Forum Replies Created

Page 27 of 426
  • Steve Connor

    May 4, 2018 at 3:33 pm in reply to: Smarter and Faster

    [Simon Ubsdell] “It makes you wonder whether they had in fact mastered all the different ways of achieving this result in those other NLEs (to borrow an argument that FCP X enthusiasts are fond of employing when championing its way of doing things).

    No, we were all dummies who were just waiting for the magnetic timeline so we could work as fast as the clever Editors!

    Seriously though I’ve always found this function of the magnetic timeline to be more convenient than offering any real increase in speed, for me it takes a little less “think” time than a traditional tracked NLE.

  • Steve Connor

    May 4, 2018 at 2:50 pm in reply to: Smarter and Faster

    [Oliver Peters] “I’m not accounting for which one a given editor might perceive as more “fun””

    mmm “snarky” 🙂

  • Steve Connor

    May 4, 2018 at 1:28 pm in reply to: Reconsidering FCPX in Hollywood

    [Tim Wilson] “topics as wide-ranging as poetry, Connemara, VR, and Cashel Blue cheese, among many others. If I could find a way to work those into this forum”

    Seriously? We’ve been WAY further OT than than that!

  • Steve Connor

    May 3, 2018 at 9:12 am in reply to: Reconsidering FCPX in Hollywood

    [Aindreas Gallagher] “FCPX was, and largely remains, a pompous long standing industry joke piece of software. It’s the literal antithesis of FCP.

    It was, is, and will ever be, a rare kind of software we all can laugh at for good reason. My connected clips you guys. I think I need a secondary storyline.

    We’ve missed you Aindreas ????

  • Steve Connor

    May 2, 2018 at 6:52 pm in reply to: Reconsidering FCPX in Hollywood

    [Simon Ubsdell] “o while this might be true it’s also not relevant to the discussion.”

    Since when did we EVER keep to the subject of the discussion?

  • Steve Connor

    May 2, 2018 at 8:46 am in reply to: Reconsidering FCPX in Hollywood

    So is Premiere making any REAL inroads into Hollywood editing? I’ve seen the PR around the movies that HAVE been cut with it, but it doesn’t seem like it’s done a great deal better than FCPX so far.

  • Steve Connor

    May 1, 2018 at 6:44 am in reply to: Reconsidering FCPX in Hollywood

    I know lots of people using FCPX and not one of them cares about what they use in Hollywood, it doesn’t seem to have affected global sales at all.

  • Steve Connor

    April 30, 2018 at 7:36 pm in reply to: FCP X 4.1 multicam issues

    10.4.2 now available with selection bug fixed (apparently)

  • Steve Connor

    April 30, 2018 at 2:16 pm in reply to: Talking of FCP X timeline timing issues …

    [Simon Ubsdell] “It’s not fair to inflict a broken system on your users …”

    It’s not broken it’s a “feature”

  • Steve Connor

    April 24, 2018 at 8:30 pm in reply to: FCPX or R15?

    [Tony West] “I just want to be at my best level of quality all the time on jobs. I’ve shot cool stuff with my phone also, but I know I can do better with my primes and I want to offer my best to the client.”

    and this is what will give you an advantage over other people. I recognise the utility of using in iPhone in certain circumstances, but in a lot of those circumstances it’s just as easy to use a small DSLR instead and get better quality results with more flexibility.

    There is no scenario where I would travel to a job with just an iPhone

Page 27 of 426

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