-
Something Professional edited in FCPX
-
[Shawn Miller] “[Simon Ubsdell] “”The promo was cut on Apple FCP X and graded on Adobe SpeedGrade.”
That’s just weird.”
Maybe they shot raw and used SG for conversion and grading…”
I meant given the choice of using Resolve why would anyone opt for the considerable limitations of SpeedGrade?
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
hehehe, indeed Charlie
Looking at the still from the timeline you posted I’m reminded of seeing a guy from Apple back when X first came out.
He had a 7 timeline on the screen with a ton of tracks
then he went to the same timeline in X
He pointed out that it was all the same information, just “condensed” in the X timeline.
Same information
Just laid out differently, in their mind to make things faster for you.
-
Where was the sarcasm?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Herb Sevush] “Where was the sarcasm?”
Here: “perfectly suited for FCP X” As we all know, even cat videos are likely too complex for FCP X. It works really well for videos of people falling down though! 😛
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[tony west] “He pointed out that it was all the same information, just “condensed” in the X timeline.”
🙂 To be fair, any NLE with “stereo” tracks will condense that info. though personally I still find moving audio around in MC or Pr to kinda suck, but that’s likely because I’m used to X now rather than it being any worse. I actually transferred that sequence to FCP 7 just for laughs. Yikes. Even after I laid it all out neatly it was a nightmare. But, the idea that one can’t layer audio in X, at least for me, is ludicrous.
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
Two people disagree on how well a tool does something. (multi-track audio with more than 16 sources)
One feels that the software can’t do it well.
The other says, “Hey, I’m doing it well, regularly and while it’s no more “perfect” than any other process, it’s pretty great.” Then shows a clear example of them DOING the thing the other argues can’t properly be done.
Argument over, in my mind.
In sum, X might not work the way you prefer – but it does work – and in a way a whole lot of us DO prefer – once we stop trying to make it work like something else we used to use.
; )
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
[Bill Davis] “Then shows a clear example of them DOING the thing the other argues can’t properly be done…. Argument over, in my mind.”
James appears to be doing long form, which I don’t, so there may well be an issue I’m not seeing. I’m open to that, but “it doesn’t work and it can’t be done” is a little uh… broad for me.
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[Simon Ubsdell] “[Shawn Miller] “[Simon Ubsdell] “”The promo was cut on Apple FCP X and graded on Adobe SpeedGrade.”
That’s just weird.”
Maybe they shot raw and used SG for conversion and grading…”
I meant given the choice of using Resolve why would anyone opt for the considerable limitations of SpeedGrade?”
Who can say, maybe they prefer working with layers instead of nodes? Isn’t the good news here that there’s at least a choice? 🙂
Shawn
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up