-
Focus – Light Iron videos
-
[Andrew Kimery] “You know you are still using inertia in a negative way right? 😉 Associating it with people clinging to something. There are certainly people like that, but there are also places where the investment in time, resources and money was so heavy in the old FCP”
Point taken, I guess I was editorializing. 🙂 “Still using” would have been more balanced… lol And I am talking about people like that, I get that there are situations like you point out..
[Andrew Kimery] “How do you bridge the gap between the thousands of FCP 7 projects sitting in archive and the new projects? Many times I would pull an old FCP project from the archive and repurpose those assets in a new project.”
Honestly, that’s really not a big deal any more. Old FCP projects run through 7 to X open up just fine. In way it’s less of a headache going from 7 to Pr due to the dual mono vs’ interleaved audio thing. But point taken..
[Andrew Kimery] “Find a seasoned editor in LA that knows PPro or X? Eh… not so easy. That’s inertia.”
True, but seasoned editors can easily learn either of those NLE’s if they choose to. And if I were a seasoned editor I would certainly think that doing so would be good thing. Oh… wait.. 😉
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[tony west] “What’s not true about it?
Those “looks” that are in X were not in legacy. Are they still updating color? What are you talking about?”It’s not true that Color is inside of X. Template looks may or may not have been similar, but if anything, those are Motion looks and not Color looks. But color correction/grading has nothing to do with template looks and the toolset from Color doesn’t exist inside of X. There may certainly be some underlying architecture derived from Color, like GPU-based performance acceleration, but not the actual grading tools. Certainly the color board is about as far away from Color’s tools as you can get.
[tony west] “Yes, but it appears he cut a superior film than you have cut without it.”
I’m not sure what that comment refers to. The film was not mixed in X.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Aindreas Gallagher] “I am neatly gone stage left by god.
“Please don’t go. Seriously.
Yours has been one of the most provocative and entertaining voices on this forum since it started. Lots of good thoughts and lots of challenging people to put up or shut up. I, for one, have always found your threads to be one of the main reasons to read this forum.
I’ve kind of assumed your absence of late has been a result of too much work to do or just wanting to spend time with your new Premiere/After Effects relationship and not enough time left for us. It was heartwarming to see you back. I mean, Charlie is entertaining and all, but no one quite has your way with words.
-
[Jeff Markgraf] “It’s unfortunate that so much discussion of X is overlaid with the need to defend it against the “it’s not professional” meme. What a waste of time. So much more interesting to focus on HOW X can be integrated into a professional workflow”
+1 or something.. 🙂
[Jeff Markgraf] ” Interchange of media and sequences between NLEs is a manufacturer-created and curated nightmare. “
Yeah, can we got this sorted out please? MC is kind of an island unto itself… EDL?!?! Pr can send a nice sequence to FCP 7, but bringing things into Pr using old fcp 7 XML is an audio mess. Using IA’s tools, going from X to 7 or 7 to X works really well, but X to Pr still uses the fcp 7 xml, so we’re back to messy. Be nice if there was a standard. hahahahahah 😉
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Jeff Markgraf] “I mean, Charlie is entertaining and all, but no one quite has your way with words.”
Hey! 🙂 I’m an Amurican, I can’t compete with A’s mastery of the mother tongue. lol
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
“Has Apple’s Color Been Merged Into Final Cut Pro X?”
This is the question that was being asked by Patrick Inhofer on a blog post back in 2011
“I’ve decided to frame this initial review this way: Has FCPx absorbed the color correction tools of Apple Color (which seems to have been End Of Life’d) and are they faster and more powerful than those of FCP 7?”
-
last bit: I guess my curiosity is whether, given the previous pieces on this, the team pushed to have FCPX as the primary editing software initially because of workflow potential? Whether the production was married to process and input and an editor that could fit? that’s cool, and as Oliver pointed out, I know zero about feature editing bar that it involves functioning relationships. I just wonder if the pre-requisite was a relationship that allowed primary scene handling outside the editor.
I made a cheap crack about Soho and commercial rooms relative to this, but I have a child like notion of the dialectic exchange between the feature director and editor, I had not previously factored in an editor so unmanned that scenes could or could not originate with him or her, or changes that would arrive pre-baked completely outside him. literally inside the software as opposed to discussion. People have made reference to directors who edit directly. Grand that’s true. Sure directors can get thrown out of edit rooms by edward norton. But those are violent moments and I can’t recall such a machined scenario in terms of software strings that take can take the editor’s hands off the keyboard inside the software.
I’m curious, up there in the god’s, where people go to the oscars, exactly how many editors would be willing to swallow what is the equivalent of a software engineer taking over their screen to direct their tool?
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[tony west] “This is the question that was being asked by Patrick Inhofer on a blog post back in 2011”
Your point?
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
That I wasn’t the only one saying that
-
[tony west] “That I wasn’t the only one saying that”
I didn’t say you were. A lot of people asked that. That doesn’t mean the answer is ‘yes’. At least not in anything other than a philosophical sense.
If your point was that the ‘essence’ of Color – i.e. a few looks and a way to layer corrections – was copied from Color into X – then I would agree with that. It you mean that literally the tools from Color were put into X, then no, I don’t believe that’s true. Certainly not to anyone who has ever used Color.
But going back to your earlier point, the level of color correction that you can do in X were possible in FCP 7 and are currently (and in the past) possible in Premiere Pro and Avid. As elegantly? That’s a matter of how much you do color correction.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up