-
FCP X Summit: new features/news
-
[Steve Connor] “my personal opinion is that it’s a solid update but not particularly exciting.”
Thanks for the feedback Steve.
-
[Bill Davis] “I’ll give AVID a pass unless someone wants to include it”
I’ll include them, because there’s still a lot of development going on even if it doesn’t affect the UI as much. For example, in that time, they converted a 32-bit app into a 64-bit app, largely without skipping a beat, nor causing major upheaval for its users.
[Bill Davis] “So over the past 4 years, (when they’ve all been competing head to head)
Which tool do you feel has made the most progress? Is there a clear leader? “Absolutely Blackmagic Design.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Gabriel Spaulding] “They got it wrong? I don’t recall the initial UI itself preventing anyone from getting their work done”
Definitely got it wrong. Whether or not it worked well isn’t the issue. You’re talking about pace of development. They started the design, most likely before design trends changed, and then had to make changes a few versions later. Making such a change after release means that other feature requests go unaddressed.
[Gabriel Spaulding] “I see that as a great example of Apple doing what neither Adobe or Avid has done —re-thinking their approach and updating the infrastructure of the entire program. Was it really a misstep? Certainly Libraries are more flexible, but FCP X worked very well at launch. “
It was either a misstep or the product was released incomplete. IMHO, 10.0-10.1 was essentially a public beta. If you created edits prior to 10.1, those edits didn’t completely translate to 10.1 because of this change. I know – I had a few film that went through that transition. If you have a brand new design, those are things (Libraries or not) that have to be factored in. Not doing so is bad research, or simply trying to force a model onto customers that they don’t find adequate.
[Gabriel Spaulding] “What matters most to me —objectively—is HOW those features are implemented, and if that takes more time I’m happy to wait”
That’s changing the discussion. We were talking about pace of development, not specific feature comparisons. The fact that the app works is great and isn’t being questioned. It’s really a matter of whether it could have been/can be more in the same time frame.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Andrew Kimery] “To you point though, I think Apple can be more flexible than Adobe or Avid because Apple doesn’t depend on post/production/creative customers to keep the lights on.”
Apple also can focus on only developing for Apple OSs. No need to make it work also with Windows and/or Linux and/or Android. Plus, as it relates to FCPX/Motion/Compressor, the ProApps team can leverage some of the development that’s already been done by the macOS engineers. So they don’t have to create each and every piece of the media architecture independent of the OS.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
[Gabriel Spaulding] “What matters most to me —objectively—is HOW those features are implemented, and if that takes more time I’m happy to wait. It’s paid off so far.”
You are not the only one that thinks this way. If speed of development is top priority for most, there should be a lot more interest in BM. As fast as they move and as affordable as it is, I don’t see anybody in my town moving to it as their main ax. I don’t think people who sell it on here even use it as their main ax. And all the traffic is on this X forum. Crickets on theirs.
X didn’t have multi-cam when it came out, but it’s awesome now. It didn’t have Lanes when it came out but it’s awesome now. I like how the tools are implemented in X better than other programs whenever they get in there.
THAT’S, my top priority.I was getting it done in X before Libraries and I’m getting it done after Libraries. Not a big deal.
As far as this update goes, I’m glad they put 360 in there. Even though I don’t currently use it myself, I see it all over the place and I want to be ready if a client asks me for it. Heck, our local newspaper is even using it (online).
I’m glad they didn’t mess with my color board : )
Right now I feel like there is not much a client can ask me to do that I can’t get done inside of X.
I’m not looking to get out of it either. I want to be able to finish sound, and grade right inside the program. I know others need to send out, but I know going in that every producer of these NLE’s has as their goal to keep you in their program. I go about my work with that in mind. If I ever did send out to an advanced sound person I would be looking for a Michael Wohl type who understands sound and X, the program I started in.
Plenty of talented folks out there these days using X. I’d find them.
-
I agree completely.
The overall approach with FCP X seems to be to provide an extremely capable and stable NLE that does most things for most people, and rather than requiring everyone to pay for features they don’t need we can seek out 3rd party plug-ins to add on functionality. I’ve purchased Color Finale and Chromatic but with the new color tools in 10.4 I will no longer need those (I generally prefer Apple’s implementation of these sorts of tools anyway, particularly as I saw how they worked while at the FCP X Creative Summit). That is one area where Apple seems to have decided it best to provide these tools rather than requiring 3rd party tools. Of course, one could buy nearly every 3rd party tool and still come in cheaper than the annual cost of a Creative Cloud subscription.
Most of the complaints about the features that FCP X should have built-in are relevant to the high-end broadcast community and Hollywood. However, while these are huge, high profile industries they are a very small percentage of the total market, and these apparent missing features haven’t stopped companies from producing top notch broadcast content and Hollywood films within the FCP X ecosystem.
