Forum Replies Created

Page 102 of 426
  • [Bill Davis] “A – X does just fine with long projects. Sure if you have a TON of material, you want a robust hardware configuration to support that – just as with any other system.”

    It does OK with big projects, it does struggle with long timelines

  • Steve Connor

    November 7, 2015 at 6:15 pm in reply to: New 2015 iMac will not run Yosemite

    [David Roth Weiss] “There is a problem under the hood of Premiere with the XAVCi codec – as best it was explained to me, a Premiere needs to be “optimized” for many, if not all, new codecs, and XAVCi hasn’t received the treatment yet.
    “

    I haven’t been impressed with XAVC performance in PPro at all, even though FCPX takes time to “unwrap” the footage, performance is significantly better with it on my system.

    I hope this is fixed soon!

  • Steve Connor

    November 7, 2015 at 6:11 pm in reply to: Offline // Online workflow for FCPX

    [Bill Davis] “It also re-inforced my experience that doing something like plopping a bunch of HUGE still images – such as those that come directly out of a modern DSLR – is pretty bad practice. I think it’s because X will try to do it’s calculations for things like dissolves and movements calculating ALL the pixel positions against each other, even if there are zillions of pixels in play.”

    Absolutely agree with this!

  • Steve Connor

    November 6, 2015 at 9:32 pm in reply to: Offline // Online workflow for FCPX

    Sorry, I’m joining this discussion late and this might sound stupid but If you are using Proxy files in FCPX for the edit and then relink at the end what is the benefit to transcoding the DSLR footage to ProresHQ first.

    Surely if you master to ProresHQ at the end then that’s one less compression step?

  • Steve Connor

    October 31, 2015 at 10:06 am in reply to: Apple and Adobe Software: Together

    To be honest I don’t care about the cost, it’s no more of an issue than paying my mobile phone bill, however Adobe aren’t doing themselves any favours by adopting the subscription only approach, but for the me the cost is low and I’m getting value back from my subscription.

    However if the price goes up substantially, or the development pace slows considerably then I would reconsider.

  • Steve Connor

    October 29, 2015 at 5:15 pm in reply to: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?

    [Bill Davis] “You’re probably right Steve.

    I should have written that first line as “They’ve RUINED Final Cut by making it TOO different. I’m pissed.”
    “

    Bill, they’re just windmills 🙂

  • Steve Connor

    October 29, 2015 at 4:43 pm in reply to: Apple and Adobe Software: Together

    [Jason Jenkins] “Sometimes when reading this forum it’s starts feeling like an either/or proposition. I say have it all together in one big happy family!
    “

    I agree 100%,

  • Steve Connor

    October 29, 2015 at 4:11 pm in reply to: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?

    [Bill Davis] “Voice One: See – Final Cut Pro X is just too different for me to learn and use.
    “

    Exactly which voice said this?

  • Steve Connor

    October 29, 2015 at 12:33 am in reply to: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?

    [Aindreas Gallagher] “The next update will probably include major feature live photo iOS snippet publishing. “

    I’d expect nothing less.

    I can’t argue with you, Keyframing in FCPX is by no means great

  • Steve Connor

    October 29, 2015 at 12:23 am in reply to: Does anyone think FCPX is NOT a Professional NLE?

    [Aindreas Gallagher] “[Steve Connor] “I just wondered if there is anyone left on here who thinks it isn’t?”

    Sure. Me.”

    I think that was a given

Page 102 of 426

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy