Robin S. kurz
Forum Replies Created
-
[Oliver Peters] “But in comparison to Premiere, it’s embarrassingly slow.”
No idea how fast PPro is, but I recently had to reconnect over 800 clips of a library and that took maybe 20 secs at best. And yes, with various subfolders, including a bunch of those convoluted RED folders.
[Oliver Peters] “No benefits that I can see. “
Unless of course you need MXF wrapped ProRes.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Rob Moragas] “1. Playback is terrible. Where as before on 10.2.3 I had no issues playing back, now it can’t even play in real time through a dissolve.
2. slow and clunky moving around the timeline…
3. unresponsive to many clicks and commands when trying to turn many things on and off. Often I have to repeat the command two or three times to do anything.”Can’t confirm a single one of those. And that with it running on over 30 Macs at a school and several at home. Quite the opposite in fact. If anything, performance has improved considerably. Ergo: if you’re seeing something else, it’s not an FCP X issue.
[Rob Moragas] “4. The dotted unrendered bar is horrible.”
How so? It serves the exact same purpose of the previous bar and offers the exact same information, just far less dominant and without color. Which coincides completely with the whole point of the GUI redesign. If anything, just muscle memory is a slowdown. Not the interface itself.
[Rob Moragas] “5. Unnecessarily moving things around on the interface with really no benefit to the user.”
Couldn’t agree less. Aside from maybe losing the buttons for favorites and rejections and getting the imho completely useless overwrite button instead, I find the logic of the GUI has improved exponentially. YMMV.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
I’m sorry, but I have to ask: why would you be using Motion v5.3 when you’re on the age old FCP 6? It offers you nothing of added value for that set-up. Quite the opposite in fact. If you were using Motion v4 (or even v3!) then you wouldn’t even have to render anything! If I’m not mistaken, you can’t even send anything from the timeline from FCP 6 or 7 if you’re using it in conjunction with v5. The absolute only advantage older versions of FCP and Motion have (by default) compared to FCP X.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[James Ewart] “I don’t think editing roles will allow you to change colour of primary storyline … not on my system anyway.”
Every clip has a video and/or audio role assigned to it. Every role has a selectable color. Therefore…
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[James Ewart] “It’s very dark isn’t it?”
So wouldn’t simply changing the role to a lighter color help? ?
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Oliver Peters] “clip names disappear and leave a blank name field”
I’ve seen this. Once. Simply hitting ⌘0 fixed it. It’s a bug though, yes. Even if a rare one.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
To be exact… Final Cut Pro 10.3, Motion 5.3 and Compressor 4.3.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
Who’s surprised? I hear you have an amazingly astute sense of humor and aren’t afraid to prove it.
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Andrew Kimery] “On the flip side, why would you want two clips/shots side-by-side that shouldn’t be side by side?”
So hit ⇧⌫? Simply insert another shot? Hit ⌥W or even ⌥⌘W? Or CTRL-T? Just plain replace the clip? Use… oh no… the Position tool ? etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.?? Because this is starting to sound like X only has two functions. Edit and ripple.
This is a completely contrived non-discussion imho. If you need gaps, you can have gaps in a plethora of ways, as with any other NLE. Yes, even Apple knows that gaps and the likes have purpose, which is why the list of options is so long. You want or need to work that way, you can. Done. Move along… absolutely nothing to see here.
[Andrew Kimery] “I think you think it is optimal for everyone, but you always pull up short a hair short of flat out saying so. Any criticism of X you explain away as either user error, user ignorance, irrelevant because the way X does it is better and/or irrelevant because you’ve happily delivered 200+ projects so far and if you can get buy w/o feature XYZ it must not be that meaningful of a feature to begin with.”
Which can be said of a LOT of people here, only in the exact opposite and every other direction. E.g. citing various functionality that plain doesn’t concern the vast majority of users, claiming the fact that X “still” doesn’t have whatever it is makes it “flawed”, worse than others, less usable, unprofessional et al? You know… because solipsism! So I have no idea what you hope to achieve by just singling out Bill as if he were some sort of sole offender or even anywhere at the top of the list. Aside from my finding it to be completely inappropriate and rather hubristic to suggest you know Bill’s “secret thoughts” with some tacky appeal to emotion, just to try and discredit him and his take on matters. Insinuating he’s being disingenuous?? Now that’s ironic.
[Andrew Kimery] “a grizzled, battle hardened vet of the NLE wars.”
Now you’ve certainly singled out the wrong person judging by that description. ?
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich! -
[Simon Ubsdell] “a) I’d almost always sooner leave a hole rather than ripple.”
That of course being easily possible in X as well, if one so desires, even if not by default. Basically just inverted steps from FCP 7.
[Simon Ubsdell] “b) I almost always have to un-embed audio in FCP X in order to be able to edit efficiently.”
I’d be very curious to know how the “un-embedding” of audio (I’m assuming that means “detaching”), works out to a higher level of efficiency when editing in X? In fact I’d say you’re, if anything, working far less efficient, since you’re creating potential pitfalls (loss of sync) all across the timeline, which you wouldn’t have otherwise. That’s like saying “The first thing I always do in PPro/FCP 7 is unlink all audio, and leave it that way until the end”, which of course I don’t know why anyone would ever consider doing that. Or am I missing something? Because the fact of the matter is, that after detaching audio in X, it does not trim with the video anymore nor the other way around. So you effectively have to edit every clip with audio twice, no matter what. With attached audio you can do either or on the fly and still never run the risk of losing sync. Like, ever.
So, again: how is that more efficient for you? I’m not saying it isn’t or can’t be, I’m just not seeing it, but am always willing to learn.
[Simon Ubsdell] “c) I almost always need to trim audio and video separately.”
… as just about 100% of the editors I know, and I, do too, yes. This seems to imply that you think you can’t in X by default? Of course there is no need to DETACH a single bit of audio to be able to do so, which I’m assuming you’re inferring in the company of the other two points? Otherwise I don’t know why it’s an additional “requirement” in this context.
– RK
____________________________________________________
Deutsch? Hier gibt es ein umfassendes FCP X Training für dich!