-
FCPX and color correction tools
-
[Robin S. Kurz] “And after having corrected my image, how is that actually relevant information? I don’t even look at the color board while changing values (or after), I look at the scopes. For me, that’s the whole point. I don’t have to know what the opposite of “more yellow” etc. is (even if I do) to get what I’m looking for with the Color Board.”
I guess we will always disagree on this. I think that understanding color is useful when manipulating it. I think that UI elements should signal what they do. (And as for scopes, I look forward to Apple’s introduction of the vectorboard.)
I don’t have some big problem with the color board. It’s the same math, just a different UI. Any issues with the color board are minor in comparison to the fact that FCPX is missing some useful color tools, and the fact that FCPX requires third-party developers to jump through ridiculous hoops with their UI, and severely compromise the overall user experience.
Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive | RenderBreak [blog] | Profile [LinkedIn] -
[Robin S. Kurz] “Funny how when you go off on your Avid tangents, you are so quick to point all perturbed to the “DEBATE” in the title of the forum (conveniently ignoring the “FCP” part) for justification if someone has a problem with it… as long as it suits your narrative, all’s good. But only then of course. Such hypocrisy of a truly angry, frustrated individual, yes…
As so often, if one has no real arguments, get personal and go with the jejune, ad hominem “FANBOY!!1!” approach. Works every time. ????????
“Tangent’s ey? Thats rich.
Id for once like you to offer something constructive other than calling every other person’s idea that doesn’t coincide with yours “nonsensical” .
Theres alot of talented people on here with great ideas on how to make software better, you should pay attention instead of combatting every point because it doesnt suit your needs.
-
Your right, and thanks for the reminder about the ignore button.
-
[Neil Goodman] “you should pay attention instead of combatting every point because it doesnt suit your needs.”
The irony and projection continues… ????
Now if only some contribution of value on the actual subject would follow, as opposed to only jumping into threads to combat every(one’s) point just because it doesn’t suit your “needs” (whatever that even means)… gee, what a concept.
Your putting me on ignore would be a huge service to everyone, yes. Thanks! Much appreciated. ????????
-
I hate when I haven’t been following for a while, come back and there’s a million posts! How do I keep up!? LOL
Winston A. Cely
Editor/Owner | Della St. Media, LLC17″ MacBook Pro | 2.3 GHz Intel Core i7
4 GB RAM | Final Cut Studio 3 | FCPX | Motion 5 | Compressor 4“If you can talk brilliantly enough about a subject, you can create the consoling illusion it has been mastered.” – Stanley Kubrick
-
[Oliver Peters] “Because it will make the product better without requiring third party solutions. But I suppose most of the faithful X users don’t care about that. That’s coming through loud and clear on this thread!”
The ol’ “sheep” argument? Really? ????
Where’s the shame it not seeing need for or desiring something one personally doesn’t need, or in being content with what’s there? For many it’s equally (if not much more) of a question of how in the end than what or if. My preferred approach as well. Not like others who apparently strive for the longest feature list, with little to no regard for actual usability.In any case, I just finished some more extensive corrections in X, so I thought I’d come back to this while the experience is still warm in my noggin, which it wasn’t as much previously.
First off, amazingly, no one here ever mentioned: keyframes! Nobody misses them? Because that is actually one of the few things I’ve missed from day one, yes. Not being able to keyframe a correction/grade, e.g. for changing light conditions, clearly is quite the oversight. And yes, some sort of standard automated white-balance correction seems oddly amiss also, even though I’m more than capable of doing those myself and usually do anyway. I just know that’s something a lot of less experienced users need. If only the auto-balance were more reliable (and adjustable!) as far as that goes it’d be less of an issue also.
Having also gotten some custom LUTs from the cameraman, that area could also use some respective improvements/abilities as well, yes.
As far as color WHEELS are concerned? Sure, if it’s, as suggested, an option and not a replacement, why not? If that makes FCP more accessible and makes fewer brains go “Ew!” and shut down because they don’t get it right away, then go for it.
And would I like to have curves etc. by default? Sure. Anyone that has bought anything like Chromatic, Color Finesse et al clearly would, too! But to suggest that those that don’t NEED that level of control, which I’ll guarantee you is the vast majority, are somehow categorically against them or would somehow be upset if they did show up is just narrow-minded polemics. I suspect some are just afraid it’d lead to something a lá “elsewhere” where you have everything in your face all the time whether you want or need it or not, much like Bill (rightfully) argued. Something I’m sure Apple would never do anyway. As with so many other things, tuck it away by default and leave it to those that actually NEED it to pull it up. As long as it’s lean and mean, which I’m sure, if anyone, Apple is able to deliver.
And yes, anything that keeps me “compatible” to the rest of the FCP world when I want and need a higher level of control along the lines of CF etc., without requiring a purchase on the side of my counterpart to collaborate, as well as anything that removes as much need (as I even have left over) for ever passing anything over to Resolve as possible, is surely welcome, too! I just don’t want a Resolve in there, nor does the typical X user imho. As many times as I’ve heard “but I’ve got Lumetri!” (or whatever it is they use) in a nyeh nyeh tone, is as many times as I’ve seen complete confusion in that same person’s face when asked how to actually use it. 😛
Like I said, I think FCP already offers fully sufficient (whether super-“pro”-flashy or not) correction tools for the vast majority as it is and there are options for the rest. And with any other app on the planet, there is always room for improvement on any level. I’d e.g. just as much love to see a few things happen for audio for example as well. We’ll see.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Robin S. Kurz] “First off, amazingly, no one here ever mentioned: keyframes! Nobody misses them? Because that is actually one of the few things I’ve missed from day one, yes. Not being able to keyframe a correction/grade, e.g. for changing light conditions, clearly is quite the oversight.”
I’ve got so used to blading a clip then adding a dissolve to change the correction after it that I’d forgotten about key frames!
-
[Steve Connor] “I’ve got so used to blading a clip then adding a dissolve to change the correction after it that I’d forgotten about key frames!”
I know, right? ????
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up