Is Oliver Peters wrong?

[Herb Sevush]

“The truth is there is no right or wrong, its a matter of consideration and choice.”

Absolutely

“I know that I’m giving myself a lot of extra work, and at times stress, through using FCP X. I also know that at any stage I can simply switch back to FCP 7. I have dipped back into FCP7 on a couple of occasions and it all feels very old fashioned and clunky, kind of square. So for the moment I’m with FCP X and enjoying the ride.”

I very much agree that in many ways FCP7 is old fashioned and clunky.
Have you given the same consideration to any of the other NLE’s out there, or just to FCPx, and if it’s only FCPx that your looking at, my question is why?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Andy Neil]

[Herb Sevush] “What makes you think that your list of fixes won’t meet a similar fate.”

Oh various reasons. Mostly because fixing the issues listed in that article don’t seem to require a major change to how the program foundation is laid out. Maybe I’m just a “glass half-full” kinda guy.

I mentioned how I would institute fixes from a user standpoint while still maintaining the core manner in which FCPX works (aside from creating a “rooms” feature where you could perform more in-depth audio and color correction editing).

I’ve used FCP from the 1st version and I’ve been eye witness to it’s growth. Now FCPX is Apple’s choice for heading into the foreseeable future. I think they’re listening to how FCPX is being used, and where the real workflow problems are. I also don’t think they’ve any plans to voluntarily concede the pro market. Particularly because as that line between pro and amateur gets further blurred, editors of all stripes will be wanting the same things out of their software.

Andy

https://www.timesavertutorials.com

[Ben Scott]

i think the article by oliver peters is good but slightly cynical

like many people have said in above comments this has been addressed or is a different consideration in FCPX

I really like this thread and think people should be turned on to it as it is explaining what is good and objectively what isnt quite working

talking about version the new upgrade end sept/beg oct 2011

personally I think the audio needs some sort of scratch track, somewhere a filter like PPMULATOR or giniometer can be added so you can watch the output of everything from the mix

in fact why not proper bussing of tracks its what is needed

the installation of motion plugins needs to be better explained and some sort of installer needs to be provided so its easier for the less techie to install

trimming is perfect when using the dragging method, frankly keyboard based it isnt, this needs to be fixed and priorities on the keyboard shortcuts need to be readjusted

what Oliver I think missed was the ganging back to original edit, this is essential for a reconform

the copy and paste feature is so lame it needs to be granular like aperture or at least FCP7, i wasted an hour trying to fix audio levels I had mixed as they were overwritten when copy/paste coloru correction. the whole lock sound /or/ lock picture idea no longer works but this is dangerous when doing finishing

the colour balance in “color” board is lame, give us the 3 way and curves then this is a viable solution, plus some form of tracker while you are at it

mixer needs to be there but I would say more important is the support for control surfaces and midi

out of sync is a joke, this is a priority

grouping of keyword collections is something I think is needed the browsing of 100 keywords isnt working

also roles are great, as are colour corrections, please sort these out so that these are loaded in a way that works. it would be nice to delete roles and have sets of roles that can be loaded in/out.

also I would like to challenge if there is rich metadata support, unless there is something like fcp server support with custom translations of metadata then this is limited.
also why no metadata out, why the dumn export NLEs have had for so long, its there, why not aggregate to rss feeds etc, its a basic function that is essential to rich media

also grading is really let down by the fact that there is no way to copy paste effects properly, this will make fcpx drag behind and not work for broadcast work and is a major priority

the I/o thing makes it embarrassing when discussing when discussing with clients e.g. its not ready

audio rolls dont work, also why the full overlap feature on transitions when what is needed is something like that on audio so you can get the storyline function to work

for tracks with visuals I have to disagree with everyone that misses in fcpx it is addressed and is more eloquently done

FCP import/export XML is a wait and see, I think there is enough proof of concept this is going to be much more rich than in the past, plus I think you will see more web based programmers picking this up

would be very nice to have some form of automated QC built in to fcpx, this is a killer feature that would make this a system over other NLEs. thinking applescript or watchers.

I can see FCPX integrating with some output VTR tools for versioning etc, this is essential for it to be used. if there is the same ease of use as AVid DS for output then this is a killer tool

the almost nodal timeline should get deeper in its nodal effects system, I think send to motion is sorely needed as is apple buying up Conduit plugin. please do!!!!

I find overall that FCPX is too mouse/touch surface driven, this needs to be addressed with keyboard priorities or control surfaces for this software to be taken seriously

but lastly and most of all
I think FCPX kicks ass big time, it is the future and when people see what it actually brings (and not be cynics) they will be bowled over. It is going to be the next indesign to the quark, wait and see.

