-
FCPX Newbie – is learning FCPX worth the time?
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “The project I described is just pushing past 100 hours of source material with more shoots to come, and this is typical for the projects I work on. The mix of formats is also typical.
When I read about restricted timeline durations, the difficulties of the timeline paradigm, an underdeveloped audio mixing paradigm, and uncertainty with compound clips, I am not enticed by small examples. I’m not won over by the use of meta-data as a selection tool (though I understand others find it useful), but I am excited by the new push in terms of integrating meta-data into editing software (FCPX is not alone in needing development on that front).”
Well my current project has 31 hours. Nothing FCPX cares about. It works just like it does with 2 clips.
Timeline duration limitations? Never heard that one. Tried it now. Put 4 hours into a project/timeline and made a compound out of it. dropped another few hours. made a compound of all again. dropped more hours and compounded the lot. In the end I had over 15 hours in one timeline compounded about 7 times into each other. I can skim in the timeline and in the project browser. FCPX does´t really care. It takes about 40 seconds until FCPX responds when you drop 4 hours into a timeline. That´s the only holdup.
difficulties of the timeline paradigm…..as you can imagine I disagree there. There are workarounds needed in certain situations, but once you used X you are forced to many more workarounds in FCP7 when going back. And soon you realize they are not workarounds, but different approaches to the subject just like PP6, Avid and Edius do different tasks different.
audiomix is currently underdeveloped. Agree.
uncertainty with compound clips? What is that about? They work great for me. What´s uncertain there? Compounds are even a great tool to mimic tracks if needed/wanted.
Metadata: Just like you I do not use it (enough) on import. Anyway not more than the way FCP7 can use it (camera name etc). The organizational tools that make X better are the metadata the editor creates. Range based keywords, smart collections and the way you can “bin” your footage easier than in other NLEs. Sure you can sub clip and duplicate in FCP, but X does it much more elegant and the event is better structured with a better visual overview than the bins in FCP7.
I am afraid some here still are thinking 10.0.0 when talking about FCPX. A lot has changed. A lot of uncertainty and bugs are gone. A lot of different workflows have proven to be just fine in X and most requests I see are easily handled. Most, Chris Harlan for example has some specific audio-requests, which X can´t easily handle yet. At least from my point of view, because I simply don´t do 5.1/7.1-editing.
-
[Andrew Richards] “[Shane Ross] “I highly doubt FCX will ever see the proliferation that FCP 7 did in this town.”
Nobody does blacklisting like Hollywood.
“Knowing some of the people who lived through that, I’d just have to say that is a pretty cheep shot, and in no way comparable to anything happening with X.
-
[alban egger] “The only lingo issue is the PROJECT, which is a TIMELINE. I can live with the event name, but project is just wrong, agreed. If they did it to be different does´t matter really, but it seems that way and it does´t work. We still call the timeline timeline here, although we are used to the term “event” by now.”
alban,
I know what you’re saying, but I think Apple has this right. In X, it’s only a “timeline” when you’re working directly IN the storyline editor.
When you “back out” of your timeline in X, you’re in the Project Library – which is essentially an expression of all your timelines – and more. It’s a place where you can see, scan, judge and critically, “export or publish” your work.
At the project library level, you can’t change your content. That’s reserved for the Tiimeline. Plus the term “timeline” is too familiar to too many editors and the term has traditionally indicated the disconnected, separate entities in most NLEs – and in X, “timelines” are far, far from disconnected and separate.
I agree that when you’re working INSIDE the storyline – you ARE in a timeline, so using that term there is perfectly appropriate.
But when you’re working in other parts of X, such as the Project Library, the term “timeline” poorly reflects the new thinking about project organization that X represents.
New terms for new approaches, IMO.
“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor
-
[Chris Harlan] “Knowing some of the people who lived through that, I’d just have to say that is a pretty cheep shot, and in no way comparable to anything happening with X.”
Too soon indeed then. That was supposed to be black comedy, I know very well how bad a time that was.
Best,
Andy -
[alban egger] “Well my current project has 31 hours. Nothing FCPX cares about. It works just like it does with 2 clips.”
Alban,
Thanks for this.
