Final Cut Pro X - still Pro

Quote
eyeseesound
You just couldn't resist could you? As reasonable as I make myself out to be...!? Yep, spent hours penning that post just for that very purpose... to make myself appear reasonable... it is completely contrived and not in the remotest bit reflective of me or my inner workings.

My comment wasn't a critique of your "inner workings". I was simply acknowledging that you perceive your issues to be reasonable while simultaneously suggesting that those of opposite opinions (the "yes" camp as you called them) were being "smug, condescending and rude" (again, your words). I was trying to get you to acknowledge that the other side would see themselves as the reasonable ones and you not. In other words, everyone views everything through the prism of their own bias.

From my perspective though, I found little evidence in the 7 pages of posts on this thread of the "pro-FCPX" crowd being smug, or snide in their comments. In fact there were VERY few posts that were unabashedly "pro-FCPX". Most were cautiously optimistic in general, with some excited over the few actual known features. The most heated posts between you and another on this thread concerned Quicktime X, not FCP. Jeff's comments, while harsh, were not at all an endorsement of FCPX.

In fact, if you want to talk smug, some of your earlier posts were indeed that. You seemed very convinced of the superiority of your opinions. I think it's a little hypocritical to complain about the smugness of other posters when you say things like:

"the point is that iApple don't really care. Not about me. Not about you. They care about i, and there is no i in Pro Apps"

"Apple no longer exists, and you won't see it till you take your heads out of the iSand."

eyeseesound - I think the problem for me is whenever I see your posts I expect a rant about iapps destroying FCP. I think the problem started when you were forced to upgrade to Snow Leopard and got some kind of dud. So when you started in on hating something none of us have even seen yet, it's hard not to get tired of it.

Here's some of your previous quotes

>>I wish marketing people actually told the truth. I'd still have bought the upgrade, obviously, but i wouldn't be so disappointed right now.
<<

>>coincidently things seem to have got bad at the same time that Jobs decided to turn Apple into a toy company... but hey, the world now has the flash free iPad, so who am i to bemoan the fact my work station no longer works well!<<

>>Dear Steve Jobs,
instead of telling us the next update of FCP 'will be awesome' how about making the £5000 system I currently own bloody work properly?
Oh, that's right, you've got all your coders working on the new iArse. Stick your head up it and pretend your a tech guru to your friends and family, only £666 for the 500meg version with a scaling price for useful capacity versions that make our bottom line go THROUGH THE ROOF!!!! <<

>>Recommended if you like troubleshooting and trying to rectify Apple's c*** ups, is that? <<

Most of us are very happy with our workstations. I understand yours was a problem. I'm sorry it was, but it's not our fault. If it was a problem everywhere this forum would be melting down with the same issues you've had. Clearly it's not, so the rants about how FCP has been destroyed by everything 'i' are not objective. And that gets annoying.

Let's wait and see what FCPX (or, possibly, FCP aARRRGHH My LEGS! I can't feel my LEGS!) is like. Or move to Avid or Adobe if you prefer. I mean it when I think you just make yourself sick by having all this frustration and anger every day. Not worth it.

Quote

Now, I can report ..... ABSOLUTELY.
I think most real editors will stick to FCP6&7. The FCPX what-cha-macall-it, IMHO is crap. no mater how it uses resources or makes the intricate settings that we do now, dummy proof.

Is there some preview copy that you've been editing on for the last few months to be able to make such a judgement? not quite sure which bit of FCPX is 'crap' but if this is yet another judgment made on the 'oh god it looks a bit like imovie so if i use this people won't think im a proper editor' approach, then i would take a moment and have another think.

There is no point making any judgements. Nobody knows enough about the app yet, or if they do they are under NDA - how can you possibly judge on something that you havn't used, let alone something that (in terms of a final retail copy) doesn't even exist yet?!

Quote
Andy
Excellent, do go and enjoy your new "church". I assume this means we can look forward to less of your knowledge + action over here on the LAFCPUG forums?

I use everything. And I don't think you could possibly expect a positive response from a personally directed line like this.

Using everything I have discovered some very nice features in premier and AE. Then there are time I think i can do this faster or in some more efficient way.

I dont like the thought of cutting with thumbs and since this thread has mentioned at any size smaller than 512x288. I like to see the frame sitting there and the info for the clip in the browser.