[David Roth weiss]

[Herb Sevush] “There are any number of features I waited 7 years for FCP7 to fix and it never happened. What makes you think that your list of fixes won’t meet a similar fate. And if they don’t get fixed, will FCPX still be useful in your workflow?”

Just yesterday I was helping someone out on the FCP Forum who was looking for, and not finding, the DVCPro50 codec, which as you all know has been listed in every version of FCP as “DV50,” for at the last five or six years.

How hard would it have been for the Apple software developers to change that appropriately?

Is there any wonder why many here are just a tad skeptical the same developers will ever get around to fixing X properly?

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.com

Don’t miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing “The Whale” to the Big Screen:
https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfitandSuzanneChisholm/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™

Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.

[Herb Sevush]

My FCP7 wish list was headed by 2 things – the ability to properly and easily digitize over time code breaks and the ability to mute video tracks without erasing all renders. You of all people would recognize these as features we had in *edit 10 years ago. Waited 7 years for it to happen in FCP – never happened; along with a less crucial list that goes on for awhile.

Being positive is a good thing, but I go by the only adage – hope for the best, expect the worst.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Andy Neil]

[Herb Sevush] “My FCP7 wish list was headed by 2 things – the ability to properly and easily digitize over time code breaks and the ability to mute video tracks without erasing all renders.”

Well, I agree with point about renders (ironically, this works in FCPX), but Capture Now has been around the whole time for capturing across timecode breaks. I’m not sure what you expected.

Andy

https://www.timesavertutorials.com

[Herb Sevush]

Capture now is an absolute and total piece of s**t. If you’ve never captured with either Avid or *edit or any other NLE that can capture, and then batch re-capture over time code breaks seamlessly, with no waste of time, no hunting for in points, no 50/50 chance of making a corrupted clip, then you have my condolences. Let me assure you, FCP is the absolute worst program I’ve ever used for this purpose. I envy Avid users this ability, if no other.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Oliver Peters]

Hi,

I’m glad the post sparked a bit of discussion. I’m not going to comment on the individual issues here, but thanks for the various summations. That post was written to point out the issues that I feel are impediments to adopting FCP X for complex projects and at professional post facilities. I just did a free, live webinar last week on the same topic, which can be purchased here:

https://www.filmmakingwebinars.com/on-demand/fcp-x-road-blocks/

I do have the update and am quite familiar with it, as well as what Apple has publicly announced for early 2012. I don’t view this as much of an update, but rather a fix that put back in those items that probably didn’t work or weren’t finished for the June launch. If anything, this update and the coming items confirm to me that Apple is designing an NLE that will probably never integrate most of the features people want brought back from FCP 7. For better or worse, they have simply decided to change direction. Unfortunately, I feel it’s an interface that boxes both Apple and the user into a very limited corner. I suppose the simplistic concepts of cuts and tracks were only confusing for software engineers 😉

I hardly view my point-of-view as cynical, simply because I don’t gush over everything Apple does. FCP “classic” has been my bread-and-butter NLE for many years and I would have loved to see something that would have been a mash-up between FCP 7 and FCP X. My choices are dictated by my clients, so I certainly stay up to speed with FCP X. I just feel that for every speed advancement, there are numerous efficiency reductions in the design of the software.

I view every project I have done since June from the angle of how would this be done under FCP X. In almost every instance, it has some up lacking. Granted, these are large projects, like a multi-commercial campaign or an indie feature film. YMMV! But if my clients go there, so will I. So far they are sticking with FCP 7 and contemplating Premiere Pro or Media Composer as their next NLE.

Cheers,
Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Ken Zukin]

Oliver’s post here says it all — to expect that Apple will somehow transform FCP into a workable tool is just tilting at windmills.

It’s been a good run. I loyally supported Apple for a decade — they profited from my involvement — I used their software (and hardware) to generate a nice revenue source.

Time to move on — wish it wasn’t so — but it is. Now if only I had some assurance that they will continue to make and support their desktop machines.

[Herb Sevush]

Ken –

I’m not faulting you on this, but the point of this thread was NOT to bash FCPx. I literally wanted to hear from those editors who like and use FCPx and find out what they thought of Oliver’s list.

It doesn’t surprise me that editors who have already decided not to use FCPx will agree with Oliver’s post, but I would like to learn from those editors who are using it everyday if they agree with any of the issues that Oliver brings up; and if so how do they work around these issues, what they think the future will bring, and whether or not they think these issues are very important to their workflow and on how they decide on which NLE to use.

I’ll be very happy to start a separate bashing thread and I’ll invite you and Aindreas to start it off.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions