-
Time for an FCP X update?
-
I feel the way mostly. But in all fairness it’s literally a keystroke to insert a track beneath v1. 🙂
-
[Bret Williams] “But in all fairness it’s literally a keystroke to insert a track beneath v1. :)”
I guess.
The unbreakable constraint being that ALL your video tracks are always and by necessity “over the line” and all your audio tracks are “under the line.”
And that you’ll never miss the “default” nature of the audio/video clip relationships that X uses to make sure you never slip stuff out of sync that you don’t want to move out of sync.
Both work. Some of us just enjoy the fact that an audio’video sync clip is always “default respected” in X.
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] “Both work. Some of us just enjoy the fact that an audio’video sync clip is always “default respected” in X.
“Until you break clips apart (which I try to never do), and FCP X decides it has no idea where that audio came from and whether it’s in sync with the video or not.
It’s tempting to break those clips apart so I could actually add cross fades, or trim out just the audio or video without expanding. Or keyframe individual channels without showing audio components.
-
Count since list update clock for FCPX
https://www.tickcounter.com/countup/2014jan17/America+New_York/123000am/Last%2520Final%2520Cut%2520Pro%2520X%2520UpdateBrian Mulligan
Senior Editor – Autodesk Smoke
WTHR-TV Indianapolis,IN, USA
Twitter: @bkmeditor -
Unfortunately I think Walter’s scenario is the most likely. X is a cool idea, I love using it, but I think what we see is what we get. I doubt it will dramatically evolve beyond its present concept, any more than iMovie has changed by leaps and bounds since the big shift years ago.
Unless there is a change from the top — someone at Apple who suddenly, Jobs-like, decrees “How did we become last in the video editing race?” — we will mostly see only minor features and tweaks.
What would motivate a Jobs-like outrage, followed by a rapid, comprehensive expansion of pro features? Well, if Jobs were alive and perceived that Resolve 11 seemed to be taunting him, he might throw more resources behind X. But Tim Cook doesn’t seem to think that way.
Doug D
-
[Mitch Ives] “Really no comparison, so unless you’ve spent time with R11, I’m not sure spending any time with R10 would allow you to reach any meaningful conclusions.”
We can be sure R11 will be track based, so in my opinion (only) that will make it slower than FCPX. Tracks will be great for some and unwelcome to others. I am personally much faster on X giving me more time to “tweak” creatively. Those looking for FCP8 will be happy. Premiere editors will be curious, to say the least.
Most color that I do can be accomplished in X so there would be no need for R11 on most jobs. Why force the issue if you can just quickly get it done it X (or any other software that is not R11 for that matter)?
However I will enjoy the ability to send those jobs that do need color over to R11 when locked and then back to X for audio, titles and delivery. And I will be learning R11 as it feels like a good place to go for future freelance opportunities.
Those are my “meaningful” conclusions (and only mine) at this point. I reserve the right to change any and all at any point! 🙂
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
Well said… and I think we all reserve the right to change our mind at any time… 🙂
Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.“Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.” – Winston Churchill
-
[Walter Soyka] “4. FCP X seems to be following the same trajectory that Motion and Aperture have, with a lot of exciting early development followed by stabilization and “boring” updates.”
Ouch… I hope that isn’t true, but I suspect you may be right.
[Douglas K. Dempsey] “What would motivate a Jobs-like outrage, followed by a rapid, comprehensive expansion of pro features? Well, if Jobs were alive and perceived that Resolve 11 seemed to be taunting him, he might throw more resources behind X. But Tim Cook doesn’t seem to think that way.”
You’re right, but it isn’t just FCP X… Tim Cook seems more concerned about social issues and writing letters to sovereign states than he does in figuring out how to deliver a Mac Pro in under 3 months. Strange focus, since he was supposed to be a supply chain expert. As for FCP X, when was the last time he even made reference to it? So, as much as I want you to be wrong, sadly, I’m afraid you may be right as well.
Mitch Ives
Insight Productions Corp.“Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.” – Winston Churchill
-
With ProApps like Aperture (a VERY promising app early on) disappearing further and further into the rear view mirror by it’s competitors, it’s of course always going to be worrisome that the same thing will happen to X.
And while we just plain don’t hear anything about Aperture development, everything I’ve heard from people who have spoken to the team, indicate that this is NOT a product that they intend to languish.
As I’ve outlined in a few places, I think development has been caught behind some walls that were not of the X team’s creation. The new Library structure required Mavericks, so it just plain couldn’t be launched until it 10.9 was in October. And even then it was another 3 months until the co-ordinated MacPro/FCPX 10.1 launch in LATE December that we finally saw the update.
I’m really hoping that the X team can get back onto more regular feature updates now, unrestrained by having to couch to any new hardware or software shifts. I definitely want to see the slowing progress of updates reversed with a nice feature update with 10.1.2 in the near future.
-
Bill Davis
“you mean I can’t pop a video track below track one? – I WANT that clip in the background for compositing below my primary – and you’re telling me that there’s no workspace below track 1? How can you work this way?”
sentences never heard in FCP 7 either (can’t put a track below track 1? Seriously? just add more tracks…)
Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up