fcpx or not?

[Brian Mulligan]

Smoke can go either way with this. You can be a complex as you want and build a very unique effect with the Node Based ConnectFX right on a clip or as an adjustment layer in the timeline.

There are also some very nice presets for the Damage & Stylize nodes as well as 3D text animation presets and 3D lens flare presets.

You can save a complex effect that you created and easily recall it.

I jazz up my edits as well in promo-land. And I find that it’s quick and easy to pipe a few nodes together for CC, and grain, and such. The speed and interactivity Smoke is known for, really shines when designing effect, as the results a close to real time, depending on the footage and effect.

Brian Mulligan
Senior Editor – Autodesk Smoke
WTHR-TV Indianapolis,IN, USA
Twitter: @bkmeditor

[Moody Glasgow]

[Bob Woodhead] “So in Smoke, I’m wondering if the “depth and finesse” would tend to slow down the “quick n’ dirty eye candy” type of work, mostly relating to using 3rd party plugs in FCP/Motion/AE (often with many presets), where on Smoke, it’s Genarts and….? “

Autodesk has been adding presets to Smoke for a little while, and is still playing catchup to AE. For Sparks, its Genarts, Re:vision, Imagica and Sapphire. I might be missing something, but I can remember anymore… After Effects has a huge user base, and available plug ins.
If you want quick and easy canned effects, Smoke probable isn’t for you. If you want something that has a great deal of depth, with great compositing and color correction built in, then Smoke is a better choice.
I know alot of people say they will just color correct in Resolve, but I find when you are doing compositing, you need a good corrector available when doing the composite.

moody glasgow
smoke/flame
http://www.thereelthinginc.com

[Jamie Franklin]

[Eric Santiago] “Feels like taking a shower under a waterfall in Hawaii compared to MC at times ;)”

I think it would be fair to make that comparison to any NLE and Avid….

[Dustin Parsons]

I’m leaning towards Premiere for my company for a few reasons:
• I’m interested in FCPX but since Premiere has been used on everything from short-form to features and everything in-between I feel it’s a safer bet for any work tossed at me at this point
• The demos of CS6 look like what I was hoping FCP8 would be
• I love AE and am really excited about Dynamic Link
• I work with a lot of freelance editors and have only found one that uses FCPX
• No matter how hard I try, I just can’t get excited for AVID (sad because I started on AVID)

[Oliver Peters]

[Dustin Parsons] “Premiere has been used on everything from short-form to features”

Just a caution. In most cases – especially the high visibility features – Premiere was only used to conform files or as a conduit into AE. It’s use as the full-fledged creative cutting tool is far less than the PR implies. I think that will change with CS6. I believe more film editors will give it a chance, but until now, features have been largely the domain of Media Composer and/or FCP “legacy”.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[John Heagy]

[Rainer Wirth] “To us, it hasn’t met a professional editors standard.”

Can you be more specific? I’m interested in understanding the difference between what doesn’t work and what you simply don’t like.

John Heagy

[Bret Williams]

Oh come on. Lack if tracks. Lack of viewer. TC overlay. Post Project Media Management. Lack of dynamic trimming. Lack of decent trimming in general. Tape ingest. Scopes and multicam at same time. Lack of drop shadow. Lack of soft edge crop. Lack of audio mixer. Lack of real keyframing tools (FCP 7 included). There are websites dedicated to the list. Things that just make an app more powerful and faster for certain functions and group workflows. It doesn’t mean you could cut the next Emmy award winning documentary on it. But there needs to be some standards. You could cut TV on iMovie or Premiere Elements for that matter but it doesn’t make them pro. I don’t have a set definition of where the line is drawn, FCP X ain’t there yet. If you don’t need any of those features, then it’s just as pro for you as an app that has them if you’re not going to use them.

[John Heagy]

[Bret Williams] “Oh come on…”

Thanks for the list Bret, that’s far better then letting websites communicate your wishes.

My question was for Rainier, maybe he agrees with your answer or maybe he has other wishes.

Don’t expect Apple to “make it pro” if you don’t list what you want. We are communicating specifics to Apple and, while we’re not changing to FCPX or any other NLE for at least another year, we are happy with the progress so far.

Apple adds 4 to 5 features per update, so I’d be interested in your top 5. Believe me, Apple likes requests in short prioritized lists. Based on how they’ve responded so far… they are listening.

John Heagy

[Jeremy Garchow]

– More reliable/user controlled Project/Event backup system.
– “Show matte” on Color Mask selections
– Color Coded Roles
– Expand Audio shows all audio tracks, not a mix down
– Range based Project Export

[Jules Bowman]

Well, we’re not. We’re chatting amongst ourselves on the CC forum. And if Apple ‘need’ short 5 point lists to wrap their heads around its limitations….