-
After a year has perception of FCPX changed?
-
I have to admit, your screenshot is intriguing. I would like to see the video it produced. I am curious how you would deal with multiple layers of audio on top of it. I have played around with FCPX very little on a friend’s system and found the magnetic timeline very vexing. Although that was many months ago
As I have said before, I have little time to really play around and learn a new NLE. Unlike many on here, video editing isn’t my primary job, but only one part of the process. My skills in FCP comes through years of use and I am loath to throw that away to begin anew in FCPX. I did get the Adobe Production package when it was on sale, but that was as much to get AfterEffects as Premiere Pro. And I have to say it is AE that I have devoted my time to learn rather than PPRO. I have stuck with FC7 because it still works for me. Time is a premium.
Just out of curiosity, how much time would you say it takes in FCPX to learn it well? How many months would one have to spend?
-
[Clint Wardlow] “I have played around with FCPX very little on a friend’s system and found the magnetic timeline very vexing. Although that was many months ago”
It hasn’t changed much. It’s still magnetic. I wouldn’t expect all of the magnetism to go away, but I’d expect some interface capability “upgrades”. It’s early days yet.
[Clint Wardlow] “As I have said before, I have little time to really play around and learn a new NLE. Unlike many on here, video editing isn’t my primary job, but only one part of the process. My skills in FCP comes through years of use and I am loath to throw that away to begin anew in FCPX. I did get the Adobe Production package when it was on sale, but that was as much to get AfterEffects as Premiere Pro. And I have to say it is AE that I have devoted my time to learn rather than PPRO. I have stuck with FC7 because it still works for me. Time is a premium.”
It’s a personal preference. I’ve edited in FCP Legend for many years now. I would not say that learning any new NLE means throwing away what you’ve learned. I certainly am not throwing away any knowledge that I bring to X when editing. I guess I am intrigued by what you mean “experimental”. It could mean a lot. It could mean a little. It could mean precise, it could mean abstract.
Ae is awesome. Some might say it has a steep learning curve. It is also very mature, and there’s tons and tons of interweb “trainers”. If you’re looking for audio, Ae isn’t the place, but it does hook in to Pr pretty well which will get you better audio control. Pr’s audio is different yet again from FCP Legend’s audio. No matter what, you will have to learn unless you stick with fcs3. And that’s viable. It’s what our shop is doing for now. It still works.
Are you looking to take freelance work at other facilities? What is it about perception that is motivating you?
If editing is only a simple part of your daily tasks, are you looking for a place to make an “investment” in money, or are you just looking on where you think others might invest their time?
When learning fcs3, did you have help, or did you teach yourself?
Are your only requirements to experiment, or do you have other technical requirements?
-
[Marcus Moore] ” With video data throughput being most a separate issue, and Adobe and FCPX leaning more and more heavily on GPU power for real time playback, rendering, and encoding. How important is the CPU at this stage? What’s the breakdown of responsibility between the CPU and GPU?”
The GPU is for real time playback, the CPU is for encoding and rendering.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Jeremy Garchow] ” you can select audio and video separately and break sync, or trim only one track, but if you hold option and click, it selects the linked audio and video (even if they are out of sync). It’s really the best of both worlds.”
Thanks for the tip, I’ll check it out next week,
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Jeremy Garchow] ” I guess I am intrigued by what you mean “experimental”. It could mean a lot. It could mean a little. It could mean precise, it could mean abstract.”
By experimental, I mean a lot of the stuff I do is not traditional linear narrative. I use image and sound produce emotional effects. I do this in many ways. Sometimes it is “precise” sometimes it is “freeflowing.” It depends on what I am going for. A lot is determined by the medium I plan to present the work. I would create something different say for a projection at an art installation than a showing in a “theatre” (often just a room with folding chairs and a video projector.” That is not to say I just do “moving pictures and noise.” Sometimes I will produce a more linear storyline. It just depends what strikes my fevered fancy at the time.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Ae is awesome. Some might say it has a steep learning curve. It is also very mature, and there’s tons and tons of interweb “trainers”. If you’re looking for audio, Ae isn’t the place, but it does hook in to Pr pretty well which will get you better audio control. Pr’s audio is different yet again from FCP Legend’s audio. No matter what, you will have to learn unless you stick with fcs3. And that’s viable. It’s what our shop is doing for now. It still works.”
