155 replies to this topic

[peterbkk]

Peter
You are absolutely right to test both suites and find out which is right for the user. I made a parallel switch to ADobe CS5 production last year. It is much closer to FCP7 in functionality and GUI than FCPX is.
With the right machine, ADobe 5.5 flies in native editing and efx layering. The ability to scrub natively is awesome! I'll just add that with CS5.5, I'm editing much faster even when using AE, Audition and PP tossing around a project... plus I can open FCP7 projects.
Color is still great but has been left out of FCPX updates. The color correction on FCPX is just not as complete as Color and definitely not close to Da Vinci Resolve (Lite version is going to be free I think).
I do think FCPX is catered for the simpler projects without too much efx or layering. ANd I agree a few of the features like the magnetic timeline and compound clips are very nice but CS5.5 has so many more features including real time native with efx, so there's no big file that's recoded in the background, multi-monitor support (WTF is Apple on?) and the Audition program is just better than FCPX audio functions by a lightyear. Then there's AE's functionality and speed for complex 3D graphics vs Motion's simpler GUI.
I am afraid to pit CS5.5 vs FCPX because a lot of it is down to types of projects and productions. I think as the project gets more complicated, FCSX starts to lose ground rapidly. I tried it for a few weeks now and just can't see pass the Nvidia CUDA Mercury engine speed differential. That doesn't matter for most MBPs but on a desktop, it's like the tortoise and the hare, except the hare doesn't stop to snooze!

I understand your views - but I suspect that you've not yet pushed yourself through the paradigm shift and seen the brave new world on the other side.

PP, AE, AU and EN have a much steeper learning curve than FCP X but, once up that curve, they do have a lot of powerful features. That Mercury engine is nice and fast but, as most of the time in video editing is "input bound" (the computer waiting for the user to do something), I don't know how essential it is. With its background engine, over the weekend, I spent almost no time waiting for FCP X.

For the kind of underwater video projects that I do, I can not see anything missing out of FCP X that I might REALLY need.

With the ability to uses masks, shapes and keying for color correction, I think I can handle even the most complex UW color problems with FCP X. It is one of those "deceptively simple" features of FCP X. When you first use that feature it looks a bit sparse. When you dig into the twirl-downs, there is a lot of capability.

By "multi-monitor", I assume that you are talking about external TV broadcast monitors. Because FCP X today can already support 2 computer monitors. Most of the work I did yesterday was on two monitors, with the "show viewer on a second window" option.

Regards
Peter

Edited by peterbkk, 10 July 2011 - 05:29 PM.

[Drew]

Peter
Multiple monitor support as in 2 events monitors and a 3rd view monitor and also external monitor support is what I meant. Not having video output from a coding level leaves many people who use broadcast monitors unable to work in higher than 8bit (think 10bit uncompressed) source. Not everyone wants to keep it @ REC709 RGB 8 bit. Then there's the interlace crowd (shrinking I know but DVDs still rule 70% of the TV world out there). Airplay is NOT an alternative since it's H.264 compressed.

That said, I have no problem with FCPX and I'm sure once the newer features are added, it'll be good. It's now obviously catering to the bigger crowd of online web and wedding/events crowd, who don't use HD SDI monitoring etc etc for content. I think Apple had aspirations to go to feature/broadcast by having some of the higher end features but lost interest in the small market. But their marketing dept just kept going!

Again, I'm not disputing that FCPX is great for you... because I think it is designed for people like you. But for those who require deeper feature sets, FCPX is just lacking now, hence the bad backlash. Which is why I strongly back testing the major programs for the features one needs.

[Steve Douglas]

I have always been a big supporter of Final Cut and Apple. Still am in some ways but I can't tell you how many professionals, not just underwater hobbyists, are moving to AVID and Premier Pro. BBC, who have always used FCP, are now in a huge bind, not being able to move to FCX. IMHO, we have also seen the last of the Apple Mac Pro desktops, I would bet a year's wages that within 2 years, the desktop pro will be deleted from the lineup and we will see only iMacs. That the new iMacs are very fast and powerful is one thing but they will not be expandable as they have not been since they were first introduced. Since its release, I have met only 2 people who said they liked the new application. FC is a new application in its entirety and should not be confused with FC Pro as we know it. Hate to say it but I agree with Drew on this.
Steve

[SimonSpear]

I guess I'll just hang these machines out as long as they'll last and make a decision at a later date as to where I jump. As an Apple convert since 2007 from a life long PC background it is a shame to think that I may have to move back again in the future

[peterbkk]

I guess I'll just hang these machines out as long as they'll last and make a decision at a later date as to where I jump. As an Apple convert since 2007 from a life long PC background it is a shame to think that I may have to move back again in the future

Don't let all the noise distract you. Try it and see. Unless you plan to make an underwater sequel to Avatar, you might find that FCP X does everything you need - and does it surprisingly well.

[loftus]

Always interesting to see folks howl when Apple changes the game, happens almost every time they introduce a major new product - DOS was better than a GUI, they howled when Apple went from OS 9 - OS X, the iPad was going to tank....
Seems like Apple always has a longer term plan than folks give them credit for

Edited by loftus, 12 July 2011 - 03:49 AM.

