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

Resolve 16 vs FCPX

COW Forums : NAB Show

VIEW ALL   •   PRINT
Oliver Peters
Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 13, 2019 at 8:59:23 pm

So how do you folks think Resolve 16 stacks up against FCPX? Anyone jumping ship?

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Ronny Courtens
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 13, 2019 at 11:58:39 pm

As an NLE, Resolve is now getting on par with the three other major editing platforms. Just like with the others, this has required BM pushing out a whole boatload of fast updates in the first years. And just like with the others, this update cadence will slow down once the software gets more complete. Although it looks promising, I'm not really sure if Resolve as an NLE will cause a huge shift in the market. For three reasons:

1. This is not a one-solution-fits-all market anymore. Today, people tend to use multiple tools at the same time or multiple NLEs within the same company. And this seems to work out well for everyone.

2. Hardcore professionals and enterprises seem to stick with their choice(s) for a long time unless the company that creates their tools screws up. This has happened with Avid who got much too greedy during the transition to HD, causing them to lose a fair amount of users to Final Cut. Then it happened to Apple who got much too cocky with the launch of FCP X, causing them to lose a fair amount of users to Premiere Pro. And now it also seems to be happening to Adobe (just visit the Premiere Pro forums) and here's where I see Resolve taking its share of the market in the short term.

But, eventually, every developer recovers from its mistakes. Avid has evolved and still holds strong in film and television. FCP X has evolved and has become the most widely used NLE in our market. And I am expecting a major overhaul of Premiere Pro in the not-so-distant future. So I don't doubt that Resolve will eventually get its fair share of the market, just like the others. But I don't see any major landslides or worldwide ship-jumping happening. People who constantly jump ships tend to fall into the water anyway (-:

- Ronny


Return to posts index

Neil Goodman
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 14, 2019 at 2:50:17 am

had a dig at it this morning. Super snappy performance in all the modes with some Alexa footage.

My favorite new thing is that button on the record monitor that basically turns a bin of clips into a string-out w/o having to do anything. Its just playing your clips in a bin in a row but i thought was pretty slick.

Not sure how much id use the cut page as opposed to the edit one but cool option for people who want X inside of Davinci.

At the end of the day great piece of software - not going to drop Avid and Premiere for it just though personally.


Return to posts index


Michael Gissing
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 14, 2019 at 5:36:22 am

[Ronny Courtens]"This is not a one-solution-fits-all market anymore. Today, people tend to use multiple tools at the same time or multiple NLEs within the same company. And this seems to work out well for everyone."

It never has been a one solutions market. There never has been a real all in one tool before so there is good reason why most facilities and power users need more than one software approach. In the past all NLEs have had serious weak spots in audio finishing, VFX, grading & collaboration etc. Resolve is the first fully integrated software to combine world class tools for all those things in a single package. We all know the edit functions and general performance were playing catchup. And this seems to be being addressed to the point where it is now harder to say Resolve is inferior or just different.

It's not finished because the task is massive but the pace of development is amazing. I'm not sure why you might assume development at Blackmagic will slow down soon and updates get less in the future. I think it won't for the simple reason that their dev team is not going to be transferred to other products like Apple does and unlike Adobe they have a hardware division that needs software tools like Resolve to be up to date with their products.

I've said it before that Resolve has not had the advantage that Adobe had with the EOL of FCP Legend. But another stumble by Apple or Adobe and the foot will be in the door for Blackmagic. History has shown that when Avid and then Apple stumbled an alternative had an advantage, even when it was not fully developed. Resolve is so much better prepared than either FCP Legend or Adobe to take advantage of such stumbles. The increasingly slow pace of FCPX & Apple hardware dev looks like an opportunity to me. Adobe's needing to update their performance looks like a smaller stumble but both may create the perfect opportunity for Blackmagic to overcome the inertia of editors to jump ship. And jumping ship make perfect sense when your boat is taking on water and may sink your business.


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 14, 2019 at 5:21:55 pm

I've always been the lucky (or unlucky) one to experience these options since part of my life consists of inheriting projects and another part teaching at a local college.
I always wonder how the other half lives.
I mean, if you have a 3 to 5 person shop and stick with I can see why you would try other options since the overhead isn't much.
But larger post houses, I don't (on a whim) foresee them moving too easily on something completely different.
A soloist maybe if you have the patience to keep trying new things.
I went through the same thing years ago with 3D apps.
We had so many options and one kept popping up.

