-
10.06 On Apple’s Website Now
-
[Chris Harlan] “Or color-coded roles. Bummer. I had high hopes. Maybe next time.”
There’s still some fit and finish left to be done, no question.
But overall this update is very very good in the limited time I have had to mess with it.
The multichannel audio tools are much improved. They could use some more functionality in the detaching but they truly are better.
Performance seems much improved.
I have a pretty underpowered laptop that I have been using for testing, and it seems to run much more better, if much more better is accepted vernacular.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “In even more playing around, this isn’t very fun.
I appreciate the need for PIOPs, I use them all the time in other NLEs.
But FCPX doesn’t work that way.
I think this breaks (or significantly hampers) a really strong suit of FCPX and that is the organization methods.”
Jeremy, when you have a free moment, I’d love to read a more detailed post on why you feel this way (and perhaps what might fix it for you.) I’m genuinely curious.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[David Lawrence] “eremy, when you have a free moment, I’d love to read a more detailed post on why you feel this way (and perhaps what might fix it for you.) I’m genuinely curious.”
Surely.
I have to spend a bit more time with it and make sure my first impressions stick around.
In other news, there’s a ton to like and PIOPs aren’t a deal breaker.
The Red importer has a floating HUD. Picture here:
I wonder if plugin devs could access this type of interface to create custom plug in controls?
Jeremy
-
[Oliver Peters] “As I said in another thread, I believe Apple has deferred this to the camera manufacturers via the camera import SDK. RED requires the RED importer plug-in and I believe that’s what takes care of adding the reel info. “
This is Apple’s file format with Apple’s metadata. No SDK required. I could care less what the camera puts in as reel in the field. We add reel as part of our post workflow. There’s little chance of prepping camera’s metadata ahead of time. Our cinematographers have too much to do, they can’t be expected to type in metadata. The only way of adding consistent metadata is after the fact by a small group of people. Reel for us is more GUID and it never comes straight from the camera. We assign reel to masters and element files not just camera files not to mention files captured from tape… yes tape… imagine that.
Reel is supported by Apple’s new AVFoundation API. Why support it in the creation of QT files and not read it!
Nothing could be simpler for Apple to do. They simply refuse to do because it’s “Old fashioned” in their minds.
Below is from the FCPX new features list. Ironic it mentions Reel soley yet Apple won’t read it in their own files. Where supposed to type it in manually!!
XML 1.2 with Metadata Import and Export
Enjoy richer integration when moving projects and media between applications. XML 1.2 includes new standard metadata fields such as Reel. And Final Cut Pro X XML now includes custom project and media metadata, so you can import from — and export to — third-party apps and media asset management systems.John
-
[David Lawrence] “eremy, when you have a free moment, I’d love to read a more detailed post on why you feel this way (and perhaps what might fix it for you.) I’m genuinely curious.”
OK, I think I have seen enough.
So these PIOPs work like FCP7, and they also have a bit of an upgrade in that you can store multiple ranges as a PIOP.
In a way, it’s cool. In another way, it’s really just like Favorites, but with even more caveats, less user control, and more automation.
What I really like about FCPX’s organizational capabilities, is that a clip can be in any number of “places” (or groups), but yet still remain in place.
What I mean by that is that FCPX allows you to sort data in many different ways through various methods (keywords, smart collections, favorites, rejects, etc).
This allows me to make all kinds of dynamic decisions as I edit, and not have to limit myself to one bin, or duplicate instances, or make true subclips. I can then delete that data once I am “done with it”. This big feature separates FCPX from other NLEs, at least in my mind. It is a rather unique feature that I use and like a lot. Sorting in FCPX is a big strength.
With Favorites, I had control of it. I know what I wanted to hold on to, which ranges I wanted to keep, keyword, or not, and I have a graphical example of that in the list view with icons (Key, Star, Red X, etc) and in filmstrip view (with the little green/blue/red bars).
With PIOPs, I can’t see where they are. I can sort the Event by Filmstrip, select the clips I want to deselect the range from, and then apply a command to clear all the selected ranges. If I am in list view, I have no idea which clips have PIOP(s) or not.
