-
still driving me nuts
-
[James Culbertson] “I can see it being irritating until someone gets used to it. But I’m not sure how it would be immature.”
So what is it I wonder?
“Clever” “Provocative” “Insightful” “Well Considered” even?
Perhaps “Playful” would be better?
For sure they must have thought about it a lot and decided it would rock the boat. But it’s needless and a bit silly in my view.
-
Honestly, I don’t care very much about all that. Apple decided to create a new paradigm and with that comes a different jargon. Silly? Yes, but hey, it’s what it is.
To me complaing about these phrases is just as silly as FCPX advocates who think AVID is stupid because the interface looks (!!!) outdated… So what? At least in AVID you can make it look more or less they way you want it.
My biggest issue is: is FCPX really better or faster. I have grave doubt about the latter. GRAVE doubts. I find myself pushing a lot of buttons for simple things. I counted that making a simple audio-video split edit of one frame (for arguments sake) takes SEVEN actions in FCPX… And only THREE in AVID MC8… Add the much more immediate media response in AVID MC8 and then where are we? To be honest, I find FCPX easy to learn, is kinda nice… pretty restrictive in customising it to personal needs, it’s cheap, it has powerful tool… but I have not found at all that it is FASTER. Project, event or library, sequence or bin whatever… I just don’t want to work around so much…
-
[James Ewart] ”
For sure they must have thought about it a lot and decided it would rock the boat. But it’s needless and a bit silly in my view.”Bingo! You nailed it James…
Hey, let’s just rename a bunch of well known shite, it’ll distract from all the missing stuff, and maybe they won’t notice.
And, it seems to have worked, at least it did for some.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss ProductionsDavid is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.
-
[Mike Warmels] “My biggest issue is: is FCPX really better or faster.”
.. of course therein lies one of the the big differences between all the users and all the different ways and areas we work in.
Faster by how much? You save an hour a day in Avid over FCPX? You may have incredibly tight deadlines to turn round a news piece. But in any event I don’t know how you measure faster. Is editing a race? For some people in newsroom I guess it pretty much must be. I think you are always going to be faster (for a while at least) working within an app you have used most because you have learned to do things its way.
in FCPX you might find you have to think differently.
In any event I don’t care a whole lot about how many cuts I can do in an hour.
Does it help me think more about shape, structure and pace without worrying about keeping things in sync or what’s going on ten minutes or even three minutes down the timeline?
Yes it does.
-
When I cut my shows I get a certain amount of time to make it in. Say for a 30 minute show about fashion (a children’s series), I get 4 days to shape and structure each episode. If FCPX means it takes me an hour extra a day to do that, so four more hours for the whole show, then I have, by my calculations, four hours LESS time to think about story, pace, shape and structure because I have to spend so much time on getting the NLE to do what I want.
Thinking about story, structure and pace is crucial, but I want my NLE not to be an obstacle. I don’t want to lose precious time on pressing buttons. I want to be able to change, shape, try, form and shape. So speed in trying and shaping IS important, I want to see if it works or how it can work better. And I am beyond the time in my life that I do those four hours extra in my own time. Producers and broadcasters skim so much of the top already.
-
[Mike Warmels] “but I want my NLE not to be an obstacle.”
I get you. All I can say is I am cutting stuff at the moment and occasionally thinking. “How would I have done that in FCP7 so easily” (really).
I do believe I am faster now but do understand where you are coming from. If you are battling the software to do something you could do before without even thinking about it, it can be distracting, slow you down and get in the way of your thought process.
Of course there is an adjustment process but there is a beautiful simplicity and elegance to FCPX although of course some things still annoy me.
The primary one for me is not having instant access to the opacity bar. And that does hold me up but not by more than other stuff speeds me up, which is principally sync and not having to worry about B roll getting knocked out of place, which saves me incredibly amounts of time.
Not having to worry about a section of the timeline if I cannot actually see it is really great. With FCPX you can have absolute confidence if you drop a shot in or lengthen a few frames nothing else is going to be impacted.
I love that.
-
Oh I am not battling the software. I thought I was doing something wrong because if feels so slow so often. But after working with professionals who have been doing professional work on FCPX for two years now, I think I am working it the way you should.
I don’t think FCP7 is the best comparison, an old lady now. But AVID for me certainly is. In many ways it’s a lot more direct. And yes, it asks a certainly discipline in putting things in your timeline, but when it’s there, it’s there.
My main gripes are that FCPX gets slow. It does a lot of calculations in the background that I cannot see or even wonder what it’s doing. I have to, just like many colleagues of mine, restart it three times a day so I clears its chaches or whatever it’s doing.
I sincerely doubt the quality of its mediamanagement and its libraries, which are, in my humble opinion, excellent in AVID. Part of why AVID handles so solidly. So I wouldn’t mind the extra button pressing in FCPX if it would respond immediately. But it doesn’t. Pressing the spacebar gives me reaction times in payback between 0 and 2 seconds… varying…. 2 seconds to start playing is ridiculously long if you ask me.FCPX is here to stay, that much is certain. But the whole thing seems very undeveloped and immature at this stage. And that includes (I honestly really agree with you) naming everything. (Projects, Libraries, Event, Start Range Selection, Skimming…).
-
[James Culbertson] “This has nothing to do with Apple and everything to do with personal linguistic stuckness. Time to take personal responsibility and move on, or accept that you personally cannot or do not want to change.”
jesus christ please.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Oliver Peters] “I believe Apple refers to the window as the timeline, not the content within the window. That’s still the project. If you look at the Event Browser, it separates clips and projects. Are you more confused now? 😉
So is an empty timeline with no content a project or still a timeline?
-
[Mike Warmels] “I counted that making a simple audio-video split edit of one frame (for arguments sake) takes SEVEN actions in FCPX.”
Funny. I can do it in three key strokes. Sometimes, two.
If play head is on the cut. Shift left or right bracket will expand the audio and select the edge. Command and period will then extend or retract. So that’s two keystrokes to make a one frame split edit. Shift left (or right) bracket and period (or comma).
To effect the video, it’s a few more keystrokes, but it’s super fast. First I expand both audio clips, then select the video left or right edge, then trim with comma period. The combination is:
Hold shift.
Hit left and then right bracket.
Release shift and hit either left, or right bracket or forward slash to select which side (or both) of the video you want to trim, and then use comma period.
If you know that combination it takes under two seconds to get what you need. How much faster can we go?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up