Most of the reports I’ve read from those working with X seem to report short timelines as optimal (I did a quick search but can’t find any references – so maybe I imagined that).
There are certainly few reports of people using X with large amounts of footage over long edits. So if you have experience, please post.
As for the rest – I’ll resist repeating myself here (timeline, audio, bins vs. sequences, compound clip issues all covered many times), except to say that it hasn’t yet enticed me to experiment.
Franz.
-
(Edit: double post)
-
[Andrew Richards] “Too soon indeed then. That was supposed to be black comedy, I know very well how bad a time that was.
“And I responded far too sharply. There was just so much anger for so long. In film school, I had teachers that had been black-listed. Al Levitt was my second year writing teacher, and what happened to him and his career was just awful. On the other hand, “Hollywood” took care of him, too. Folks like Walt Disney knowingly hired him under his pseudonym, for which, he was ever grateful. Of course, Al’s been dead for almost a decade now, so maybe I should let it go some.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “There are certainly few reports of people using X with large amounts of footage over long edits. So if you have experience, please post.
As for the rest – I’ll resist repeating myself here (timeline, audio, bins vs. sequences, compound clip issues all covered many times), except to say that it hasn’t yet enticed me to experiment.”
What is a long project to you? I made a 52-minute sports-documentary for a festival that was done in 10.0.0!! And it worked. It had 7.000clips, about 55 hours footage.
I had problems on my 2008 MBP with 4GB RAM, but my 2009 MacPro with 16 GB had no issues at all. Now my 2011 MBP edits big projects fine as well. So hardware might have been an issue from early adopters.16GB RAM are needed for long-edits. That´s about it. Since 10.0.4 it is a very complete feature set with 3rd party apps filling some specialists´ holes (e.g. OMF out, Xto7, 7toX).
I am also repeating myself here 😉 but a lot of the perception of FCPX comes from the first 3 days of its launch and urban myths that evolved from that, not from hands-on experiences.
A lot of my stuff is broadcast as 26-minute pieces, but I have no doubt a two hour-edit from 10.000 clips or a series of ten 45-minute films would work just fine in X within one event.
-
[alban egger] ” Since 10.0.4 it is a very complete feature set with 3rd party apps filling some specialists´ holes (e.g. OMF out, Xto7, 7toX).”
Alban,
“Complete feature set” is a subjective term. There have been issues reported with some of these third party solutions. Have you used them a lot?
[alban egger] “What is a long project to you?”
A lot of posts I’ve read are by people working regularly on short pieces (10mins or less). By long form I mean (arbitrarily) an hour or longer, usually with high shooting ratios, and often with long edit periods. Your experience seems to fit into this.
[alban egger] “a lot of the perception of FCPX comes from the first 3 days of its launch and urban myths that evolved from that”
I read here regularly and try to keep up on the latest – I don’t perpetuate myths. There are people using X successfully, that seems clear. On the other hand I think your trouble free experience with X is unusual, at least in terms of posts I read here.
Franz.
-
[alban egger] ” I have no doubt a two hour-edit from 10.000 clips or a series of ten 45-minute films would work just fine in X within one event.”
Alban,
… a sampling of some of the threads I’ve read concerning issues in long projects:
https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/37972#37972
This one is about “massive amounts of footage” (by which they mean only 700 Gigs) and “long timelines” (over 30mins as well as discussion of the events folder getting too bloated (from 75 scenes).This was Craig Seeman‘s assessment in that thread (you may have a different one):
So the digestible version would be:
• A Job can have multiple Events in many cases if large.
• Event based Compound Clips are work areas that are to be dropped into Projects/Timelines and broken apart, not used as Clips.
• We need to examine how to handle Event based Compound Clips when they need to be divided, to avoid bloat.
….We do need to think more about workflow for large projects.https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/28761#28761
Steve Connor, Hunter Weeks posted more positive experiences with larger projects.https://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/36301#36301
on disk access issues, “background” rendering, “native” editinghttps://forums.creativecow.net/thread/335/34096#34096
regarding timeline mechanics and also the bloating issue with compound clipsSome of those maybe 10.0.3 – I think most are 10.0.4
Franz.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up