I live in Resolve but mostly in the Color/Delivery pages.
I still love using the big (not so anymore) three :)


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 14, 2019 at 7:50:08 pm

[Ronny Courtens] "I can see a good future for Resolve, but just not one that is causing the kind of landslides we have witnessed before."

I would agree. All of the tools today are good. Much of the decisions related to NLEs involve workflow and ecosystem. A fancy new feature or even somewhat better performance usually isn't enough to make a big change. I think most people and most facilities today are reasonably happy with the choices they've made. With the low cost of Resolve, together with its cross-platform compatibility, there's no reason not to have it as an additional tool, no matter what you are using - without completely jumping ship.

OTOH, the reason I asked the question in the first place, is precisely because I see a number of very positive comments towards Resolve 16 both here and at FCPco. Not to mention also among RED users. Maybe not enough to switch, but certainly in the vein of "the grass is greener..." This strikes my as intriguing from a standpoint of human nature. Many folks who like X swear by the magnetic timeline and trackless UI. Somehow when they look longingly at Resolve 16, those issues are suddenly less important. Kind of funny to me. ☺

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Ronny Courtens
all
on Apr 14, 2019 at 7:32:51 pm

[Michael Gissing] "And jumping ship make perfect sense when your boat is taking on water and may sink your business."

You see, Michael, there is where the caveat lies. I honestly don't see anyone right now who feel that their boat is taking water or that their business is at risk just because of the software they are using. Today, I think most people are quite happy with the tools they use. And these tools are not limited to just one NLE. I can see a good future for Resolve, but just not one that is causing the kind of landslides we have witnessed before.

- Ronny


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: all
on Apr 14, 2019 at 11:21:42 pm

[Ronny Courtens]"I honestly don't see anyone right now who feel that their boat is taking water or that their business is at risk just because of the software they are using."

You are quite right. I felt exactly that way the day before FCP Legend was EOL'd. I'm simply saying that it can happen again. Meanwhile as Oliver has said why not have Resolve as well as your favourite. That way the change over process is gradual. It's what I'm seeing happening in my market place which is not big facilities with their inertia.


Return to posts index

Mark Raudonis
Re: all
on Apr 14, 2019 at 11:59:04 pm

Anybody who knows me knows I'm not afraid of jumping ship... even in the middle of stormy seas!

What keeps large post facilities from jumping is NOT so much inertia, but what I call the "10 X Rule". In order to overcome
inertia, the proposed change has to be at least ten times better than the status quo. You'll NEVER achieve 10 X in real life for a variety of reasons, but at least on paper there has to be a compelling enough case to make the leap. All of the options discussed here: FCP- X, Adobe, Resolve do NOT have 10 X better than AVID for large, work group environments. That factor and that factor alone is what keeps large facilities from making the leap. When that issue is successfully addressed (without compromise or workarounds), then many large installations can make a decision based on a level playing field.

If I had to place bets on who will get there first, I'd say Resolve. Meanwhile, I'm happy to watch the horse race.

Mark "AVID-FCP-AVID... all three now!" Raudonis



Return to posts index


Andrew Kimery
Re: all
on Apr 15, 2019 at 1:23:48 am

[Mark Raudonis] "What keeps large post facilities from jumping is NOT so much inertia, but what I call the "10 X Rule". In order to overcome inertia, the proposed change has to be at least ten times better than the status quo."

Agreed. And not just large post facilities, but I think it also applies to anyone that has aa vested interest (i.e. spent years learning) in a certain workflow. The competition can't be 'just as good' or 'a little better' because we all know that switching will fix some problems, but also create new ones that your old workflow didn't suffer from. No one wants to take the time/effort switch when it's just going to be a net gain of near zero. I might as well stick with the devils I know at that point as opposed to killing them only to introduce an equal amount of new devils.

No to belabor a point, but thats why Apple's killing of FCP Legend and launching of X was such a huge deal. Apple removed that inertial barrier by forcing people to choose. Legend users had to make a conscious choice to move to another NLE. Apple created a very rare situation and that's why it's still so talked about.


