-
Well, I like it…
-
[Oliver Peters] “This makes the process quite modal, which is something that X is supposed to move away from.”
I’ll agree that Role based mixing is still a work in progress. What they’ve done is made it work. Now they can make it work more efficiently. You’ve seen the “mixer” patent right? Now they can implement it if they want.
For me, the improvements to Roles, and how you can interact with them in the Timeline is the benefit right now. There’s is nothing at all like it and for Projects with tons of layered audio this is a dream come true. I’ve had to move X projects to Premiere recently and, for me, what was easily manageable in X, is a giant PITA in Pr. I can work with it of course, and I’m not Pr bashing here, but the difference is even more pronounced than it was before…
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~\”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.\”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~\”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented\”~ -
Kind of honour bound to say that, to be fair, that really does look pretty cool. They ticked a whole pile of boxes there.
All they had to do was release this in 2011 and we all might not have run off screaming. -
Wow, only had a chance to start it up and see what happens so far but it seems much faster! Can’t wait to spend more time.
Kirk Pitts.
video amateur.
Personal skateboard and band historian. 😉 -
“They made it work…” Well, what achievement… It worked once quite well in other NLE’s.
And I agree with Oliver, the functionality of opening them up not only makes it modal… it makes my screen way too small for functionality. And I have a 30 inch screen. With this kind of functionality I need two of them. And maybe even turned 90 degrees so I have more height.
Still, happy with the Audio Lanes! That sure makes the overview a lot better… or should I say: more like it once was in FCP7 and like it is in AVID and Premiere. Maybe what they came up with and what has worked well for so long wasn’t so bad after all.
-
[Mike Warmels] “”They made it work…” Well, what achievement… It worked once quite well in other NLE’s. “
lol… nice out of context quote, do you work for the press? ?
I think you know what I meant though right? They built the framework, now they can flesh it out. And while it’s the same end result as have a mixer, there’s a whole lot less patching and track assigning etc involved. Less complexity is better I think. I’m interested to see where they go with this…
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~\”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.\”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~\”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented\”~ -
[Charlie Austin] “I’m interested to see where they go with this…”
So am I, will be interested to see if there was any chat about it at the Summit
-
The Flow dissolve is a nice addition, which will clean up jump cuts in interview edits. Cross Dissolve worked, but was never as smooth as this.
– Gerry Fraiberg
Media Handyman – videographer, editor, photographer, voice over artist.
______________________________________________
http://www.visionandvoice.ca
❖ ❖ ❖ -
[Gerry Fraiberg] “The Flow dissolve is a nice addition, which will clean up jump cuts in interview edits. Cross Dissolve worked, but was never as smooth as this.”
I’ve played with this a bit. When you use its short default transition it tends to look more like a dissolve than a morph. If you really stretch out the duration and try it on something that doesn’t really match, it looks a bit like a morph between two still frames. When used as intended, it’s pretty effective. And it’s impressive that it does this in real-time. I think the Adobe solution is technically more accurate, although I’ve found it to be slow and crash-prone.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
No, the point is this: they come up with this ‘new paradigm’ discarding a whole lot of stuff from ‘traditional’ NLE’s. And slowly but slowly they start putting things back these ‘traditional’ NLE’s had. Somewhat altered, something that kinda fits with the ‘new paradigm’ but in the end they’re putting stuff back in people have been asking for for ages. Stuff they knew from the ‘traditional NLE’s’. Or as it has been put on this forum: they’re ticking a lot of boxes. Boxes with content we had once and has been absent for a few years due to the ‘new paradigm’,
All in all, it’s rather ironic. One day FCPX might actually turn out to be a proper, professional NLE. Next on the wish list: AAF exports from FCPX, not through some 3rd party software.
-
[Mike Warmels] “All in all, it’s rather ironic. One day FCPX might actually turn out to be a proper, professional NLE”
Seriously?
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up