-
FCPX Newbie – is learning FCPX worth the time?
-
[Scott Sheriff] “In case you haven’t read any of my posts, you need know I’m no fan of X.
In this forum you will find a small cluster of fans who will no doubt extoll the virtues of of movie hero, and talk about how they use it on project after project with excellent results. All of which is subjective to say the least.
If you are asking if you should stick with tried and true software like FCP, which is a suite of applications that cover several disciplines, and translates easily to most other proven editing platforms or go with movie hero which is essentially imovie on steroids, just look at jobs posted in the year and a month that X has been around paying careful attention to the rate offered for FCP, Avid, Premier editors vs editors who know X.
If you do that you will find the real answer to your question.“
X shortcoming aside, I haven’t seen one person asking for an X specific editor yet (besides the rate), and i do alot of freelance. I have it in my toolkit, and have been poking it with a stick, just cause i thought it would come up one day, but really i dont think anyone in LA is taking it seriously yet.
Neil Goodman: Editor of New Media Production – NBC/Universal
-
[Mark Dobson] “… It is now really easy to quickly organise a ton of clips into a clear structure, to hide rejected material, to even create sub edits, using compound clips, …”
Mark,
This is “really easy” to in FCP7, as well as pretty much any NLE as far as I can tell. Meta data can help in the process (for some approaches) but it is not necessary, and it isn’t clear that it makes the first stages of editing universally “easier”. I have no doubt that it has made your process quicker and easier, but I use very little meta-data in my process and I don’t foresee that changing in the near future, quite aside from choice of NLE.
[Mark Dobson] “For someone working with file based formats, doing everything ‘in-house’ and delivering a file based end product what possible advantage is there in returning to FCP7 or Premier Pro?”
… preference, habit, other features, integration with other software, integration with other users, ease of use, price (if you already own FCP7), …
The reality is that FCPX is one of several options now. If you’re trying to make a case that FCPX is better, you haven’t. It’s certainly worth exploring and some users will find it to their taste, while others won’t.
Franz.
-
[Chris Harlan] “If I had to choose a single piece of software for a video editing business it would NOT be FCP X. Its far too limiting. Of course, in other arenas, it could be all you need.”
We understand this about you, Chris. You’re heavily invested in what you’ve always done and the needs of your current business model. That’s fine. But perhaps what’s most “limiting” here isn’t X, but the way you emotionally react to those who appreciate it – which tends to drive you to trot out this kind of language?”
Ploy? Cogs?
Are you doing lots of work for either Fox or MSNBC? You know, someplace where it’s fashionable to use language to belittle and marginalize in order to puff up an otherwise weak position?
But on to the heart of things…
[Chris Harlan] “I still think that’s a false dichotomy, Bill. CS6, for instance, offers quite a few more tools to a one-person-bander than X does. I mean, way more. Beyond not-even-in-the-same-ballpark more. And, its design lets it play with other tools, like DAWs, that that one-person-bander may also own, but, since it also has a DAW, that might not be necessary. And, it fits on the same laptop as X. Your rather constant ploy seems to be that anything that is not X is about big, last-century video and is used by cogs or “role players” in someone else’s machine.
If you’re correct in your analysis, Chris. Then X will fade away and Premier will become ascendent.
But I simply don’t see that happening.
The only people I see talking about PPro are the ones with large vested operations and want a tool that’s “more like FCP Legacy” largely for their editing style comfort.
As new editors flood in (and they are, in legions) they’ll need to choose a tool.
I believe that tool will increasingly be FCP-X for lots of reasons. The primary is that it represents three market-making realities. It’s inexpensive. It’s very, very capable with tremendous “back end” potential rapidly developing. And, unless the editor is burdened with lots of ingrained practices that have to be jettisoned in order to adapt to it’s new processes, it’s extremely easy to acquire and learn at a basic, functional level.
And I can’t emphasize that last element enough.
Buying X is a couple of clicks and a single, clean choice. With some basic training you can be cutting basic video on it in a couple of hours. The “auto” stuff in it makes basic easy in X. Easier than any other software I’ve used. Then like a good DSLR, as you learn to take control, it lets you turn all the “auto” off and be more precise.
Buying Premier Pro, in contrast is still wrapped in a maze of “bundle packages” and “own verses subscribe” options that make little sense for anyone but the company selling it. It reminds me of a photo gig I did with a Mamaya 4×5 camera with a Leaf back about 18 months ago. That was NEW grafted onto OLD. They tried to keep the “pro” of the 4×5 format – while adding some digital sizzle.
But few people are talking about 4×5 cameras today. The DSLRs blew past them – because they were simply better tools for these times.
For someone who just wants to learn to edit video and turn out quality work with minimal hassle – I believe X has the much superior path.
