-
Prognostications on FCPX compared to OSX and iOS from Alex4D
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “There was a discussion on issues with network media – I think it may have even been Jeremy? Search is failing me. Solution was to keep things on the boot drive, including renders.”
I think it was Oliver as he was having problems with his Volume based SAN.
The way that SAN works, it’d be nice to be able to keep the Project/Event databases on the boot drive, an all media (renders included) on the external drive/SAN. This is how I currently work with fcp7, project and media in separate drives. FCPX allows for this with everything except render files at the moment.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “… it appears using one’s imagination is certainly frowned upon in this forum.”
You think so? I would say it is broadly encouraged, sometimes to a fault (ie. 10 million users is certainly imaginative, …).
As for the rest I am not currently experimenting with X, and some of those questions don’t relate to my workflows. I’m on 7 still and will be into the new year.
I take it you have good experiences with those examples?
Franz.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “From what I’ve seen of the software and read here in the forums, it just strikes me that “workflow” was entirely an afterthought to FCPX design: renders kept with the project file which is designed to be kept on the boot drive. Really? At what point in the design process was that idea analyzed and arrived at as the ideal solution? Using the finder to organize projects?”
Was anyone complaining about this with FCP Legend? It was the same story there- everything defaulted to the user’s Documents folder, including all scratch disks. They have to default it that way, the boot volume is the only one they can always assume exists. It has always been up to the user to provide and assign alternate storage. I do wish FCPX let you assign Render storage separately from Project storage though.
[Franz Bieberkopf] “A better database and workflow model is certainly needed (as per your post) but right now that prize is up for grabs and it doesn’t seem to me that Apple has any particular advantage built into its software, nor any particular drive in that direction.”
Unless they release a much deeper API than XML, Apple is the only one who can do it the way I described it. I too question their interest in doing such a thing, except perhaps if they want to push the limits of CoreData and use FCPX as a bellwether. I suspect they are already using it to push AVFoundation and OpenCL on OS X, so it isn’t impossible that they’d take a stab at a new sort of Final Cut Server made up of shared Events and Projects databases.
Best,
Andy -
[Franz Bieberkopf] “There was a discussion on issues with network media – I think it may have even been Jeremy? Search is failing me. Solution was to keep things on the boot drive, including renders.”
It was Oliver and storing the Events and Projects on a FibreJet SAN. The solution was local storage as opposed to that particular SAN, and local storage does not have to be the boot volume.
Best,
Andy -
[Franz Bieberkopf] “You think so? I would say it is broadly encouraged,”
Except when someone like Alex4d comes up with some good ideas that are based on what he actually sees inside the app and backed up by a bit of Apple development history, and someone like you says something like, “Hogwash, Apple’s database motives are an afterthought. How do I know? I just know. I’ve never tried to do anything with media management in FCPX, I just know it’s an afterthought.”
Sorry man, but I’m calling it like I see it and sorry to be personal.
Perhaps we have different ideas of “broadly encouraged”.
[Franz Bieberkopf] “I take it you have good experiences with those examples?”
Yes, I do have decent experiences. I would like a bit more control and some more options (like a trim media option, or metadata sync, or getting metadata in/out via XML) but for the most part, I find it to be pretty decent for an “out of the box” media management system without a bolt on asset manager. Sharing one Project or Event (instead of duplicating) would bring it to the next level. It would also have the potential to make things more complicated. If I use my imagination, those complications could be mitigated by some really cool features (like a big check box to turn off the other person’s metadata, or a big checkbox to turn it back on). If I am thinking about it, so is someone else who’s much more capable than I am.
-
[Andrew Richards] “Probably just a coincidence.”
Yeah. Total coinkydink.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Yeah. Total coinkydink.”
It really does probably have a lot more to do with Oracle’s acquisition of MySQL in 2009 than anything related to MAM product plans (if any even exist).
Best,
Andy -
[Andrew Richards] “It really does probably have a lot more to do with Oracle’s acquisition of MySQL in 2009 than anything related to MAM product plans (if any even exist).”
A great headline in that article, by the way.
I am not sure if there’s separate MAM plans in the works for FCPX, I’m not sure if that would be a worthwhile venture for Apple.
WHile it might be coincidence and was done out of necessity, it is still interesting that they both are based on the same platform rather than having a more custom designed interface.
I do think that the current FCPX is a great start at a true sharing interface, but I know nothing.
-
As far as MAM’s go….
Keep wondering where this will end up?
https://www.squarebox.co.uk/fcpxml.html
Marvin Holdman
Production Manager
Tourist Network
8317 Front Beach Rd, Suite 23
Panama City Beach, Fl
phone 850-234-2773 ext. 128
cell 850-585-9667
skype username – vidmarv -
[Jeremy Garchow] “… and someone like you says something like, “Hogwash, Apple’s database motives are an afterthought. How do I know? I just know. I’ve never tried to do anything with media management in FCPX, I just know it’s an afterthought.””
Jeremy,
You’ve used quotation marks there.
I don’t think they mean what you think they mean.
Franz.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up