-
X Sports
-
Do you think it has it been out long enough to accurately judge it for “long form”?
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Do you think it has it been out long enough to accurately judge it for “long form”?”
Yes, I do Jeremy.
In it’s present state, I think the detriments of X far outweigh its benefits in all but short-form editing. The absence of professional monitoring alone makes it pretty tough to use for anything that needs a proper QC before going to broadcast, and it’s less than seamless ability to move projects to other facilities and between apps just compounds the problems as I see it.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.comDon’t miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing “The Whale” to the Big Screen:
https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfitandSuzanneChisholm/1POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.
-
[David Roth Weiss] “The absence of professional monitoring alone makes it pretty tough to use for anything that needs a proper QC before going to broadcast”
Which, according to Apple, will be available in the next release.
[David Roth Weiss] “nd it’s less than seamless ability to move projects to other facilities and between apps just compounds the problems as I see it.”
Absolutely. FCPXML is still in it’s infancy and needs more time. For sure. But that doesn’t mean I can’t edit a long form program with it. I’m talking just the edit, not interchange.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Absolutely. FCPXML is still in it’s infancy and needs more time. For sure. But that doesn’t mean I can’t edit a long form program with it. I’m talking just the edit, not interchange.”
I see the interchange as being absolutely essential to the edit. I have always advised my clients and fellow Cow members to have a complete workflow starting from the end and working backwards, and X doesn’t allow for that, at least not now. So, honestly, I wouldn’t cut a long-form piece on X nor would allow a client to head down that path.
Plus, there are simply too many obstacles X places in the path of creativity at this point. Storytelling, at least the stuff I work on, is tough enough as it is with adding additional hurdles to the process.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.comDon’t miss my new Creative Cow Podcast: Bringing “The Whale” to the Big Screen:
https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/Podcast-Series-2-MikeParfitandSuzanneChisholm/1POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.
-
[David Roth Weiss] “I see the interchange as being absolutely essential to the edit. I have always advised my clients and fellow Cow members to have a complete workflow starting for the end and working backwards, and X doesn’t allow for that, at least not now. So, honestly, I wouldn’t cut a long-form piece on X nor would allow a client to head down that path. “
I hear you. It can get to Resolve, though! Soon, I’m sure it will be able to get to much more. The next release will tell us if indeed it’s worth sticking around for (meaning they show enough proof on concept that they are in fact thinking and working on an interchange language) or if it’s going to be another hobby.
-
Hey Tony,
I am a sports-producer myself and totally agree. It is so much advanced to FCP7 it is not even funny and it will be perfect in the sportsworld or any world that needs fast turnarounds.I have to disagree that the editors “loved” FCP7 in their trucks. FCP was in there because it was much cheaper than AVID. I have been around them and they all (like me) always found FCP to be a lame duck, but the cost-speed relation made it the choice of producers. After all the editors made it happen always…..nobody asked if another App would have been faster/easier, especially if that other App demanded higher costs in personal and hardware.
Without external connections FCPX is useless; I have one box equipped with FCP7 and Matrox´ gear just for Live output and Live recording. Once AJA/BlackMagic/Matrox comes out with a HD-SDI solution there will be tons of sales for them and FCPX. I am wondering if they right now talk to each other to come out simulatanuos, because whoever is second is losing big time in that market.
As you say, 3rd party will evolve FCPX. Not Apple. And I am OK with that. Some will need OMF out, some will need live-connectors……the modular set-up of FCPX will allow us to build the boxes that work for our workflow.
-
Has anyone saying that X would be good for news actually used it for news?
Because I’ve been trying..and failing.
Here’s my current workflow for a basic news story.1)Take the reporter track and put it into Audio 1
2)Insert sounds bites
3)Cover black holes with video/audio
4)Play out (not export)finished story split track, with reporter track on audio 1, and all other audio mixed to audio 2.Keep in mind we shoot and edit in dual channel mono.
So, let’s picture doing this in X.
The reporter audio becomes the primary storyline, all b-roll has to be edited as connected clips or as a secondary storyline, which can cause complications.
Lack of dual mono workflow means I have to go into every clip in the inspector and choose which track to use, instead of just assigning it once or twice on the patch panel.
No way to play out in dual mono…again, I could go into each clip and pan left or right, but that would take lots of time.
And I’m leaving out the obvious stuff…lack of tape support, no broadcast monitoring, etc.
Keep in mind I’ve just started playing with it…I’d live to hear suggestions on improving my workflow.Matt Tureck
Editor
CBS Evening News -
[Matt Tureck] “Lack of dual mono workflow means I have to go into every clip in the inspector and choose which track to use, instead of just assigning it once or twice on the patch panel.”
Not true. You can select all clips in the browser and choose dual mono from the audio section of the inspector.
Then using Roles, you can export dual mono.
If you want to make it really easy, after your edit is complete (or at any point really), you can use “Detach Audio” and then assign the roles, then export a multitrack QT using Roles.
Picture to help you visualize it (this was from another post, so you would simply select mono from the drop down on the right side):
Jeremy
-
Ah, but you’re assuming we use a vaguely modern workflow. 🙂
I don’t need to export in dual mono, (although it’s good to know, thanks for the post)I need it to play out through a mixer and up to satellite in dual mono…and that’s what I can’t figure out. -
[Matt Tureck] “I don’t need to export in dual mono, (although it’s good to know, thanks for the post)I need it to play out through a mixer and up to satellite in dual mono…and that’s what I can’t figure out.”
FCPX doesn’t have broadcast out yet but has been announced for the next release. You’d have to export, and then use separate play out software for the time being. AJA VTR Exchange is free for AJA users, Matrox and Blackmagic also have free software to do what you need.
Jeremy
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up