Andy Patterson
Forum Replies Created
-
[Charlie Austin] “[andy patterson] “Was the Chevy Logo created in FCPX or Motion?”
All in FCP X using stock title, generators and effects. Thought be fair I did have to make the bowtie logo into a font using a couple free web based conversion sites.”
I appreciate your honesty but that is kind of my point. Using a dedicated 3-D animation program to create simple logos is not hard at all and I bet I could do it faster and easier with a dedicated 3-D program than you could using FCPX. Having said that I bet you could do it really fast and easy using Carrara yourself. You are so close to working in a dedicated 3-D program. The jump would not be huge. Having said that the canned effects and templates might be better in one NLE but creating logos might be better in another NLE. I will admit everyone’s needs will be different.
[Charlie Austin] “[andy patterson] “I hope it is better and not worse. I will probably download it this weekend.”
It is better in many of ways, but honestly feels a little… unfinished. The fact that the “legacy” title tool is still there can make things a little confusing.”
Thanks for the info. I think it is good to have both titling systems for a while until people get used to the new system. Having said that thanks for the demo. I would like to include the video clips in a demo I am creating if I can.
-
[Charlie Austin] “My point in this post was to compare the contents of the new Pr title panel, which I like, to the contents of the FCP X title templates, which I also like. What you’re suggesting really has nothing to do with that.”
I think it is worth mentioning if logos can be created and if so how easy is it as opposed to using templates. Was the Chevy Logo created in FCPX or Motion? Having said that it looked pretty good.
[Charlie Austin] “EDIT: FWIW, I rarely use the canned templates in FCP X in real life without extensive tweaking, though there are some very good ones,”
I am not saying there are not a few good templates and some of the motion graphics are good it just depends if it would really compliment the the products or services for the client.
[Charlie Austin] “I doubt I’ll use the canned titles in Premiere”
Me neither.
[Charlie Austin] “I’ll definitely use the new Title text capabilities in Pr though. :-)”
I hope it is better and not worse. I will probably download it this weekend.
-
[Bill Davis] “B) it was MUCH more capable at professional editing than the “iMovie Pro” branders were noticing.
And that”Some people needed broadcast monitor support, multi-cam, closed caption and other various things that FCPX lacked upon release. It is great that it worked for you but it could not work for a lot of people.
[Bill Davis] “From the vantage point of today, it seems to me that in each of those three areas, time has not diminished, but strengthened the case for my opinions.”
I don’t doubt FCPX is much better than FCP7 but have you actually bought and used any other NLE? I know Premiere Pro CC is much better than Premiere Pro 1.0 but that would not indicate that Premiere Pro CC is better than FCPX.
[Bill Davis] “How else do I decode that over 20 YEARS they have elected to keep things VERY comfortable and safe. I keep asking here and elsewhere for people championing the other big NLEs to point out any significant innovations in approach from their pre-2000 NLE Toolsets. I get mostly silence. It’s possible that the NLE designs of the 1980s and 1990s were just so PERFECT that there’s no room for much improvement. But I reject that. Loudly.”
Who is champion the other NLEs? I think it is good to point out the facts about the other NLEs but I would not confuse that with champion the other NLEs. I let you know several times that Fast/Pinnacle/Avid had background rendering first but even Newteks Speed Edit had it long before FCPX. Also Fast/Pinnacle/Avid had GPU acceleration long before FCPX. If you want to get technical about it the Canopus Explode Plugins were GPU accelerated before Fast Liquid. Also some of the PC editing programs used Quick Sync before FCPX. Don’t confuse setting the record straight with champion a NLE.
[Bill Davis] “They’ve also innovated MASSIVELY in the PAYMENT space, (right?) subscription, subscription and free? – so why not in tool design? Is it largely because they see the financial space as WAY more important and wildly more deserving of creative effort than their actual creative tools?”
What does Apple charge so much to go from 8 GB of RAM to 16 GB of RAM when I can buy it myself for less than half the cost?
[Bill Davis] “I guess your point is that I must somehow be too inexperienced or ill-equipped to judge this stuff, properly.”
Have you ever bought any other software beside FCP? If so what what other NLE was it?
[Bill Davis] “And I suppose the fact that there are now so many other working editors* successfully using X at all levels of editing, all around the world, just means there are quite a few others willing to fork over their CASH like me, who must be deluded in exactly the same way I must be.”
