-
FCPX is Ready for prime time
-
[Bill Davis] “Something to consider is all.”
Yes, absolutely. And I am. But “FCP X, Learn it”? Again, please.
Tim
-
Life. Live it!
-
Thanks Charlie.
As for those of us using CCs for things they were not designed for …
To quote Spinal Tap, “It’s such a fine line between stupid and clever.”
Doug D
-
‘Live it. Love it. Know it.”
Bill, I’ve looked at FCX three times since it came out, and cannot see how I will benefit from it. But my biggest stumbling block is the editing interface. I don’t like it, it doesn’t work for me. I didn’t see why that needed to change. But, that’s me, I’m becoming a dinosaur apparently.
When I first looked at FCP…back at version 2, I saw it as a great inexpensive tool that finally allowed us to edit side projects without having to plead with our employers to borrow the company Avid after hours. Then V3 came along and added a lot more things, and solved many issues I had with Avid. Then v4.5 solved more, and I jumped ship.
FCX doesn’t solve any issues I am having, and in fact adds a stumbling block. Editing with it is so vastly different that any muscle memory I have is gone. FCP 7, ADOBE Premiere Pro, Avid MC…all have the same basic editing style and toolset so I can easily move from one to another without being derailed too much. Those basic tools, and the other features do all I need. Where something doesn’t work on Avid, Premiere does it well, so I go there.
FCX gives me nothing I need, it isn’t seeing much of any use in projects I work on, so I see no need to learn it. That might change, it might not. But i dont see any reason to learn FCX unless a job requires it. And at this time, the prospect of that happening is very very slim.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
I actually wouldn’t have a huge issue with this if it also included the ability to lock of a span that I was working in and treated as such within the greater span or timeline. But without some sort of safety rails like that, it would be a nightmare. Also, a true “live”simultaneous editing would have editors fighting over position and view of the timeline and play head. And while we can generate change lists comparing two sequences, there is no ability to merge edits from two versions of a sequence although I went down that path with a patent years ago with timed management of all edits in a timeline with “use most recent, by user, etc.”
Michael
-
My experience going from FCP 7, then to Premiere, then to FCP 10 is that FCP 10 is worth learning because it it will save you massive amounts of time, aka you can make more money. Especially on long form projects which is what I’ve used it the most for. There are a few reasons for that. Once you really learn the program you can edit faster because of the timeline mechanics and the ridiculously powerful playback engine that cuts out almost need to render at all (depending on your hardware of course). Exporting is twice as fast as any other NLE I’ve seen. Some of the biggest time savers though come from the organizational system for media and projects. It is designed for organizing massive amounts of data (long form projects). The media manager in FCP X is by far the most advanced design I’ve seen with the greatest flexibility while working inside the NLE. The Event to Project relationships, Metadata tagging system, Key Wording, Roles system, Smart Collections, Favoriting system, multiple retainable In/Outs, Compound Clip system, three type customizable Marker system, and then the Timeline Index to keep track of/search for it all. There’s more but you get the point. It is very easy to share projects between editors but there are still a few advancements needed in the project sharing/archiving department for sure. The Multicam system is brilliant (and adobe is trying to rip it off as much as possible with each update).
I can’t understand how editors/producers can afford not to use it (other then just not understanding the advantages) in some way in their workflows just for the time saving/organizational reasons.
I’m totally fine if people want to use their favorite tool of choice for editing, or have to use another NLE because a studio mandates it. I just have the benefit of having used used three NLEs pretty extensively and I can’t imagine how anyone could work as fast on the others as you can in FCP X. I can’t speak to Avid but it hasn’t been known for having a speedy workflow since 1994.
Interesting article about FCP X being used on a Hollywood feature film being shot in Bulgaria:
https://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/1225-fcp-x-in-bulgaria-a-new-definition-of-professional
If you care to see the Multicam in action here’s a great example for you. This is just one way to do it. There a couple syncing features he doesn’t cover but it is still impressive:
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Google Youtube” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
-
[Douglas K. Dempsey] “Oliver, are you going to write a book”
LOL. No, but thanks for the vote of confidence.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Shane Ross] “FCX doesn’t solve any issues I am having, and in fact adds a stumbling block”
I think this article is apropos about now 😉
https://provideocoalition.com/kmcauliffe/story/do-the-professionals-care-about-fcpx-anymore
Honestly, though, I’ve been cutting a lot of professional work on X for the past 2 years. I like a lot of it and it has been holding up on the indie film I’ve been cutting. Yet, when I think about the complexity of a project like the feature film “Rush”, I find it inconceivable that cutting such a film with X would be a very smooth process.
I realize Apple (and most of the proponents here) couldn’t care less, but that’s an example where X simply isn’t the right tool. It doesn’t exhibit an interface and underlying architecture that scales to that level. At least not from my experience with it.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[TImothy Auld] “Yes, absolutely. And I am. But “FCP X, Learn it”? Again, please.
Tim
“But why does that bother you?
You’d expect any Raiders fan to say “the Raiders rock!” and everyone accepts that for exactly what it is. Someone who’s a fan of something publicly acknowledging that.
So WHY is it that when a FCP-X “fan” says “learn it!” which is, after all, just a public expression of an individuals experience and enthusiasm – NOT something that’s going to be enforced on anyone else – it becomes so important to deride the opinion?
I just don’t get that.
As rabid a supporter of X as I’ve been here, you’ve NEVER heard voices here being extremely derisive about anyone using AVID or Premier or Vegas. Occasional bad experiences, sure. But not push back when somebody likes those, right?
But since day one – there HAS been a vocal group who just can’t let any positive opinion about X go un-challenged.
That just seems weird.
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
Braden, in that article he says FCX is used to cut the EPKs for the film, not the film itself. The film itself is being cut on Avid. He mentions that the Avid editors from the movie were looking and scoffing at FCX. But then he mentions that he was headed back to the states to set up a feature that planned on using FCX.
If shot tapeless and delivered tapeless for digital projection, I think FCX would most likely be fine.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up