But the market will make the final choice.
In five years we’ll look back at the way most contemporary editing is being done. And if at that point, the “mega-suite” something for everyone Premier approach is dominant, I’ll say so.
If the more focused and connected model of X comes to dominate, we’ll know that as well.
I haven’t had a project that X couldn’t handle beautifully and very efficiently once I learned to use it properly.
That’s also true of AVID and PPro – but the paths are vastly different – and the main difference is that the last two are still trying to be the programs they once were in order not to “annoy” their bases.
Apple felt that annoying the base was both a necessary and fair price for making a better product for the future.
The only thing I know for certain is that nearly everything about how I make video has changed over the past 5 years. I don’t use the same cameras, I don’t’ use the same tungsten lights, or analog audio gear, or CRT monitors I used to use. All of that technology has changed for the better.
Why should I use the same old style of software?
It’s a reasonable question, anyway
“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
-
Yes I believe the question as to whether or not it was worth learning, was in the context that he was passing up jobs for FCP, because he was limited to Vegas. It had nothing to do with how well the software works. It looks like his clients are dictating which software is used, and to be honest there are more jobs posted for Sony Vegas than FCPX.
This idea that freelancers should be highly skilled in ALL NLE’s is nonsense. In todays environment, an Editor is often expected to be an expert in Sound, color correction, and motion graphics. Being highly skilled in One NLE is hard enough and it shows by Editors who make comments like “why do I have to keep toggling the smart tool.” Anyone who knows Media Composer well knows that the smart tool doesn’t have to be touched ever. I was just in a room with an FCP editor who had been using since version one, and didn’t even know that the autosave could be adjusted. I cut a doco with an Avid Editor from version 1 who didn’t know how to use the attic or find function.
I see a lot of people commenting on NLE’s that they have not been properly trained on, and then form an opinion of its “clunkiness” and “intuitiveness”. This includes FCPX. That is why I dislike when people say “download the trial and see if it works for you.” You’re better off taking that time searching the web for which NLE has or is missing certain features for the workflow that you are tackling. Learning Avid and FCP7 are safe bets however because the market demands them. Media 100 is a great NLE (the first I learned on) but there are no jobs for it as a freelancer so why should I get highly skilled in its use? FCPX is in Vegas, Media 100 territory. People love them, but there is no freelance market for them. Spend your time Mastering Avid and FCP 7 (there aren’t many jobs on Premiere either) its takes time, but is well worth it.
-
[Bill Davis] ” It’s inexpensive. It’s very, very capable with tremendous “back end” potential rapidly developing. And, unless the editor is burdened with lots of ingrained practices that have to be jettisoned in order to adapt to it’s new processes, it’s extremely easy to acquire and learn at a basic, functional level.”
Bill,
Which NLE have you described here? It might be PPro, Avid, X, 7, Lightworks, or a few others.
Franz.
-
If people are looking to hire you to use the software they have to edit with, or that is compatible with the software they use…then pay attention to what they are using. Like many others here, I have pretty much only seen companies using FCP 7 or Avid (Premiere, not yet) and hiring editors that know those systems. SO the FCP they are talking about is most likely FCP 7. But you need to find out what version they are talking about to be sure.
I have seen only one case of a company switching to FCX in this town (Los Angeles) and requiring all the editors use that. And the company produces videos for a YouTube channel. Everything else that is broadcast is either Avid or FCP 7. Unless you count the folks at LEVERAGE who switched to FCX…ok, two places.
The point is…find out what people who are hiring are using, then learn that. FCP and FCX are very different, and you need to know which they are talking about.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Bill Davis] “[Chris Harlan] “If I had to choose a single piece of software for a video editing business it would NOT be FCP X. Its far too limiting. Of course, in other arenas, it could be all you need.”
We understand this about you, Chris.”
LOL. We? You and the other doctors in the observation room?
[Bill Davis] “But perhaps what’s most “limiting” here isn’t X, but the way you emotionally react to those who appreciate it – which tends to drive you to trot out this kind of language?””
Oh, Doctor Bill. Physician, heal thyself.
[Bill Davis] “Ploy? Cogs?
Are you doing lots of work for either Fox or MSNBC? You know, someplace where it’s fashionable to use language to belittle and marginalize in order to puff up an otherwise weak position?
“Bill, you use more loaded language and set more straw arguments than any other person on this site. You go so far out of your way to “belittle and marginalize in order to puff up an otherwise weak position” that you should be receiving awards for it.
[Bill Davis] “If you’re correct in your analysis, Chris. Then X will fade away and Premier will become ascendent.
But I simply don’t see that happening.
