PDA

View Full Version : Why is there so much FCPX support?



RockettMan
03-09-2013, 09:56 AM
Please any FCP users don't get angry with me here. I stopped using FCP once X began, like many others and like many others moved to Adobe Pr. So, why is there still so much talk about FCPX? I was under the impression that FCPX has gone the way of iMovie only better? I'm seriously not trying to stir any crap, seriously. Just wondering why I don't here about more native Adobe and Avid stuff for the BMCC? Those programs seem more pro. Should I take a second look at FCPX these days?

teh
03-09-2013, 10:16 AM
I'm not sure what you mean by FCPX support? In which way does it get more support and by whom?

Isn't Premiere the only NLE that supports DNGs?

RockettMan
03-09-2013, 10:30 AM
Well, I see so much about FCPX articles in relation to the BMCC, etc. Just seems to be a mis-match for the BMCC.

SConnor
03-09-2013, 10:35 AM
Well, I see so much about FCPX articles in relation to the BMCC, etc. Just seems to be a mis-match for the BMCC.
Despite the fact that you can enter Metadata on the Camera that imports straight into FCPX? A lot of rubbish is spoken about FCPX, it IS a fully featured professional NLE that works VERY well with BMD ProRes files as well as excellent xml export to Resolve (better than PPro). I've been using it for almost 2 years on a range of Productions including cutting a feature film on it. BTW None of the NLE's offer native BMD RAW support yet

Deggen
03-09-2013, 10:35 AM
My company uses FCPX, it's fast and makes life pretty easy in a few different ways. It's far less technical than FCP7 which helps our editor who is more interested in story than tech.

The first FCPX version was irritating, but they fixed pretty much everything I the most recent update. Awesome program, I highly recommend it.

Oh, and for the record, we have FCPX, FCP7, the latest adobe suite with Premier, Edius... and still we choose FCPX and Davinci to edit and grade.

- Darren

randyman
03-09-2013, 11:10 AM
Dare I say it; there was a certain amount of... hysteria... when FCPX was first released. Some of it involved very legitimate concerns, and some of it was resistance to change.

Given that FCP7 still worked fine, and wasn't being actively confiscated from anyone's desktop, there may have been just a tiny bit of overreaction.

I still use FCP7 for most of my editing. But there are some interesting plugins that are only available on the FCPX platform, and for some projects, I find FCPX to be speedy and fun. I've made a point of working with it from time to time, just to make sure I'm keeping up with things. To paraphrase Mark Twain, reports of FCP's death have been greatly exaggerated.

archstanton
03-09-2013, 11:17 AM
You should revisit final cut x again if you want to be pleasantly surprised. I bought it when it first came out and hated it, it took me about a year to come back to it and by that time apple updated the programme to make it at last very usable(they still update on a regular basis, obviously listening to user feedback about what needs to be done to make it more professional), I also use the Adobe creative suite but I am more and more coming back to final cut x and I use it all the time when I am editing on location.
So what I'm saying is, "yeah, give it a try"!

Paul Stephen Edwards
03-09-2013, 11:20 AM
I'm a recent FCPX convert. I've been using FCP Studio 2 up until recently. I spent about half an hour fighting the program when I first started... but then everything clicked into place. It's definitely a new way to work, but I'm really starting to appreciate it. It's a perfect match for the BMCC when shooting ProRes.

Peter J. DeCrescenzo
03-09-2013, 11:32 AM
I'm still using FCP 7, but once Nick Shaw's plug-in for FCPX (http://forum.blackmagicdesign.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5392&hilit=antler) is released, I might make the switch to FCPX.

However, I'm not looking forward to learning FCPX's "new" way of editing. At all. So, before making a final decision, I'll take another look at Premiere, too.

metaljesus
03-09-2013, 11:58 AM
I think the reaction to FCPX was completely reasonable and justified; the fact that software that many companies (an whole industry, almost) had based their entire workflow on had just been end-of-lifed was not a small thing.

I switched to Premiere, love it, and now have zero interest in FCPX. However, I do know several production companies here in the UK that swear by FCPX and use it in all their suites. It seems that most of the concerns with FCPX have now been fixed with updates, so I can understand why it's gaining support.

SConnor
03-09-2013, 12:13 PM
I think the reaction to FCPX was completely reasonable and justified; the fact that software that many companies (an whole industry, almost) had based their entire workflow on had just been end-of-lifed was not a small thing.
. It was a mistake by Apple to EOL FCP7 that quickly, however I believe that FCP7 still actually works? and all those Companies can still use it and many have been since FCPX was released.

jmad
03-09-2013, 12:14 PM
I bought Premiere when it went on sale but rarely use it. FCPX, to me, is faster and far more efficient. But there is certainly a learning curve. It takes a little time because you have to think differently, while Premiere is basically FCP 8. I feel like when I go back to FCP 7 or Premiere I'm constantly clicking and clicking, while in X I'm always viewing footage. There's always footage moving across my screen and I spend less steps on each choice I make. FCPX, after I got used to it, is very fluid. Also, the multi-cam editor in X is simply a joy. Now if they would just add better audio mixing ...

dustylense
03-09-2013, 01:11 PM
FCPX rocks. If you are still calling it Imovie on steroids, then you should just move on and get a day job. Once you get in it and understand it, there is little chance of going back.

