-
#FCPX feature request
-
[Andy Mees] ” Did you try without the MXO2 installed at all, and if so, was it any stabler?”
I also thought about that Andy and tested after uninstalling the Matrox drivers too. No luck there either.
I think you should at least give STP a try to see if you get the same crashing and kernel panics I was getting. I frankly don’t think it’s possible that you won’t have the same issues, but I’d like to be proven wrong on this if at all possible.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.comPOST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.
-
Wow, Im surprised that everyones has had such a bad experience with STP. I do short form / commercials (30 sec to 5 min) on a Mac Pro I and I have NEVER had any of the variety of problems mentioned in this thread. I love its sophisticated tools and the wealth of SFX in the library. The loops are pretty great for creating soundtracks for projects. I guess either the time frame I work in or the platform I work on have insulated me from the nightmare you guys have experienced.
Tom Daigon
Avid DS / FCP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com -
[Tom Daigon] ” I guess either the time frame I work in or the platform I work on have insulated me from the nightmare you guys have experienced.”
Short-form, or 30-second movies as I like to call ’em, undoubtedly helps Tom. And, to be fair, the project I was working on was one initiated by someone other than me, and it’s possible that project was the source of some of the STP evil I encountered.
BTW, although very few FCS users use STP, I actually think it’s got a lot of nice features. I particularly like the ease of use in auditioning elements in the STP library. There’s no clicking and hitting play involved at all, just move the cursor, an item is selected and it plays. Way better and more efficient than the FCP browser.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.comPOST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.
-
Okay I feel better. I tried it once and it was completely unstable, unlike Logic which has been rock solid in my experience.
David A Fenton
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9Mu1dbRZYo -
I use both Logic and STP and both have been rock solid .
Tom Daigon
Avid DS / FCP / After Effects Editor
http://www.hdshotsandcuts.com -
I know this doesn’t help you guys in terms of roundtripping to FCP, but in the course of my weekly work I have to edit the audio on a 30-40 sermon for a podcast. I tried to do it in STP, but it was so cumbersome, that I gave up, but then (because like every good Final Cut Editor, I also own the Adobe Production bundle) I discovered Adobe Audition. It is so intuitive and works a lot like a video editor. A great application!
don walker
texarkana, texasJohn 3:16
-
[Tom Daigon] ” I have NEVER had any of the variety of problems mentioned in this thread”
I entirely second that – I use STP pretty much everyday (for short form work from 30 seconds up to about 10 minutes) and it works perfectly. In fact, I also have ProTools, the industry standard for audio post (which I have used professionally for more than ten years), but I would always prefer to work in STP given the choice both for speed and functionality.
Compared to ProTools 9, it’s insanely good value. The list of features that you have built in that in ProTools 9 would cost you many hundreds if not thousands of dollars extra in PT, are simply amazing: noise reduction; reconform (incredibly good and useful!), 5.1 mixing (yes, PT will charge you around $2K extra for the privilege!); a wealth of great sounding plug-ins (the basic PT will give you just one type of EQ and one type of compressor, all the rest you have to buy); a great library of sound effects and music loops. I would also say that PT is just a liable, if not more so, to instability. (ProTools has so far cost me thousands of dollars, whereas STP has cost me effectively none since I didn’t actually choose to buy it!)
So I’m amazed to see this thread where people have queued up to chorus: “I tried it once and it doesn’t work”. If the same comment were to be made on the FCP forum it would justifiably be shot down in flames, but because it’s about STP which non-one knows anything about it’s apparently fine to say it.
Looks like you’ll all get your wish, though. I have no doubt Apple will hear your comments and a really great product will go the way of Shake and be no more. What’s the point in Apple developing it any further when no-one can be bothered to learn it properly?
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “So I’m amazed to see this thread where people have queued up to chorus: “I tried it once and it doesn’t work”.”
So Simon, then let me ask you, what would you write here in the following instance?
If you were me, and you clearly knew your way under the hood of a Mac, and you rebuilt that Mac from the ground up, because STP made it crash constantly, even when all other apps run perfectly, and it kept crashing. Then, after four days of troubleshooting, without ever finding a solution, you finally had to revert to other less desirable software.
Please, let me know, what do you think I should have written? I’m all ears…
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.comPOST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.
-
You misunderstand. I’m all for learning new workflows, but whatever the changes are multiclip simply will not function without simultaneous viewing of all angles. Perhaps you don’t work with multiclip enough to appreciate this, but I can assure you that without this feature, however it’s implemented, multiclip would be broken. I agree that the current implementation could use improvement, particularly in regards to working with different types of source media. I am looking forward to almost all of the changes I have seen in FCX so far, so don’t get the idea that I’m “in love with the way FCP works right now”.
-
[David Roth Weiss] “Please, let me know, what do you think I should have written?”
Look, David, I know you’re fantastically knowledgeable when it comes to FCP and many other matters come to that (and I’ve benefitted from that knowledge frequently, as we all have), but that’s why I am surprised at your position in this case!
I’d say that your particular problem could have been down to corrupt media or a corrupt project (which can cause serious difficulties in STP as it can in many other applications, as I’m sure you know, but which are usually fairly easy to resolve), but without knowing a lot more about the details I couldn’t say for sure.
But if someone had written in the FCP forum that they were new to FCP and were having problems that led them to believe that the software itself was fundamentally defective (as you appear to be suggesting in the case of STP), I am sure you would have dealt with them appropriately!
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up