-
Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?
-
The Mac Pro is long in the tooth. When it first came out it got attention and promotion. And they did mention FCP X as an app of choice for it.
“Apple’s radically redesigned pro desktop launched on December 19, 2013, bringing Intel’s Ivy Bridge E Xeon processors, dual AMD FirePro graphics chips, and fast PCI Express-based flash storage.”
Mac Pro, macbook pro, Imacs (i7); Canon 5D Mark III/70D, Panasonic AG-HPX170/AG-HPX250P, Canon HV40, Sony Z7U/VX2000/PD170; FCP 6 certified; FCP X write professionally for a variety of media; teach video production in L.A.
-
Can anyone here mouse and click their way through some complex audio filters faster than Michael Cioni?
-
[Oliver Peters] “This is an area that Avid has down to a science and why, when a lot is on the line with a large project, most experienced film/TV editors will pick Media Composer + Isis. For better or worse, it’s the known and reliable workhorse.”
If they could implement something similar to Avid’s bin locking in FCPX, it would change some minds in LA. It’s the last remaining deal breaker.
The irony is that any AE’s worth their weight in salt knows how to easily work around it in a pinch.
-
“Why not promote it more heavily?”
Because iPhone, iPad, iPod, and iMac – all of Apple’s consumer products – are what made it all its money. Why actively promote what is, in essence, a niche product when you’re rolling in dough from all your consumer gagdets?
The day Apple pushes us all to edit on iPads is the day I sell this MacBook Pro I just bought.
-
[Phil Lowe] “”Why not promote it more heavily?”
Because iPhone, iPad, iPod, and iMac – all of Apple’s consumer products – are what made it all its money. Why actively promote what is, in essence, a niche product when you’re rolling in dough from all your consumer gagdets?
“Gruber has some insight on this.
https://daringfireball.net/2015/11/what_goes_up
-
Wow what an interesting thread.
From my side, I have been both very pleased with FCPX and hating it to the very core. It does a lot well, but drops the ball in some key areas (some mentioned in this thread). I am just finishing a series of documentaries on FCPX and will be glad to see the back end of it for a while, but I look forward to v 10.3
For the next feature doc I am cutting, I had the producer go with AVID. I have found AVID to be more reliable and suitable for my style of work.
That being said, I will continue to use FCPX for short projects and look forward to it maturing. It’s a good and affordable tool, but at this stage I’m not a big fan.
-
[Scott Parker] ” I have been both very pleased with FCPX and hating it to the very core. It does a lot well, but drops the ball in some key areas (some mentioned in this thread)”
Care to fill some details of the good and the bad as you see it? Just curious. Thanks.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Well, I hesitate to get too far into it. Somebody will call me out over some damn thing.
I really like the magnetic timeline, getting away from the source/record monitors and the way you can scrub tiles. That’s a really nice improvement for my workflow. This is the best part of the application for me.
The trim functions are great, especially the way FCPX seamlessly expands the clips for trimming. I like that.
It’s not expensive, so that’s a plus.
Motion stabilization works nice and is very handy to access.
Write to primary storyline: it automatically adjusts all your audio trims and I really like that feature.
Some of the things I’ve disliked (and a few I’ve outright hated)
I don’t like the lack of customization of the workspace. I work on 2 monitors and I would like to also resize the browser window.
I’d like to be able to open two events at once, in their own windows.
Speaking of events, I can’t possibly say how much I dislike the nomenclature Library, Event and Project. This has caused no small degree of unnecessary frustration working with my partners.
On several occasions, FCPX has automatically loaded a project without me doing anything. I ended up making revisions to the wrong version at one point, causing a few hours of headaches. This is flaky.
There is no consolidate option. Oh I mean there is but Apple has decided that consolidate now means something different from what it used to mean. I’m in the middle of that mess right now, dealing with huge amounts of data because there is no simple way to do an actual consolidation (and I know the workarounds possible, like with Resolve, but it doesn’t work with h.264 codecs right now)
So those are a few carps. As I stated in my earlier post, I look forward to v 10.3. If anyone’s planning on jumping on me for whatever reason because I’ve criticized FCPX, save it. I just wanted to reply because this is a thoughtful and helpful thread.
Thank you.
-
[Scott Parker] “Well, I hesitate to get too far into it….”
Thanks for posting, since I asked. Some of these issues are addressable with some workflow changes and some are just the way it is. I doubt a potential 10.3 would change many of these items.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Aindreas Gallagher] “It’s la la land software. You’re all at the mad hatter’s party.”
What I love most (and I do enjoy your prose – you may be in the wrong game even) but after all these years you still feel compelled to remind us of our errant ways.
I DO kind of get that. I know that feeling.”How could they possibly not realise what fools the are being?”
It’s Richard Dawkins syndrome. I absolutely empathise.
But when it comes to keyframing I get by okay and like the fact that once you’ve added one, FCPX understands what you are doing and adds the rest of the for you. Sometimes I do get in a bit of a muddle I confess – I’ve aways blamed myself to be honest.
I don’t do much in the way of compositing and I rather prefer keyframing in X to legacy. So at the risk of causing people to snigger and guffaw at my ignorance, what exactly is the issue with keyframing (in a nutshell) that you so dislike please?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up