-
FCP X features or lack thereof. Your opinion on the rationale.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “And why doesn’t every DAW support the open and free to use fcpmxl, or provide a free translation tool?”
Exactly. As far as I can see, Apple has in fact done their homework and even continue to do so. So how is it asking too much to now have others do their’s (many of which are and don’t seem to have a problem with it)?? That’s the “standard” logic I’m having a really hard time following. But then I guess some people would have thought it a much better idea to “standardize” FCPXML 1.0 and leave it at that?
Especially since it’s funny how e.g. Adobe has found time to fiddle with (as in change) the XMEML they export several times, but never found any time to simply support FCPXML. Even AFTER they bought Automatic Duck who were already doing it! Meanwhile FREE software such as Resolve support the new FCPXML the day after it is released.
It’s a mysterious world, no?
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Robin S. Kurz] “So remind me… when, how and where do I not have that ability with FCP X again? Be it via XML or with 3rd party apps? I’m very curious.”
If it’s built in to the app and therefore seldom updated it must be more professional.
Nowadays I just turnover a no effort on my part DRP project file as opposed to an EDL and they are ecstatic I even bothered to make sure the footage was linked to the drive I send them.
The last feature the colorist was able to open Resolve, import the project and start making looks. No online was needed.
But I guess this is somehow not professional next to EDLs. (Which I can make from FCP X)
-
[Darren Roark] “If it’s built in to the app and therefore seldom updated it must be more professional. “
????
Another reason I’m glad none of that ancient, painfully limited, proprietary nonsense is built-in? Because that forces the one or other person/developer to finally get off it and demand others do, too! To actually claim anyone actually needs EDL with a straight face just boggles my mind, sorry. No, no one needs EDL, but everyone needs to kill EDL and others for the useless, vastly inferior exchange format of yestercentury that they are. Or is anyone actually going to claim that there is any reason EDLs of all things are still used other than laziness, complacency or even just plain spite? DAWs would even have by far the least work supporting XML, since none of the vastly more complex video attributes and information is of any interest to them. So yeah… what’s their excuse if not the aforementioned? Or make a side-car app for your DAW like Marquis Broadcast has, sell it for less and even make a buck off it!
And yes — staying with Apple — just as I greet the fact that the iPhone does not have a headphone jack and the new MBP doesn’t have PCIMCIA or an SD slot or Firewire or USB 3. That, for me, is what is called forward thinking progress, whether someone want to call me a “fanboi!!1!” for it (or for lack of any real arguments) or not. ????
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Robin S. Kurz] “Another reason I’m glad none of that ancient, painfully limited, proprietary nonsense is built-in? Because that forces the one or other person/developer to finally get off it and demand others do, too! To actually claim anyone actually needs EDL with a straight face just boggles my mind, sorry. No, no one needs EDL, but everyone needs to kill EDL”
I wasn’t aware that it was still needed anywhere! As you say, why on earth would any DAW still need one!
-
[Steve Connor] “As you say, why on earth would any DAW still need one!”
A DAW in fact being the one needing it the least by far. I don’t actually even know of one that supports the use of them (are there any??). EDLs are entirely useless when it comes to audio, i.e. even more so than they are for video.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Robin S. Kurz] “Or is anyone actually going to claim that there is any reason EDLs of all things are still used other than laziness, complacency or even just plain spite?”
It’s the last one, and the conform labor is clung to like a full canteen in a drought. Most big name post houses will not accept a Resolve project, only an EDL.
No XMLs, no project files, just EDLs.
My favorite are the places that switched their color systems because Resolve dropped in price to $1K.
-
[Darren Roark] “No XMLs, no project files, just EDLs. “
The SOP at many high-end color grading facilities in LA is to require EDLs. Not XML, AAF, etc. The reason is that they are using Linux-based systems and parse the EDLs into what they need. They also will not accept anything that requires speed changes, mixed frame rates, etc.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “The SOP at many high-end color grading facilities in LA is to require EDLs. Not XML, AAF, etc. “
Just because something is a standard operating procedure doesn’t make it right.
[Oliver Peters] “The reason is that they are using Linux-based systems and parse the EDLs into what they need. “
This can be done with the Resolve project without needing an EDL conform.
Many of them also still have outdated servers that require max 2GB file chunks.
Shouldn’t really be my client’s problem.
[Oliver Peters] “They also will not accept anything that requires speed changes, mixed frame rates, etc.”
Getting speed changes out of Avid into any color finishing is hell. I don’t blame them.
There are plenty of places who are willing to adapt.
-
[Darren Roark] “Just because something is a standard operating procedure doesn’t make it right.”
And that in a nutshell is why I want editors to own tools that (for whatever crazy reason to them) allows them to deliver what the next facility down the chain actually wants. When I am grading or mixing I am not going to dictate to the director what is right or wrong in their film. I try to give them what they want with value added. If you think post facilities are wrong then you just aren’t doing your job.
I really don’t need to explain why OMFs are sometimes better than AAFs or why fcpxml is not a supported format in my DAW when it does AAF,OMF AES-31 and gosh yes EDLs. Sometimes I need everything. XML relinking is always an adventure and if I say I need an EDL to drop into a text editor so I can do a quick find on a file name when I am on the phone to the edit room to tell them which files are missing from the drive then bloody well should give me an EDL. So stop wasting my time by telling me what limited tools that suit you are always enough. I get that you and Robin don’t get it. I’m used to working with editors that at least accept that I might just know what I need.
-
[Robin Kurz]”Or is anyone actually going to claim that there is any reason EDLs of all things are still used other than laziness, complacency or even just plain spite?”
Yes. I sometimes want one for none of those reasons. You are just plain ignorant if you can’t accept that more than one form of interchange has viable practical uses. At times I need xml, OMF, AAF and EDLs just to sort the mess that some know all editors create. I always want a reference video too or is that too old school?
You might embrace the Apple concept that we all need to be forced off working interchange formats but you do not pay for the workflow consequences of that disruptive attitude. I accept that Apple plays that way and will never build in anything other than fcpxml. Don’t expect me to love them for it because it costs me time and I don’t charge by time but by the job.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up