[ehanauer]

Go into this with an open mind. I'm going through the Ripple training tutorials on FCP X and it looks like it's got a lot of promise. Definitely a new paradigm, but that's what Apple is all about.

When I'm done with my current projects I'm upgrading.

[Steve Douglas]

Remember Eric, that you will not be able to open old projects created in FC7 in the new FCX
Steve

[jonny shaw]

That is the biggest killer for me as I am always going back to old projects for clients and using them as templates, or taking specific sequences and dumping them into a new project. Also the print to tape would be an issue as most broadcasters here in Australia still want footage on tape. By the sounds of it FCP X will never be able to open a FCP7 timeline as the programs are just too different.

[peterbkk]

Remember Eric, that you will not be able to open old projects created in FC7 in the new FCX
Steve

Thinking back over the last few years, I have never needed to re-edit a finished project. Once its done, its done. In any case, when I finish a project, I always export a full QT version of all the versions of the movie, an XML, a disk image from DVDSP and a Media Manager copy of the used media into an archive folder. With these I have always been able to make new copies or reuse some footage, when required. (I wonder if an XML import will be possible in a future version of FCP X or via a 3rd party plug-in if anyone did want to recreate a timeline).

One of the great features of FCP X that I am planning to leverage is the event library. Instead of having to search clip by clip through archived footage, I will be able to import all my previous "keeper" footage from old FCP 7 projects into the FCP X event library and assign some keywords. I recently spent hours looking for one clip: couldn't remember its name, only had a vague memory of which previous project archive it might be in. With the FCP X event library, using previous footage in new projects will be quick and simple.

Swings and roundabouts...

Regards
Peter

[muckdiver]

Why in the world would you switch? FC7 does a very fine job and it integrates well enough with Compressor, Motion, Color, DVD Pro. Changing to a new and upgraded program when it just left the gate is territory for first adopters. Is it really that important?

I have been watching the forums, not just WP, and I was all twisted about the new paradigm, lost features, and feeling abandoned by Apple that I finally just did a 180 out of exasperation. FCX is apparently a ghost of it's former self but fills a niche, one that just does not include some editors. Does this matter to me?

In a parallel universe a very similar story unfolded years ago. I like my associates put the developer to task about it's latest and greatest product upgrade. We got nowhere. Finally an entire market segment just upped and stopped upgrading. That company lost huge market share that is now dominated by a then small upstart competitor. I am still using the old program today, over 5 years after the debacle and making money using it. I am guessing FC7 can continue for years in the same way.

I have been searching for FC7 only forums. There is one on the Apple website that has members who will not upgrade. If anyone else knows of others please post them. I for one am not upgrading even if it

is only $300. Unless someone hits me over the head with a 2x4 of new must have features expect to see me using FC7 for awhile.

I have far too many assets to abandon and too little time to dedicate to a program that so far is getting mixed reviews. If I learn anything new it would be with a company who's life depends on good graphics programs and not on a company who sells more hardware because it happens to have graphics program. Its all about core competency for me now.

I will still watch the forums ... so far it's been an interesting read.

[Steve Douglas]

Muckdiver, The two largest FC Forums are the kenstone.net (which is in my opinion the finest of the them all) and the lafcpug.org. The former has an excellent discussion forum and plenty of new articles, tutorials and reviews. All of my articles are first published there and then republished on the other sites or by the companies themselves.
Steve

[Drew]

Always interesting to see folks howl when Apple changes the game, happens almost every time they introduce a major new product - DOS was better than a GUI, they howled when Apple went from OS 9 - OS X, the iPad was going to tank....
Seems like Apple always has a longer term plan than folks give them credit for

Well I don't think it's howling but just the product repositioning which leaves the users who faithfully went from FCP1-7 in a bind, without 64bit and multicore etc etc. I switched to Adobe because it's faster with native editing etc etc. I won't go back to Avid yet until they go 64bit and multicore. I'm pretty sure Apple will sell more since the new GUI is more iMovie style and thus easier to use. They just threw FC Express and iMovie together.
I don't bemoan the change but want those who demand those features which are missing to know that there are better alternatives like Adobe CS.5. The BBC switched to Adobe last year for those reasons. Of course the companies tout that XYZ uses their software, and that sells a few more. But seriously, if people buy NLE based on what is used by others, then well, good for the ad people!

Why in the world would you switch? FC7 does a very fine job and it integrates well enough with Compressor, Motion, Color, DVD Pro. Changing to a new and upgraded program when it just left the gate is territory for first adopters. Is it really that important?