I’m curious about what Avid does, what Adobe does, what Blackmagic does. It’s interesting to me. But what they do has little to no effect on my workflow and my ability to produce content, because I am a FCP X user. I wonder why so many Avid and Premiere users are so obsessed with the development of FCP X if it does not affect them? Six years in it feels like Apple could add every possible feature and it still won’t sway anyone’s opinion of FCP X. This isn’t a problem with FCP X, it’s an emotional problem. Too many people can’t let go, and don’t want to share the same playground.
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com -
[Gabriel Spaulding] ” I wonder why so many Avid and Premiere users are so obsessed with the development of FCP X if it does not affect them? “
I also wonder about that when the replies go beyond what would seem just a general interest; for me it’s just about keeping up with what’s going on in the edit world.
FCPX didn’t meet our needs when it first came out (and still doesn’t in some ways), so when it came time to decide where to go from FCP 7, we chose Premiere. And then we eventually moved on to PC. So FCPX isn’t an option (without a lot of change) for us right now, but I still read these threads because I like to keep an eye on what the industry is doing—you never know what the future has in store.
I won’t say I don’t also find the occasional drama entertaining too.
-
[Gabriel Spaulding] “I wonder why so many Avid and Premiere users are so obsessed with the development of FCP X if it does not affect them?”
Anyone editing should be interested in all tools relevant to their work. In my case I’m at the finish end (grading in Resolve & audio post in Fairlight) so the quirks of each NLE impacts on my business. I need to get video & audio out so how each NLE works and delivers is highly relevant.
In the same way you write “I’m curious about what Avid does, what Adobe does, what Blackmagic does. It’s interesting to me.” Unsurprisingly non X users are similarly interested in what Apple is doing. We all justify our choices and think our perspective is the superior position but curiosity and an ability to be a bit more detached in deciding where to put your money in software is just being professional.
-
[Gabriel Spaulding] ” wonder why so many Avid and Premiere users are so obsessed with the development of FCP X if it does not affect them? Six years in it feels like Apple could add every possible feature and it still won’t sway anyone’s opinion of FCP X. This isn’t a problem with FCP X, it’s an emotional problem. Too many people can’t let go, and don’t want to share the same playground.”
I’m interested because I’m an editor. Simple as that. If one day FCPX can become my main tool it will. I hold no affection for software, no emotional attachments.
What’s more curious to me, is why after 6 years, X users still feel the need to overly defend X and justify their reasons for using it. usually with the same argument over and over again. If you lovei t -thats great for you, let us people who teter on the edge debate about how and why it could be better.
-
[Gabriel Spaulding] “I wonder why so many Avid and Premiere users are so obsessed with the development of FCP X if it does not affect them? Six years in it feels like Apple could add every possible feature and it still won’t sway anyone’s opinion of FCP X. This isn’t a problem with FCP X, it’s an emotional problem. Too many people can’t let go, and don’t want to share the same playground.”
I don’t think it has anything to do with Avid or Premiere users, it’s just humanity. Mac vs PC, Chevy vs Ford, Gibson vs Fender, Snap-on vs Craftsman, IndyCar vs F1, Xbox vs Playstation, Scripted vs Reality, etc.,.
Somewhere in the FCP X lore it gained traction that X has been beaten on like no other NLE (or possible even no other product) before it and I just don’t see it. X is going through the same growing pains that everything else goes through. I mean, six years into the life of FCP Legend and it was still seen in major markets as an NLE for people that can’t afford a ‘real’ NLE even though the feature set was mature and it wasn’t fighting the uphill battle of ‘reinventing editing’. I think product years 8 and 9 were probably the strongest in terms of momentum in the industry (of course all that momentum came to a screeching halt when Apple hit the reset button in a massive way with X).
But even with the levels of acceptance Legend made there were still a lot of people that saw it as a lesser program. It’s just the way things go. In the NLE space I think Premiere has probably has the longest slog, and I regularly run into people that have sworn off Avid because Avid did something to piss them of in 2005. Speaking of Avid, I doubt linear and film editors welcomed Avid with open, loving arms when it first rolled off the line in ’89.
Maybe the reason some X users perceive more heat is because many former FCP Legend users moved to Avid and/or PPro so hangouts (both real and virtual) that used to be FCP-centric changed to having a more mixed clientele. This change caused the inherently insular situation of FCP users hanging out with FCP users, Avid users hanging out with Avid users, etc., to be disrupted. For a time X users were ‘homeless’ until the community grew and congealed enough to find/create their own X-centric hangouts.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up