, and generate terabytes of footage. Having to keep all of that online all the time because my software won't share information with me isn't good. This should be addressed by Apple. It's a reasonable and logical feature request."

You're still just not "getting it" - and I'm not sure I can help you.

You keep trying to link what X is to your pre-conceptions. And that's going to fail for you, IMO.

Not to beat a dead horse here, but NO, you aren't "required" by X to have "all projects online all the time." The number and arrangement of your projects is totally up to you. I regularly move mine onto backup drives. They stay out of sight until I connect those drives. Then all the projects on that drive are "INSTANTLY" connected to my workspace with all their clips linked.

This means I control the library by the simple process of choosing which drives to connect.

That plus one of the trivial disk cataloging programs like Disk Librarian, and give me all the tools I need to locate archived projects in seconds - and lets me determine what I want ti arrange on-line or off-line.

Again, you keep pushing about what the software does or doesn't do. And all I'm telling you is that much of it is NOT like other NLE's I've used.

What I see in it was confusing at first, but every week becomes more useful to me - and I better appreciate what it is and how it's likely to keep growing over time for me. Even if Apple never adds a single new feature what's in X right now has made my editing life easier with tools I don't want to leave behind to go back to edit like I did in Legacy.

It may never work for you like it does for me.

Because our needs might never be the same.

But I'm one kind of very typical editor. One with clients that have on-going video needs with usually show to medium range production time frames (not instant every hour needs like a TV station - and not once a year massive needs like a movie producer) but somewhere in the great middle ground where most editors I know work. A large amount of my work is for on-going businesses where revision and deployment are important factors. Many of them are moving from physical media distribution to on-line access. They want to be able to publish now - revise later and republish the revised content quickly and efficiently. (they used to send out DVDs - now they just want to publish on-line for managed group access via the web.) They used to deploy to break room TV sets (in my corporate training work) but are moving rapidly toward deploying that content on smart devices like phones and iPads.

For those clients and for me FCP-X is an absolutely excellent tool.

It's simplifying and breaking down the production and distribution cycle and making my content easier to produce, revise, manage and deploy.

And that's how it's earned my continuing use.

I've said here countless times that X is not the ONLY tool that does any of these things.

But it is, IMO, an absolutely excellent one among others that competes on it's unique strengths exceedingly well.

Learn it or not. Use it or not. That's up to you.

But it's a mistake to judge it if you fundamentally mis-understand it. And your questions appear to me to be evidence that you don't understand it very well at this point.

No more or less than that.

"Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions."-Justice O'Connor

Posts IndexRead Thread 

Current Message Thread:

© 2019 All Rights Reserved