No one said FCPX will not work. Keep in mind you make references to the past and back in 2011 FCPX was unusable for some people. By 2014 it was ready for most editing tasks but keep in mind Premiere Pro was also getting better and better. As of 2017 I don’t claim FCPX is better or worse than Avid, Premiere or even Edius. A lot would depend on where it is being used and who is using it and for what purpose.
-
[Bill Davis] “In the X system, this lets you do useful customization without needing to ever launch Motion.”
Not from what I seen in the video.
[Bill Davis] ”
Take the mostly white title sequence in Charlie’s group. It’s very “neutral” overall.
Check your clients type specs – and maybe all you need to do is quickly match those – and you have a perfectly serviceable communications piece opener in under a minute.”Replicate the logo below in FCPX with the 3-D titling tool. I am sure GM would prefer you animate their Chevy logo as opposed to animating the word Chevy. See my point?
[Bill Davis] “For those that do, Motion (honestly really amazing for a one time $49!) lets you go farther or totally custom if you like.”
I would hope so.
[Bill Davis] “Yes, if you are a longtime AE Ninja, you’ll likely want features Motion does not yet have.”
Motion? Just create the simple Chevy Logo and use it as a track matte only using FCPX.
[Bill Davis] “But the open question is how many editors (very much like me) would prefer NOT to be forced to learn another entire application and it’s attendant skill set just to get decent titles incorporated in our work.”
With Premiere Pro I can create logos not just titles and animate them very easy.
[Bill Davis] “The better question might be if the strengths and differences between the two systems would functionally affect what each unique editor can successfully deliver to achieve increased client satisfaction.”
I am thinking the answer to your question is yes.
[Bill Davis] “For me that’s the only “holy grail” of any of this stuff.
And each editor has to answer that for themselves.”
We agree 100%.
[Bill Davis] “Along with maybe …
do I need an art director?
can I afford a good one?
can I do without one?– and the scariest question of all,
Am I currently fooling myself into thinking I AM one?”
Are you saying you never created a logo for a client? Is it really that hard to do in FCPX? That is kind of my point.
-
[Bill Davis] “I ask, because I’ve been quite suprised at just how much basic graphics work I seem to get done in JUST the part of Motion that Apple “co-located” inside X. I’m constantly building useful text and graphics directly inside X – without leaving the core editorial space at all.”
Perhaps you could do a demo. Make a few logos using only FCPX.
[Bill Davis] “Is this the Adobe bid to adopt a bit of the same approach?”
We really didn’t need it but some people do like using templates. With the graphic design ability of Premiere Pro’s titling tool I prefer not to use templates. It would be like using templates for InDesign or Photoshop. Templates may or may not complement the creative process as good as starting from a blank page. Having said that I can probably start from nothing and be done faster than trying to tweak out or rework an existing template.
[Bill Davis] “Or am I not seeing something distinctive happening here that goes beyond that?”
The old Premiere Pro could go beyond what you seen but I am not sure about the latest version.
-
I got back form vacation and I have not had time to download the latest edition of Premiere Pro CC. I am creating a video that shows what Premiere Pro CS 4.0 can do as far as graphics are concerned. Not sure if the new graphics titling system in Premiere Pro is better or worse than what we already had. I will try to download it soon.
-
That sounds odd to me. Having said that I don’t get any hissing sounds with my Intensity Shuttle using a Windows PC. I would like to think the Ultra Studio Express would be better than the Shuttle. Could there be some option that needs to be selected in your software? Did you try a few different drivers? Some times the drivers are buggy. A few screen shots might help.
-
[Scott Witthaus] “[andy patterson] “Why is it impressive if FCPX does it but Premiere Pro needs a total rewrite of the code when it does the exact same thing? ”
Because you are on an FCPX forum? Just a wild guess. ;-)”
That is incorrect. This not a forum dedicated to FCPX. This is a forum where people are supposed to talk about the merits of FCPX along with other editing software. I have provided a link below to the actual FCPX forum.
https://forums.creativecow.net/fcpx
-
[Scott Thomas] “I should have been clearer. He wasn’t talking about people calling FCPX underpowered and lame.”
If he is talking about people commenting on the laptop being under powered it depends on what needs to be done. No one said you cannot edit video using an Apple laptop. For certain projects a laptop (even using FCPX) would not be the best option.
-
[Oliver Peters] “[andy patterson] “Are you being served?”
Huh?”
Did you watch my video link? You do realize the commercial Thomas edited was a parody of the British TV show “Are You Being Served”? Does it makes sense now?