You can do a lot of non-feature work with fcp7, As commercials, sitcoms, TV movies and docs are i would guess at least 85% are at 1080 or smaller. So upgrading to something that looks like its less robust than what i am using feature/setting wise is not exciting to me.

Tjis thread is a speculative of FCPX and what we see it as a nearly finished product upgrade. As upgrades go we are always excited and look at the preview to tease ourselves and gossip.

You may remember that HD in FCP wasn't around until i think FCP4.5 (i think) previous to that The big house fellas would look at it as a joke or even undesirable in use. AVID WAS KING!!! As things improved to say v5.1 the progression of its ability was well respected tool in editing.

You may very well remember a lot of post that i have written. The flame throwing, the mistypes or responses to question i had not read well. Maybe you don't really read what i write now because all you can remember is what i said before i i had the experience to access things like i do now. I really can't be worried if some people can not upgrade their perception and take i extra minute to read the post carefully and respond to its content... rather than what you remember.

I have been a member here for at least 2005.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

There's no doubt in my mind that you post less rubbish these days than you used to J, but its not the issue here. The specific post you made above, the one to which I responded directly, well it was not one of your better thought out ones was it? You stated overtly that this unreleased software that you have never used is in your opinion, "crap", you note that Apple have "lost" you, and you round it off by saying that you want to go and worship at the "church" of Adobe CS5. What kind of response did "you" expect? I'm sorry, but its this kind of all-or-nothing mindset that restricts folks both personally and professionally.

You've got a thick skin J, I've seen that, and so I know that you absorb and learn from the good and the bad. Keep doing that.

Cheers
Andy

Quote
J
You may remember that HD in FCP wasn't around until i think FCP4.5 (i think)

FCP has been able to deal with HD since the early days (well before FCP4.5). it just depended on your video card and hard-drives.
calling FCP4.5 FCPHD was a bit of a marketing gimmick that was based on FCP4.5 being able to handle DVCProHD natively.
or something like that, sorry it was a while ago, and i don't remember the exact details,
but there was nothing inherent in FCP that would STOP you from working with HD.

Quote
J
previous to that The big house fellas would look at it as a joke or even undesirable in use.

sadly, that's very true, although that attitude didn't really change just because of FCP4.5


nick

I remember something about the video card also. I was shooting with consumer cams then so i didn't really get into FCP3 full host of capabilities then. I was happy to be able to do anything with video then.

FCPX is a disappointment to me if there is no viewer. Maybe i should have said " its a crappy deal for me if there is no viewer". ANDY
Maybe crappy is a bit over the top for some. I could see that.

Anyway, i am gonna try it cause of the price but I am extremely skeptical about having the flow i currently have when editing. Its good you can keep FCP7 and have FCPX also.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

You can open an individual clip from the timeline into a clip editor that gives you access to an individual item, its audio, video, and controls, and displays it for you in the Viewer.

All the best,

Tom

Okay, I think we need to stop FCP X bashing. It's not even out yet, so give the poor engineers at Apple a break.

FCP vs Avid vs Premiere... FCP and Avid are different systems. IMO, it's probably easier to go from FCP to Avid than to go the other way around, because Avid up to MC5 has that One True Way? of working with files, whereas FCP has a many ways, and there are some serious caveats with some workflows (eg. editing RED or H.264 natively, etc). Sometimes I get frustrated working with Avid because I don't know too much of Avid behind the hood. And sometimes I meet Avid editors who run into issues with FCP and I find it hard to explain all the issues they have within 5 minutes (why do I need to render everything, how come it says "effect light rays cannot be rendered on the graphics card". I do understand why some long time Avid editors try to switch over to FCP and feel frustrated. I feel frustrated at times when I run into tech issues or if I need to do video effects in Avid. I haven't worked with Premiere for years, and I am very curious as to how well Premiere works with RED natively (or does it?), or does it work with scaled down resolution?

What I really need is to know what's been released recently at NAB. I remember AJA had something that was to be released that would be based on Thunderbolt. And I also heard that you can't Thunderbolt in a SAN environment. Anyone has any comprehensive NAB reviews?



www.strypesinpost.com

>>you can't Thunderbolt in a SAN environment<<

You probably can if you have a THOR licence. You can Thunderbolt anywhere you damn well feel like it if you're Thor. I'd like to be Thor. Teach those damn hippie camos a thing or two. Hey! Use a freaking tripod! *ZPPSTTssspfffZZZTTT!*

Thor. Crepes. Viking editors.

