FCP X Design Influences

[Eric Santiago]

Agreed and hopefully Apple will let us break it up across multiple screens 🙂

[Oliver Peters]

[Eric Santiago] “hopefully Apple will let us break it up across multiple screens”

I typically work in dual-display situations and have set up some layouts that work well for me, which I’ve posted about before. One thing I’ve done is map a number of the window on/off functions across the function keys. Even though some of these already exist in the defaults, I still find workspace switching is faster with the F keys. It quickly allows me to put the viewer on the left or right screen, open scopes or the inspector, and so on. While a custom docking set-up would still be preferable, I’m pretty happy with the way this now works for me.

– Oliver

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

[Paul Neumann]

I use HP workstations right now (day gig) and Camtasia 8.6 is the most FCPX-like feel I’ve ever experienced outside of Mac. That rubbery/fluid timeline thing in full effect.

I don’t use Camtasia for Mac, but would reckon it’s the same. Very familiar feel and look.

[Craig Shields]

[Oliver Peters] “Even Premiere Pro CC 2015 has picked up some of this aesthetic with the introduction of the Lumetri Color Panel (controls on the right, scopes on the left).”

Wasn’t Lightroom already doing this?

[Andrew Kimery]

I know it’s not from FCP X itself, but Apple’s flat UI design has certainly creeped into other applications for better or for worse (more worse than better IMO).

-Andrew

[Oliver Peters]

[Andrew Kimery] “but Apple’s flat UI design has certainly creeped into other applications”

I don’t know if that’s Apple or just the current flavor among designers in general.
What a fickle buch 😉

You see flatness all over. For example, starting with Windows 8, MS went that direction. Just like website design. Everyone has decided to jump on the HTML5 vertical-scrolling-page bandwagon. You get that in Muse, but it’s like all of a sudden that’s the only way a site should look.

– Oliver

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

[David Mathis]

I am seeing a bit of this in Fusion, remaining neutral in my opinion.

[David Mathis]

Oliver,

Resolve feels like a combination of FCP X, general UI; a bit of Avid due to tracks; and a little bit of Smoke, due to OFX being added into the nodes. Only downside with Resolve is the need to render OFX and transitions, otherwise a step in the right direction. Of course, that could be another topic. My two cents, whatever it is worth.

[Dennis Radeke]

[Craig Shields] “Wasn’t Lightroom already doing this?”

Yes, Lightroom was the first Adobe application to show a newer interface which included workspaces on the top (library, develop, etc.) and a progressively revealing/deep aspects to manipulating your image. In Premiere Pro, we call this feature ‘stacked panels’. As a side note, we’ve taken the idea of stacked panels and made it a new customizing option for most panels in Premiere Pro.

Lightroom came out in 2007 so predates FCPX by quite a large margin.

I will be very forthright in saying that my bias for Adobe’s general UI design is pretty high, so feel free to disagree, but I don’t really see any UI influence from FCPX in this case.

Dennis – Adobe guy

PS – I launched FCPX to make sure I hadn’t missed anything (you’ll point out if I did) and it made me touch the keyframe editor…

[Oliver Peters]

[David Mathis] “Resolve feels like a combination of FCP X, general UI; a bit of Avid due to tracks; and a little bit of Smok”

It feels to me like R11 was more like FCPX in appearance. Then with R12, they’ve come up with their own style. Possibly a foreshadowing of where FCP X could go with a flatter look. 😉

– Oliver

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