-
Todays FCP X announcement
-
[Craig Seeman] “Databases are far more powerful. Over time, regardless of NLE, the power editor or their assistances, will be database proficient. I suspect other NLEs will catch up but FCPX is taking the lead in that department. It really needs a facility level management tool though.”
More powerful for what? The analogy really doesn’t make sense. It’s like saying because we have mySQL, there’s no longer a need for Microsoft Excel. Really?
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[David Lawrence] “More powerful for what? The analogy really doesn’t make sense. It’s like saying because we have mySQL, there’s no longer a need for Microsoft Excel. Really?”
It’s not that the spreadsheet doesn’t have utility but it’s way too limited IMHO. If you don’t need to go beyond those limits in a given project that’s fine. I used to do a lot of Filemaker work and, of course, used spreadsheets. The number of people and organizations who used spreadsheets instead of databases because they had no idea how to use a database was pervasive IMHO.
Being able to use Roles to line up content in rows (tracks) as needed would be good. I don’t want my NLE to limited by that mode, as most are. This is something I’ve felt since I first used Avid circa 1990 and it’s the thing that ignited my interest in FCPX. Despite its weaknesses it’s the first NLE (at least that I’ve seen) that designed to be a database.
One thing that FCPX hasn’t broached, and may not for some time, is that a powerful database not only allows for complex relationships but allows for flexible display. FCPX has a ways to go in that area but my own guess is that Apple is going to move the database further along for a bit before it can really get into more flexible interface control.
-
[Carl Edwards] “I’m sorry but that’s not how VFX shares media, we do it with XMLs and with Avid AAFs and relinking to the original media.
We never export out of final cut do to quality concerns (8bit and such).”
I don’t understand. FCPX can export XML. Its a new flavor of XML so it may not be compatible with whatever you do VFX on, though that may change since Resolve already supports it. Also, FCPX renders in 32-bit float, what are your 8-bit concerns regarding a QT export? ProRes? HQ is a 16-bit codec I believe, but quality will only be as good as the original footage.
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
[Craig Seeman] “One thing that FCPX hasn’t broached, and may not for some time, is that a powerful database not only allows for complex relationships but allows for flexible display. FCPX has a ways to go in that area but my own guess is that Apple is going to move the database further along for a bit before it can really get into more flexible interface control.”
Maybe I’m dense, but would you please elaborate on that with some specific examples? I’ve seen it stated over and over, but I just don’t see it. For example, FCP X’s database functions seem considerably less involved than Avid’s. (Especially when you factor in things like script-based editing.) Or than Final Cut Server’s or CatDV.
Smart Collections and Keywords are simply other ways of doing the same things. Plus this data doesn’t appear to be externally accessible. You can export XML, but you can’t reach in from the outside and extract information. So, I fail to see how FCP X is any more of a database with any more power than what others have been doing for 20+ years.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Andy Neil] “I don’t understand. FCPX can export XML. Its a new flavor of XML so it may not be compatible with whatever you do VFX on, though that may change since Resolve already supports it. Also, FCPX renders in 32-bit float, what are your 8-bit concerns regarding a QT export? ProRes? HQ is a 16-bit codec I believe, but quality will only be as good as the original footage.”
It is in fact a new flavor of XML that very little supports, so yeah, that would be part of the problem.
But I get the feeling you didn’t read too closely. We export out DPX and OPENEXR, neither of which FCP supports so we do this out of one of our smokes or flames. There was great integration between the two with FCPs old XML format turning into a near universal format that we could pass around. But apple chucked all this integration for no reason when they up-versioned.
So I don’t have QT export concerns, but even if I did HQ is certainly not a 16-bit format. The only decent quality you can get out of FCP is 4444 at 12bit, the rest is chopped off at 8bit. 4444 would be ok except only Macs can read it, which doesn’t help us that much.
On top of all this we still get people sending us tapes all the time and expecting us to be able to read them.
-
[Carl Edwards] “But I get the feeling you didn’t read too closely. We export out DPX and OPENEXR, neither of which FCP supports”
I read fine. I didn’t mention DPX because I know that FCPX doesn’t support that format at the moment. Besides you were talking about exporting DPX from FCP, not importing DPX INTO FCP.
[Carl Edwards] “Until we can get DPX or OPENEXR out of final cut…
So I focused on formats that you CAN get out of FCPX. I looked up ProRes 422 HQ because video bit depths are not my strong suit. According to what I read, HQ is 10bit, not 8bit. And you can also export out of FCPX in Uncompressed 10-bit. Surely, you can read Uncompressed on a PC?
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
Listen, it’s nice that you are trying to help us recreate our workflow to get around FCPXs shortfalls, but don’t.
A 10bit “uncompressed” compressed quicktime is not a substitute for 10bitlog DPX or 16bit OpenEXR. This is aside from the fact that I bet we can’t read it in Linux, which is what our compositors are working in.
I’m not expecting anything out of FCP to look good honestly. It’s always had so-so image quality and really terrible looking timewarps. That’s fine. It’s offline quality and it’s great for that, or it was until they took away it’s ability to integrate into a pipeline. That’s what bothers me.
-
[Carl Edwards] “Listen, it’s nice that you are trying to help us recreate our workflow to get around FCPXs shortfalls, but don’t.”
Hey, I’m just trying to understand here. There’s no need to be snippy. I’m just asking questions about your workflow and pointing out what FCPX can do. If it doesn’t work for you, fine. I’m not trying to sell you on it.
Have a nice day,
Andy
https://www.timesavertutorials.com
-
I’m sorry, you’re right. I let the condescending tone you use in pretty much every post get under my skin a bit.
Sorry about that.
-
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up