-
Goodbye FCPX
-
[Bret Williams] “The difference between CS6 and CC put it over the hurdle for sure.”
I thought 6 was a pretty impressive comeback, but yes, CC DID put it over the hurdle.
-
[Lance Bachelder] “but it can now sit proudly next to Avid and FCP 7 as a truly great NLE…”
As a Premiere user since Premiere 5.1 (Not Premiere Pro!) I’d have to say CC stands ABOVE FCP7 and Avid, apart from it’s sharing capabilities and I imagine that Adobe are working very hard on that as we speak.
Steve Connor
Class Bully
-
steve connor is drinking whiskey from 6 every night I have reliably been told. He just stays really even tempered and types very neatly.
#AmItheonlyoneStuckEditingAtThisHour
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
It was decent. But I remember going through the list of new features for CC and thinking “that wasn’t there already? That’s been in every NLE since 1997!” And sadly I think some things on that list are still missing from X.
Truly the only reason I’m using X is I just like it. I don’t know if I’m faster or whatever, but it’s just more enjoyable. I also resist getting in too deep with rental software. I’ll always be able to open my psd and il files with 3rd party apps, but can’t do that with premiere or AE. Sigh.
-
[Steve Connor] ” I’d have to say CC stands ABOVE FCP7 and Avid,”
I’m on my third project with it now, and I’m quite the half assed editor, but I’m still boggled at how fast it’s progressed.
again – I really cannot get past that implementation of the link to SG – I know I did a whole moron’s burble on that and everyone knows about the thing anyway – but just getting to play with it in the flesh was kind of mad. I even texted a mate to find out what a realistic day rate for a well trained colourist would be.you can get a good colourist for around 400 quid a day, and the three balls for a grand – also there have to be editors getting tooled up on it given how straightforward it is relative to davinci. there is a good argument that you cannot do without access to look up tables to properly handle dng material coming off the blackmagic or even the flat profile higher bit prores stuff. You get there with a lot less hassle off SG than you do with davinci. particularly if you start in premiere.
way more people could develop competence for those lut application operations with SG than are ever going to with davinci. not least because the whole issue of footage transport and handling is moot with SG. as long as you are in a ppro environment. I’m basically explaining this to myself here, and its all super obvious, but you’d feel there are some super good arguments for SG handling what has to be lots of DNG/flat 12bit prores material on the way. because it’s really not crazy complicated. if apple are making an 80/20 argument with X, you’d feel SG is making the same argument with high level finishing.
side note – media composer apparently has a hinky implementation of LUTs that happens in the bin and is supposed to be incredibly awkward in workflow terms.
[Steve Connor] “apart from it’s sharing capabilities”
al mooney nearly hinted to kanen flowers on the latest podcast that the project sharing component of anywhere would hit CC – presumably after a solid round of enterprise monetisation. you could nearly hear flowers kicking his shin.https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
Sadly I’m never even tempered – wine or no…
Lance Bachelder
Writer, Editor, Director
Downtown Long Beach, California
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1680680/?ref_=fn_al_nm_1 -
[Bret Williams] “It was decent. But I remember going through the list of new features for CC and thinking “that wasn’t there already? That’s been in every NLE since 1997!” And sadly I think some things on that list are still missing from X.
Truly the only reason I’m using X is I just like it. I don’t know if I’m faster or whatever, but it’s just more enjoyable. I also resist getting in too deep with rental software. I’ll always be able to open my psd and il files with 3rd party apps, but can’t do that with premiere or AE. Sigh.
“Totally understand. I go back and forth on the CC thing. I use both it and Media Composer pretty much every day. My CC yearly is coming up soon, and I haven’t really decided what to do. I’m doing a lot of writing/producing right now, so I’m working with a lot of low-res offline files. CC is very convenient in the way that it works directly with the proxy from CAT DV, but has a timecode bug that won’t let me switch TC to NDF so I can match TC to window burn. Media Composer is solid with the TC, but I have to transcode the CatDV h.264 because AMA doesn’t recognize it. So, if I have to turn around a script fast, I end up using Premiere, and have to hand log the shots I’m calling from Window burn–something I don’t think I should have to do in this decade of this century.
Right now, I’m only actually editing and delivering a promo or two a week (as opposed to writing and producing them), and I’ve been rocking back and forth from show to show between Media Composer and Premiere. I’ve been using Media Composer on the last 17 episodes of the show I’m on, and should–on the next show–flip to Premiere. I don’t know if I will. Don’t know that I won’t. Maybe I’ll figure it out at NAB.
-
I feel like Avid burned their bridges here in Atlanta. At least in the corporate circles I dwell. A few are deciding on X or premiere this year. But they’re chugging along with 7 right now. Most made the switch from Avid years ago and aren’t interested in going back. At least Premiere or X are both new territory.
-
[Lance Bachelder] “Pinnacle, which has a somewhat cool consumer NLE by the way, would this forum even exist – I say no.
“You might be right Lance, I can only speak for myself. There were two reasons I went with X
One, I liked the program, and two, I felt like Apple had an advantage being that they can basically give their product away for almost free. Their competitors can’t really do that.
I didn’t want to have to change again in a few years if somebody went out.
I feel like Apple’s cheap X price had something to do with CC rental and that whole rental thing has many folks bulking even though it’s a really good product.
I don’t know what will happen long term but I still think I made safe bet.
-
The bottom line to me is if you’re a fixed in your ways editor then you’re more prone to reject the fundamental changes in FCPX and obviously there are real issues with larger facilities and exchange of a lot of media.
If you’re willing/able to entertain a different paradigm, where weaknesses absolutely exist (as they do in each program) but improvements at many levels also exist then FCPX will start to make more and more sense.
I think the new media management is finally a solid one and a better one than any of FCP’s incarnations.
I also think Apple made a smart decision based on the future and present of editing.
Like so many things in the creative industry, it’s become much more democratized.
I know it’s been said a lot but it’s true. I don’t know how much as a percentage but it’s obvious to me in real life how much work, outside of the narrow realm of broadcast, is being handled by small and individual editors.
And how much work is also being done by non-dedicated editors who also shoot and composite…and mix audio for that matter.It’s the new reality and it’s certainly going to become that more and more – certainly not go the other way.
Pro editing has a new definition just like pro shooting does.
For a block of pros FCPX just isn’t the right tool, but for the growing block of editors/creatives it seems to be an ideal tool for a number of reasons.In that regard, I think Apple has made the right choice looking forward.
And for us, producing a lot of promotional film work and TV spots for broadcast and web, it’s a great program.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up