-
Thoughts on 10.1.2
-
I like it going into the event, I just don’t want it to go to the timeline at the same time.
I label takes with the first 3 words of the paragraph of the script so I can find them and drop them in.
As it stands now I have to go back and delete the tracks that land in the timeline. An extra unwanted step for me.
I fought I was just overlooking an easy way to do it but I don’t see the answer so maybe not.
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “I don’t know enough to know – but does the, now complete, long four year walk back to what is once again effectively an FCP7 project file with basically everything else external if you want – right down to render files – solve the problems raised with the use of X in a shared facility? Or at least that it has as many or as few problems as 7 had that way?”
As of this update FCP X libraries are better than FCP 7 projects in this respect, as storage locations can be designated on a per-library basis.
—
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read our blog.
-
Has anyone tried X2Pro yet?
To answer your question specifically, Aindreas, yes I think this goes a decent way forward towards larger installs if there are any larger installs still interested besides Scripps.
Libraries were a step in the right direction, but having proxy or optimized files meant long file transfers and made sharing Libraries a slower process than it needed to be, even if you decided to manually remove the media, and then recreate it at the new source.
I still think making a new library and dragging stuff in to the new library is better, but now there’s the advantage of not having to dupe media, but still retain the Library advantages of extremely portable media options.
Also, it’s cool we can select pieces and parts of a Library for XML transfers.
Finder tags will be awesome, at least they will be for me, to allow a bit of preorg right in the Finder without using X.
As far as this taking time, yeah, it’s been taking some time. But as we’ve mentioned on this forum before, if you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe.
-
I used Xtopro for a feature doc and it worked great. I just wish FCP X would do it natively.
James
-
You’ve edited a feature with 10.1.2 already?
Wow.
I know X is fast, but that’s crazy fast! 😉
I use x2pro, but haven’t updated to 10.1.2 due to the new XML version.
Just wondering if anyone has tried x2pro with 10.1.2.
Jeremy
-
It just works exactly like FCP 7. It’s a VO tool, meant to record VO while you playback video and audio. However that doesn’t mean dropping it in the tl shouldn’t be an option. When I use it I go to the end of the TL so it’s easy to delete as well.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “As far as this taking time, yeah, it’s been taking some time.”
It’s interesting to think what they could have got done these last two years – if they hadn’t had to walk back the entire project/event/library/storage paradigm architecture. That feels, looking back, like a bit of a time sink for cupertino.
I thought Oliver Peter’s point is interesting as to whether apple feel there is a need to perform any more major advances to X in terms of editing or audio handling say. Whether they think X is in their eyes largely complete with the work on the library file.
This is only interesting in terms of what apple tend to do to largely complete software. Given they will always need new software to sell new forms of hardware. Basically, if Apple think X is largely put together in their eyes – that notion should probably be accompanied with jaws music.Once they get to a certain point, as with old FCP, old iMovie, the old pages/keynote/numbers, soundtrack pro, shake, they do seem to just sit on it – until they dynamite it and – selectively – start over. Farewell Shake and the rest of pro apps.
bar cash cow itunes – it’s hard to think of any piece of software apple has actually chosen to actively develop past around 5-6 years – FCP was the outlier, but it barely advanced past 6-7 – that it hasn’t outright killed or radically reformulated? Sure how long is X on the market now?
I thought it was fascinating that they apparently considered iphoto on iOS a failure given complexity – hence photos – and you would be very curious to hear their thoughts on iOS imovie given they are apparently opening the icloud gates to iOS video too.
with their thoughts turning to the iOS OSX continuity move – what could apple be thinking about FCPX and imovie as regards shared consumer storage for consumer video files? Now that they are fashioning a shared iOS OSX photos app environment for stills? Could X and imovie come a cropper in a year or two? That would be close to the 7 year apple itch to nuke the software. As an iOS lead company, you’d think their metrics on iOS video recording vs iOS imovie editing would be super interesting to them.
could there be another year zero looming for video apps on iOS/OSX?
But no – no doubt Apple will be greatly hard at work advancing all aspects of FCPX for many, many years to come. Businesses can be assured of audio advances, loudness meters etc.
Sorry. I sort of couldn’t resist. feels like telling a campfire ghost story to X users.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “Sorry. I sort of couldn’t resist. feels like telling a campfire ghost story to X users.”
I tend to be in the camp that feels an X/iMovie hybrid could appear down the road. I don’t think that would necessarily be a non-pro product, just as I don’t think Photos will be completely consumer-oriented.
One inkling is the development of the ProRes 4444 XQ codec. That’s clearly targeted at the upper-end pro, non-cloud world. There’s no reason to do that if there was no interest in the pro enterprise world – at least at some level.
OTOH, since Apple gets licensing fees for ProRes when a camera manufacturer uses the codec family, they could benefit from it, even if there were no FCP X. Clearly ProRes has become a ubiquitous codec. Not to mention that handling this data rate puts it into the MacPro/Thunderbolt2 world.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Aindreas writes –
I don’t know enough to know – but does the, now complete, long four year walk back to what is once again effectively an FCP7 project file with basically everything else external if you want – right down to render files – solve the problems raised with the use of X in a shared facility?REPLY – this has been my favorite cow thread in a LONG time. It’s because of this thread that I watched all the tutorials on the 10.1.2 updates, and the new libraries stuff. I CANT WAIT to hear from John Davidson on all of this (who is STILL using sparse disk images). FINALLY, this could now (possibly – what the hell do I know) resolve all of these issues that have been going on for years.
You can finally put stuff where you want it – gee, what a concept !Bob Zelin
Bob Zelin
Rescue 1, Inc.
bobzelin@icloud.com -
[Oliver Peters] “One inkling is the development of the ProRes 4444 XQ codec. “
you’d think the fact that apple are executing mad large scale annual manufacturing, with the code/apps as a conjoined process is being ignored.
If you love software, you make you own hardware – per jobs quote – but the issue is the manner in which, and for how long, you love any development specific instance or incarnation of that software tied to already sold aluminium lumps. you’re maybe talking a six year old car. you might support it, but you will never advance it. Pro Apps is an apple hangover.
What apple loves, needs and wants is the presentation of ever now software with current hardware, that has a rhythm. that makes sense – seven year old software never will.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up