[Adam White]

I’m sticking with FCP 7 until Premiere CS6 is released. I’ve been really impressed with some of the features + power of PP and I like the fact that it respects a more traditional editing paradigm and the fact that I feel like it just gets out of my way and lets me work how I want to.

I’m waiting for the new version of PP because A) FCP 7 still works great for now and B) I feel that CS6 will build on the progress made by Adobe the last couple years and I’m really optimistic its going to be a really good release.

In terms of FCP X, I find the lack of a source monitor offensive frankly, and for me its an instant deal breaker. So is the idiocy of not being able to have multiple sequences in a project/event/hoopla whatever the hell Apple have decided to call it now. And I just felt like it wants to hold my hand through the process which is not what I want from an NLE at all.

For me the issue with FCPX is not missing features but its whole design and way of working. I simply don’t want to work the way X wants me too, so I’m not interested in it. The only way I can see myself sticking with FCP is if all those design decisions are reversed, which is never going to happen.

From the part of the industry I’m in (short form web content) I can’t see FCPX being the NLE of choice for many. We should be it’s ideal user – but we also respect and like working within the editing paradigm that X tossed aside.

[Adam White]

Thanks everyone.

Appreciate your taking the time out to give your advice. It’s making more sense to me now.

Have a great day 🙂

[Adam White]

Having downloaded the trial version and attempting to get to grips with it, I came away thinking that the problem was that Apple didn’t know who exactly it was aimed at all.

It looks and feels like iMovie+ and it does feel as if they are trying to hold your hand through the editing process. The assumption seems to have been that the editing process as it was/is in FCP 7/Avid/Adobe is really too complicated and needed to be simplified. My experience has been the complete opposite – people new to editing are very quick to pick up the UNmagnetic timeline / multitrack paradigm because it makes perfect sense. FCPX requires you to learn about it’s (extensive) assumptions and mode of working before you can get anywhere with it, FCP7 gives you a very limited set of rules to learn and then really just gets out of your way.

But there are clearly some very powerful features under the hood, too. I think it was a botched product that tried to appeal to everyone, and ended up appealing to very few people because it’s not sure what it wants to be. At least that’s how it appears right now.

[Adam White]

Why not create an additional sequence in Final Cut just for your interview? You can lock the synced audio in place, and you’ll have all of your interview in one place. You can use whatever sections of it you see fit in your main edit in another sequence. We work mostly with the 5D, and this is generally the way we do it. It works pretty well for us.

As Shane says, if something happens to your media, and you need to reconnect later, you might find it problematic and time consuming to do so if you export a clip and then have to re-create it exactly.

[Adam White]

Thanks Matt,

This is the kind of insight I’m looking for. It may well be that a workflow like yours is the best solution, but I just wanted some more perspectives.

I found it a little bit difficult to get my head round, just because working from the SAN project files works for the vast majority of the time. It just seemed weird that it would only cause a problem some of the time. I also couldn’t/can’t get my head round how video files don’t cause a problem, but the project file does.

[Adam White]

Thanks for your response, Rich.

With an upper limit of 5 Megabits – I think I’ll probably just give this a miss, then. It isn’t required by any of the festivals we’ve got lined up – I was only going to do it as an extra.

However – your suggestion to use Toast may very well come in handy later down the line. I’m only on a iMac with Standard DVD drive, though – won’t I need an external BluRay burner to make a BR disc?

Thanks for your input – really appreciate it. Nice showreel at Tilt Media btw – I’m on the other side of the pond, so it’s nice to see how the BBC promotes its content abroad (Lost in Austin e.t.c.)

Best,
Adam

[Adam White]

Ben,

Thanks for your response.

Frame-rate is indeed set to full. The refresh rate cannot be changed (it’s at 60hz) on the additional monitor, but as I say the same problem occurs when playing back footage on the iMac monitor. As far as I’m aware there is no way of changing the refresh rate on the iMac – am I wrong about that?

[Adam White]

I’ve tested several different projects, with footage captured from various different sources using different hardware. Some was captured via a Sony Z1, some through a Sony HDV FireWire Deck and there was even some XD-CAM footage that I tried and had the same problem.

What’s weird is that I’ve just tried a couple sequences again, and the tearing has now stopped. But I haven’t changed any settings either in FCP or System Preferences. I dare say the issue will be back – this has happened before.

I’m so confused! Been using FCP for about 3 years now, and have never come across this before!

[Adam White]

They will certainly be tears of sorrow if I have to get hardware repaired! 🙁

Too much work to do for that!

[Adam White]

Hi B.J.

One of my first thoughts was that it was an interlacing issue, too. But I’ve tested this on some Progressive material and I still have the same problem.

I’ve tried DV Pal material with a Lower (Even) field dominance, and HDV 1080i60 footage with an Upper (Odd) dominance and have the same issue with both.

I’m stumped!