-
FCP-X and the Odd Couple intertwine.
-
In other words, we all deserve a box of cigars for learning X.
-
[Jason Jenkins] “I’ve been using the disk image method of organization on my 6TB RAID 5.”
Is there a link on this method? Was it discussed before?
Thanks!
-
[Bill Davis] “Really?
I’d be interested in your reasoning supporting the above comment Neil.
I’ve finished and delivered 17 paid projects to date and not one of them missed deadline because of anything I can attribute to the software.
Yes, actual learning is required to operate this software. And no, it’s not perfect. But to describe it as “buggy as all hell” nearly totally miss-represents the state of the software in my experience as a daily user.
To my thinking “bugs” are repeatable flaws in software code that are reproducible, universal, and stop the user from being able to do things they need to do. “Bugs” technically aren’t missing features, or elements that software A does that software B does not.
Do you use it regularly? If so, where are these “bugs” causing you grief? Are they show stoppers, or merely annoyances? Have you missed deadlines?
We’re all here essentially learning about the software so I’d like to know what you can factually contribute to the discussion.
You say you’ve experienced this software as “buggy” and I’d like to know how and why.
“You said it best in your original post. When i meant buggy as hell its the constant beachballs i and a bunch of other people in this same thread are getting when doing the simplest things, or trying to use long clip and or long sequences/timelines, whatever they are called now. Its the slowness and sluggishness of it. Im perfectly sure you can deliver your projects on time, but that doesnt mean its not a buggy program.
I have taken the time to learn the software, its not rocket science. I understand the difference bewteen it and legacy and how it takes a different approach. Its no excuse for beach balls all the time.
Neil Goodman: Editor of New Media Production – NBC/Universal
-
btw.. I havent missed any deadlines or failed to deliver because i wouldnt use this on a paid freelance job, Unless the client asked for it, and i fully explained to him the consequences of it. Ive simply been putting it through the paces, doing tutorials, and LEARNING the software to see if i liked it, and while theres stuff i like, theres way more stuff i dont.
Neil Goodman: Editor of New Media Production – NBC/Universal
-
[Richard Herd] “Is there a link on this method? Was it discussed before?”
Richard, this is where I started: https://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/fcp_x_managing_disk_image_martin.html
Jason Jenkins
Flowmotion Media
Video production… with style!Check out my Mormon.org profile.
-
[Richard Herd] “In other words, we all deserve a box of cigars for learning X.”
Well, I’d take the equivalent in low fat frozen yogurt treats!
The big take away is that again, this is a “re-invention” not any sort of “update.”
I think X was made for the era we’re migrating towards where larger data pipes, ever faster processors, and I/O via technologies like Thunderbolt increasingly make handling big caches of data faster and more sure.
To me, this feels like back in the early days of Firewire, where working with anything beyond 3.5Mbps DV was asking for trouble. As the system plumbing and pipes developed, life got a lot easier, quickly – and before you knew it FCP was handling HD and SDI streams as happily as it ever handled Firewire 400.
The hardware had to catch up to the capabilities of the software – and both grew together.
I think that’s simply happening again with X.
In fact I’m pretty sure it is, since I have a lot more issues running it on my Quad core MacPro that’s 3 years old, than I do on my i7 Core Duo Laptop that’s less than a year old.
FWIW.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor
-
[Jim Giberti] “And then there’s the issue of having to re-render some projects every time you open the project.”
Gosh, next I fear you’re gonna report that you’re encountering the dreaded clip collisions that created this entire fiasco…
On that note, some day we’re likely to find out that Bill Davis was the sole complaintant about clip collisions in legacy, and then we’ll know exactly why he spends so much time trying to put lipstick on this pig. 🙂
-
[Bill Davis] “Have you noticed that part of the confusion with X …”
Bill,
Where you seem to find confusion, I see lucid judgement: there are complex (and simple) workflows which are just not suited to enduring the FCPX experiment. There is no confusion about that.
One of the continuing frustrations that I’ve had with FCP 2 through 7 is the poor design approach to managing projects – an oversight which was perhaps addressed by FCP Server (I am not familiar enough with it). But this aspect of the software contributes to my sense that Apple tend to muck about with software only until boredom sets in, leaving many outstanding issues.
When I read about your issues with the upgrade and ongoing issues with larger projects, I cringe. For me, project management is a fundamental for NLE design – by this I mean “projects” as people speak about them in colloquial terms (not in the niche definition that Apple has developed). That a design team would sit down and reserve this aspect for later development or third party solutions or actually just not think about it boggles my mind.
It doesn’t leave me confused, though.
Franz.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “For me, project management is a fundamental for NLE design – by this I mean “projects” as people speak about them in colloquial terms (not in the niche definition that Apple has developed).”
I use FC Server with shared storage and collaborative editing (FCP7) on a routine basis at a client site. It is a very weak asset manager, but a very good workflow manager. When used with FCP7, you get an environment not unlike Avid Interplay. From what I can tell, that is absolutely NOT the approach Apple built into FCP X.
I do not understand how Apple expects FCP X to work, when you have 50 different projects (i.e. client productions or jobs) and each of these has several dozen Projects (i.e. edited sequences) as part of getting to one or more masters tied to that job. In the current design, you either have to constantly move media around or you have to have EVERYTHING online. Neither is viable. And I’m sorry, but the disc image “solution” (yes I know it works) is about the dumbest joke of all. We might as well just all go back to putting individual projects on individual FireWire drives. Pretty 1990s, don’t you think? 😉
This is a fundamental design issue that absolutely has to be in the design from day one. It isn’t, which gives me great concern that it was even contemplated as needing to be part of the way FCP X can be used. No offense meant with the iMovie moniker, but that’s the exact same approach the same developers took with iMovie. It’s great when you only work on one project/session/job and then move on to the next. It works for journalists slapping a news story together for a nightly broadcast. It works for editors doing convention gigs. It doesn’t really work for most places that function as ongoing post-production businesses of any size.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “It’s great when you only work on one project/session/job and then move on to the next. It works for journalists slapping a news story together for a nightly broadcast. It works for editors doing convention gigs. It doesn’t really work for most places that function as ongoing post-production businesses of any size.
“Pretty much nails the lid on the coffin Oliver.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up