Is FCPX development slower than you’d like?

[Bret Williams]

I hate it when old posts from 2 years ago spontaneously reappear on this forum. Somebody should check into it. Some bad html or something.

[Charlie Austin]

[Walter Soyka] “Going forward, I think separate apps will work best if the developer can move all the apps onto a shared data structure: one editorial timeline as the hub to which contributions may be made in context by the specialist spoke applications. Eliminating the concept of interchange as we know it now, making it totally invisible and seamless within a suite, and enabling non-linear collaboration would be a great next step for improving post workflows.”

I agree. And there’s something about FCP X that’s always made me think about that concept. I have a vivid, possibly delusional imagination… 🙂 In any case, can you spot it?

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Brett Sherman]

The connected clip structure of FCP X opens up a lot of possibilities if Apple chooses to pursue them. It would be possible to have different “views” of the same timeline. One for clip editing (the current one), another one for audio mixing (where visually, audio would be split off the video into tracks based on roles and with a role “mixer”), another where video keyframing would be primary. Also I’d love to be able to “explode” a compound clip within the timeline, work with it, and “implode” it once I’m done. There would also be possibilites of a Motion project basically being a special sort of compound clip where you have Motion-style arrangement of clips and can swap and trim them within the FCP X interface.

But maybe I’m a dreamer too. I’m not sure Apple is down this road or even realizes the possibilities at this point. However, it is one of the clear advantages of a linked timeline.

[Bret Williams]

Hit film actually works in that way for compositing. It has a little after effects like app built in. I just played with demo of 2. It was a horrible editor, but decent compositor.

[Chris Harlan]

[Steve Connor] “Considering how fast Resolve and PPro are evolving, I have to say I’m a little disappointed that the pace of FCPX development seems to be slowing. I know Bill will say it’s great as it is and that is true in some respects, but if I’m honest I thought that we’d see a lot more features added.”

Just another way they are copying Avid.

[Keith Hamm]

I wouldn’t hang my hat on any Apple products. They don’t have a poor track record of maintaining “professional” products.

[Robin S. kurz]

[Keith Hamm] “They don’t have a poor track record of maintaining “professional” products.”

Wow… you’re actually right, they don’t. Well spotted.

(there’s something to be said about trying to troll with the most tired and worn meme and still blowing it. :-)))))

– RK

[Scott Witthaus]

[Keith Hamm] “I wouldn’t hang my hat on any Apple products. They don’t have a poor track record of maintaining “professional” products.”

Maybe so, but might as well run with this one while we can. Oh, and ask Avid DS users how their “professional product” was supported, promoted and maintained….

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter

[Scott Witthaus]

[Robin S. Kurz] “Well spotted.

(there’s something to be said about trying to troll with the most tired and worn meme and still blowing it. :-)))))
“

HA! I just saw that. Very funny….

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter

[Walter Soyka]

[Charlie Austin] “I agree. And there’s something about FCP X that’s always made me think about that concept. I have a vivid, possibly delusional imagination… 🙂 In any case, can you spot it?”

Are you talking about the Window > Final Cut Pro item in the screenshot, suggesting that it could eventually contain other apps as well?

If so, I do fear you might be reading too much into it. Mac OS uses MDI (multiple document interface), and is highly document-centric. Most applications on the Mac platform are capable of opening multiple documents, each in a separate window, simultaneously. The title of a window is usually the name of the document, and the entries under the Window menu would be use to show which document was active in an application (via the checkmark), and to activate a different one (by selecting its menu item). Open a couple of documents in TextEdit to see what I mean.

FCP X, though, only supports a single window/document, named “Final Cut Pro” — so this is what appears in the Window menu.

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]