Gabriel Spaulding
Forum Replies Created
-
“You mention you keeping libraries and caches on internal SSD–presumably with media on external drives.
Anyone else doing it? Are there performance gains?
I’ve been keeping everything, including the library, on external 7200 RPM Raids.
Wonder if there’s a performance boost by splitting library and media on internal and external drives. Thoughts? Experience?”
Until recently I also kept all of my media and FCP X Libraries on external 7200rpm RAID drives. With my iMac Pro I keep media on external drives but move the Library (cache files inside) to the internal SSD and now audio waveforms draw significantly faster. Certainly the CPU and GPU play a role in drawing thumbnails and waveforms, but it seems to me that the storage itself makes the most noticeable impact. FCP X generates thumbnails and waveforms for different cameras at different speeds. The GH5 is extremely fast. The Sony Fs7 with multiple audio channels, however, is annoyingly slow to draw, so I’ll take my speed improvements wherever I can find them.
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com -
“Have they fixed the crappy problem with premiere that makes project unwieldy and horribly slow to open, save and add media to when you have more than 5TB of rushes inside?”
I don’t use Premiere Pro as a regular part of my workflow anymore, so I haven’t experienced that. This is the first I’ve heard of the issue. I would be surprised if those problems were caused by the iMac Pro itself, especially if, as Oliver reported, the problem is not universal.
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com -
I can’t compare my 10-core iMac (Radeon Pro Vega 64 with 16GB of HMB2 and 64GB of RAM) to a 2013 Mac Pro or current 5k iMac because I don’t have one of those, but I have run a number of tests comparing it to my maxed out late 2013 iMac. In every case rendering (Motion and After Effects) is 2x faster or more, and the actual experience of using those apps is completely different, especially in Motion where I am seeing realtime playback with much more going on than I would have ever attempted on the iMac. Where I had to create proxy media to edit 3 angles of 4k multicam (GH5 and Fs7 files) in FCP X on the iMac I can edit them all natively with the iMac Pro —even when KeyFlow Pro is simultaneously creating thousands of preview files in the background. Keeping FCP X Library and cache files on the internal SSD I am seeing drastic improvements in the speed of audio waveform drawing. I can tell that not every app I use is fully optimized for the iMac Pro, some use more resources than others, but apart from this I am absolutely thrilled with the iMac Pro. Every 2 weeks I receive about 1TB of data for multicam edits, and it would take nearly an entire day to create proxy media for those projects; not having to create proxy media means I have 26 more days to work every year now that my computer is free to do other things, which well more than pays for the iMac Pro.
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com -
“Wonder which system harbors the most “have it but don’t generate a penny from it” practitioners.”
Considering the fact that a Creative Cloud subscription comes with all of the Adobe apps there are certainly a huge number of subscribers who do not use and likely have never even opened Premiere Pro. Conversely, Final Cut Pro X is a standalone purchase, making it much more unlikely that someone would purchase it specifically and then not use it. I rent Adobe software every month and despite my subscription including at least 24 different apps (shown in the Creative Cloud app) I only ever use 4 of them —and none of them are Premiere Pro. So while I do pay to use Adobe software for paid work am I being counted as a tick in the Premiere Pro box? How many people use either of these apps for paid work is of course very difficult to determine, but given the nature of the different purchase models it seems to me that the a la carte option would by default provide the most ambiguity.
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com -
Those are all valid points that put things in a nice context.
“This sort of thing has cropped up before, and it has always been due to human error.” —HAL 9000
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com -
I agree completely.
The overall approach with FCP X seems to be to provide an extremely capable and stable NLE that does most things for most people, and rather than requiring everyone to pay for features they don’t need we can seek out 3rd party plug-ins to add on functionality. I’ve purchased Color Finale and Chromatic but with the new color tools in 10.4 I will no longer need those (I generally prefer Apple’s implementation of these sorts of tools anyway, particularly as I saw how they worked while at the FCP X Creative Summit). That is one area where Apple seems to have decided it best to provide these tools rather than requiring 3rd party tools. Of course, one could buy nearly every 3rd party tool and still come in cheaper than the annual cost of a Creative Cloud subscription.
Most of the complaints about the features that FCP X should have built-in are relevant to the high-end broadcast community and Hollywood. However, while these are huge, high profile industries they are a very small percentage of the total market, and these apparent missing features haven’t stopped companies from producing top notch broadcast content and Hollywood films within the FCP X ecosystem.
I’m curious about what Avid does, what Adobe does, what Blackmagic does. It’s interesting to me. But what they do has little to no effect on my workflow and my ability to produce content, because I am a FCP X user. I wonder why so many Avid and Premiere users are so obsessed with the development of FCP X if it does not affect them? Six years in it feels like Apple could add every possible feature and it still won’t sway anyone’s opinion of FCP X. This isn’t a problem with FCP X, it’s an emotional problem. Too many people can’t let go, and don’t want to share the same playground.
