August 31, 2008 at 8:15 pm
Hi all,before going into the subject just want to let you know that i did my search on this forum but the last posts date from the beginning of this year so i’m trying to find out if there’s new developments on this: i’m looking to build an editing system at home, most of the work i’ll be doing is offline so i need to be “compatible” with both fcp and avid to taste. I guess by now you got the idea…..i want to install both applications on a:
Mac Pro Two 8 Cores 2.8GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Harpertown” processors
4GB memory (800MHz DDR2 fully-buffered DIMM ECC)
ATI Radeon HD 2600 XT graphics with 256MB memory
320GB Serial ATA 3Gb/s 7200-rpm hard drive1
Like i said i read some posts where people mention issues with leopard, installing apps in two different drives or on 2 partitions on the same drive etc, i know that my question seems to be simple but it really isn’t: is it possible for the 2 apps to co-exist on the same system and for me to edit and hand out offline projects to people working on both fpc and avid? Any help on the subject will be really appreciated.
August 31, 2008 at 9:13 pm
I’m not sure about them existing on the same system, but I do know that they each have very different file structure, and therefore don’t necessarily play nice with each other.
It sounds as if you would like to mix and match, and I don’t think its that easy.
At the very least you will want Automatic Duck. A third party program that makes going from one system to the other MUCH easier. I think you may need 2 different versions, one on the FCP side and one on the AVID side.
Its my understanding that very basic, cuts only type stuff, may make the transition between the two systems, but if that is the case, it would seem to make more sense to stick with just 1 of the 2.
I.E. why not stay within AVID, or FCP for all editing. As mentioned on the cow often, there really isn’t much need anymore to “offline”. Choose a system and stick with that from start to finish.
Just my humble opinion
August 31, 2008 at 9:54 pm
The problem is NOT how they interact with each other, but the different version of OS, QT, etc. that either are qualified to run under. Typically, Avid will lag behind Apple in qualifying their software, so it becomes very difficult to “sync” the latest versions of these NLE’s on the same drive. That’s why the easiest solution is to have separate bootable drives with proven OS and software versions.
August 31, 2008 at 10:07 pm
Exactly. I happen to have FCP 6.0.2 and Avid 2.8 on the same system, because they both like QT 7.4.5 and MacOS 10.4.11. However, Avid 3.0 is on a different drive, with different OS….although same QT version.
August 31, 2008 at 10:23 pm
Hey Todd, first and foremost thanks for your response….you actually brought a couple of good points one is i don’t want to mix and match projects between the 2 apps that’s exactly one of the reasons i’d like to have them both to avoid the automtatic duck route and instead deal with projects accordingly: fcp to fcp and avid to avid without crossing apps…..does it make sense?
I couldn’t agree more with you on the second point, the trend nowadays is to cut online once and for all since storage is somehow cheap but unfortunately in the editing world is inevitable that you’ll get or have to hand out projects in the editing platform you don’t have or cut something your client wants to online on a better finishing system….maybe i’m asking for too much but i’m just evaluating my options outhere, and i know that at the end this is possible it might not be so common but there’s people who has done it.
September 1, 2008 at 4:22 pm
That’s what I understand as well. Apparently, the local college will be stuck at FCP 6.0, as it needs to be limited to that older version of QT to be able to work with Avid. This is how it’s always been… Avid’s glacial pace of updating always holds FCP back… was that way for the 5-1/2 years I taught FCP and it apparently hasn’t changed in the last year…
Insight Productions Corp.
September 2, 2008 at 4:30 pm
Most dual platform builds we do entail either a dual partition or dedicated drives. The main reason, even though you may have a QT and OS version that are simpatico- often times Apple will update QT, iTunes and FCP concurrently to add more functionality. If you do upgrade to MC3 you will need Leopard and QT 7.4.5-7.5 which coexists more with FCP, that being said though they are each using resources codependent of each other. In a troubleshooting scenario it’s best to have them isolated as well. Best of luck.
September 2, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Hi — Just for the record I have the latest Avid MC and also the latest FCS installed and working fine on my Macbook Pro and Intel iMac. Previous version of Avid works fine on my Dual G5 along with FCS. No problems at all working with either tool, independent of each other. No dual boot or partitions.
They fight over the firewire port so don’t run them at the same time if you have a firewire deck connected. Without a deck I can have them both open. Call me crazy but I’ve had to do this for legacy projects.
The Avid is more picky about the graphics card installed so be careful there. Otherwise just install the software and get to work with the tool you need for the job.
September 3, 2008 at 1:24 am
Thanks Paul (that’s what i wanted to hear) and thanks everyone else for your responses, see how beautiful life can be making love instead of war, who would imagine both editing platforms living under the same roof a few years ago!!! they might even get married in the near future who knows… and have children……ok ok i just got carried away i still like my fcp better than the avid at work jejeje
May 16, 2009 at 11:57 pm
I have Macbook Pro 2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo. I have Avid installed on my laptop. Now I want to install Final Cut Pro. I was told I would need to reformat the HD, then partition, then add Final Cut Pro, Leopard & Qt to one partition and Avid, Leopard OS & QT to other partition (as on my Mac Pro). Can I operate them both on the same system without doing this? My media would all be on external drives.
Log in to reply.