Real World job on FCPX

[David Lawrence]

[Clint Wardlow] “there is an apple store close by, and maybe they well let me take FCPX for a spin.”

This is an excellent way for you to check out FCPX, I did it just the other day. The nice thing is you can play with Apple’s car demo project, the same one you see in all of their marketing videos. So it gives you an idea of how Apple thinks a project should be structured. Even though I have a copy of FCPX and have been playing with it for a couple months, I found this very informative. I suggest everyone try this.

Hint – unless you’re using Lion and are used to “natural” scrolling, the first thing you should do is go to system prefs and turn it off. Otherwise, you will go insane.

I was able spend about a half-hour on a laptop trying things out. You won’t have any trouble getting your hands on it and learning enough to assess if it fits your needs.

[Clint Wardlow] ” do a lot of projections and non-linear narrative (along with more traditional stuff). However, I currently use tracks extensively to layer audio & video and my biggest fear is that the magnetic timeline will limit my ability to control these elements to the degree I want. “

I do this kind of work too. My gut is that if this is what you need, you’ll find the magnetic timeline unusable. It really favors simple, linear assembly and doesn’t offer the flexibility you get with tracks for the kind of layered, non-linear projects you describe. If you need multi-track audio mixing, you’ll hit a wall immediately. There’s a reason that you don’t see any audio mix screen shots in any of Apple’s FCPX marketing material.

But do check it out and report back. I’m curious what you’ll think.

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

[Bill Davis]

I hear what you’re saying.

I’m just thinking of two things. First, a few years ago on one of these boards, somebody was doing a commercial spot – and I was telling them that it was important that it not go “a frame over 30 seconds.”

They popped back to report that the “commercial” was not for broadcast, but for the web only and therefore no 30 second requirement. In my traditional brain, the entire definition of a “commercial” was built around time avail conformance that was an absolute industry standard. But the poster wasn’t playing the game the way I was thinking of it. I had to broaden my personal definition of what a “commercial” might be or risk becoming irrelevant myself.

That was a powerful lesson for me. I have to constantly re-assess what my former “standards” might be and whether they’re still active in this particular situation.

If you MUST conform to :29 second 29 frame timeslot (or a 43:15) one – then a rigid timeline is a very useful thing. But if not, maybe not.

Secondly, the real point I’m exploring is whether what they “ripped out” of FCP to make X – while it might be VERY relevant to a particular well-established linear tradition – might spawn some new traditions that might be even more relevant to the way people will want to get things done in the future.

We’re ALL guessing about that. Apple included. They’re a business full of smart people who can get access to anything they might want or need by virtue of their current industry stature.. They saw the need to re-imagine editing. Why? I have to suspect that this was the result of their team members (or at least Randy U and Brian M and the other core team leaders) seeing some possibilities that simply weren’t on the table within the classic FCP code base. So they bit the bullet and took the big step.
Only time will tell if it was a smart one. But I don’t think the contention that they did it capriciously holds any water. I say that because you can be SURE they mix with people at the VERY top end of many disciplines in the digital realm. Chip architects, coders, human interface designers, etc. And with access to all that expertise, there will a zillion voices who could tell them that what they thought would be possible in the long range was either likely or not likely. I have to believe that they coded FCP-X with an eye to what will be likely. With that in-house expertise and access to any human or physical resources they needed, they decided to make a HUGE change in direction.

What we’re all debating is whether that was a foolish mis-step to force people to do things that aren’t as efficient or natural, or a smart bet based on real changes in digital manipulations of visual data that are coming toward us that most of us don’t yet see.

I’m not saying I have any answers. I just know that remaining focused on the past is NOT usually the smoothest path to the future.

We’ll see.

“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor

[Clint Wardlow]

Actually my biggest fear is that FCPX is just a “hammer.” That it forces you to edit in a very specific style that isn’t conducive to more free-form creativity. That it is aimed at hammering out product as quickly and painlessly as possible at the cost of hamstringing the more subtle art of editing.

Now I admit that I could be very wrong on this as I haven’t had the chance to give FCPX a turn around the block (unfortunately I don’t make enough money on my projects to be able to afford purchasing every editing system under the sun –when I upgrade or alter what NLE I use it is a sizable outlay in cash for both software and hardware–so, I have to make my decisions very carefully because I will be stuck with them for a long time).

That is why I came here. I haven’t really heard much about how FCPX works for guys like me — only what is lacking for professional mainstream editors or how great it is for people shooting DSLR video. Is FCPX just a “hammer” or a full toolbox? I would really like to know.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Clint Wardlow] “Is FCPX just a “hammer” or a full toolbox? I would really like to know.”

It depends on what kind of tools you need to get your job done. So the answer to both of those is, yes.

I recently did a ripoff test of layered timelines (I tried to copy someone’s FCP7 timeline as I was skeptical that FCPx could even do it, full thread here, it’s very long: https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/335/13325). To absolutely sound like a complete jerk, it took more than 30 minutes at the Apple store to figure out, so give yourself some time to learn the interface if you decide to play around. It is different. You can do multiple layers very easily, and playback is much more smooth and real time than FCP7 will ever be, I don’t know if real time playback is conducive to your layering or not:

fcpx_federlinetribute_partial_connections.png

The Motion effects publishing capabilities is a pretty cool and useful feature if you need Motion effects.

A lack of an audio mixer is not good, but the audio mixing is much more useful in X than in 7, as are the real time audio filters.

The lack of baseband video out is a huge bummer, and you will not be able to export to any other platform (save if you use the autoduck plugin) but be aware that you won’t be able to get the video timeline out of the program if you need to.

It is certainly not software that is “finished” by any means, but it really depends on what you need. We can’t use it in our shop, for example, for every day work.

What video formats do you usually work with?

[David Lawrence]

[Jeremy Garchow] “A lack of an audio mixer is not good, but the audio mixing is much more useful in X than in 7”

Sorry Jeremy, this is just factually incorrect. FCPX is incredibly awkward and constrained for multi-track audio. Things that are absolutely trivial to do in a track-based system are currently impossible or require all sorts of workarounds in FCPX. Realtime filters don’t help.

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

[Bill Davis]

I was reading with much interest until I got here…

“Incidentally, this project went to DVD, and not the web. The CEO wanted a tangible to hand out at a meeting, so having DVDSP was also helpful.”

And every thing crashed down in my thinking.
DVD? Really. That’s the level the CEO is stuck at? Plastic discs for a meeting. Wow.

If the CEO had a clue, he would have simply ended his presentation with a slide containing a QR code – and told anyone wanting a link to the video to take a picture of it with their phones. Or put the same QR code on an easel at the exits. Of course there are people who don’t have smart phones – but many, MANY do – and that’s orders of magnitude more efficient than producing and passing out plastic discs.

If the point is to send out something that people perceive a valuable “take away”, a branded thumb drive on a lanyard would have made a hundred times the impression at little extra cost and has the attendant glow of giving someone a thing that remains USEFUL if they no longer need the content.

DVD’s and CD’s have little to NO perception of value any more. They are rapidly becoming “landfill fodder” because the moment a person comes to realize you don’t NEED a plastic disc to access the content anymore, the very concept becomes kinda quaint.

Plastic discs are a sure sign that you’re thinking backward, not forward.

How many of them will YOU be throwing out in the next few years? I bet that CEO’s disc will be at the top of the heap – and his “producer” will have her “awakening” not long after.

The physical “production suite” is an endangered species, IMO. It’s rapidly following the monolithic “Recording Studios” in music. Every large town had those once upon a time. Today, outside of big media centers like LA, Nashville, or NYC, they’re GONE. Like “video production facilities” they were an artifact of the need for big power, big air conditioning and big engineering staffs, and folks who felt that spending the day sitting on someone’s couch at a remote edit suite in order to “supervise” was a smart business model.

I’m sorry, It’s NOT. I still have my edit suite and couch, but I’ve known for a while that it’s only a matter of time before it goes away!. That’s because my client is as likely to be sitting in San Diego or St. Louis as here on my couch watching me push buttons for hours at a time.

The experience Scott describes is very real. Still very much alive. But it’s aged, inefficient, and under huge pressure from the economic realities of the ACTUAL needs of the production process. The “video editing suite” approach with racks and racks of rapidly depreciating gear, miles of wiring, massive electrical and AC loads all around a “client chair” where people have to come, sit and make one comment every half hour is silly. That’s where that particular “producer” is stuck. She’s bought into a “this is professional” and nothing else is as professional mindset and holding that is what’s keeping her from even CONSIDERING stuff like QR codes and thumb drives.

She doesn’t see that if the same skilled editor cutting in the fancy “edit suite” took his or her laptop down the street to Starbucks – they could most likely sit down there and apply the SAME talent and achieve the same quality they can get back in the studio – with NONE of the overhead.

That’s the massive change. And it’s unavoidable.

My 2 cent’s anyway.

“Before speaking out ask yourself whether your words are true, whether they are respectful and whether they are needed in our civil discussions.”-Justice O’Connor

[Jeremy Garchow]

[David Lawrence] “Sorry Jeremy, this is just factually incorrect.”

Whatever you say. I, of course, am always wrong.

I am talking about the pen tool adjusting parameters (you know, mixing).

I have spent more than 30 minutes checking this out.

[Tom Wolsky]

I don’t know why you bother posting here, your’e wrong so often. 😉

All the best,

Tom

Class on Demand DVDs “Complete Training for FCP7,” “Basic Training for FCS” and “Final Cut Express Made Easy”
Coming in 2011 “Final Cut Pro X for iMovie and Final Cut Express Users” from Focal Press

[David Lawrence]

[Jeremy Garchow] “Whatever you say. I, of course, am always wrong.”

Not always, just in this case 😉

[Jeremy Garchow] “I am talking about the pen tool adjusting parameters (you know, mixing).”

Mixing is way more than just using the pen tool. I’m talking about working with multiple channels of audio in a flexible, open workspace (you know, mixing). BTW, I think FCPX’s pen tool and fade handles are awesome. I wish I could use them.

[Jeremy Garchow] “I have spent more than 30 minutes checking this out.”

Same here – about two months in my studio.

I spent 30 minutes at the Apple store because I was curious how Apple thinks a project should be structured. It’s interesting and revealing — especially for audio. A big tell is they resort to the same clumsy workarounds discussed in these forums. The one I found most revealing was the gap clip at the head with one long connected audio clip labeled “final soundtrack”. No multichannel mix, just a final which is conveniently brought in as a single clip. Then they add some sound effects connected as needed along the primary. They stage everything so it looks great for a demo. They ignore any real world scenarios that break the model.

I really, truly, cannot imagine any audio engineer wanting to work with the magnetic timeline. Feel free to disagree, but I think the facts are on my side. Every audio/music person I’ve demoed FCPX to reacts the same way when I ask if it would work for them. They laugh.

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

[Steve Connor]

[Clint Wardlow] “Actually my biggest fear is that FCPX is just a “hammer.” That it forces you to edit in a very specific style that isn’t conducive to more free-form creativity. That it is aimed at hammering out product as quickly and painlessly as possible at the cost of hamstringing the more subtle art of editing. “

It doesn’t ‘force’ you to edit in a particular way and the only limits to free form creativity are where they have always been – in the hands of the editor. Y

Steve Connor
Adrenalin Television

Have you tried “Search Posts”? Enlightenment may be there.