Return to posts index

Neil Sadwelkar
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 14, 2019 at 11:50:19 pm

One of the issues with the popularity (or not) of Resolve (free) is that, since its not a sold software, and needs registration before download, only Blackmagic knows how many (or how few) times it has been downloaded.
Further, since it doesn't need registration to be installed on multiple machines once downloaded, maybe even Blackmagic doesn't have a precise idea of just how many machines its installed on.

Compared to Adobe with Premiere Pro and Avid with MC, which can't be installed or launched without registration/activation.

So, the exact size of the Resolve active user base is likely to be conjecture, whereas Avid/Adobe have a more precise idea of usage of their software.

Resolve is now evolving into one application with multiple capabilities extending into compositing, sound design, colour correction,

In my opinion, this versatility of Resolve will make it grow and be used in multiple roles, but only when multiple humans are used for different tasks. Maybe in a collaborative environment where 3 or more humans on separate systems work on the same media and timelines but doing different tasks. Collaborative editing, needs Resolve Studio and a network.

Or, in a situation where there's one system and multiple specialists take turns working on the same project on the same system.
Either way, editing, colour correction, compositing/cleanups, sound design and delivery are all done within one application without needing to round-trip in and out of the NLE.

Another aspect is that other NLEs are editing systems, with capabilities for colour correction, compositing, sound design as added features.
Resolve is the other way around. It is a very accomplished and established colour correction system, which integrates two separate but established softwares within the NLE. Fusion and Fairlight. Within this, editing features have been added over time.
For this to succeed as a package, humans proficient in colour correction, compositing, or sound design, exclusively work within the respective pages (only) within Resolve, and the editor holds it all together by working in the Edit page and media pool. Expecting these 4 to be the same human is unrealistic, and certainly not commonplace.

FCP X, on the other hand, is a different editor with an appeal to first-timers, and with many added features for graphics, compositing, sound, offered as dumbed down features that anyone (even one human) can understand and use, and a huge collection of features that users can add at will, using plug-ins as needed.

FCP X and Resolve are in my opinion, mutually exclusive and 'either/or'. So, one can like and use one or the other, but not both. But time will tell. And the market is big enough, that both can be big winners without replacing one another.

-----------------------------------
Neil Sadwelkar
neilsadwelkar.blogspot.com
twitter: fcpguru
FCP Editor, Edit systems consultant
Mumbai India


Return to posts index

Mark Raudonis
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 15, 2019 at 12:06:51 am

[Neil Sadwelkar] "FCP X, on the other hand, is a different editor with an appeal to first-timers, "

Did you see the new "cut" page in Resolve? That's Resolve's entry point for first timers.

This feature opens up some very interesting large shared storage workgroup opportunities. Having a "dumbed down" version of the timeline that is instantly transferable to "regular editors" is a brilliant feature.

I look forward to figuring out how to make this work for our creative teams.



Return to posts index


Ricardo Marty
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 15, 2019 at 3:25:21 am

This could help show how the cut page works.







Ric Marty


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 15, 2019 at 3:49:22 am

[Ricardo Marty] "This could help show how the cut page works.
"


Thanks for that.

Now does anyone know what that display is behind him?
Or is that a large LCD?
Im on the hunt due to aging Apple 30s.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 15, 2019 at 3:45:46 pm
Last Edited By Oliver Peters on Apr 15, 2019 at 3:48:32 pm

One glaring issue in the current Beta version of R16 is that you cannot trim audio separately from the picture in the Cut page. Like FCPX, clips are combined a/v clips. Although a clip goes to V2, it functions a bit like a connected clip in FCPX. Therefore, the Cut page has no separate audio tracks, only video (actual a/v) tracks.

A clip edited to V2 has source audio married to it. Clips on any track cannot be expanded and the audio trimmed independently, like you can in FCPX. You have to switch to the Edit page for that type of editing.

In this current form, it seems like the Cut page is largely a place to build rough cuts before going to the Edit page, or maybe very simple YouTube or news stories. Maybe that will be fixed before R16 finally hits the release version.

BTW - it's also interesting that between NAB and now, the edit keyboard price has changed from $995 to $1,025.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Ricardo Marty
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 15, 2019 at 4:04:08 pm

Also, titles can only be placed and nothing more. I guess these are the result of beta 01. Should be fixed by the time its finalized.