I am not looking at audio in AE. I’m just trying to up my effects capabilities. I have used Motion since it came out and it whetted my appetite. Although, AE is pretty deep and I have barely scratched the surface. I find it oddly familiar from all the years I have spent with photoshop.
[Jeremy Garchow] “Are you looking to take freelance work at other facilities? What is it about perception that is motivating you?
If editing is only a simple part of your daily tasks, are you looking for a place to make an “investment” in money, or are you just looking on where you think others might invest their time?
When learning fcs3, did you have help, or did you teach yourself?
Are your only requirements to experiment, or do you have other technical requirements?”
This where I am different from most of the folks on here (and one of the reasons I come to the site, is to search around for the collective knowledge gathered here). I’m not really looking to work for hire. I consider myself an artist, and video & films is only one of the mediums I use (I’m sure the unkind among you would call me a hobbyist). I generally just want to create my own works, but will also provide my skills to other artists projects if they interest me. I make very little money doing this.
Consequently this gives me a great deal of freedom because I don’t have to satisfy a clients needs or perceptions. On the downside, every time I add a new piece of gear it is an expense I might never recoup. That’s why I look very carefully at any new product before I commit. (I am currently drooling over the Blackmagic Cinema Camera, but will definitely wait till others have tested the waters, used it, and discovered its strengths and weaknesses before I purchase.)
So, I’m not saying FCPX is out forever. A new NLE is not my highest priority at the moment. But one of the reasons I initiated this thread was to get input beyond the initial bad publicity of its release in June. Most of the film folks I know in my circle still have a negative view and I was looking for a broader perspective.
Oh, and my only technical requirement for anything (I shoot with vhs, 16mm, betacam, pixelvision, super8, dv, hdv, and a dslr) is that I can produce something cool. I am pretty much self taught in NLE editing, but did have training at the University of Utah in film theory. My editing classes involved a 16mm flatbed. And I did take a couple of adjunct classes when I first embraced video in and had to learn to cut on a tape-based linear editing system.
-
[Tangier Clarke] “buying, rebranding/repackaging, improving, feature-merging (Shake-Motion, Logic-Soundtrack), and the massive undertaking of AV foundation and frankly I think we’re starting to see the fruits of a lot of labor that we hadn’t yet had the chance to fully exploit; thank you 64-bit.”
Don’t know what you are talking about – Shake, Color, FCP Legacy haven’t been rebranded, they’ve been totally destroyed. It’s been software homicide around Cupertino for years. If I were an App and I heard Apple Pro Apps was calling I would just tuck my head between my legs and kiss my ass good-bye.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Michael Hancock] “However, if you’re on a Mac (which you obviously are) you can rewrap the Quicktime ProRes files to ProRes MXF files which gives you full functionality and the stability Avid is known for. It’s like rewrapping P2 footage in FCP – it double the disk space you need, but it’s super fast”
I’m coming home with 14 Terrabytes of data. The idea of doubling that to 28 Terra is not practical.
[Michael Hancock] “If you shoot to ProRes, does your recorder also shoot to DNxHD? If so, you could transition to Avid on the next shoot.”
That’s a possibility I’m exploring, though most recorders that encode to DNxHD do it in a quicktime wrapper.
[Michael Hancock] ” you could transcode the ProRes files directly off the recorder/cards (what are you shooting with) and edit with the Avid ProRes MXF files and place the originals on a shelf. Think of rewrapping the ProRes to MXF as your first backup, of sorts, that you’re editing with.”
That’s a possibility worth investigating.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
I think that you would be doing yourself a disservice if you didn’t look around.
I think the needs of most of the people here vary differently.
If you aren’t locked to one way of working, or to one style of working, I would look at everything, no matter what the perception is.