- Loren

Today's FCP 7 keytip:
Nudge a Canvas layer by SUBpixels
with Command-Option with Arrow keys !

Your Final Cut Studio KeyGuide? Power Pack.
Now available at KeyGuide Central.
www.neotrondesign.com

Jude Cotter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >>you can't Thunderbolt in a SAN environment<<
>
> You probably can if you have a THOR licence. You
> can Thunderbolt anywhere you damn well feel like
> it if you're Thor. I'd like to be Thor. Teach
> those damn hippie camos a thing or two. Hey! Use a
> freaking tripod! *ZPPSTTssspfffZZZTTT!*


We need a "like" button.



www.strypesinpost.com

I wish there was a 'Like' button on here

You know, I wouldn't be entirely shocked if they ended up doing one more "classic" FCP version as well as FCP X.

- Justin Barham -

Well - as this is already one of the longest running threads in the history of the known universe, I might as well add my 2 cents worth.

On the whole, I agree with Grafixjoe and others who are saying that it's just too early to make a judgement about FCPX. I've watched the video of the SuperMeet presentation right through and been intrigued by "Auditioning" and "The Magnetic Timeline". For the way I work, sadly, I have to say that "Auditioning" is not much more than a joke, but I did find "The Magnetic Timeline" interesting. When I'm cutting a film, I tend not to worry too much about which tracks go where because I know I will always end up spending a day or so tidying them up at the end of the job before outputting an OMF. So the ability to close a video gap in the timeline without having to worry about sound tracks is quite attractive.

Several people have commented positively on the fact that it will be possible to run both FCS3 and FCPX on the same machine. And yes - that's great - but what worries me is Apple's habit of refusing to sell legacy software. In other words - once FCPX comes out, will it become impossible to buy FCS3 from Apple ?

When I bought my dear old (read: solid, reliable, wonderful, etc) PPC G5 it was running Tiger. For various reasons, about a year ago I decided I needed to upgrade to Leopard. By that stage, Snow Leopard had come out - and no Apple dealers were able to sell me a copy of Leopard. Snow Leopard is Intel-only so I ended up having to buy Leopard on TradeMe (the NZ version of eBay). That was OK (it is a legal copy) but... You get my drift, I'm sure.

regards

Mike

My guess mike is that it will be ok - unlike the OS updates and point incremental updates this is a completely new application so there won't be that issue - that and im sure apple realise that a lot of facilities are not just about to jump straight into fcpx and there is still going to be a demand for fcp7 for a good few years!
Fingers crossed anyway!

Many here agreed FCP X will be a completely new application. Some may like it some not.

The good thing still is that you CAN run both versions side by side. You always had been able to run another than the actual version of FCP on one machine in parallel. With FCP 7 also Apple made a more or less official statement that you can do.

As I wrote sometime earlier FCP X preferences will be different from the versions below and so there is no problem.
And anyway who would jump on a new software(update) within a running project -- regardless whether it's the OS, the NLE, the sound app or any other thing.

Drives are cheap, create a new boot disk and try from there.
Josh is right it will take some time for the companies/people to switch depending on their workflows. It also will take some time to 'mature' FCP X.

No 3rd party software companies that I have been in contact with have gotten NDAs as yet. This means that no plug ins that you may regularly use will probably be compatible with FCX. That will take awhile so just hold on to your Studio 3 and work in it while learning the ins and outs of X.
Steve

steve-sharksdelight

Are there any 3rd party (plugin) developers that signed an NDA and are able to release FCPX compatible plugins at FCPX's launch date?

Of course I will also rewrite/redevelop/adapt/recompile my plugins to make them compatible asap after FCPX is available.


Quick Press Release:

Marietta, GA - 05/19/2011

CHV-Plugins, software developer for Final Cut Pro and Final Cut Studio since 2002, announces his intent to support FCPX with new plugins.

Hey Christoph,
From speaking with many of the companies, they are waiting for the release just as you are. My guess is that 'PERHAPS' Boris FX may have an NDA but that is only a guess. Red Giant and many of the other companies I have spoken with are waiting just like you and I.
Steve

steve-sharksdelight