FCPX or Not?

[Philip Davies]

Fundamentally I think it’s a winner – I didn’t at first.

I can honestly say though that no woman, let alone a piece of software, has ever caused me so many frustrated outbursts. In retrospect, much of that was down to old habits and now that I’ve settled into a workflow, I think I’ve made the right decision sticking with FC.

It’s still got more bugs than a Swahili tuberculosis ward but I can just about put up with multiple force quits a day because, like a Mac, it is so efficient at restarting itself.

A year or two from now it will be awesome.

[Dean Neal]

I am definitely warming to it.

FCP X’s embracing of true Metadata foundations and better content management/control will be brilliant.

By housekeeping our content, this will provide efficiencies in editing.

I like the new timeline, and if we hadn’t already seen iMovie, many of us (not all I know) would call it revolutionary.

The ROLES feature is a good methodology to deal with workflows externally moving forward.

I like the integration of some of the components of color and SoundTrack Pro into FCP X.

I know these products were great on their own, however I know a lot of editors who loathed round-tripping and by bringing these products into FCP X – that’s a positive as far as I am concerned.

I will write up a full commentary on it when I have finished further exploration.

YES – there are some missing pieces for sure which is well documented on here (Multi-cam, Video Monitor etc.)

It’s also still a bit buggy but that is to be expected.

FCP X is a solid foundation with reasonable potential – but there is more needed before it will be accepted by the wider POST community for sure.

Dean Neal…

[Mark Dobson]

I’ve been using FCPX exclusively since it was released in June.

My opinion of the software changes constantly as I get more used to it. Basically I think it has a lot going for it. I also think it will take a fair while to get totally up to speed on it. Every movement still requires thought.

I spent years using and learning FCP 7 and always felt I was still only scratching the surface of it’s capability. On the surface FCP X seems a lot simpler – but I’ve found this to be an illusion – it’s possible to to accomplish extremely complex editing tasks but only through adopting a different mindset.

Initially I installed it on the same drive as FCP 7. I’ve got a 2009 2 x 2.8 Quad Core and upgraded the memory to 14GB. I found the performance really unreliable – spinning wheels, crashes etc and with the launch of Lion decided to give it it’s own partitioned drive.

Well things didn’t improve that much. So my whole experience of the software have been tempered with frustration. Following the upgrade to 10.0.1 my latest set of problems involved the undo function not working. I eventually realised that that also meant that nothing I was doing was being saved. I would recommence work and get into a Groundhog Day loop of re colour correcting etc.

My workaround for this was to File Z after every action and quit as soon as it stopped working. That together with constantly trashing the preferences, initially manually and more recently using Digital Rebellions excellent Preference Manager. Allowed me to get the job out the door.

With no deadline looming I then decided to trash FCPX and do a clean re-install from the App Store. Well, fingers crossed that seems to have resolved the issue. So maybe that’s a lesson learnt, to not install an upgrade over existing software but go for a clean install.

Despite all of these problems I have produced 5 or 6 productions using FCP X. There are lot’s of things I really like and dislike in equal measure.

I find organizing clips in the Event browser really quick. I don’t use any of the built in analysis tools and I also only reference files on their drives rather than have the software re-transcode and duplicate them. If data storage were not an issue I might just let it get on with it but with HD material taking up roughly a 1GB a minute it is a real issue.

I don’t miss having tracks in the timeline and if one wants to emulate FCP7 one can do through using the P function and layering files in a similar fashion. I find the trim tools and the precision editor really easy to use and editing audio has become a very precise task now.

The ability to create and manipulate Compound Clips is one of the biggest plusses for me. It declutters the workspace and makes moving programme sections around really easy.

FCP X has to be seen in tandem with Motion 5 – and I’m sure that in the future the two programmes will actually integrate. Why the roundtripping function between FCPX and Motion is not active is a complete mystery.

It really is early days still with this software. Anyone using it professionally is acting as a beta tester. We ‘ve had one upgrade already with another one due in a few months time. I think by this time next year most of the core problems will have been resolved and some of the missing features and problems, I/O issues, external monitoring, multicam will have been resolved.

But I think that for many this software will never cut the mustard. Oliver Peters has really nailed some of the issues in his FCP X road blocks blog;

https://digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2011/08/14/fcp-x-road-blocks/

But for someone like me I feel FCP X can only get better with each upgrade. Like many small production companies we do everything in house now. Music production, graphics, color correction, etc. And that’s what FCP X has been designed for. I can’t see it being used in the Broadcast market place apart from one off documentaries and shorts.

I feel that Apple are committed to redress many of the shortfalls identified after the launch. I feel they really upset a lot of people by giving Final Cut Studio the EOL sticker. Adobe Premier Pro and Avid have already benefitted greatly from this change of direction.