RockettMan
03-09-2013, 01:19 PM
Well, well! Then I shall try it again. I used FCP7 for years. So, I'll try!!!

dustylense
03-09-2013, 01:26 PM
fcp.co for those that need some resource on the program.

Kholi
03-09-2013, 01:51 PM
It's near unusable for any workflow that requires more than one human being to access a cut for various jobs. If you need to get an OMF out for Post Audio, or an XML out for VFX, or basically communicate with any other software -- which is basically how everything worth salt's done, then you should not be using FCPX.

IF you're a one man band doing corporate videos, likely doing everything on your own, then FCPX is probably the fastest and easiest way to do that.

SConnor
03-09-2013, 01:56 PM
Export for ProTools via plugin works well, XML out works well and BTW you the "everything worth salt" line shows a wonderful level of arrogance. I get more budgets sometimes for corporates than I do for TV work.

Kholi
03-09-2013, 02:04 PM
Export for ProTools via plugin works well, XML out works well and BTW you the "everything worth salt" line shows a wonderful level of arrogance. I get more budgets sometimes for corporates than I do for TV work.

X2pro is a pretty terrible solution for a ProTools operator, and the one that does work costs several hundreds. These are things that should have been part of the software. XML also isn't flawless, there are always issues (as of at least two months ago) communicating with mainstay software like After Effects. It's a very poor NLE choice when you need to collaborate within established workflows.

If you happen to have the time to quote where anything budget related was mentioned, feel free to do so. The specific talking points of my post are collaborative process and workflow, not budget. I place a higher value (worth salt) on the collaborative process and projects that require that; no need to take offense to that.

dustylense
03-09-2013, 02:05 PM
It's near unusable for any workflow that requires more than one human being to access a cut for various jobs. If you need to get an OMF out for Post Audio, or an XML out for VFX, or basically communicate with any other software -- which is basically how everything worth salt's done, then you should not be using FCPX.

IF you're a one man band doing corporate videos, likely doing everything on your own, then FCPX is probably the fastest and easiest way to do that.

LOL!
Kholi, you're dead wrong.
http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/tutorials/1017-superb-walk-through-tutorials-on-making-trails-with-final-cut-pro-x-on-shared-storage

and http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/1033-moving-from-final-cut-pro-7-to-fcpx-on-french-tv-series-lazy-company

Kholi
03-09-2013, 02:08 PM
LOL!
Kholi, you're dead wrong.
http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/tutorials/1017-superb-walk-through-tutorials-on-making-trails-with-final-cut-pro-x-on-shared-storage


How does shared storage have to do with what I said? Again, are you in the wrong topic or something?

And did you actually read either of those? Especially the Lazy Company? Still workarounds for things you shouldn't have to do, not to mention having to finish in FCP7.

If you like FCPX that's fine, there's a good reason why most FCP users haven't adopted it yet and it's not for lack of trying.

dustylense
03-09-2013, 02:10 PM
As quoted "It's near unusable for any workflow" Hence ANY workflow. ANY. You didn't say HOW YOU prefer to work.

Kholi
03-09-2013, 02:13 PM
It's near unusable for any workflow that requires more than one human being to access a cut for various jobs.

That's the actual quote, thanks for reading.

dustylense
03-09-2013, 02:15 PM
Why don't you watch the video and stop being arrogant. I've shared projects with editors over the internet. Back and fourth, back and fourth. Super easy...

Kholi
03-09-2013, 02:23 PM
Why don't you watch the video and stop being arrogant. I've shared projects with editors over the internet. Back and fourth, back and fourth. Super easy...

So, in a nutshell, on larger projects you've got a post team that consists of several people outside of just editing what's been shot. Ninety eight percent of these larger jobs require a post sound mixer, that person needs you to meet a specific set of delivery specifications so that he or she can work with original audio tracks. Typically, you have to deliver what's called an OMF, along with a few other things.

If your paid-for plugin spits out an OMF with hundreds of audio tracks that should not be there, and you have to manually re-sync several tracks, something is wrong.

Next, you have a colorist, and depending on what needs to happen there you should deliver an Edit Decision List (EDL) that his or her software can see. Thankfully, one of the last iterations of Resolve fixed that, and you can see the XML in R9.

As well, depending on the job, you've got someone that needs an EDL or XML of your cut in an AE environment for beauty, and likely titles, effects, so on and so forth.

That's a quick and very simplified run down of post duties on a larger project, none of which outline simply passing files or projects back and forth between another editor. File access is simple, that's what we have the XSAN for. FPCX's design isn't very friendly to this established process, which is why this thread exists in the first place.

