-
FCPX Newbie – is learning FCPX worth the time?
-
[Shane Ross] “I highly doubt FCX will ever see the proliferation that FCP 7 did in this town.”
Nobody does blacklisting like Hollywood.
Too soon?
Best,
Andy -
Alban,
Thanks for you response.
(First, one side note, “conform” in cinema tools is not strictly a destructive process since it can easily be reversed and the data retains its original integrity.)
In terms of frame rate flexibility, the integration in FCPX as you’ve described it does seem more adept than FCP7, though I don’t see how it fundamentally differs from speed effects (one click and a dialog, with copy and paste ability).
(On another side note, our frame rate conversions (should there be any) will (likely) be handled by the finishing lab. For fractional conversions I still find hardware conversions superior to software, though I would be open to being disabused of this prejudice.)
But, as you’ve said, you have described a small example.
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).
Be ye not mistaken! – I have frustrations with FCP7 (as I have since FCP2). But my larger point is that when I was considering these projects, FCP7 was still the most attractive solution – flexibility being a large part of that assessment.
Franz.
-
[alban egger] “The Hobbit, shot on two REDs in a 3D rig.”
This is an excellent post Alban.
I have pondered this front the beginning. When I think of big time Hollywood projects, Who is shooting that stuff on tape?
We don’t even use tape in my smaller market anymore.
When X first came out I thought the knock from Hollywood would be weather or not this product could handle 5k footage well, and if it couldn’t they would say it’s not ready.
I didn’t imagine people saying it’s not ready because it’s looking past the old technology of tape.
(that’s not to imply that’s all folks are saying about it not being ready, I’m just talking about the tape thing)When I think of tape, I think of someone stuck with old equipment because they don’t have the budget to keep up. I don’t think of top end.
-
Hi Alban,
as a FCP7 and FCP X user, just curious: which button are you referring to?
Is it in the Retime tools?Thanks,
-
[tony west] “Who is shooting that stuff on tape?”
Tony,
Ideology aside – that is probably a more interesting and genuine question to ask:
Who is using tape now? How is it being used?
If you’re interested in that question,this forum is probably a good place to survey.
No doubt part of that answer is people “stuck with old technology”; it is not the whole answer.
You also ignore the question of dealing with materil that isn’t newly acquired – ie vast archival resources that are on tape.
My own recent experience with tape has been with WesCam aerials which were delivered as a mix of HDCamSR tape and ProRes4444 files.
Franz.
-
The compound file container does seem convenient for mutli-camera shoots – something I didn’t think of when watching the video.
Christopher Key
-
Mathieu,
Read this, I explain it there
https://www.eggermedia.com/blog/2012/7/21/conforming-50p-without-cinema-tools.html -
[tony west] “[alban egger] “The Hobbit, shot on two REDs in a 3D rig.”
This is an excellent post Alban.”
Except that in actual practice, you couldn’t cut Hobbit on X in its current form. The film is being cut on multiple Media Composer systems with shared storage and conformed with Quantel Pablo.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “Except that in actual practice, you couldn’t cut Hobbit on X in its current form. The film is being cut on multiple Media Composer systems with shared storage and conformed with Quantel Pablo.”
I didn´t claim it was edited on X!! I said the “Hollywood-trademark” has nothing to do with tape based network workflows. And FCP7 is just as far away from The Hobbit as X is.
-
[alban egger] ” didn´t claim it was edited on X!! I said the “Hollywood-trademark” has nothing to do with tape based network workflows. And FCP7 is just as far away from The Hobbit as X is.”
Agreed. I didn’t mean to imply that you had. I simply took your point as being that Hobbit was an example of the future of file-based post and that by extension, X was somehow better suited for this world. Sorry if I misunderstood your original point.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up