-
Todays FCP X announcement
-
[Lance Moody] “As I mentioned, the magnetic timeline can’t really be a showstopper for an actual editor. “
Oh, dear. You must be an ACTUAL editor. How thrilling to meet you.
-
Hi Chris,
That wasn’t meant to be a pissing contest type of comment, just that there is nothing inherent in the magnetic timeline that might preclude an editor from editing (even though he or she might bristle at the metaphors used in the software). That’s all.
Lance
-
[Lance Moody] “there is nothing inherent in the magnetic timeline that might preclude an editor from editing”
All true, it’s just that some of us need more than one real track 😉
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Lance Moody] “Hi Chris,
That wasn’t meant to be a pissing contest type of comment, just that there is nothing inherent in the magnetic timeline that might preclude an editor from editing (even though he or she might bristle at the metaphors used in the software). That’s all.
Lance”
Fair enough.
-
[Craig Seeman] “Tracks have been used that way because there was no alternative. Now there is. It used to look like a spreadsheet with rows of clips. Now it looks like a database. “
It’s about frame-of-reference. Tracks are the most natural and efficient way to represent multiple concurrent channels of media relative to absolute time. The database functionality doesn’t help with this. Labels (roles) exist outside time and space — they solve a different kind of problem.
There are many workflows and project types that demand multiple, parallel, media channels in absolute time — multi-track audio recording or multi-channel video to name a couple.
I’ve said for while and I still believe that FCPX’s single Primary Storyline is its biggest conceptual weakness. It’s efficient for certain kinds of editing and will hopefully improve; but at its core, it’s currently still an embellished single-track system. Sure, you can edit with it, but many editors like myself will find it limiting until it gets much more flexible.
Today’s updates are great and I’m curious to see how the timeline evolves. Now if they ever give the ability to create multiple Primaries as needed, things could get really interesting…
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
Maybe in 8 months FCPX will “evolve” into FCP8. What will the next new/old feature be? Whatever it is it will plainly demonstrate the utter dominance of FCPX. Like “hey guys, now we have EDL out so take that!”.
Robert Brown
Editor/VFX/Colorist – FCP, Smoke, Quantel Pablo, After Effects, 3DS MAX, Premiere Prohttps://vimeo.com/user3987510/videos
-
“If you do that with FCP7, the clip will go offline and gets automatically reconnected.”
Huh? No it doesn’t. People in FCP 7 SAN environments do this all the time. The limitation is that each has to work in their own local project or copies of a master project.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
Tracks served valuable functions, but it’s a situation of you like it or you don’t. I doubt Apple will now change the course they’re on. Adapt or move on.
BTW – it’s completely incorrect to say tracks existed because there was no other way. In fact early NLEs started with completely different designs than tracks. Quantel Harry used a vertical filmstrip metaphor with composites stacked behind the visible clip. These approaches were dropped because tracks worked better. Even today some of that exists in Smoke and DS, where effects can be broken out into nodes.
One real issue right now is that Apple attributes different values to Storyline clips versus Connected clips. There is no real reason to do that and as a result it causes the user to swap one set of workaraounds for another. It also forces the user to toggle between the Selection and Position tools (magnetic versus position MODES) in order to do the SAME task – moving clips around in the timeline work area.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
This announcement, release list and further announcements by 3rd party companies gave us insight on how FCPX is going to be developed as a product. FCPX is never going to be a “complete package” as FCP 7 was. Apple decided to strip the engine make it a basic editor, if you want the bells and whistles beyond what’s provided, your on your own. They’ll keep adding to it but it will never be like FCP 7. If you want backward compatibility to the legacy, there’s an App for that in 7toX. You want high end color grading, go purchase BMD DaVinci. If you want formal audio support to Pro Tools, there’s an App for that as well. It falls into their business model of making hardware and base applications and letting anyone develop and sell through their means (ie. The App store.) This also further my previous conclusion 8 months ago that the entire FCS was dumped because of legal and licensing of the previous software more than anything.
-
[mark cookman] “After the update it seems studios can still only use FCPX collaboratively if they run on a SAN.
Due to flexibility needs; there is no ‘per seat’ file-share licensing in our future.”Are you talking about Xsan? Xsan is now included in Lion, no additional cost per seat. You still have the infrastructure requirements though.
Best,
Andy
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up