Simon Ubsdell
6
COW Coins
Forum Replies Created
-
I hate to disagree with Tom who is usually right about everything but in this instance I personally would absolutely not correct audio on import for a number of reasons.
Firstly you really don’t want to be adding unnecessary background processes if you can avoid it as they can dramatically slow your work down in FCPX and are generaly best avoided wherever possible.
Secondly there is no obvious advantage to processing more than you need to – you will save far more time processing your (far shorter) edited clips if you need to.
Thirdly the audio processing tools are very crude, in particular the “background noise removal” which will almost inevitably give you highly undesirable audio artifacts, and should only ever be used with extreme caution. (Also note that this is probably the slowest of the three processes and hence the biggest waste of time if you are processing all your audio rather than just your edited clips.)
Finally, it is always the best practice to make any audio corrections “in place”, i.e. within the context of your edited piece and in relation to your other audio elements whether music or ambience or sound effects.
As a side note, it is far better to learn how to use the EQ and compression tools (which are genuinely excellent in FCPX) to get the best audio results rather than relying on “automatic enhancements”.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Thanks Timothy for this in-depth and impeccably argued overview of what is clearly one of the biggest hurdles that FCPX has to overcome – and quickly!
Have a great holiday!
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Unfortunately the Motion Blur settings can’t be published from Motion – would be far preferable if they could be.
There’s a not very nice kluge that can be done by linking directional blurs to the movement offsets but it’s not at all convincing so I didn’t want to inflict that on anybody.
Oddly, though I have had a few issues with performance in other areas I don’t find that motion blur slows me down much in this case but I know others including you have found it troublesome.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Do read the Apple installation notes:
https://support.apple.com/kb/HT4722
It is strongly recommended that you install Final Cut Pro X, Motion 5, and Compressor 4 on a startup disk that does not have Final Cut Studio (2009) already installed.
However they go on to describe the safe method of installing both on the same partition which seems to work fine for most people as Steve and Jason have commented.
Do ensure you follow the instructions otherwise you could have problems using Motion 4 apparently.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
I had a specific issue with Automatic Duck in which multi-track (i.e. more than a stereo/dual mono pair) audio failed to come through as expected when detached from its video source track.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Olly Lawer on Nov 18, 2011 at 10:32:10 am
I was kind of hoping it would be even quicker than Final Cut Pro 7 as it renders in the background doesn’t it?
So-called “background rendering” only works when you’re not actually doing any editing so it’s probably not quite as sexy as you’re thinking it is and perhaps the marketing made it out to be.
In fact, it’s essentially no different to the Auto Render option already in legacy FCP.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Here’s Apple’s list of non-compliant graphics cards.
https://support.apple.com/kb/HT4664
Your card appears not to be compliant.
I don’t know for sure but I can’t see that there should be any issues with FCP6 and X as against FCP7 as long as you follow the correct installation procedure.
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Olly Lawer on Nov 17, 2011 at 8:29:13 pm
Would you partition your hard drive just to be safe – seeing as I’ll be running FCP 6 too.
No obvious issues with running FCPX on the same partition as FCP7 – a lot of people are doing this without issues – but make sure you follow the installation instructions that Apple recommend for this route.
https://support.apple.com/kb/HT4722
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Oliver Peters on Nov 16, 2011 at 9:19:29 pm
Yes, I’ve actually been doing that – using the export as the render. The trouble with doing that is your project is still not rendered. So if you have to make any changes, you are back to the same slow, unrendered sequence.
Yes, indeed, this was a huge problem for me in the job I was doing last week (as I know it was on your job as well).
The only option was a monumentally slow render of the current project – and all its variants (why do clients insist on changes?) – just in order to be able to play the timeline at all.
Rendering is shockingly slow, there’s no two ways about it …
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
Oliver Peters on Nov 16, 2011 at 8:51:10 pm
Unfortunately at this point, when trying to actually use it on projects for real clients, it hasn’t performed as well as FCP7 based on the one criteria that it should – better performance based on a 64-bit architecture.
I think it is very important that this issue comes out into the open. There are some very serious question marks of FCPX and its ability to deliver performance mnsot particularly when it comes to rendering, and m ost especially when it’s a question of rendering Motion 5 effects.
Here’s a very good post from Timothy Payton (on another forum) that illustrates where some of the problems lie:
https://fcp.co/forum/4-final-cut-pro-x-fcpx/2175-looking-for-a-reason-to-actually-render-in-fcp-x
Simon Ubsdell
Director/Editor/Writer
http://www.tokyo-uk.com