Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Activity Forums Creative Community Conversations Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?

  • Shane Ross

    October 28, 2015 at 3:19 pm

    By the way, I consider it professional.

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

  • Oliver Peters

    October 28, 2015 at 3:53 pm

    [Shane Ross] “All the marketing for FCX as a professional editor is being done by FCP.co and others like it”

    Like other things with X, they rely a lot on third parties.

    [Shane Ross] “FOCUS cut on FCX….did Apple mention it? That OJ Simpson doc on A&E cut on FCX…Did Apple mention it?”

    Yes on “Focus”. There’s a big “In Action” spread. No on “OJ”.

    – Oliver

    Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
    Orlando, FL
    http://www.oliverpeters.com

  • Herb Sevush

    October 28, 2015 at 4:14 pm

    I consider it as professional as any other NLE. I still find people who do not and I try to educate them, but the “prefect” roll out by Apple still has consequences.

    Herb Sevush
    Zebra Productions
    —————————
    nothin’ attached to nothin’
    “Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf

  • Andrew Kimery

    October 28, 2015 at 4:17 pm

    [Greg Jones] “I think if you use any editing program to make money, it could be considered professional.”

    I draw a distinction between the person and the tools. For example, a long time ago I cut weddings for an event videographer that worked on the more… affordable… end of the spectrum and I used iDVD to author the DVDs for the clients. He shot for a living, I cut for a living, so by that metric we were both professional, but I’d never consider iDVD a professional grade DVD authoring application even though I used it to make money. For my needs at the time it was fine, though I’m sure many people who had more exhaustive needs would not have found iDVD adequate (and eventually I went to DVD SP as my needs were no longer met by iDVD).

  • Andrew Kimery

    October 28, 2015 at 4:18 pm

    [Oliver Peters] “Why not promote it more heavily?”

    Maybe Apple assumes pros are diligent enough to keep clicking until they find what they need? 😉

  • Shane Ross

    October 28, 2015 at 4:46 pm

    [Oliver Peters] “Like other things with X, they rely a lot on third parties.”

    Well, they made the NLE that they felt suited the needs of a majority of editors, and they were right. It does. But the tools needed to make it plug into the Hollywood workflows weren’t included, because, as Philip Hodgetts loves to point out, we are the minority…only 2% of the market. So why cater to us, and then hope that it works for everyone else? That’s what they did with FCP 7, and they found that yes, it worked for us, but it required a lot of twisting to make it work for the rest of the editors…the majority.

    It was a sound business decision. It just stung a lot of people pretty badly, and leaves a bad taste in our mouth. But I’m over it.

    Is it professional? Yup…if you earn money with it and are a professional editor, it’s a professional tool. Does it suit the needs of Hollywood features/TV? Nope. not without a lot of help. Alone it BARELY works, and that’s if you are a one man band here. It doesn’t “Plug in” without lots of help, and that’s why many of us elitists types say “nope, not professional.”

    But, whatever. Why does it matter to FCX users what we think? Is it CLIENTS that are balking at hiring people because they use FCX?

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

  • Jeremy Garchow

    October 28, 2015 at 4:47 pm

    [Shane Ross] “All the marketing for FCX as a professional editor is being done by FCP.co and others like it. FOCUS cut on FCX….did Apple mention it?”

    Nope. Not here: https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/

    Not at all!

  • Shane Ross

    October 28, 2015 at 5:05 pm

    [Jeremy Garchow] “Nope. Not here: https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/

    Ah…that’s what I get for not paying close attention to Apple.

    I do know that in order for that to work, they needed TONS of on-site help and arm twisting. Just like FCP 3 needed for COLD MOUNTAIN. But hey…if it worked…

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

  • Andrew Kimery

    October 28, 2015 at 5:24 pm

    [Jeremy Garchow] “Nope. Not here: https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/

    Yup.

    All you have to do is go to Apple.com, wonder why there is no software icon on the nav bar, click ‘Mac’ because that seems like the next best option, wonder again why there is no software option in the Mac section, click El Cap cause you think maybe they put all the software under the OS X header. Nope, realize you were wrong, click back, look at the nav bar again to make sure you aren’t overlooking it, scroll down the Mac page because now you are getting frustrated and just aimlessly mousing around, stumble upon FCP X near the bottom of the page, click Learn More, click ‘In Action’ up at the top and *bam* there is Focus… and 8 other pieces that I’m pretty sure have been there for at least 3yrs.

    How could anyone possibly miss finding the In Action section? 😉

    There is cold comfort that it’s not just ProApps that are getting shoved under the bed. If you go to Apple.com the only piece of software that has a permanent, direct link is iTunes (and that’s a link way down at the bottom of the page). Everything thing else links to hardware. El Cap has a link on the main page but it’s in the ‘new stuff’ section so it’s transient.

    BTW, if I did over look a direct (or at least semi direct) link please point it out to me, because having to do so much digging to get to info about a ProApp is a little sad and I’d love to be mistaken in this case.

    EDIT: fixed some grammar, sure they are more problems.

  • Bill Davis

    October 28, 2015 at 5:39 pm

    [Shane Ross] “I do know that in order for that to work, they needed TONS of on-site help and arm twisting. Just like FCP 3 needed for COLD MOUNTAIN. But hey…if it worked…”

    And just like they needed on Gone Girl? IIRC, they had lots of Adobe help plus guys like Phil and Greg helping them make THAT work properly.

    So whats the point? If you have $100 million bucks riding on an outcome – it’s inconceivable that you’d want a strong back bench ready to help you.

    It’s how EVERY movie ever made has been done.

    If a Panavision rig on an early Ron Howard film had issues, I’d suspect calling Panavision – or at least guys with lots of Panavision camera experience – would kinda be step one in solving them. So why is that notable in this case?

    Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.

Page 2 of 9

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy