Someone give me quaintifiable evidence of FCPX market penetration. Features. Industrials. Commercials. Weddings. Where?

[James Ewart]

Delighted and thank you.

I guarantee you will enjoy it and more than likely feel the need to share.

Merry Christmas.

[Oliver Peters]

Seems relevant to the discussion:

https://postperspective.com/radicaloutposts-evan-schechtman-talks-latest-fcp-x-updates-nle-trends/

– Oliver

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

[James Culbertson]

[Scott Witthaus] “So what is it? What are you looking for that Adobe or Avid can supply as well?”

Of course, if Tim were to answer this question, then the whole premise of his initial question about FCPX would be negated.

The rest of us know the answer to that and Tim’s initial question, why feed his illogical and uninformed obsession.

[James Ewart]

Thanks for this Oliver. Because I never work in any of these collaborative workflows where people are simultaneously needing to access media I am curious about this side of things.

I understand Avid is the winner for simultaneous media sharing but am surprised to see him also favouring premiere and FCP7.

FCP7 still has some advantages for this kind of workflow over X? I’d be interested to know which and how if anybody can spare the time.

Thanks

James

[Oliver Peters]

[James Ewart] “FCP7 still has some advantages for this kind of workflow over X? I’d be interested to know which and how if anybody can spare the time”

It’s not that you can’t do the same things with X, but the process is more fluid (and certainly more familiar to most) using FCP 7. The most basic issue is that Editor A can send Editor B a segment of a common show simply by sending an FCP 7 project file that only includes the edited sequence. This can easily be moved into Editor B’s project by drag & drop.

There are also several workarounds in existence that permit Avid-style project sharing with FCP 7. EditShare has been doing that for years.

In addition, if collaboration involves outside audio post and color correction, FCP 7 internally generates the proper files (EDL, OMF and/or FCP 7 XML) without any additional translation step. Not all mixers will accept AAF files and not all color correction houses will work with XML or FCPXML.

– Oliver

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

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Oliver Peters] “It’s not that you can’t do the same things with X, but the process is more fluid (and certainly more familiar to most) using FCP 7.”

Besides Editshare like capability, those can’t be the reasons.

FCPX has drag and drop sharing, just make a new library w/Event drag, drop the Project. Open that Library on another machine, drag, drop, the Project in to whatever Event. Keywords come over, if the media is shared, it automatically links, it’s pretty straight forward and very similar to FCP7 project sharing. You could teach someone to do this in 30 seconds.

[Oliver Peters] “In addition, if collaboration involves outside audio post and color correction, FCP 7 internally generates the proper files (EDL, OMF and/or FCP 7 XML) without any additional translation step. Not all mixers will accept AAF files and not all color correction houses will work with XML or FCPXML.”

The transition to AAF for us, personally, has been flawless. Whenever I ask if someone accepts AAF, it’s always “Of course!”. Not one complaint, not one slow down, not one botched transfer or file. EDL-X is available for purchase from the AppStore, and this minimal cost isn’t going to slow down someone like @RadicalMedia. Also, you can tee up EDLs for free through Resolve if you really really don’t want to spend $99 to buy the specialized EDL tool.

[James Ewart]

Jeremy I think this is what Ripple call the ‘Transfer Library” and it seems a very tidy solution although you cannot rename it I(i don’t think) if FCPX is going to be able to automatically link the files.

Or is that the drive name you can’ rename even though it’s different drive?

Must go back and check I have confused myself.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[James Ewart] “Jeremy I think this is what Ripple call the ‘Transfer Library” and it seems a very tidy solution although you cannot rename it I(i don’t think) if FCPX is going to be able to automatically link the files.”

But we are talking about a shared storage situation, where the media files sit on one drive that isn’t renamed, and Libraries are passed between editors at different stations. Since the media hasn’t moved, it will relink. Sometimes even if the media IS moved to a different directory on the same drive, the media will relink, in my experience.

Yes, you are right, in that if you transfer everything to a different drive, you will need to relink, unless that drive has the same name.

I just don’t see how X is any worse than 7 in shared projects workflows.

[James Ewart]

Sometimes “worse” just means “different”?

[Jeremy Garchow]

[James Ewart] “Sometimes “worse” just means “different””

I think you have FINALLY found the new name of this forum!