Ric Marty


Return to posts index

Lee Doucet
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 28, 2019 at 5:16:53 pm

Cut is not meant to be a replacement for Edit. I think complaining about some of these things is missing the point, a bit.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 15, 2019 at 1:13:41 am

[Neil Sadwelkar] "Another aspect is that other NLEs are editing systems,.... .......humans proficient in colour correction, compositing, or sound design, exclusively work within the respective pages (only) within Resolve, and the editor holds it all together by working in the Edit page and media pool. Expecting these 4 to be the same human is unrealistic, and certainly not commonplace."

One thing to point out here, is that Resolve has a very definite left to right workflow through the pages. For example, it doesn't work well to add effects in the Fusion page and have those appear back in the Edit page. Some effects show up, some don't. You have to do a mix down or compound/nest the clip (whatever Resolve calls it). That's contrary to a true all-in-one workflow philosophy. The design is really that you lock the edit, then do color and effects, and then finally mix.

That's as opposed to Adobe where I can send a clip off to AE with Dynamic Link/render-and-replace and have an AE designer do the embellishment/compositing. But only if I want it linked in the same timeline, which is optional.

Remember, too, that neither Fusion nor Fairlight ever garnered large market share and historically more node-based compositors have hit the market and failed compared with fewer, but more successful, layer/track-based compositors.

So I think Resolve - the idea - is more attractive than the reality.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index


Lee Doucet
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 28, 2019 at 5:15:15 pm

Downloads aren't indicative of much, since you had to register to download updates as well. They only just added an in-product update system in Resolve 16b1...

Resolve is exceedingly popular by virtue of Windows' market share vs. macOS; and the fact that it is also available on both macOS and Linux.

It probably already has more users than FCPX, at this point.


Return to posts index

Andrew Kimery
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 15, 2019 at 1:54:37 am

[Michael Gissing] "I'm not sure why you might assume development at Blackmagic will slow down soon and updates get less in the future"

Isn't that an inevitability as all software titles mature?


Return to posts index

Craig Alan
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 25, 2019 at 6:13:48 pm

"FCP X has evolved and has become the most widely used NLE in our market"

Is that professional market or over all usage. Is it active use or number of sales?
I'm not debating just curious.

Imacs (i7), Canon C300, Canon 5D Mark IV, Panasonic ENG HPX250P, , FCP X, teach video production in L.A., Cool Light Productions, Producing series of multimedia Portraits of creative women in the production arts.


Return to posts index

Tony West
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 15, 2019 at 4:41:47 am

They are really trying their best to copy X, and I don't blame them for that. In order to do a lot of adjustments looks like you have to jump back to the edit page. I wouldn't want to do that myself. Jumping back and fourth. I would rather just stick with the X timeline and do everything I need all in the same page.

It's funny how when X made that timeline it was seen as dumb to many, and now that R 16 is trying to do it it's fine : )

It's a nice program but as some have pointed out, most folks are pretty happy with their current NLE and don't have a big enough reason to learn something else.

So happy in fact, that this little "debate" page has died down. Not much really to debate anymore, as many have moved on from this forum.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 15, 2019 at 7:37:47 pm

Here's the full BMD tech overview of NAB products by Grant Petty. Resolve 16 starts at around 1 hr 14 min.







- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 17, 2019 at 4:07:25 am

Resolve 15 would have been my holy grail when I was using FCP 7, and today's Premiere would have been what I would have expected from the next version or two of FCP at that time. I could imagine looking longingly at Resolve 15 if I was using Premiere currently.

But I use FCP 10 primarily. I find it a joy to use compared to Premiere and much faster for the sorts of corporate/documentary work that I do.

I'm using some of my spare time to gradually learn Resolve. But the edting side feels like Premiere, and to be honest, FCP 10's color correction tools, along with the built-in audio effects and iZotope's RX and Ozone plugins get me most of the way there such that it is rarely necessary for me to go outside of FCP 10 anymore.

I'm curious about Fusion too, but I have used After Effects since 1995 and its hard to start something like Fusion when you are so comfortable with another.

That said, it is really easy to get FCP 10 timeline's into Resolve, and I would probably end up using its color tools sometimes, BUT, the import process strips out all audio levels, fades, and keyframes. And that is essentially makes Resolve DOA for me for many projects. I know I can round trip but...