“Again, false argument! There’s plenty of room for X. I expect it to thrive. There are a number of things that it is probably better at than any other NLE. I probably end up saying that in about a fifth of my posts. So, fiddle-stixs to you for creating an argument that I’m not having with you, so that you can make a point that isn’t there. This is something you do a lot of, btw.
[Bill Davis] “As new editors flood in (and they are, in legions) they’ll need to choose a tool.
I believe that tool will increasingly be FCP-X for lots of reasons. The primary is that it represents three market-making realities. It’s inexpensive. It’s very, very capable with tremendous “back end” potential rapidly developing. And, unless the editor is burdened with lots of ingrained practices that have to be jettisoned in order to adapt to it’s new processes, it’s extremely easy to acquire and learn at a basic, functional level.
And I can’t emphasize that last element enough.
“Hey, you get no argument from me. Especially if it improves, gets rid of its current ceiling, and loses some of its rigidity, it might just end up being top of the heap.
[Bill Davis] “Buying X is a couple of clicks and a single, clean choice. With some basic training you can be cutting basic video on it in a couple of hours. The “auto” stuff in it makes basic easy in X. Easier than any other software I’ve used. Then like a good DSLR, as you learn to take control, it lets you turn all the “auto” off and be more precise.
“Dude, buying anything is pretty much that way now, and its only going to get more that way. Only takes a couple of clicks to download CS6 or Media Composer. AND, you can do that from the world’s largest OS. I mean, an OS that has so many more installed seats that its laughable. So, who actually has the future advantage there? Seems like it might be NLEs that straddle both worlds.
[Bill Davis] “Buying Premier Pro, in contrast is still wrapped in a maze of “bundle packages” and “own verses subscribe” options that make little sense for anyone but the company selling it. It reminds me of a photo gig I did with a Mamaya 4×5 camera with a Leaf back about 18 months ago. That was NEW grafted onto OLD. They tried to keep the “pro” of the 4×5 format – while adding some digital sizzle.
“Oh, I see. Offering actual choices is a BAD thing. Oh, Doctor Bill. Funny, I don’t get your analogy at all. What it reminds me of is walking into a store that has its shelves stocked with a variety of products, as opposed to walking into a store where there is the exact same thing on every shelf.
[Bill Davis] “For someone who just wants to learn to edit video and turn out quality work with minimal hassle – I believe X has the much superior path.
But the market will make the final choice.
“No. If that were true, there’d only be one car.
[Bill Davis] “In five years we’ll look back at the way most contemporary editing is being done. And if at that point, the “mega-suite” something for everyone Premier approach is dominant, I’ll say so.
“I don’t give two poops bout what is dominant. I just care about what I need.
[Bill Davis] “I haven’t had a project that X couldn’t handle beautifully and very efficiently once I learned to use it properly.
“Okay. That’s your business.
[Bill Davis] “Apple felt that annoying the base was both a necessary and fair price for making a better product for the future.
“I’m always amazed at the certainty with which you can read Apple’s mind.
[Bill Davis] “The only thing I know for certain is that nearly everything about how I make video has changed over the past 5 years. I don’t use the same cameras, I don’t’ use the same tungsten lights, or analog audio gear, or CRT monitors I used to use. All of that technology has changed for the better.
Why should I use the same old style of software?
It’s a reasonable question, anyway”
Sure it is.
-
[Scott Sheriff] “In this forum you will find a small cluster of fans who will no doubt extoll the virtues of of movie hero, and talk about how they use it on project after project with excellent results. All of which is subjective to say the least.
“If there is any subject that lends itself to a subjective point of view, editing could well be it.
This forum is successful because it allows both sides of the FCPX debate.
To denigrate people, refer to them as a small cluster of fans, who have taken the time to become proficient in this new software, to refer to it a ‘movie hero’ says more about a lack of objectivity than anything else.
And referring to FCPX as imovie on steroids doesn’t actually move the argument on from those early days back in June 2011.
-
Bill,
While I certainly agree with you that X exists for one reason and one reason only I am afraid we differ on the reason. From my perspective X exists to harvest an infinitely larger profit pool. Is that the future? I don’t know. Neither do you. You seem to regard editing as as some sort of dark age secret that has been protected by evil guilds for low these many years. And that X has somehow set editing free. Time will tell. But editing has not been as you say “untethered.” Practically speaking we are tethered to our clients and also tethered to telling a story. And in both those respects X does not work for a great many people at the moment, despite all your (completely speculatory) claims that X is the future.
Tim
-
[David Powell] ” …(there aren’t many jobs on Premiere either) its takes time, but is well worth it.”
It depends on what you do. You probably won’t find many PPro listings for broadcast work, but if you do corporate, motion graphics or or event work, you’re much more likely to encounter Premiere.
Shawn
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up