FCP 10.1.2 Where are you?

[Oliver Peters]

Marcus and Jeremy,

I re-ran the test with FCPXML and an X2Pro-converted AAF into Logic Pro X. Both work fine, except, the AAF retained the overlaps created by split edits in storyline audio edits, while the FCPXML does not. It does retain these overlaps if I detach audio first in the FCP X timeline before export.

OTOH, if I leave the camera clips set to stereo instead of dual mono, the AAF comes in as 2 tracks per clip (dual mono), whereas the FCPXML comes in as stereo. So pros and cons either way. The AAF strips off all levels, while the FCPXML retains the FCP X levels.

The problems I’ve had before with X2Pro and AAF, as I recall, seemed to have to do with QT sources that were linked and not copied into the library. In this case, these were C300 clips, which I imported into the library. In any case, AAF-generation with X2Pro is now working for me – at least on this project and with LPX.

– Oliver

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

[Oliver Peters]

Also to clarify, the Avid number of 3 million users is a total for all of Avid’s products, whether Media Composer, Pro Tools, ISIS or an old copy of Avid Xpress. At least that’s the answer given at Avid Connect. So it isn’t purely Media Composer licenses.

– Oliver

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

[Charlie Austin]

[Franz Bieberkopf] “Here’s the revolution: Audio and Video in one application.”

That revolution started to happen about 20 years ago. It was called Avid Audiovision. They killed it off when they acquired Digidesign. It was a great app. The transition to ProTools when I was was mixing was painful.

Everyone’s needs in this regard are different. Personally, the last thing I want to do when I’m cutting something is bring up a bank of faders and start throwing them around. The mixer in Pr drives me nuts. To me, if X did have faders, having a master fader per role would be enough. It’s faster and more precise – for me – to do clip based leveling. A lot of mixers I work with spend more time adjusting clips in the DAW that throwing faders, they’re usually reserved for group master levels. Not always true, but not uncommon.

I think Apple is doing a lot of work “under the hood” on things like fcpxml that will open up some very interesting workflow possibilities. It’s not a sexy, in your face feature, but it’s really important for for things like Color, Audio, Asset Management, Versioning etc. Maybe it’ll make “mixing” better too. Who knows… 🙂

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Marcus Moore]

Here’s my general philosophy on this-

After having used X for 3 years now, I’ve come to believe that tracks are an impediment to speed in editing video. Before now, we’ve NEEDED to use the concept of tracks, but they were a concession to the audio side of the equation.

FCPX seems to me is putting more weight on the video side of that equation. It may not be a purely better audio solution, but a better video solution. If Apple can do what I’m hoping, then the net deficit on the audio side will more than made up for by benefits in speed and fluidity on the video side.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Marcus Moore] “I think the answer is pretty simple- Adobe is counting ALL Premier users, and not just those on CC. So that would include anyone using Premier from ANY Legacy CS package.”

Marcus,

It isn’t clear to me, but one way to interpret him would be all Premiere Pro users (discounting Premiere.) He also mentions 5 or 5.5 at the beginning of the interview, so maybe he uses that as the cut-off point.

Likely he’s using a broad, vague qualification that allows him the largest number.

On the other hand, Apple made no claims about users of 10.1 – by your logic, shouldn’t that be the cut-off for “current” users?

Edit: … and in any case, FCP 1-7 and FCP X are (uncontroversially, I think) considered different NLEs, not an extension or upgrade.

All the numbers should be taken as what they are – which isn’t much except maybe an upper limit. I agree we should question the claims and try to clarify, but that applies to Apple’s number as well.

Franz.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

Oliver,

Thanks, that was not clear from the previous discussion.

Franz.

[Charlie Austin]

[Franz Bieberkopf] “and so far Apple hasn’t hinted that it’s a problem they’re interested in with X.”

For better or worse, Apple never hints at anything publicly.

[Franz Bieberkopf] ” It’s interesting to see what new limitations people will accept with X and what they feel is important.”

That’s a fairly negative interpretation. 🙂 I find it limiting that I have to open up some big old mixing pane to adjust my audio. It’s all relative. 🙂

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Marcus Moore]

Just to be clear, I’ve never been much of a live mixer- and have always been happier with the more tedious results from key framing. And that covers my experience across AVID, M100, FCP, and FCPX.

So this isn’t a concession I’ve made specifically for FCPX’s sake.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Charlie Austin] “Everyone’s needs in this regard are different.”

Charlie,

One way to assess a tool is how readily it adapts to different needs.

[Marcus Moore] “FCPX seems to me is putting more weight on the video side of that equation. It may not be a purely better audio solution, but a better video solution.”

Marcus,

I’m intrigued by this in that it at least admits of certain ideological underpinnings in the design decisions. But again, if what you say is true, then FCPX will appeal more to editors who “put more weight on the video side of that equation”. That’s one way to describe it as an NLE.

Franz.

[Marcus Moore]

I think this is just another pointer to me that I think people have an over inflated sense of the size of our industry. I just don’t think the number are that huge for anyone.