Switching is actually a viable option for increased productivity. Render times, transcoding all takes time (even with background rendering) and FCP 7 is just too slow to work with the new formats effectively or efficiently. Instantaneous response to efx and other changes to clips is just better, especially when ramping, scrubbing etc.
Adobe CS5.5 isn't that far removed from FCP7, you can even set it to use FCP7 keyboard inputs! It took me just 2 months to adjust and figure out ways to do color correcting without Color (which could be faster!). Colorista and Da Vinci Resolve can take the place of Color and work faster. Red RAW is in realtime with Adobe and Da Vinci. Da Vinci Lite is free and is almost like Color Lite, using EDL off line editing, it's just a great replacement.
As for FCP7 integration with Compressor, how long does FCP7 take to export to Compressor directly? That is not how a pro NLE works.

[jonny shaw]

So by the sounds of it Drew you are as PP 5.5 convert?
I can feel myself traveling down that path also. Especially if my next big project is a RED project.

[peterbkk]

So by the sounds of it Drew you are as PP 5.5 convert?
I can feel myself traveling down that path also. Especially if my next big project is a RED project.

For your own sake, I would urge you to take a serious look at FCP X, unbiased by the noise from a small section of the editing community. Once you get the hang of it, FCP X is a delight to use. It has a bunch of features never yet seen in a professional NLE.

For example, this weekend I was doing the soundtrack for a 35 minute project. The audio included some camera capture, which needed cleaning up, a music track, some sound FX, and a narration track. Previously I would do this in Soundtrack Pro. But, now it all can be done in FCP X. And, because it is all inside one editor, alignment is simple. You can link pieces of audio to clips or to compound clips so, if you want to move something around later, it all stays in the right place. And, with FCP X's range selection tool ®, it is very quick to adjust sound levels across the audio components. The R tool, with two keystrokes and a mouse-drag, places 4 key-frames and changes the audio level between them with a nice fade-in and fade-out curve. Zoomed through the soundtrack work in half the speed as before!

Don't short-change yourself! Give it a try. I'm sure that it is only a matter of time before all the 3rd party plug-ins will be available.

Regards
Peter

[TheRealDrew]

For your own sake, I would urge you to take a serious look at FCP X, unbiased by the noise from a small section of the editing community. Once you get the hang of it, FCP X is a delight to use. It has a bunch of features never yet seen in a professional NLE.

For example, this weekend I was doing the soundtrack for a 35 minute project. The audio included some camera capture, which needed cleaning up, a music track, some sound FX, and a narration track. Previously I would do this in Soundtrack Pro. But, now it all can be done in FCP X. And, because it is all inside one editor, alignment is simple. You can link pieces of audio to clips or to compound clips so, if you want to move something around later, it all stays in the right place. And, with FCP X's range selection tool ®, it is very quick to adjust sound levels across the audio components. The R tool, with two keystrokes and a mouse-drag, places 4 key-frames and changes the audio level between them with a nice fade-in and fade-out curve. Zoomed through the soundtrack work in half the speed as before!

Don't short-change yourself! Give it a try. I'm sure that it is only a matter of time before all the 3rd party plug-ins will be available.

Regards
Peter

You are going to force me to buy this aren't you? LOL. I keep on coming close to pulling the trigger (knowing what it is generally about), but ....

Ack.

Dunno

[Drew]

Jonny
I'm not a convert... just wanted something faster and CS5 was better than FCP7... with CS5.5 it's even better. But as everyone's needs are different, the mileage may vary.
Peter seems to be happy with FCPX. His projects primarily consist of DVDs/promo videos for resorts/boats if I remember correctly, and FCPX suits him. More power to him. FCPX isn't broadcast ready but for work that don't need heavy work like efx, it's actually a nice tool. This is where Apple placed FCPX 1.0 to be. They left out the "pro" features on purpose.
But if you have Red Raw projects, there's no competition yet. You can tweak video and audio in a dialog box. If you need a Red Raw NLE, FCPX can't do it NOW! I'm not in the habit of waiting for things that may possibly happen when I need something now. Adobe/Avid cut Red Raw now better than FCPX. No one can say otherwise.
Peter's projects are single cam projects. If you have multicam projects and want edit natively, FCPX fails you. I haven't checked out how FCPX links to Logic Pro and Pro Tools as my enthusiasm to learn was curbed at the missing NLE features. If you are adding 20 tracks of audio, it's something you may want to check. Problem is you can't open an old project to test it either!
It's all about features set and what your projects need. FCPX has quite a few awesome features included and given a few versions of feedback, it will probably be a more advanced platform. Still I personally think waiting for a software to bloom in future versions is not the way forward, especially when there are software which don't need you to relearn terminology. You can do that later when FCPX finally suits your needs.

[Drew]

Oh and also realize there are issues with every NLE. FCPX's issues are more fundamental. Avid MC5.5 is also bug filled. The CS5.5, while lacking in UI refinement, seems to fill most uses seamlessly and is blazing fast!

[Steve Douglas]

One problem with X is that there are several functions that literally do not work. There have always been bugs that needed to be sorted out in future versions but Apple put too much of a rush on this. X is a beta app in my mind. This doesn't mean I won't use it but for serious work, 7 will still be there and X can wait until it grows up.
Steve

[peterbkk]

One problem with X is that there are several functions that literally do not work.
Steve

Which functions in FCP X have you come across that don't work?