-
The Color Wheels Mystery …
-
[Tim Wilson] “I mean, it’s like they’d have to, like, SAY something or something.”
Or!
It’s fixed in the next dot release without a word being said, like it never happened. 🙂
-
[Robin S. Kurz] “it seems no one can argue 100% that it’s in fact a bug or not, so ultimately pretty moot conversation, no?”
Yeah,
I’ll wait and learn more. -
[Tony West] “I’ll wait and learn more.”
Agreed. And I wonder what percentages of FCPX editors this “bug” actually matters to (at least outside of this forum)? Probably a very low number.
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Visual Storyteller
Managing Partner, Low Country Creative LLC
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
[Robin S. Kurz] “But then different is not inherently wrong. I’d have thought FCP users of all people would have understood that by now. ????
“The initial post and video from Simon is simply a question. What is happening? If it is different how does it differ? Why is the behavior working as expected in one color space, but the exact same behavior is different in another? If we have come to a point where we can’t ask questions, we have all lost.
If you look at Simon and Oliver’s 709 vs 2020 suggestions, you will notice that the actions occur as expected in one area and not the other. To me, this is the very definition of a bug. It may just be a miscalculation. Part of fixing the bug would to be to calculate the current filter values in to the corresponding fixed values so there would be no loss of work. I don’t think it would require an additional adjustment filter. So before we go sounding alarm beeps about how a fix would screw everything up, let’s take it one step at a time and figure out the issue, no? There’s a TON of new and different color science in FCPX so there may be some inaccuracies in this first version that I’m sure can be fixed without destroying current work.
-
[Bill Davis] “Everywhere I go online today in the X community, I see posts sbout how the FCP X new color grading is “broken” or “sub professional” or “needs bug fixing, stat.” “
For months now you have been badgering this forum as a place that is inherently hostile to FCPX and lauding the other internet sites as bastions of “good-speak.” Now, suddenly, those idealic forums full of the FCPX faithful are a mob of jabbering hysterics and this forum is a model of reasonable inquiry. Funny how that goes.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin\’ attached to nothin\’
\”Deciding the spine is the process of editing\” F. Bieberkopf -
[Bill Davis] “The only thing I know for sure is that for 30 years now when I’ve put my faith in Apples technical development vision, the resulting ratio of hits to strikeouts has been excellent. So I’m still willing to put my personal productivity bets there, happily. “
It is no big deal if there is an error in the color wheels – new features are a petry dish for bugs. The only problem comes from those being in denial about the problem – Apple can’t fix what it doesn’t realize is broken. The only danger lies in silence.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin\’ attached to nothin\’
\”Deciding the spine is the process of editing\” F. Bieberkopf -
[Simon Ubsdell] “My problem is that I can’t see the virtue in the way that the Wheels behave in Rec.709, whereas in Rec.2020 they make complete sense and conform to what I would expect.”
This.
It makes no sense that Apple would want the color wheels to behave differently depending on which color space you’re using. I’d say this clearly identifies it as a “bug.” And as someone who has very little knowledge of color correction, there is no way I’d want to correct with the way it works in Rec.709. Of course I’m happily plugging away on the curves. I usually set my black and white levels with that as I can operate faster without having to switch interfaces. Though I know it’s better to just use the curves just for “shaping” for lack of a better term.
————————–
Brett Sherman
One Man Band (If it\’s video related I\’ll do it!)
I work for an institution that probably does not want to be associated with my babblings here. -
[Jeremy Garchow] “The initial post and video from Simon is simply a question.”
Yes, I very much realize that, Jeremy. Thank you. Which is why it wasn’t in fact directed at Simon. MY reading comprehension in fact does go far enough, that I can differentiate between the terms “Mystery“, which was used, and “Bug” or “Problem” or “Broken“. ????
It was directed at no one in particular, rather just anyone that does consider the matter to be a bug or problem or whatever before anyone in fact knows for sure. Be it through Apple or any other reliable channels. I am in fact not judging anything either way, just curious to see what any subsequent explanation of it all may be.
Or to OVERexplain: “different is not inherently wrong” in this context means that a LOT about FCP (especially in the early stages as we know) has been considered to be “Wrong!”, when it in fact was merely a different, misunderstood approach. One merely had to grasp the WHY to define the “wrong or right” for ONESELF. Preferably without pretending as if that conclusion is globally applicable to any and everyone. Whether it’s the same this time around I do not know, but something tells me little to nothing of this magnitude is just BY ACCIDENT with Apple and FCP. We shall see.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Herb Sevush] “The only problem comes from those being in denial about the problem – Apple can’t fix what it doesn’t realize is broken. The only danger lies in silence.”
I would argue, Herb, that the greater threat is spreading misinformation under the guise of accurate discussion.
This might well be a BUG.
It also might be an alternate rational and defensible choice on Apples part.
If so the leap here to pre-define it as a “BUG” – is the central issue I’m addressing.
If it IS – that will be confirmed.
If it ISN’T the damage to the softwares public perception will be all that remains.
And that’s not cool if the premise proves to be false.
That’s exactly what happened to X in its first year. It’s depths we’re hidden behind the equally flawed quick meme of iMovie Pro.
This excerpt from Phil Pan (a qualified color scientist whom I quoted with permission in another thread) is one small indication that this might NOT be a BUG at all, but rather a rational alternative software design choice.
He wrote:
Avid is the oldest digital video software company on the block and its tools are laden with legacy items that will not be removed until the last user from the old analogue broadcast days retires. It makes zero sense in 2018 to use analogue-days nomenclature and units; nor does it for Final Cut to still show a waveform monitor that expresses picture excursion in IRE units, with antiquated concepts such as ‘superblack’ and ‘superwhite’. But the FCP team didn’t have much of a choice, since it needed to compete with Avid in what had become a buttoned-up, conservative market.
AND
Now, if there are problematic naming conventions in FCPs various colour tools, one shouldn’t panic. As is the case for Avid, there are legacy reasons for the naming conventions to be messy. What matters is that you understand which parameter does what to your image. In time, as the industry evolves, Apple will be in a position to ditch the old names and abide by a more coherent standard.
These are excerpts from his full, complex post that I pasted above so that these excerpts can be read in full context.
My point is there MAY be a bug – or there may be nothing of the sort.
It’s YOU who was triggered to attach the terms “error” and “bug” and “broken” to this discussion in your post.
So that’s clearly the top level impression this thread has spiked for you.
IF it proves to be none of those things, just understand you are the guy who ends up spreading the FUD.
Not clarifying things.
FWIW.
Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery. -
[Bill Davis] “Avid is the oldest digital video software company on the block and its tools are laden with legacy items that will not be removed until the last user from the old analogue broadcast days retires. It makes zero sense in 2018 to use analogue-days nomenclature and units; nor does it for Final Cut to still show a waveform monitor that expresses picture excursion in IRE units, with antiquated concepts such as ‘superblack’ and ‘superwhite’. But the FCP team didn’t have much of a choice, since it needed to compete with Avid in what had become a buttoned-up, conservative market.
AND
Now, if there are problematic naming conventions in FCPs various colour tools, one shouldn’t panic. As is the case for Avid, there are legacy reasons for the naming conventions to be messy. What matters is that you understand which parameter does what to your image. In time, as the industry evolves, Apple will be in a position to ditch the old names and abide by a more coherent standard.”
What does this have to do with wether this a bug/vs intended feature.
You really think the team at apple cares what Avid names there shit? I think apple showed it gives zero f#$%s about naming conventions right out of the gate with X.
Why do full fledged Color correction suites like Davinci and Baselight, etc use the same lingo? Got nothing to do with Avid.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up