LLoyd Chambers reviews Mac OS Lion – shades of FCPX

[Alban Egger]

[David Lawrence] “Apple has take up a dangerous trend for professionals, driven by the iPhone and iPad world: a tendency to oversimplify the user interface, to remove command-key shortcuts, to force multi-step efforts for what used to be a single step…
“

Hmmmm…..to me it is the contrary. FCPX has a lot of single-steps that have been multi-steps.
That is definitely Not the problem of FCPX, the prpble, is some steps are not possible at all, but those paths that are open are better than in FCPX (but that’s my 2 cents and i know 90% here disagree)

So maybe he found some stuff in Lion and maybe you find some in FCPX, but you would find it also when switching to Windows7 or any other NLE that some steps are different. It is the choice of the software designers and if they would leave everything as it was…there would be no upgrade.

[Gary Hazen]

Doing a dissolve on an audio track has certainly become more complicated.

https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/10042

[David Lawrence]

[alban egger] “FCPX has a lot of single-steps that have been multi-steps.
That is definitely Not the problem of FCPX, the prpble, is some steps are not possible at all, but those paths that are open are better than in FCPX (but that’s my 2 cents and i know 90% here disagree)”

Alban, I’ve enjoyed reading your megatest blog and appreciate your reporting on both the pluses and minuses you’ve experienced. Real-world benchmarks like yours are valuable in helping us understand what FCPX is and is not good for.

I’m curious about what specific things you’ve found in FCPX to be single steps that were multiple steps before. My experience has been exactly the opposite so obviously we work differently.

[alban egger] “you would find it also when switching to Windows7 or any other NLE that some steps are different.”

This is true and it’s a big reason why I’m so disappointed with what Apple has done to FCP. If I have to retrain, I’m going to retrain on a system that is industry standard and supports universal workflows.

[alban egger] ” It is the choice of the software designers and if they would leave everything as it was…there would be no upgrade.”

Have to disagree here. They could have left the UI as is and built on top of a new 64-bit metadata-based engine. They could have added new UI features to the old. Lots of ways they could have gone that would have added new power without sacrificing flexibility and alienating a majority of their user base.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl

[Alban Egger]

[David Lawrence] “I’m curious about what specific things you’ve found in FCPX to be single steps that were multiple steps before. My experience has been exactly the opposite so obviously we work differently.
“

David, I gave several lists here already and funnily hardly ever get arguments back.
Someone in a TV studio asked me this the other day and I felt several pairs of eyes on me and I had to shoot quick…so here was my answer:
1. Skimming….no click at all, while in FCP7 and other NLEs I need to doubleclick constantly to watch things.
2. Trim-Start / Trim-End…they are not new, I know them from Edius, but missed them in FCP7…they save hours and allow me to sell my Edius PC (because I kept it to do quick roughcuts on sportsevents just because of thiese two shortcuts)
3. J-cut/L-cut

There are many more “tools” in FCPX that make life easier and work moving faster, but these 3 off the top of my head came out quickest, so I give you the same three.

I know there are also things slower now or not working at all….or definitely not as expected, like audio-transitions etc, but the general feel of the program FOR ME is faster, easier, straightforward.