[Mark Dobson]

The Matrox MXO2 Mini that I’ve been using to get a 1080p signal onto a HDMI monitor has a built in colour correction calibration programme taht you access through the control panel.

Previously I had been using a Blackmagic Intensity Pro card but this had no calibrator which is why I upgraded to the more expensive Matrox device.

There is now the Matrox T/ADP* (TADP, T-ADP) thunderbolt adaptor for MXO2 ( $210 ) which will enable it to work with the new Thunderbolt Macs. Matrox are very good at keeping up with the numerous Mountain Lion and FCPX updates.

I use a 32″ Sony Full HD TV to check output. I don’t work in the Broadcast market so this is an excellent solution for me and closely matches the devices that my client will see the work on. Unfortunately the Sony TV I’m using (KDL-32W5810) does not accept a 1080p 25 signal, it does accept 1080P 24, So I either monitor with a 72P set up or 1080i.

The picture looks superb.

Most of my work is delivered electronically and will watched a plethora of differently set up monitors so it all gets a bit subjective after a while.

[Mark Dobson]

[Nicholas Kleczewski] “Check out my rather long and boring post about that matter here”

I have to agree with you and unfortunately it doesn’t answer my question.

But thanks anyway

[Mark Dobson]

Hi John

Sure you’ve told us all before but apart from the 1TB fusion drive which graphic card did you go for?

And again I’m presuming you went for the 3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7 processor.

I’m getting a bit twitchy and starting to add up the cost of all the peripheral thunderbolt accessories I’ll need.

And, whilst these seem to be an inevitable investment, I fear these will cost more than an iMac.

[Mark Dobson]

[Nicholas Kleczewski] “Worse still, in 10.0.6. Favorite creation behavior changed. Before when you pushed F and got a new favorite, it was then highlighted. You could, as footage still plays, hit Tab, name the clip, hit return, and keep going without ever stopping.”

I too have found the new behaviour really frustrating. I would really like there to be an on-off switch for the new persistent ranges feature. Whilst I’m happy for the developers to improve the functionality of the software it really annoys me that one has to unlearn previous workflows that one has developed to work within the previous confines.

I am constantly hitting alt X to clear these ranges. I had become totally used to the way the selection and nomination of favourites worked and am still struggling to get back up to speed. So your post provides useful feedback.

For me one of the biggest frustrations of FCPX is limited amount of individual customisation that is available ranging from the inflexibility of the pre-set window arrangements through to being able to turn off default ‘improved’ behaviours that one doesn’t want to take advantage of.

[Nicholas Kleczewski] “But basically, I made Compound Clips and outside Multicam clips (Plural Eyes) of absolutely everything and imported that. Instead of 10,000 clips, there are now about 130 and even though it references the exact same number of media files, performance is completely different, not perfect, but manageable. “

Sorry Nicholas but could you explain what you are doing here. Are you exporting a master file of selected clips and then re-importing this into a fresh event?

[Mark Dobson]

[Oliver Peters] “[Mark Dobson] “Again despite numerous spinning ball type force quits and a long wait for renders this job went very smoothly.”

Any idea what caused these?

…………………………….

I’ve always had problems with FCPX and Spinning balls despite carrying out every remedial recommendation in the book. And these increase exponentially with longer and more projects. Preference manager is one of my best friends.

I put a lot of my problems down to my 2008 2x 2.8Ghz Quad Core intel MacPro and also realise that most people do not suffer from the same issues I have had.

FCPX has improved massively since it was released and had it not it would have become untenable as a working NLE.

…………………..

[Mark Dobson] “The way I have learnt to work with FCPX is to spilt the edit into fairly short sections and then bring these together in a master project as they become formalised.”

How responsive was the system, once you had everything in a combined master timeline? Were you still able to easily make adjustments at this point with relative ease?”

…………………….

By this stage you are dealing with compound clips, and once they have re-rendered themselves into the new project, adjustments are made by using the open in timeline option, and unless really substantial do not cause any problems.

So to answer your question the system was pretty responsive once every thing was rendered. Without rendering, totally unresponsive due to the power of my system.

[Mark Dobson]

Hi Oliver,

I’ve done a couple of long-form edits. Nothing quite as exciting as documentaries and movies.

These have been edit of 2 one day conferences one a 3 camera shoot and the other a 2 camera shoot. Aaaaargh!

The first one produced a 4 hr master which for expediency I split into 3 sections ( for eventual distribution on DVD ) This was edited together from 3 cameras, 2 x xf305 and 1 x EX1 resulting in a total of over 12 hrs material. Unfortunately the job was a real pain because the files from the EX1 had to be synced manually. ( FCPX ver10.0.3 I think )

But the system itself, FCPX running on a 2008 quad core with 22GB ram coped fine apart from the obvious long time for any universal rendering.

The second job was a one day conference recorded on a C300 and XF305. This resulted in an edited back master of 50 minutes and went very smoothly despite the ten hours worth of combined footage / files. Again despite numerous spinning ball type force quits and a long wait for renders this job went very smoothly.

Both these jobs were filmed and edited at 1080P ( @ 25P here in UK ) with all the files on external GTech drives connected via ESata.

I produced 1080p Pro-Res 422 edit masters and produced my deliverables from these. Were I to do these jobs again the overhaul of the function of compound clips with the release of 10.0.6 would speed things up.

The way I have learnt to work with FCPX is to spilt the edit into fairly short sections and then bring these together in a master project as they become formalised.

Fulfilling these 2 edits has given me an added confidence in FCPX as most of my edits are 10 to 30 minutes.

Mark

[Mark Dobson]

[John Godwin] “Are you the same Mark that was on the Liquid Silver boards a lot some years ago? I see a lot of Silver DNA in some of the FCPX choices …”

Not me – liquid silver sounds like something I shouldn’t tried out at one of those festivals I used to go to when I was young and used to edit using a cutting block and glue!

[Mark Dobson]

[John Godwin] “Why, it’s almost as if FCPX and the iMac were made for each other. “

Thanks for that information John.

Sounds like you have really benefited from getting the new iMac.

What storage are you using?

[Mark Dobson]

[Gary Slickman] “I have some indoor HDV footage shot mistakenly with an ND filter. Does anyone have any color correction tips on how to improve the quality. It is dark and flat. There is a second angle properly lit but the framing on the footage shot with the ND filter is far superior. I have FCP-X or Color as my tools. Thanks for any suggestions.”

Gary,

Whilst it will depend on how dark and how flat the footage is you should be able to improve it within FCPX without any difficulty.

You might need to boost the exposure using the Color Adjustment Exposure window in the inspector. Just see how it affects your clip using the global setting and refine it using shadows, midtones and highlights.

An alternative method would be to copy your clip, place the copy above the existing clip and then go to the compositing section in the inspector and alter the blend mode from normal to Add or Lighten or Screen. Again you can attenuate the change through the opacity slider.

Good luck

[Mark Dobson]

[John Davidson] “Seems more relevant to the material than this forum”

I’ve always seen a clear delineation between the 2 Cow FCPX forums.

FCPX Techniques seems the place to post with technical workflow problems and solutions and this one for the more discursive, dare I say, interesting aspects
of how FCPX fits into the ever changing NLE environment. And that means looking at both the positives and negatives in the debate.

Like many others visiting this forum I’ve been using FCPX since it’s launch but that is not to say that I’m open to listening to those who still see this software as being deeply flawed.

Despite all the updates and improvements FCPX still has a long way to go before it attains the position that FCP 7 held, or still holds.

Not posting positive FCPX experiences on this forum will diminish the debate but as most people participate on both forums it’s not such a big deal.