-
The (still) temporary Verdict: FinalCutProX usable for Pro’s?
Hey there,
Where are we with the discussion, if FCPX can be used for complex, big and multiple-user Editing-Workflows?
1. Where is the interface, has it gotten better, customizable?
2. How is Motion interacting with FCPX? (talking about Bezier-Curve-Timewarps etc.)
Should one expect it to be around in 10 Years among the big studios?
Links and opinions are highly appreciated!
Disclosure: I am (was) an expert FCP7-editor, now I am a happy Avid-editor, just curious about the old capricious friend FCP…) -
17 Replies
-
Yes, FCPX is very usable for Pro’s. There is absolutely no reason whatsoever not to consider it pro, unless you have certain specific workflows you might need.
Rendering speeds are awesome, the organization of footage is a lot better than in FCP7, once you get used to the magnetic timeline it’s very fast to work with, exporting separate Audio Tracks for TV works very well with roles.Sofar I’ve mostly used it for short form, currently I’m finishing a 60 min Low Budget Experimental using XDCAM and my 8 year old 500 GB Raid FW800 Drive, connected to my 2011 MacBook Pro. Never had a problem, spinning beach balls once in a while.
I’m starting to edit a 90 min Dokumentary this Month, probably using eSATA, lets see how that goes…
I work in Berlin, Germany. The Market here really hates change, there are still very few companies using it – I’m still flabbergasted to find companies here that still haven’t figured out that FCP Legacy is as professional as Avid.
But I just got a FCPXjob offer for a regular gig starting next month, internet stuff.
The Editor Knut Hake has been using FCPx for the German TV series Danny Lowinski and is currently editing his 3rd narrative feature on it.
I am seeing quite a few prosumer editors adopting it, especially some actor friends of mine editing their own demotapes, a few Kameramen, a Musician friend of mine, and funny enough the Painter who’s Experimental I’m finishing
You should check out Larry Jordan’s page https://www.larryjordan.biz/
and very good training by https://www.rippletraining.com
“Always look on the bright side of life” – Monty Python
-
[Mark Snow] “Should one expect it to be around in 10 Years among the big studios?”
Who’s to know? It isn’t here now, and it isn’t built with our needs in mind…at this time. Who knows how they might update and improve it. But, with the current path it is on, the current way that it works…it isn’t a viable option for big studio (feature film) or broadcast TV series work.
I don’t doubt that someone will do a special with it. I did that with FCP 4.5 back when FCP was originally seen by HOllywood as “not viable.” So, only the future will tell.
Currently…no. Next year?
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
FCP X is perfectly capable of doing pro work today in its current form. Please browse the threads in these two FCP X forums and you will already find numerous discussions of how it is being used in professional, demanding environments.
The technology curve is accelerating, so 10 years from now is a very long time. By the yardstick of mainstream pros (Hollywood film and TV editors), FCP “legacy” hasn’t been successful either. There are tons of indies and documentaries and some TV cut on FCP 1-7, but as far as studio work, the number of high visibility work done with FCP has been a drop in the bucket compared with Avid.
Avid is hardly gone, Adobe is making a big push and when EditShare finally ports Lightworks to Mac, the picture will shift again. Today, it gets down to a personal decision. Can you do the work? Yes! Will you encounter it within the majority of facilities within the coming years? Unknown.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “By the yardstick of mainstream pros (Hollywood film and TV editors), FCP “legacy” hasn’t been successful either. There are tons of indies and documentaries and some TV cut on FCP 1-7, but as far as studio work, the number of high visibility work done with FCP has been a drop in the bucket compared with Avid.”
Correct and important to bear in mind when measuring the “success”of FCPX
Steve Connor
‘It’s just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure” -
[Steve Connor] ” Correct and important to bear in mind when measuring the “success”of FCPX”
Cept for the “tons of indies and documentaries and some TV” which by every measure, is a success, and should reflect on the current “success” of FCX
-
[Jamie Franklin] “Cept for the “tons of indies and documentaries and some TV” which by every measure, is a success, and should reflect on the current “success” of FCX”
I absolutely agree, but the fact major broadcast facilities, broadcasters as well as big budget features aren’t using FCPX at the moment is often touted as a ‘failure” of FCPX when as Oliver said FCP Legacy was not the dominant player in these areas anyway.
Steve Connor
‘It’s just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure” -
[Steve Connor] “as Oliver said FCP Legacy was not the dominant player in these areas anyway.”
It wasn’t dominant, but it was losing ground rather quickly. FCP Legacy was making huge inroads in this town. And when FCX was released, the Avid employees let out a collective sigh of relief… Their future is safe. Apple is no longer a threat to Avid…they turned down a different path.
Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def -
[Shane Ross] “[Steve Connor] “as Oliver said FCP Legacy was not the dominant player in these areas anyway.”
It wasn’t dominant, but it was losing ground rather quickly. FCP Legacy was making huge inroads in this town. And when FCX was released, the Avid employees let out a collective sigh of relief… Their future is safe. Apple is no longer a threat to Avid…they turned down a different path.
“Concur. IMHO, if FCP had been allowed to continue down the path it was headed, it would have eventually become the dominant player in these areas. The uptake on it, here in LA, from 2006/7 until its death was huge.
-
[Steve Connor] “but the fact major broadcast facilities, broadcasters as well as big budget features aren’t using FCPX at the moment is often touted as a ‘failure””
I have to agree with those saying it. Maybe not from where they view things. While I was quite vocal during the release on the consequences to my own experience moving forward with the mag timeline of creative lost causes, seeing the consequences in the professional environment, and as Shane pointed out, the collective relief by Avid users, really was a big deal when many were saying it wouldn’t be. My point of view, all that upward momentum was squandered. But I haven’t moved on myself. I still enjoy using Legacy for what it’s worth. And that I wouldn’t have predicted 2 years ago…leaving a sour taste by my initial reaction.
-
But what about the editing and trimming in FCPX? When a simple task takes one or two steps more than in another system, I consider it a major problem, as you do these things 100’s of times -a-day…
Example: Timewarp with bezier-curves… I can’t imagine that you would be as fast opening up Motion an tweaking as it was done in Legacy and Avid, or is it?
Then the timeline: I hate thos rounded Edges of the clips! How are you supposed to know on what frame exactly this dude rests with rounded edges?
Lastly: the skimming thing is nice, but it tends to slow down your Cursor and drives you nuts with sound and picture. Just my opinion.
All this togheter, I still prefer working on the fast and tipsy FCP7 over X and I am so far not persuaded by the FCPX-Believers, for X to perform on complex and big Productions.
Is there anyone out there who really enjoys the Edit/Trimming in X who knows well the alteratives Avid and Legacy?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up