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com -
“Then you have to factor a redesign of the UI because they got it wrong out of the gate.”
They got it wrong? I don’t recall the initial UI itself preventing anyone from getting their work done. And I recall seeing clapping and cheering when it was first shown to the public.
“Plus you’ve got the big misstep (or incomplete development at time of release) when Libraries were missed at time of launch.”
I see that as a great example of Apple doing what neither Adobe or Avid has done —re-thinking their approach and updating the infrastructure of the entire program. Was it really a misstep? Certainly Libraries are more flexible, but FCP X worked very well at launch.
I don’t see the point of comparing the developmental pace of competing NLEs. How long did FCP X have the skimmer before Premiere got Hover Scrub (which only has a tiny fraction of the functionality of the skimmer)? How long did Adobe have Morph Cut before Apple got Flow? How long did Avid have collaboration features before Premiere? How long did Premiere have multicam before FCP X developed their multicam, which is arguably the best in the industry? None of that matters. Features for the sake of features —is that the smartest path to take? What matters most to me —objectively—is HOW those features are implemented, and if that takes more time I’m happy to wait. It’s paid off so far.
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com -
“I don’t think I can go more than a few days w/o seeing an X supporter bashing another NLE on Twitter or FB. Or a PPro supporter bashing another NLE on Twitter or FB. Or an Avid MC supporter bashing another NLE on Twitter or FB.”
I’ve seen FCP X users poke at Premiere among fellow FCP X users —many of whom have actually used or currently also use Premiere— but I’ve never seen a FCP X user jump on an Adobe forum to assault Premiere users. I can’t say that never happens, I just haven’t experienced that and I do visit Adobe forums because I am in a situation that requires me to use Adobe software. I have seen countless people jump on specifically FCP X forums spreading misinformation and malice, however.
There are things FCP X does that are legitimately better (faster, more efficient, more fluid) than other NLEs, but the same is true of Premiere Pro and Avid. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. The past six years it really feels like FCP X users have been asked to prove their professionalism, and the professionalism of their tools, when the same is never asked of Premiere Pro or Avid users.
The mistake people make is that they form an opinion of one NLE and deem it unfit for their needs, and then hyper inflate their opinion of it and state that the NLE is unfit for everyone’s needs. It’s childish. Some people just don’t understand why someone would use FCP X, and they cannot let it go.
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com -
“I again ask if Apple are meeting expectations and desires.”
Rather than piling code on top of old code Apple took a risk, wiped the slate clean, and built FCP X from the ground up, delivering a new video editing paradigm that covers both organization and editing. The amount of development it has seen in the past six years is damn impressive. For some the risk was well worth it. For others it was not, and no matter how powerful FCP X becomes they will never be swayed. So be it. Based on the numbers of FCP X users Apple is reporting I’d say that all in all people are satisfied.
There is a big difference between simply bolting on a feature and re-thinking a feature and implementing it in a novel way. Inventing new ways of doing things takes more time.
Those who think keywords and smart collections are just like bins clearly have not grasped the power of keywords and smart collections. Those who think the magnetic timeline is nothing more than a permanent ripple edit mode are completely oblivious to the core of what the magnetic timeline functionally is. One has every right to prefer tracks, or to prefer bins. There is nothing wrong with having a personal preference.
Every NLE comes with its own strengths and weaknesses. I have my own list of things I’d love to see in FCP X. When I was a Premiere user, though, I wasn’t looking for new features, I wished that the existing features were implemented differently. I hated using Premiere. I could get my work done, but it was a frustrating, clunky experience for me. That doesn’t make Premiere a bad NLE, it was just bad for me. FCP X works extremely well for me. I actually LOVE using it. FCP X meets my expectations and desires, and those of at least 2 million others.
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com -
Rather than requiring every user to pay for features they will never use FCP X has a vibrant 3rd party community that helps users meet the needs of their particular niche. For the most part this works very well. In the case of the new color tools in FCP X 10.4 it appears that Apple decided it best to provide those tools to all users. This is a good thing. I have no insight into Apple’s decision making process, no idea how they determine what should be built-in and what is best left to 3rd party developers, but new functionality is never a bad thing (provided it is well-implemented).
“If I was an X user I would be pretty disappointed.”
You are not an X user. FCP X users are by and large NOT disappointed by the little we know about the 10.4 update.
“Why are they not pushing the requested audio features to roles?”
All in good time. We’ve only had Roles (in their current form) for about a year, and they were a significant workflow improvement. Apple has a patent on a Roles-based mixer. While some companies like to bolt on new features regardless of how well they are implemented, doing things the same way they’ve always been done, with FCP X Apple takes a different approach. Is it always better? No. Is it frequently better? Yes —depending on who you are and how you like to work.
Gabriel Spaulding
Creator & Director of ACE Enterprizes
Videographer | Video Editor | Motion DesignerHow Can We Help You Tell Your Story?
http://www.aceenterprizes.com