The “film folks” you know, might have different needs, and therefore have different perceptions.
If you can throw out the perception, and throw out what FCPX can’t do (like capture from tape), or Ae can’t do, or any other content creation software, and look what it CAN do, and where it’s strengths are, I think that’s all you, personally, will need. Who cares what anyone else thinks? If you can get you projects done in a cost efficient and creative way, that’s all that really matters, right?
You obviously need some sort of video capture device as well. Right now, the jury is still out on Pr CS6. I haven’t seen drivers from AJA yet, so I have no idea how and when that will work. FCPX only works from certain firewire based tape capture. So either way, you might need a stand alone capture software, and if you have an io device, they all have free capture utilities.
Compositing and effects are capabilities that reside within FCPX, just like they are in Pr and Ae. It won’t feel like Photoshop. I work in Ae fairly frequently, and every time I go to Photoshop, I have trouble. Ae is just makes so much more sense to me. I think they work very differently, even if they both share a levels filter and have a mask tool. Photoshop’s weird non-direct manipulation I find unintuitive as compared to Ae, let alone the key framing which is much easier in Ae.
If you understand layers/composite modes, and understand FCP7s “well” system, I am sure you will be fine poking around in FCPX if you’re interested. There’s also scrubbable/renderless effects previews, which if you put down the FCPX stigma, are pretty rad if you ask me.
If FCP7 is working for you, you can always stick there. It still works in Lion, it sill works on modern Apple machines, and older Apple machines, and it won’t cost you anything in time or money.
Jeremy
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “You obviously need some sort of video capture device as well. Right now, the jury is still out on Pr CS6. I haven’t seen drivers from AJA yet, so I have no idea how and when that will work. FCPX only works from certain firewire based tape capture. So either way, you might need a stand alone capture software, and if you have an io device, they all have free capture utilities”
Tape capture is the least of my worries. Though it probably would horrify many here, I transfer all analog video via my HDR-FX1 to DV, wrap it in Prores so it plays nice. I know this is not optimum in a lot of ways, but it works for me. And as the HDR-FX1 connects to the computer via firewire I don’t think that would be a problem in FCPX. For film, I send that to a specilty house in Texas that does a telecine transfer to Prores 422 (costly, but they do a good job).
I guess my biggest issue with FCPX is the magnetic timeline and its primary storyline structure. If I want to use audio (and not nessesarily just one audio track) to develope the rythym of the cut it seems difficult at best and envolves bizarre workarounds. Maybe that has changed a bit, but was a big issue. The new plugin solved my other big issue (being able to import legacy).
Frankly what others think of my methods doesn’t worry me. You should see one of my shoots (wheelchairs & kiddy wagons as dollies, any kind of light that gives me the look I want, and a the possibility of a varity of cameras from JVC VHS, a refurbished pixelvision camera, an ancient sony betacam, a Beaulieu 4008 super8, etc, etc). Most pros would have a heart attack (and often do go out of their way to tell me everything I am doing wrong when they visit one of my sets….sigh).
It is just when I tried FCPX it didn’t feel right for me. The wierd thing is whenever I suggest it to others who I feel would benefit from its use, I get a lot of resistence. So I started this thread more out of curiosity to see if the negative perception had changed on a wider level among professional editors. After perusing all of the comments I’m still not sure because in someways it turned into the usual pro and con argument (though to be fair many did address the issue of perception).
-
Herb, that’s why I added “feature-merging”. You are correct about the destruction of these apps, but they some of their features were rolled into other apps and now FCP X in some ways. I am not saying that our current toolset is a replacement for those now gone apps, but rather acknowledging how Apple tends to (even outside the production and post world) bring high end features to the masses in ways sometimes I am sure we all don’t appreciate in some way shape or form.
My fault for not making that clear. Perhaps I was trying to be too concise with commas, and run-ons. It’s something Apple has done across their entire hardware/spectrum for some time and I was pointing to that to try and make some connection to the way things are going with the controversial release of X, subsequent updates, and our projections for it’s future (features and perhaps another app).
Tangier
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up