-
Is FCPX on iOS pointless?
-
I agree with Tony and I want to avoid FCPXML interchange if at all possible. I am hoping for an iPad version of FCPX for my work and for students.
Scott
-
Wouldn’t the better question be would LumaFusion be pointless? Especially if the iOS version comes with the FCPX version.
But the benefits could be, beyond the portability and work by the pool aspect, similar to GarageBand. GarageBand benefits from the touch interface when you need to record drums or piano or guitar as you can virtually play them directly on the screen with an interface that’s not on their MacOS counterparts. Using the pencil to draw paths, or your finger to ride role based audio sliders.
______________________________________________________
FCPX TUTORIALS – https://www.youtube.com/BretFX -
“Wouldn’t the better question be would LumaFusion be pointless? Especially if the iOS version comes with the FCPX version.”
That’s a hypothetical based on a product that doesn’t exist. My question was whether it would be pointless for Apple to even develop FCPX for iPadOS at all.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
To add to what you said, it’s a really great offline editor for Final Cut Pro X if you’re on the go. With some time for preparation, and making sure the filenames are the same, you can take the higher res footage and use compressor to shrink the resolution down to 540 with burned in timecode. Afterwards, you could place the offline footage on an ixpand drive, and import them into Lumafusion to setup an edit. Once done, you can send off the XML to Final Cut Pro X, and relink the higher res footage back ☺
Only downside is since Lumafusion doesn’t currently have an xml import, it’s only a one time go with each timeline/sequence. I’ve also read people claiming the xml will also work for Resolve.
-
True, but aren’t you’re asking a hypothetical question about a hypothetical product that doesn’t exist? How am I supposed to answer? I’m assuming FCPX will benefit from the touch interface in ways that other iPad apps also differ from their desktop counterparts. Seems logical. So with that in mind, I’m taking the question to the next logical hypothetical and asking if LumaFusion would be able to survive. It’s filling a specific void that Apple has left. If Apple fills that void, Lumafusion would perhaps cease to be viable like so many others before them.
______________________________________________________
SPLITZ Split Screen FX for FCPX – https://www.bretfx.com/product/splitz/ -
[Bret Williams] “True, but aren’t you’re asking a hypothetical question about a hypothetical product that doesn’t exist?”
I suppose that’s true. I guess I was coming at it from the point of why should Apple even bother to develop it for the iPad.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
-
Because they’re a hardware company and it would sell more iPad Pros? They don’t make any money selling software. Well, their own software at least.
______________________________________________________
SPLITZ Split Screen FX for FCPX – https://www.bretfx.com/product/splitz/ -
Small thinking to my mind.
What makes editing in X, editing in X isn’t really just timeline behaviors. Because for me, the storyline is simply where the rest of the efficiency enabling technologies in X REPORT their data for assembly. It’s an important part of the assembly process, of course, but for me ONLY insofar as it give expression to the organization I’ve done in the browser, the Prep I’ve done to my assets BEFORE the browser, and the metadata management the FCP X tools allow me to use before my first clip ever hits a storyline.
The entire reason I’m regularly getting projects that used to take multiple days done in hours isn’t exclusively because my storyline assembly practices are wildly more efficient (tho they often are) but because by the time I’m assembling, exporting rough cuts and getting into client approval loops so much other time-wasting distraction has been driven out of my workflow by my new prep habits.
Until LumaFusion (or anything else running on iOS or even MacOS optimized for Apple Silicon) has THOSE toolsets available to me – there’s always going to be a place for the one tool that already has all those features in spades — FCP X.
Now, if any of those processes can be “sidecar’d” onto outboard devices or even moved to the cloud – I’d say BRING IT ON. I’d love to see LumaFusion become a better feeder world for my X storylines.
But as an editorial replacement, Pffff.
No need to fix what isn’t broken – and I’m already getting work done at Ferarri like speeds on my laptop at home.
Just my view.
Creator of XinTwo – http://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bill Davis] “Because for me, the storyline is simply where the rest of the efficiency enabling technologies in X REPORT their data for assembly.”
I would suggest that this workflow – in the amount you talk about utilizing it – would be only be common to a minority of editors, particularly those who cut with X. ☺
– Oliver
Oliver Peters – oliverpeters.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up