I think that by now most people will already have decided which direction to go in.

[Kevin Patrick]

File Z?

[Tony Badea]

I love it. I’ve used Motion from 1.0 so the transition from FCP7 to FCPX wasn’t that difficult. In my case, I feel Motion was the key factor, I prefer it over AE (I started my motion graphics career with AE, just feel at home with Motion) and FCPX and Motion are closer than ever.

[Owen Wexler]

I finally got to test drive FCPX at the WIFV Non-Linear Editing Demo in DC last month.

Surprisingly, it’s not horrible.

I could use it if I really had to.

I mean I’d rather not. I will still not be using it for my work or personal projects, as it is still missing too many features that I need and doesn’t really fit my muscle memory.

But if I somehow get a decently-paying client who wants me to cut on his or her FCPX system (unlikely as that is), I am not going to turn down money for a petty reason like not being 100% into the editing software.

Also, as someone whose skill set includes color grading, I had to give the color board a whirl. Surprisingly it was pretty easy for me to figure out and wrap my head around, but it’s no Color. I still prefer three-ways, curves, and secondaries over the dots, but I could use the dots if I had to.

Cinematographer – Editor – Motion Graphics Artist – Colorist

https://www.owenbwexler.com

[Andy Neil]

Hated it at first. Or rather hated the way it looked. I was suspicious of its simplified UI and especially its preferences. Also it’s default configuration of filmstrip view made me want to throw it across the room.

However, having found a UI configuration I can work with and just some honest time with it, I’ve grown to really love some of its capabilities (though with caveats).

I love its new media organization. Giving users a choice between organizing how they’ve always done it, and organizing for you by putting everything in one place (ala Avid) was a great choice. I hate the fact that I can’t override its offline, reconnect feature, although I will say it’s not often wrong.

I absolutely love keyword collections although I would have preferred they not rename everything. Why these couldn’t just be called bins is beyond me (same with event/project and sequence/project). Organizing projects, especially projects with large numbers of clips is quite a bit easier with collections. I however, find the auto analysis feature to be pretty dumb still although for single camera scripted work, it might be a starting point for the AE.

I’ve never had the problem with the magnetic timeline that other people seem to have. I tend to put all my clips together to start and then push them apart later. And I especially like the Append Edit. It’s nice not having to care where the playhead or skimmer is when dropping a clip into the timeline. I still hate not being able to perform a rolling trim on connected audio clips or even just the embedded audio of two clips beside each other in the primary storyline.

All in all, its beginning to win me over (I already prefer using it to using FCP 7 but that might just be because I like discovering things and there’s very little I don’t know about FCP 7). It needs some technical upgrades (bug fixes, ext video, more compatibility with other production programs), and some workflow upgrades (multicam, channel expanded audio, beefed up Timeline Mode) and some visual UI upgrades (better timeline view options, user defined workspaces).

Andy

https://www.timesavertutorials.com

[Devin Crane]

So far just using it for special projects involving a lot of h.264 and avchd from DSLRs. For this it works great, for regular TV broadcasts needs better timecode support before I can be more efficient with it. We plan to move to it when the next updates come out.

[Mark Morache]

I started using this from day one. Since I don’t need to send anything out to protools or a colorist, I don’t miss that.

My first project took me about 3 times as long because of the paradigm shift in the timeline, but I’m getting used to it.

I have a larger paid project with a tight deadline, and I decided to take the chance and do it on FCX. The organization tools are great. I’m really loving the skimmer these days, once I got used to it. I’m getting used to the magnetic timeline, but I’m still not convinced it’s any faster. It’s much quicker to start with, but by the time I make all of my audio trims, I’d say it’s taken me longer.

It’s quite a change, and my brain hurt trying to see the path through the interface to get me to my final product. It required “thinking different”, and I can’t honestly recommend it to people using FCP7. I can laud the great new tools, but also talk about the frustrations with the bugs and the missing features, so with my friends I give a marginal thumbs up. Unless they’re the adventurous type, I tell them to stick with what works.

I understand the “version 1.0” nature of this thing, but I really wish they could have found a way to keep more of the the good things from FCP7.

Meanwhile, I’m addicted to the organizational tools, so I’m continuing to use it. They just can’t come up with updates fast enough for me however.

I could use another one right about now.

———
FCX. She tempts me, abuses me, beats me up, makes me feel worthless, then in the end she comes around, helps me get my work done, gives me hope and I can’t stop thinking about her.

Mark Morache
Avid/Xpri/FCP7/FCX
Evening Magazine,Seattle, WA
https://fcpx.wordpress.com

[Andy Neil]

Curious Mark, what things you would like to have been kept from FCP 7 (aside from obviously mulicam I suppose)?

Andy

https://www.timesavertutorials.com