[Charlie Austin]

[Andrew Kimery] “Hollywood needing validation is just a symptom of humans generally being risk averse by nature. If one is happy and productive with what one already has, what’s the motivation for tossing that aside? Especially if hundreds of millions of dollars on the line? The more that’s at stake, and the more people that have to sign off on changes, the longer it’s going to take to make changes.”

Oh, I get it. And there are good examples of the new thing working quite well. I guess just not enough. I still think it’s stupid. ????

[Andrew Kimery] “Of course as was brought up in the article, if there isn’t a decent labor pool for the new workflow than there is very little incentive for businesses to adopt it.”

Totally agree. That’s changing though. Not so much in big features yet, but definitely in the indie, Doc, Advertising spaces. Hopefully it’ll trickle up. Or down, depending on one’s POV 🙂

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~\”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.\”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~\”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented\”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Oliver Peters] “The result is a general attitude among key influencers that it’s not the tool to use.”

I can’t disagree about the PR, but the whole “key influencers” thing is, to me, ridiculous. That doesn’t change the fact that it’s real. That “hollywood” needs validation from from “big names” before they’ll try something new. Something that could arguably make their jobs easier, and save money and time.

Focus and WTF? “meh. Sure the whole team loved it and had a great experience, but you know, who are those guys?” All the international stuff being done in X? “Phht… never heard of it.” Now Fincher using Premiere? “Ooh, I’ve heard of him! He’s ‘somebody’!” Validation! Let’s use it on our movie! Deadpool! And Adobe will help us!

Pr is a great NLE but… How’d that work out?

So sure, you’re right. it is what it is. And it’s incredibly stupid.

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~\”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.\”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~\”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented\”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Oliver Peters] “However, if you limit the scope to studio-distributed films, it’s only those two to date. Nothing in the pipeline either, that I’m aware off.”

I know you’re just answering the question, but does that matter? If so, why?

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~\”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.\”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~\”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented\”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Neil Goodman] “I’ve dropped a few of my feature request to the feedback link. Most have to do with a timecode window and being able to see multiple sources of timecode at once. The others were interface-y things that Im probably alone on, lol.”

heh, yeah, I’m sure we all have those. ☺ As to multiple TC sources, the clip skimmer *kinda* works for that in a pinch, but having them all as a HUD or something would be great. There is a free FxFactory plugin (Timecode) that gives you a nice floating TC window, albeit just a mirror of the one that’s there….

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Neil Goodman] “The more high profile gigs, hopefully the more feature requests from high profile editors start pouring in and the software will continue to get better.”

There are already a lot of feature requests from high profile editors pouring in – some in L.A. and some not – and they’re getting addressed. Probably not as fast as some would like, but it’s happening. Honestly, even if you don’t use X, but own it, click the feedback link in the Final Cut Pro menu and request away. Seems like things that are most requested do appear.

Unless you want fixed tracks back, that’ll never happen. 🙂

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Shane Ross] “We are in different fields, you are short form, I am long form. So I don’t have to deal with what you do. I can see how that’s a huge time saver for you though….
“

True, and yes… It’s huge. 🙂

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~\”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.\”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~\”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented\”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Shane Ross] “So if FCX takes 5 min, and Avid takes 15…heck, 20. Not sure how much money is saved in 10-15 min.
“

Again, I’ve digressed here, so this isn’t about this article, since I had absolutely nothing do do with it. But, in the versioning example above, It’s a much bigger time savings than that. Particularly if you have 5 or 6 spots, that need 5 or 6 versions each, with different picture versions for each, different audio configs, possibly different audio versions (tags) etc.

For this scenario, Roles crush tracks and mixer panning and track enabling/disabling 6 ways to Sunday.

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~\”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.\”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~\”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented\”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Shane Ross] “What’s to set up? you get the audio stems from the audio mix and drop them into their prospective tracks. Would be comparable in time to setting up each stem with a ROLE.
“

Like I said, I can’t speak to this article. But in the case I laid out, sure, You get Stereo Stem from a mix. Drop them into your MC tracks or into X and set Roles. Then, you need to export 3 or 4 different Audio configs, different audio tags, different layouts, mixed mono and stereo, going to different channels to different versions on output. Dead simple in X, from one timeline. I’ve done this in other NLE’s Been doing it for over 20 years. It’s easier and faster out of X.

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~\”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.\”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~\”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented\”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Shane Ross] “No, that takes no time additional time. Export SAME AS SOURCE in Avid and you can use the Direct out option and it comes out fine. No extra time there.
“

Sure, if the tracks are all set up correctly, and everything is split correctly, and the sequence is set up correctly etc. In X none of that matters, only that Roles are set up correctly.

EDIT: to be clear, I’m not talking about track 1 to Ch 1, 2 to 2, 3 to 3 etc. I’m talking about Split tracks. Something like Stereo Comp to 1&2, Stereo M&E to 3&4, Mono DIA to 5, MONO FX to 6, Stereo MX to 7&8 etc etc.

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~

[Charlie Austin]

[Andrew Kimery] “I think you’ve done some videos (or at least blogged) about how well Roles handles that, right?
“

Yeah, for versioning, but even to just spit out tracks for a mix Roles + X2Pro is literally 2 clicks, done. All split out, labelled and good to go. As someone who still has to sometimes “prep” tracks from other editors on other NLE’s, I can’t stress enough how huge of a timesaver this is..

[Andrew Kimery] “I’ve worked with some insanely talented editors that have no clue how to prep footage, get it into their NLE, export a cut w/TC, etc., but they don’t get paid to know those things, they get paid to be awesome editors on high profile, high pressure gigs. “. . .

[Andrew Kimery] “If everyone who’s using any NLE professional knows what’s required to have it do it’s thing workflow specialists wouldn’t be required because everyone should already know the best workflow, right? ????”

lol, far enough… I guess my point is that, on larger shows and features anyway, there’s always at least one assistant who’s expected to know all that stuff for whatever NLE is being used, so in the case being discussed, that cost is the same as if they cut in Lightworks or whatever….

[Andrew Kimery] “‘ve come into multiple situations where I’ve helped improve workflows because the established ones were either out of date (in that helpful new updates and/or new apps exist that didn’t exist when the workflow was created) or they are just not as tweaked as they could be.”

Oh. for sure, and I’m sure some of this falls into that category. But there really are some things that X does that other NLE’s don’t, that can save significant $$ if leveraged. Reading the article, it seems like the hardest part about using X was finding “A list” talent that know how to use it. Which is a concern, at least in LA for sure.

————————————————————-

~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~\”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.\”~
~I still need to play Track Tetris sometimes. An old game that you can never win~
~\”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented\”~