Charlie Austin
Forum Replies Created
-
[Shawn Miller] I was referring to hardware… I thought that was what Chris was talking about. I don’t deny that FCPX is powerful.
Gotcha. 🙂
[Shawn Miller]I wasn’t making the case that FCPX is not responsive. My point is that usability wise, some people find FCPX’s UI less desirable than a traditional NLE. Of course, I also think this is a completely subjective preference. People should use the applications that get them where they need to go with the least amount of angst. 🙂
Shawn”
Well then, we agree. 😉
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
[Shawn Miller] “What if you actually NEED a truck? “
I hate to belabor the point, but X *is* a truck, if you need it to be. This is not to say it does everything other NLE’s do. Yet. It’s a moving target, for better or worse.
[Shawn Miller] “plenty of people seem to be moving away from FCPX because of usability issues. “
Really? Other than UI responsiveness on my Mac Pro, now that I’ve used it for a while I find it to be extremely usable. And I use it in anger as Aindreas is fond of saying. 🙂 I’ve also noticed that the X UI responsiveness on my Macbook Air is way way better than on the Mac Pro I use at work. I’d guess that most “switchers” are running on towers as well. X, not surprisingly, seems to want a newer computer to run it’s best. FWIW, MC 6.5 is pretty snappy on the MB Air as well. 😉
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
[Andreas Kiel] “It can make perfect sense as you don’t have to juggle with source media — except maybe with media which are copied or converted by FCPX automatically.”
ya know what kind of sucks? You can have all your media nicely aliased (not copied to the event) but if you bring in anything from the audio browser tab… It copies it to the event folder! I discovered this the hard way, so beware. :-/
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
[Dan Stewart] “Lets get them”
They apologized. It was a rogue employee. 😉 Hey, that excuse worked for the banks right?
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
[Craig Seeman] “Ahh, so the winner gets a system they can use FCPX on.”
LOL… Hey, I’m running MC 6.5 on a MB Air too, and I can run Pr on it as well.
As an aside… Just for giggles I DL’d trials of both MC and Pr. Hadn’t cut on Avid in a while, and never really used Pr, I figured I’d see where they were at. Gotta stay current right? 😉
MC has been easier for me to get back into the swing of, having used it for years in the past. I like the smart tools… And I realized FCP X Storyline editing feels very MC-like. Honestly… X is more like MC than Pr in a lot of ways.
Pr is way better than I remembered it being, based on my limited past experience. Very similar to FCP 7, for good or ill. Entirely too many buttons and disclosure triangles etc for my taste. This is true of all of ’em I guess, 7, MC, Pr…
The other thing those all have is tracks. Did I mentionI really hate tracks now? Having gotten fairly proficient cutting in X, I feel hamstrung on “traditional” NLE’s. Oh well…
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
[Bill Rabkin] “There must be a better way to do this in FCPX”
I may not be the best source for info, having not done a whole lot, but i’m pretty sure that, as long as all the clips have the same audio, you can import them into an event, select all the clips you’d like to sync/combine, and select “new Multicam Clip” from the File menu. FWIW, here’s a link i just posted above…
https://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/fcp_x_multicam_basics_stone.html
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
[Joe Williams] “if someone could walking me through the process on FCPX.”
I am not real well versed in this, but FCPX does a nice job of syncing stuff in the app, and it sounds like fairly basic shoot. Here’s a link to an article that walks you through the process, and I’m sure others will chime in as well. 🙂
https://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/fcp_x_multicam_basics_stone.html
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
[Bill Davis] “[Oliver Peters] ” So, conservatively, if I finish a spot at V.6, it’s likely that I’ll have at least 12-15 copies of it in the library.”
So what? Just stick them in a Project Library folder and keep them out of sight, out of mind if you’re not working with them.
Is there something I’m missing here? “
Yes… you’re missing the fact that Oliver was quoting me. The line of “his” you quote above was mine… And my post above his was saying that I like the project library, for this reason. Calm down. 😉 lol
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
[Nicholas Kleczewski] “I hope next iteration brings back tracks that you can give dedicated role assignments too. Tracks 1-2 always get audio associated with a Dialogue role. 3,4 always automatically get Music role edited there, etc. Then toggle it so that this only persists with inserts and overwrites are made but when Q is used the video and audio get put into their own outside space until you decide where you want it to go. something like that….”
Ahh… nooo! 😉 All they need to do is let you group roles and all this track talk can end. You can add all the specific roles you want and they’ll stay together. Done. D1, D2, D3, FX 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 etc. Fixed tracks, and the inevitable clip collisions that come with them, suck. 😛
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
-
[Oliver Peters] “I do see having tons of SFX/music/VO clips to be problematic if not compounded, because of how connected clips bounce around vertically. There needs to be a cleaner solution, like the “zones” idea of past threads.”
I’m with you on that. I found that using a single, long, silent audio clip to separate roles works in a pinch. Hopefully we’ll be able to group roles at some point….
————————————————————-
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~