Difference Between Final cut pro and Final cut pro x…

[Aindreas Gallagher]

tee hee.

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[Steve Connor] “Of course you do, you’ve “dicked around” with it.”

actually I’ll go one better – I’ll give you an example.

When I go to trim a connected clip – extend it say – not really enter any trim mode per se – simply drag the outpoint, the detail view in FCPX shows me the clip out connected, and the underlying in point on the primary, or the connected clip below.

that’s really, really, really nice.

lots of people edit topographically in FCP, but because it is universally tracked based as opposed to A-B fixed to primary, it’s not in a position, semantically, to provide that kind of dependent feedback – I very much enjoy getting that kind of knights move feedback – that feels interesting and smart. I would love to know what exactly i’m hitting below in FCP or premiere.

but the cost for these cosy bungalow furnishings is immense – as I said with regard to ranges, apple have an object only timeline, dependent on the existence of the primary – I know it was a niche point steve, but it is notable that, if your secondary overhangs the primary at the tail –
you are no longer in a position to set in and out points.
that’s unusual.

so here’s a census now – hands up all editors who think it is a problem that in and out point taget selection operates on one single track.

would you look at that show of hands.

Apple have demolished the editing timeline down to a phrase style “secondary” “connected” nub around the primary, and only the primary can accept in out edit commands.

that is beyond problematic.

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Steve Connor]

I understand it may be problematic for you but it’s not problematic for me or the many people here that use it.

Seriously Aindreas I know my craft as well as you and the FCPX timeline does not hinder me practicing it in any way, on the whole it makes it easier.

I think we’ve been here before, I’m probably going to stop here, nothing new in these arguments any more!

Steve Connor
‘It’s just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure”

[Aindreas Gallagher]

totally cool – seriously tho – you really don’t miss open track timeline operation for the construction of the edit?
I’m not kidding steve, I kick FCPX open most days, lately I’m trying to do my reel in it – I find the timeline almost impossible to accept given all the avenues gone? no probs stepping away from old argumentative ground – but just to re-iterate, its not needing to get ahold of what I’m being offered – at all – its not being able to accept the absence of the multiplicity of approach and thought process available inside what I would term a true disinterested timeline.

for my money that’s editing – that real, “I am indifferent to what is happening here within me, I will simply keep absolute time and count tracks” timeline umpire represents the only valid broad field for individual editing expression.

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[Bret Williams]

Your Math May Vary. It hasn’t even been out 17 months. 🙂

[Steve Connor]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “you really don’t miss open track timeline operation for the construction of the edit? “

I know it’s hard to believe but I prefer it to open track, I don’t miss fixed tracks at all. I like clip connections, adding secondary story lines above narrative in the primary and the flexibility that allows me with broll. For me It gives a much better fluidity in organising and moving story elements in groups around the timeline, I feel I can experiment with structure more without disrupting an already complex edit. For me it’s all about when to use and when to ignore the primary.

I’ve done a broad range of projects in it over the last year and I haven’t once felt that it FCPX was working against me, well no more than any other NLE does.

However this is just my experience, I’m not particularly disciplined when I start putting timelines together, I just like to wade in and get “down and dirty” with my projects, the organisational capabilities of FCPX are great but they aren’t the things I like best about it.

As I’ve said before I can fully understand why others wouldn’t like the timeline in FCPX, I just hope Apple don’t listen to the dissenting voices and we end up with a bastardised version of the timeline which tries to incorporate fixed tracks in a way that changes it’s current operation.

You have PPro if you want FCP8

Steve Connor
‘It’s just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure”

[Cem Yildirim]

[Rafael Amador] “Did the ever tried to learn FCP?
“

I used to teach FCP 7 until this semester then we switched to FCP 10 recently. Although not the same students, but same student profile and they are learning much faster.

http://www.cemyildirim.i8.com

[Aindreas Gallagher]

[cem yildirim] “same student profile and they are learning much faster.
“

not to be pedantic – but with regard to the reduced bite size descriptions of editing process provided by FCPX – secondary storyline, auto connecting clips –

what exactly are they learning here? is this FCPX training fit to be tested by a complex narrative dialogue problem say, in the future, within a fully exposed track timeline, presented to them in a competing, full track editing system seat?

or is it all going to magically become an FCPX methodology world?

are they simply to presume they are going to meet the cosy A/B primary timeline of FCPX whenever they look for employment?

Is FCPX training applicable to Avid, Premiere or other true track timelines?

does FCPX methodology present a valid transferrable skills base, for the paying student, that plays well across the employer base? Given that no jobs are being posted for it?

what is being provided here for the student? Outside of completely one off apple methodology that has no employer market traction?

https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics

[James Culbertson]

I learned to edit on a Sony switcher and Amiga toaster system. The hard part was learning to tell stories. Learning how to push buttons on an AVID later on was a minor learning chore in comparison.

Why would FCPX to AVID be any different?

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “what exactly are they learning here?”

Aindreas,

A/B editing as a conceptual foundation is quite common in a lot of broadcast. I suspect learning FCPX will quite solidify this conception.

I would be concerned that, as students of editing, they may be quite baffled by the idea that there is any other conceptual foundation to editing. Education raises interesting questions about this (see the posts above about what to teach next …)

Franz.