-
FCPX – Should we move to Premiere???
-
For example if you project A want to have a setup where you see icons / previews of say 4 different bins where in project B you want a setup with 1 large bin in list view. Every time you swap between the projects the bin-layouts are screwed up. There can also be inconsistencies in the GUI every time you open a project.
Note the above only affects media bins (or is it the project window possibly).
Now in my case I can on a given day work with three – four projects with various requirements and I’ve just given up on anything else but manually organizing everything each time it’s required.
The above could be seen as a detail but it can be very frustrating. I can’t say if FCPX is better or worse in this regard though.
-
All this is exactly what makes the Adobe eco-system relatively complex. A lot of things are great there but they are far from perfect and do require one to know the ins and outs.
Apples idea of a unified engine in FCPX and Motion is defiantly “the future”. From what I’ve heard Adobe has concidered that route but it’s to big of a task.
-
[andy patterson] “Could OS X have more problems than the Windows computers? Premiere Pro was rock solid when it only supported CUDA. Could Open CL be a problem?”
If you have certain Nvidia cards in your Mac, you still have CUDA support.
[andy patterson] “Premiere Pro has always had the titling tools of Photoshop.”
Hmm… It’s my understand that prior to this newest update, the titling in Premiere was based on a third party plug-in adopted by Adobe some years earlier.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “[andy patterson] “Could OS X have more problems than the Windows computers? Premiere Pro was rock solid when it only supported CUDA. Could Open CL be a problem?”
If you have certain Nvidia cards in your Mac, you still have CUDA support.”
I know. I am asking if it happens only with Open CL or does it do it with both?
[Oliver Peters] “[andy patterson] “Premiere Pro has always had the titling tools of Photoshop.”
Hmm… It’s my understand that prior to this newest update, the titling in Premiere was based on a third party plug-in adopted by Adobe some years earlier.”
The titling system of Premiere Pro works the same as Photoshop. You have all the same drawing tools and options. I am only saying the tools are the same. The code is probably different.
-
[Glenn Grant] “I wouldn’t switch just because a few new guys know Premier better.
As for NAS, there are some pretty solid solutions for FCPX so that shouldn’t be a problem.
Depending on what you use After Effects for, you might be better off using Motion with FCP. That would be an easier and more cost effective switch than going to Premier.”
I agree 100% on every count.
Also, the round-tripping to/from X is exponentially more solid and far lossy than to/from PPro, thanks to Resolve’s native support of FCPXML and no need for the painfully outdated and limited XMEML (v7 XML).
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
maybe because they are terrific editors who’ve spent years on standard NLEs and found no need to relearn everything to suit Apple?
Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852 -
[Andy Field] “maybe because they are terrific editors who’ve spent years on standard NLEs and found no need to relearn everything to suit Apple?”
(Oooh, the “big bad evil Apple” shibboleth rears it’s head again! Been a while.)
Those folks – who hurt your feelings back in 2011? Keep the flame alive, brother!
Throwing their muscle around and screwing up EVERYTHING for the rest of us poor traditional editors.
They are just so MEAN over there, aren’t they?
They are so cruel to ALWAYS focus on thinking that they might create superior tools that enable editors to work more efficiently.
The jerks.
When are they going to understand that you can already cut a string with a pocket knife, single edge razor blade, or a samurai sword.
Each have their place.
So why did Apple have to take a stab at developing yet another approach – a very refined specialized string cutter that they feel cuts string particularly well, with special string cutting features that no other string cutter has. Sure just maybe it cuts string a bit faster, and with less hassle. And we can’t let THAT take root, can we? THAT’s A BRIDGE TOO FAR!
We must constantly remind them of the value of a slow, methodical approach to string cutting – an approach like our forefathers employed when they settled the string cutting frontier back in the glorious analog age – the age where hard drives spun with a comforting noise and if your red channel offset on gen-3 footage was something you STFU about and LIVED with. (At least until you could afford a consultation with an engineering priest and spend last month’s profits on a TBC or something.)
They MUST be punished for such cheek!
Long live the large group of pro string cutters pushing back that the new Apple string cutter is too complex, doesn’t have features we all know agree are critical to a real pro (perhaps the ability to batch cut strings like the samurai sword? – or to make carrying the blade safer (as with the pocket knife verses the razor blade) and how the new string cutter will NEVER catch on because it’s just too different and the old string cutters are all anyone will ever need.
We have our own innovation, too, dang it. Look, we have Swiss Army style pocket knives. Machine mounted Samurai swords, etc, etc, etc. Things that are BETTER – and don’t scare you so much. W(ell, Except the machine mounted samurai swords – those ARE kinda scary) But it’s just grossly unfair that we have to compete with the Apple String cutter. That damn thing is like a VIRUS spreading world wide now.
It’s SO CRUEL. No matter how much marketing money our priests spend, over time, Apple spends next to NOTHING and yet a TON of people are apparently so dumb that they buy into that stupid, useless, industry-destroying Apple String (dammed) Automated MF*@#Ing cutter.
It’s so annoying.
Sheesh.
(That was fun.)
Hey, OP.
My real suggestion. For six months, let the Premiere editors cross train the X guys in Premiere and let your best X editors cross train the Premiere guys in X.
Then buy a case of beer throw a party and let THEM decide.
My 2 cents.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
Sheesh! (As you like to say)
Is someone insecure about their NLE choice? Someone asked a question. I gave a possible answer. Wasn’t challenging your manhood.
I work in network broadcast and documentary news There’s is not a single shop I know that uses FCP X. It’s all FCP 10 Premiere and Avid. May be one reason a FCP x shop has trouble finding experienced editors. Just a guess
Nothing against your cherished NLE
Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852 -
Alex in this forum you are going to get a lot of FCP X all the way. You won’t get an unvarnished opinion on Premiere here from many participants. I love Premiere but it is true there are some issues with each upgrade. You should religiously auto save as we’ve had unrecoverable project files that we could only resurrect with auto save. AE to Premiere round tip is mostly good except when it isn’t
That said both systems have many pros..and cons
If you are the only FCP x shop in town. Don’t expect experienced editors to jump thru hoops to learn X for one client if they are flush with work
Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852 -
Why not let the editors use what they want to use, there’s ways of getting FPCX projects into Premiere and Visa Versa?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up