[David Mathis]

[Bill Davis] “Surely some snarky spoilsport would show up with a list like…

1. An integrated database.
2. A range based key wording system.
3. A magnetic timeline
4. Roles

And so on.

; )

Sorry, couldn’t resist.”

You forgot to add perpetual license!

Just had to get that out of my system. 😉

[David Mathis]

Thank you. I now have two pop-up menus. One with the blend modes I selected and another with all blend modes.

[David Mathis]

It is the official release, features listed were in beta as well, so they are not new.

A quick question for Peter, if I may. How can I submit a feature request for the next update or version?

[David Mathis]

Bill, curious to hear your thoughts on the recent acquisition of Fusion by Blackmagic Design. This is of great interest to me.

[David Mathis]

[Walter Soyka] “[Mitch Ives] “With all due respect Walter (and I mean that sincerely), I think that’s a bit of a stretch…”

May I ask why?

Here’s my logic:

Adding tracks to FCPX would require adding patching and would blunt the advantages of the magnetic timeline. It would also divide the attention of the development team as they develop new timeline-oriented features.

Adding perpetual licenses to CC would require taking development and testing effort away from bug fixes plus new features for subscription holders to put into back-porting bug fixes only for perpetual license holders, or would require leaving perpetual license holders utterly unsupported via bug fixes.

Adding perpetual licenses to CC would also muddy development priorities, creating tension between the marketing-oriented features and the actual user-oriented features I noted above.

In both cases, adding back something traditional to the new model for prospects has a cost that’s contrary to the interests of current customers who are benefiting from the new model.”

You do have a valid point here but must respectfully object to the current subscription model. One size does not fit all.

[David Mathis]

As of this moment, still no exit strategy.

[David Mathis]

Not sure where this fits in the list (if it does at all) is about fades on the video side of the equation. You could use the create an effect template in Motion, add a fade in / out behavior effect and publish all the parameters. Save that and use it in FCP X, not sure about this being redundant. Any thoughts?

[David Mathis]

[Aindreas Gallagher] “the only thing left right now on the dock is ppro. There are rumours they’re going to make a deadly serious argument for CC AE in the near future, but right now I’ve walled off everything but CC PPro. Which I do quite seriously like tbh.”

I wonder if this is partly a response to Blackmagic Design acquiring Fusion by any chance. I mean, that software just looks powerful and from what I have been told the learning curve is not too steep. Flip side of coin, not something I would use for motion graphics work due to the nature of working with a node based structure.

Having the Dynamic Link feature is of huge benefit and is more powerful then the “Send To Motion” which has vanished into the night. Then, on the other hand, being able to cook from scratch, ready made transitions, generators, effects, and titles in Motion is pretty darned sweet. That is why I really enjoy working with Motion, plus a solid tool for a mere $50, not bad.

I am now eying Resolve as a possible alternative to FCP X as an NLE but there still is room for improvement. After all Rome was not built in a day.

[David Mathis]

Thanks for posting. I have always felt key framing in AE is very nice, like having those jolly expressions, too, but do not feel like “renting” those tools.

[David Mathis]

[Bill Davis] “[Shane Ross] “Wow…some of those are so basic, and are not only in other professional NLEs…but were also already doable in FCP 7. So they stepped back on functionality. Guess they didn’t realize that professional editors needed those things? Some seem like huge oversights…like audio crossfades and markers. So basic

Shane
Little Frog Post”

Shane,

If you want to take the “glass half empty” traditional approach, then absolutely. All of these are accurate. On the other hand, if you realize that Apple poured a fully functioning database, range based key wording, magnetism for assembly speed, a planetary class multi-cam system, the ability to work in one rez, then swap pointers to other resolutions nearly instantly with a click – and the hundreds of other large and small advancements that Randy U built into X after rethinking things he perviously created for Premier and FCP Legacy before X – then YEP, these things are “missing” in X.

And many of us barely miss them.”

Bill:

I agree with you on most of what you are saying but I respectfully have to disagree with you on a few points. Sometimes it is the small stuff that counts. Having the ability to adjust the opacity or audio level in the timeline is nice and I consider it a time saver. I am also in complete agreement with what Steve Martin says.

I do like FCP X and how much it has developed into something nice. I just don’t like seeing some of the basic functionality being done away with.

One area where FCP X has really excelled since 10.1.2 is media management. On the other hand, key framing and trimming is a weak point with FCP X, really want to see that addressed.

One thing that was not in the list, so this will be considered a “bonus”, if you will would be a storyboard edit. You could do a quick rough cut by simply arranging the clips in the order you wish and then drag them into the viewer (canvas in prior versions). Why this feature went missing is a mystery to me.

Just sharing my opinions and thoughts.

camera operator | editor | production assistant

Remember kids, tracks are you friends when you charge by the hour. Track Tetris, game on!