Return to posts index

Michael Gissing
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 17, 2019 at 10:50:13 am

James Resolve 15 is so last year.


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 17, 2019 at 1:49:52 pm

[James Culbertson] "That said, it is really easy to get FCP 10 timeline's into Resolve, "

Do it all the time for a few years now.


Return to posts index

Mark Suszko
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 26, 2019 at 6:49:31 pm

I know he didn't mean anything insulting by it, but the comment suggesting that features of FCPX are "dumbed down" for the "simpler user" is I think, a tad unfair.

I've been having to work in FCPX and Premiere side-by-side now for a while, and I have to say, a lot of the FCPX functionality is seemingly done in a much less "clunky" way than my experience of Premiere. FCPX is very intuitive and there is an economy of steps to do what you want, whether that's using shortcut keys or the mouse.

My Premiere experience so far includes way more tabbing around to get to what I need, functions that seem similar but aren't, and the paths to get to those items or tools I need don't always seem "logical" to me.

Part of that, i'm sure, is just that I have more familiarity and practice in FCPX; I'm way faster in it, I know where everything is, and how the tools work.

But part of it is also just a better user experience, not "dumbed down", but clearer, logical, "more intuitive", and maybe more "accessible". One little example of this, for me, is the implementation of crop tools. In Premiere, it's buried two steps away in it's own little bubble. In FCPX, it's with all the other transform controls, and I like that.

I am impressed with how much faster Premiere renders out a file over FCPX. I've even done whole jobs where I've done the cutting in FCPX but handed off the final render to Premiere... But much of the rest of it seems like it's pretty old-fashioned in how you have to work in it. I hate the interface, just hate it. They are putting me on a ledge, in terms of mastering Premiere before they take away my Final Cut Pro X at some random, unknown future date, so I'm under the gun to get better at Premiere... But cutting in Premiere to me just feels like work, when FCP has always felt like play. Simple isn't "dumb"; it's powerful.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 26, 2019 at 7:07:24 pm

[Mark Suszko] "I am impressed with how much faster Premiere renders out a file over FCPX. I've even done whole jobs where I've done the cutting in FCPX but handed off the final render to Premiere.."

Weird. I'm generally found FCPX and Compressor to be much faster renderers. I suppose it depends on your machine and the codecs involved. OTOH, I find Resolve to render faster than either for complex, multi-codec timelines.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 26, 2019 at 7:42:04 pm

[Mark Suszko] "but the comment suggesting that features of FCPX are "dumbed down" for the "simpler user" is I think, a tad unfair."

More wrong than unfair. I think by now most of us know that this kind of talk is code for "I don't really know how to use FCP 10." A fair statement would be something like, "I prefer to use Premiere over FCP10." (or vice-versa).


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 26, 2019 at 8:07:36 pm

[James Culbertson] "I think by now most of us know that this kind of talk is code"

At this point it's all water under the bridge.

I think the best way to look at it is there's the base of the tree where the concepts of tape cutting and film cutting were combined to envision modern NLEs. Avid/Adobe/Media100/EMC/etc all went in a very similar direction - one branch of the tree.

In creating FCPX, the development team went back to the bottom of that trunk to start up into a different direction/branch. As a result you now have two large branches that diverge a bit from that common base, but still with a ton of similarities. Blackmagic has attempted to embrace both with the Cut Page + Edit Page in Resolve 16.

We'll see how well that works in practice.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters - oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

James Culbertson
Re: Resolve 16 vs FCPX
on Apr 26, 2019 at 9:41:19 pm

[Oliver Peters] "there's the base of the tree"

That's true Oliver.

I spent my first couple of years editing on both flatbed and tape to tape. Editing on FCP 10 and Premiere makes me realize that more traditional timeline-based NLEs like Premiere are like tape to tape, and FCP 10 feels like it has gone back to a more film-feel type edit style. FCP 10 just feels more tactile while at the same time getting out of the way to embrace a more intuitive way of editing. I still have a hard time explaining the feel to my editing friends who do not use FCP 10. Also, they don't believe me... :-)


Return to posts index

VIEW ALL   •   PRINT
© 2019 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]