Chris Harlan
Forum Replies Created
-
[Shane Ross] “FCP LEgacy didn’t have a good bezier matte. There was a third party one that was out there…forgot what that was. “
Silhouette. It now exists as a stand-alone, but they used to make an FCP plugin that would let you build masks inside the program. That was back when everyone was incorrectly calling the process rotoscoping.
I worked the 30 day demo, and had it on my list of things to acquire, but before I could, the masking in Motion developed to a point that I liked it better.
https://silhouettefx.com/silhouette/
-
[Alan Okey] “I’m very surprised that Apple didn’t simply combine Motion 5 and FCP X into one application. There’s really no reason that Motion’s tools couldn’t be integrated into FCP X, even as separate “rooms,” etc. Then again, I say this as a Smoke fanatic and a compositor/editor, so perhaps it’s not as cut and dried as I’d like to believe.
“Yeah, Motion is pretty terrific at masking and when you could easily round-trip, using it felt like a module of FCP. I expected X (or 8) to fold it in, too.
-
[Steve Connor] “How about a change to “FCPX – PIOP’s or not?” It does seem to be the persistent topic of conversation here!
“LOL. Yes, but how else are you going to learn the ins and outs of the program?
-
[Joseph W. Bourke] “Hey! Since this is the Creative Cow-munity, why not just change “The Future of Editing” to “The Pasture of Editing”, then everyone will be so confused, they won’t have time for the “It’s great…it sucks!” ongoing battle…”
I’ve grown fond of the name as it is, but following your lead how about “Greener Pastures.” Contrary to the old saying, it seems that when it comes to NLEs, the grass is always greener on MY platform. Whatever MY platform happens to be.
-
[James Culbertson] “Yes, it does seem like there should also be an “Adobe Premiere or Not: The Debate” and ” AVID Media Composer or Not: The Debate.””
It would only seem that way if either Avid or Adobe released a completely new NLE using the same name as their old NLE, but was in fact forcing their users to learn a completely new program or choose another. The name of the Forum is a reflection of the decision that Apple forced on its users, and not a referendum on the software, itself.
-
[Michael Gissing] “Why do those who rarely participate in this forum regularly ask to change the name. It pops up every few months and no-one has yet to give a decent reason why we should change the forum name. “
I think its because they don’t understand the history, and see the name as a referendum on existence of the software, itself. We know that our forum title is a reference to a decision that FCP editors around the world were suddenly forced to make–and, for that matter, are still making–when our software was discontinued in every way but in name. If Apple had simply discontinued FCP, and had given birth to X with any other name, this forum probably would not exist. Its the implication that X is somehow an upgrade or furtherance of FCP Legend that gives added weight to the forum title. Even if you chose/choose to use the NLE that now owns the name “FCP,” you were/are, in fact, using a completely new program. So, do you choose to use this new program, or go with another program. It ain’t an upgrade; its a fork in the road. People who don’t understand that, don’t understand the name.
-
[willy pimentel] “I don’t see any other program titled that way and it shows a very bias negative comnotation about how the cow views the program.”
Willy, the title of the forum simply reflects its history. FCP X is so radically different than the FCP versions that came before it, that the only thing the two programs have in common are the letters “FCP.” Moving from 7 to X is not an upgrade, but is, instead, choosing a different program with the same name. This new program does not do everything that its namesake did, and so many editors were confronted with a decision: where to go?
Around the world, many people are still trying to make this decision. FCP 3-7 was a highly successful platform, and is still heavily used more than a year after X’s introduction. The name of the forum specifically refers to that hotly debated choice, and shouldn’t be taken as a derogatory statement about the software itself.
-
[Oliver Peters] “[Craig Seeman] “The relationship between Events and Projects”
In what way is this any different than Avid’s bin structure? Each bin, whether it holds sequences or clips is a separate data file on the hard drive. Plus project media is embedded into the media file format.”
The bin structure, btw, is on of the things I’m really digging about MC. I love the way I can move bins between projects, and that the bin retains its own identity. I’m really appreciating the whole notion of a bin as a unit that transcends a project.
-
[Bill Davis] “the mess for so many years in 7 when moving any clip single would force the entire timeline into re-render”
What? I have to be misunderstanding you. What you are saying above–or at least what I think you are saying above–is clearly not the case.
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “It sounds notably better.
“I’m not sure it sounds better, but its certainly a kinkier name.