-
Who would like a unified interface for FCS?
-
Speaking as a jack of all trades, i don’t think a unified solution is going to work.
I like having separate apps for different aspects of my work. I don’t think its reasonable to expect one app to be the master of every discipline. And to think its ever going to be so, its just wishful thinking.
I like to be able to pick the right tool for the job, and if that means i edit my video in fcp, but cut and mix audio in Protools, whilst using After Effects to create motion graphics,and Cinema4d to bring in a 3rd dimension to my ideas, then i’m happy working that way.
The other thing i tend to do, is to have my audio software running on a separate mac from the video software. Protools is notoriously slow at updating, so i avoid any conflicts by keeping everything on different machines. Using a KVM matrix means i can use the same dual-screen monitors and my wacom/keyboard regardless of the mac powering them. It also means i can be rendering on one mac whilst dubbing on another. It also gives me a backup system should one mac develop a fault.
I’d hate to be reliant on one app/one mac for my entire workflow. Thats just silly.
I want the software developers to be refining their own products to be as good as possible, rather than being as all encompassing as possible. Forget one size fits all – i’m a big guy, and one size certainly does not fit all…ever!
adam
Adam Taylor
Video Editor/Audio Mixer/ Compositor/Motion GFX/Barista
Character Options Ltd
Oldham, UKhttp://www.sculptedbliss.co.uk
-
[Michael Aranyshev] “Regarding interface redesign the obvious candidate is Color. The GUI of every grading app on the market – Discreet Lustre, Nucoda Film Master, IRIDAS Speed Grade, Baselight, Resolve is pure abomination. But they used to cost your kidney and olor was cheap. Now the big boys come down in price. To compete Color has to be faster and the big part of the speed is the efficiency of the interface.”
Can’t disagree more. The interface is very fast and intuitive. Actually Resolve is even faster using Nodes to replace the Secondaries.
I have found anyone who doesn’t like these interfaces are Editors used to the very basic interface of an NLE. Guess what. Color applications were not designed for editors. So if you want to use a color enhancement tool, learn how to be efficient in it.
Apple and BMD have give you the choice of using a professional color enhancement tool. If you don’t like the way it works, then use a plug-in like Colorista, Magic Bullet Looks and others available for Final Cut Pro. These have very simple interfaces designed for an editor.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media“Foul Water, Fiery Serpent” Winner, Best Documentary, LA Reel Film Festival.
-
[Neil Hurwitz] “FCP is a side show that is gonna go away.”
I love these statements. Completely based on….. nothing.
It might be true that Apple will get out of Studio, but do you honestly think it would go away? I would actually PREFER for Apple to sell the Studio suite to someone who can actually give us updates on a regular basis, lay out a roadmap for the next two or three years so we know where the product is going, integrate the products to work better with each other.
Apple can’t do this because they keep re-allocating resources to their iOS products. So give away the entire Studio to someone who can actually move FCP forward in a more timely manner and make it cross platform. It started on Windows so offer the suite to folks on both platforms. Would certainly save me a lot of money over buying $8000 Mac Pros every other year.
My vote would be The Foundry.
[Neil Hurwitz] “Do you guys think anybody at Apple is listening?”
Actually yes, they do read these forums and many other forums relating to Apple products. There are folks assigned to do this very thing.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media“Foul Water, Fiery Serpent” Winner, Best Documentary, LA Reel Film Festival.
-
Guess what? Dial your patronizing tone down a bit, Walter. There used to be times companies actually researched what works in a GUI and what doesn’t and they came up with some pretty objective criteria. The GUI of any current grading software doesn’t make sense because it breaks too many rules. Not because it is targeted only to the most enlightened ones.
-
[Michael Aranyshev] “Guess what? Dial your patronizing tone down a bit, Walter. There used to be times companies actually researched what works in a GUI and what doesn’t and they came up with some pretty objective criteria. The GUI of any current grading software doesn’t make sense because it breaks too many rules. Not because it is targeted only to the most enlightened ones.”
The GUI for color enhancement software WAS researched and designed with the target users. Colorists. Just because editors can now use the same tools doesn’t mean the GUI has to change to please the editors.
The GUI for Resolve was further redesigned with Colorists and it’s incredibly simple for editors to pick up.
What you’re asking is for all the color enhancement companies to completely redesign their GUI interfaces for editors instead of editors taking the time to learn the GUI interfaces and find out why they are so efficient in the tasks that they do.
Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media“Foul Water, Fiery Serpent” Winner, Best Documentary, LA Reel Film Festival.
-
I’d still like Apple to keep them as separate applications….BUT with each application having a unified (or very similar) GUI.
As long as the round tripping is vastly improved (with as little re-rendering required as possible) and some key features (most editors need these days) are borrowed from Motion and duplicated in FCP (masking, tracking, better basic animation etc) then this would be the best of both worlds.
If you want a single application that does everything then Smoke for Mac is the baby for you.
-
I’m with Brett. Motion and STP should just wrap right in to FCP. Audio editing in FCP is horrendous. Most of the filters aren’t rt. Are you kidding me? Audio is the “easiest” thing to process with today’s monster computers and we can’t get rt audio effects? M100, back in the day on OS9, had totally awesome real time audio GUI filters that were completely intuitive, completely useful and completely built in to M100. It had separate busses and effects processing built right in to it along with a master track. It was really really useful. STP could be that for FCP. No professional audio mixer that I work with uses STP, they use ProTools. So, that being said, seeing STP get wrapped in to FCP makes a lot of sense because if we send out for a sound mix, it’s an OMF to ProTools anyway. I just don’t see a reason to keep STP as a separate application.
Motion in FCP also makes sense. Real time WYSIWYG text, ability to draw masks, shapes, and simple compositing, keying? This is all becoming part of my edit these days. Things are getting more and more complex and simply placing to clips together at the right time is just a part of what I do these days. Wrapping Motion in to FCP would be a huge help for me. Again, if working with a professional motion graphics artist, 99.75% of the time they are using After Effects for the type of work that we require. So, keeping Motion a separate application would also benefit me the editor more than most of the graphic designers I work with would benefit by leaving it a stand alone application.
I’m on the fence about having Color in the application. I think aspects of it would be good to have (like the Primary in room), but that one I think needs to stay a separate app. Tighter XML integration would help get from FCP to Color and back, though.
I don’t care what you call it. If you call it Motion and STP get wrapped in to FCP, or if you call it adding more advanced features in FCP like rt audio mixing capabilities with a GUI, and the ability to draw masks and shapes freehand, and a real time text generator that doesn’t suck and isn’t outside of the FCP app, and for goodness sakes a real keyer that is worth something. I don’t see how everyone on the this entire Creative Cow FCP forum couldn’t benefit from having those capabilities built right in to FCP. Some better finishing tools would be an awesome addition to FCP.
I’d highly welcome an all in one. A nicely organized application, perhaps setup in rooms/tabs, kind of like Color.
XML needs to be fixed and locked down.
I use MXF4mac for native MXF editing and now couldn’t live without it. I guess it’d be nice to see that in FCP, but I highly doubt Apple will move away from a QT model.
I could see huge benefits to better tools in FCP that don’t involve leaving the application.
-
I’d prefer the universal FCS project approach … and sure, if that native project format is an open and extensible format such as XML then all the better.
In such a scenario I’d see “round tripping” as no more than manipulating the current project inside any of the FCS apps … and no need to reinvent any of the job specific GUI’s (FCP, MOTN, COLOR, STP) just in order to make them sit prettier inside a single app approach.If wishes were horses eh?
-
I am all for it – I respect walters concerns of it taking amillion years to open but having worked om smoke recently that opens in 30 seconds – as smoke weighs in at 2gb and fcp at 50gb we need to rethink the game, why not have the option to stack or float the apps and allow 64bit magic do the rest – after working on fcp for a decade it has paid my wage many times and I still show respect to the old girl.
I think the next version will need to compete with avid and adobe but with a loyal fan base offering a prosumer version could de value our services.
Don’t get me wrong there is fcp in every agency and our loyal clientele come for the staff not the kit so if the awesome version of the studio can do stuff faster and less of a workaround that works for me.
Taking about transcoding – I really fell this should be a seperate app to free up fcp – look at burn for autodesk – background encoding …
-
Check info on FCP. It’s nowhere near 50G. Most of that is Soundtrack media which doesn’t load in the application anyway. My FCP is 518.5MB.
All the best,
Tom
Class on Demand DVDs “Complete Training for FCP7,” “Basic Training for FCS” and “Final Cut Express Made Easy”
Author: “Final Cut Pro 5 Editing Essentials” and “Final Cut Express 4 Editing Workshop”
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up