FCP X at the NAB Supermeet – Thomas Grove Carter live edit demo.

[Andy Patterson]

Are you being served?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mz6wvKUsP6M

Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!

This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.

[Steve Connor]

I think Apple should be linking to this on their FCPX page 🙂

[Bill Davis]

I watched Tom’s demo from in the audience. Hearing whispered comments around me like “wait a second, he’s editing that fast WHILE the timeline is playing back in real-time?”

I kinda wanted to whisper back “Yes, and on a totally stock TouchBar MacBook pro – the exact same rig you can buy at the Apple store tomorrow” – and the same one people who don’t actually edit in X keep saying is “underpowered and lame” all over the internet.

Kinda doesn’t look all that “underpowered and lame” here – huh?

Oh well.

Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.

[Andy Patterson]

[Bill Davis] “and the same one people who don’t actually edit in X keep saying is “underpowered and lame” all over the internet.”

Could you please link me to such a quote ? It should not be hard since you claimed it is all over the internet. Having said that I don’t see people saying X is under powered. I do see people saying Premiere Pro uses old laggy outdated code. I’ve seen people make those comments right here on the Cow. I have also seen many people claim Adobe needs a total rewrite of the code but I don’t see the same thing said about FCPX. Many people in 2011 claimed you needed a $7500.00 work station in order for Premiere Pro to edit AVCHD in real-time. In 2014 the buzz was that you needed a $7500.00 to edit 4K in real-time using Premiere Pro. Both statements were incorrect. I can show a video of my mediocre $800.00 system editing several layers of 4K with each layer having several filters in real-time using Premiere Pro but when Premiere Pro does it, it just not impressive. Why is it impressive if FCPX does it but Premiere Pro needs a total rewrite of the code when it does the exact same thing?

[Bill Davis] ”
Kinda doesn’t look all that “underpowered and lame” here – huh?”

Who said it was?

[Oliver Peters]

[andy patterson] “Are you being served?”

Huh?

– Oliver

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

[Andy Patterson]

[Oliver Peters] “[andy patterson] “Are you being served?”

Huh?”

Did you watch my video link? You do realize the commercial Thomas edited was a parody of the British TV show “Are You Being Served”? Does it makes sense now?

[Scott Thomas]

[andy patterson] “Having said that I don’t see people saying X is under powered. “

He’s not saying FCPX is underpowered. Reread his message.

[Scott Thomas]

I should have been clearer. He wasn’t talking about people calling FCPX underpowered and lame.

[Brian Seegmiller]

The difference between PP and FCP X in my opinion is mostly how the edit gets done. For me it is editing tools and features that allow for a faster workflow. FCP X does this for me. No more clip collisions for me.

[Andy Patterson]

[Scott Thomas] “I should have been clearer. He wasn’t talking about people calling FCPX underpowered and lame.”

If he is talking about people commenting on the laptop being under powered it depends on what needs to be done. No one said you cannot edit video using an Apple laptop. For certain projects a laptop (even using FCPX) would not be the best option.