If I don’t (or forget to) deselect the range, and add a keyword to multiple clips, the keyword gets added only to the PIOP range(s), and not the whole clip.
This relinquishes control to the software. With Favorites, I had to remember to hit f after marking a range, but it allowed more flexibility in marking keywords with either ranged or unranged. I had full control.
With this new method, if I have lots and lots of clips to sort through and tag, I have to do a lot more work just to make sure that there’s no PIOPs on all the clips before I tag them with a keyword. I have no control of how and where the PIOPs are stored
How would this get better? I would make PIOPs a visual cue, just like a keyword or favorite (although, this just causes more clutter).
I would also go so far as liking to have an option to turn off PIOPs via a preference.
I could see having the option to have keywords avoid PIOP ranges, perhaps with a modifier key of some sort.
PIOPs feel like automatic favorites; automatic with little control. I know there was a HUGE backlash during the inception of FCPX about the software being dumbed down and making decisions for you. Ironically to me, this is the most this application has been dumbed down and the most decisions it is making for me. Yet, it seems to be a feature that people have really clamored for, especially the people who don’t use the software that much.
Oh well, to each their own, and ya can’t win them all.
Onward.
Jeremy
-
The dual viewer system is miles better than what we have in 10.0.5. Do note I haven’t jumped away from FCP7 as my main editor. However, I’m still lacking a few (a lot perhaps) of things:
– General GUI performance is horrible. Scrolling in the event browser should be silky smooth.
– The secondary views shouldn’t be locked as a “event viewer”. I’d love to se it work as a dual viewer for the timeline as well. The player shows the current play-head location, the view is used for skimming or similar. If I’m doing effects / color corrections I want two viewers which isn’t possible currently. It’s a step forward but quite limited.
– Timecode, timecode, timecode! I never new I much I used TC before trying out FCPX and seeing how much LACK of timecode there is. The viewer needs to show TC.
– Use the view to “open clip from timeline”. Why can’t I do this?
– I don’t get any visual indication of how long a clip is in the viewer and / or player. Mini timelines are lacking.
Over all Apple seems to be pushing things. But the application still feels quite some ways off to be ready for prime-time. For me primarily the perceived performance is a huge hurdle to get over.
-
How about the retina tethered to Pegasus R6 thunderbolt?
-
There are cheaper options to have fans whining at you all day long… 🙂
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “PIOPs feel like automatic favorites; automatic with little control. I know there was a HUGE backlash during the inception of FCPX about the software being dumbed down and making decisions for you. Ironically to me, this is the most this application has been dumbed down and the most decisions it is making for me. Yet, it seems to be a feature that people have really clamored for, especially the people who don’t use the software that much.”
I still don’t get the reason for the complaint. You didn’t lose anything. You simply gained a second way of working. What’s the problem? Don’t use it and continue to use range-based favorites as you always have. I also see no element of “the software being dumbed down and making decisions for you” in this instance.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Yes, I agree Oliver. It doesn’t seem that this addition prevents you in any way from working with favorites as before. It’s a simple key stroke to get back to the whole clip being selected.
From my standpoint, as I’m training staff to use the program, it was very difficult to get people understand that they needed to mark the favorite marking before moving away to something else. The editors I’m working with won’t have the luxury of spending lots of time in the program before making the switch. The feature of the range becoming unmarked was a deal breaker for them. A lot of guys go back and forth from the timeline to the event (or the viewer in legacy), I’m not sure of why they have the compulsion, but they do. Checking TC, whatever… I’m not willing to fight for them to overcome the problem they have with the unmarking and I found it cumbersome myself.
This is a big step forward in getting wider adoption and like Oliver, I can’t find that it’s some huge hindrance to the old way. It seems that it has even given you a way to keyword ranges on multiple clips simultaneously. I haven’t tried that, but it seems it would work.
Keith Koby
Sr. Director Post-Production Engineering
iNDEMAND NETWORKS
Howard TV!/Movies On Demand/iNDEMAND Pay-Per-View/iNDEMAND 3D
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up