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

Re: OT: Edit Software of Oscar Nominees

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

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

Shane Ross
Re: OT: Edit Software of Oscar Nominees
on Mar 3, 2014 at 7:17:21 pm

[Rich Rubasch] " At the time Final Cut Pro came out, the only reason it won the battle (in many ways) was cost."

It won the battle for many many reasons. Cost was a big part of it, yes, but the fact that the Adrenaline was a piece of crap was a major contributor. That's what made me switch. Adrenaline failed on almost every level for the projects I was working on.

But adding to this, was the fact that compositing shots in FCP is much easier than in Avid (Picture in Picture, 3D Warp...all behave very oddly, and take a long time to accomplish what I can do in seconds in FCP), moves on stills is easier in FCP, no need to rely on Moving Picture, (and now the unreliable PAN AND ZOOM). A lot of the shows I worked on, and still do, incorporate a lot of stills, require a lot of compositing to be done by the editor in the Avid application.

FCP answered a lot of post needs I had...far better than Avid did.

Avid still has the most robust media management..hands down. Which is why we put up with it. But man, I had to do layering of stills and a background just last week, and it took me 2 hours to do. Something I could mimic in FCP in 10 minutes.

As a straight cutter, I love it. When it comes to doing FX inside of it...oy! And what about plugins/filters? They are very few, some are very hard to use, or they are astronomically expensive. Sapphire, the best set hands down, costs nearly THREE TIMES the cost of the Avid software itself! Unjustifiable, if you ask me.

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

Posts IndexRead Thread 

Current Message Thread:

© 2020 All Rights Reserved