Hopefully that helps you out a bit. If not, well, god speed.

dustylense
03-09-2013, 02:32 PM
Again, watch the videos. You're just repeating the hyperbole that you read on the internet. You didn't watch the videos, right Kholi. There are more that I can share. EDL, OMF, XML... They all work once you know how in FCPX.
God speed, Kholi. The arrogance in you is strong today. As usual....
By the way, for just the FCPX 2 Resolve roundtrip... It can't get easier than it is and I'm sure it will get even stronger. FCPX to protools, pretty easy. Soon, probably in the next update you will be able to mix right in FCPX as easy as pie.
ANd you're right about one thing. For the one man band, FCPX is REALLY strong.

Go watch the video Kholi, rather than acting MOD GOD. Maybe you'll learn something today.

SConnor
03-09-2013, 02:41 PM
So, in a nutshell, on larger projects you've got a post team that consists of several people outside of just editing what's been shot. Ninety eight percent of these larger jobs require a post sound mixer, that person needs you to meet a specific set of delivery specifications so that he or she can work with original audio tracks. Typically, you have to deliver what's called an OMF, along with a few other things.

If your paid-for plugin spits out an OMF with hundreds of audio tracks that should not be there, and you have to manually re-sync several tracks, something is wrong.

Next, you have a colorist, and depending on what needs to happen there you should deliver an Edit Decision List (EDL) that his or her software can see. Thankfully, one of the last iterations of Resolve fixed that, and you can see the XML in R9.

As well, depending on the job, you've got someone that needs an EDL or XML of your cut in an AE environment for beauty, and likely titles, effects, so on and so forth.

That's a quick and very simplified run down of post duties on a larger project, none of which outline simply passing files or projects back and forth between another editor. File access is simple, that's what we have the XSAN for. FPCX's design isn't very friendly to this established process, which is why this thread exists in the first place.

Hopefully that helps you out a bit. If not, well, god speed.

Wow thank you for that, I've been working in the industry for 20 years and I didn't realise that's how larger projects work.

Kholi
03-09-2013, 02:46 PM
Again, watch the videos. You're just repeating the hyperbole that you read on the internet.

In December I personally decided to try FCPX instead of FCP7 on a short film that was primarily Blackmagic shot. Exporting using plugins for OMFs created ProTools projects with multiple audio tracks that should not have been present, and would force the sound mixer to resync a lot of audio manually. That was going to take her an additional two days of just re-syncing (around her schedule) before she could actually get to the job that she should be doing.

Now, at the same time, VFX had trouble with the XML which I re-exported a total of three times, but would not read properly in AE for whatever reason.

The only thing that seemed to work fine was Resolve 9's round trip, which I would credit BMD for completely, as before that specific update FPCX's XML also would not work with Resolve.

By the end of the process, due to FCPXs limitations, I had to go and basically recut the entire project in FCP7 just to save time, so that it could be delivered.

That's my first hand experience with the software as it was released two to three months ago.

I wouldn't call that hyperbole from the internet, but you can if you want. I'm also not sure if you telling me what my experience is qualifies me as arrogant, but maybe in Bizarre World those are the rules.



Wow thank you for that, I've been working in the industry for 20 years and I didn't realise that's how larger projects work.


I quoted Dustylense, not you. It was definitely an explanation for him, not Sconnor/you. If I accidentally quoted you, though, I will go back and correct it. =]

dustylense
03-09-2013, 02:48 PM
Then you don't know what you're doing, OR you THINK you know what you're doing!
Pretty easy:

Workflow
Portland, OR
Shooting on the RED EPIC camera at 4K and 5K.
Dailies shipped to Hollywood arrive a day later on hard drive.
Each episode includes seven days of shooting, generating 1400 video files (200 per day).
Hollywood, CA
All RED .r3d files are converted to ProRes Proxy using RED ROCKET cards at faster than real time.
RED files are archived while ProRes files are synced with audio using Intelligent Assistance Sync-N-Link X, named based on scene and take number, and checked against shooting logs. All dailies are placed centrally on an Xsan network.
Organized dailies are further prepped by the editor’s assistant to customize the material according to the individual editor’s requests. Multicam Clips are created.
Dailies arrive every day for seven shoot days and are merged with the main Final Cut Pro X event each day.
Dailies are made available for the individual editors to begin cutting in the afternoon of the first day. Each of several editors works on an entire episode that consists of six acts.
Editors review the cut with the director and then the network sees changes and comments.
Picture is locked.
Finished XML is sent through Marquis X2Pro Audio Convert to Pro Tools for sound mixing.
XML is also sent to the DaVinci Resolve color grading suite for the final grade. The edit reconnects to the original RED .r3d files, which are graded and rendered out as ProRes 4444 files.
Color-graded and audio-sweetened files return to be combined in Final Cut Pro X and checked against the original offline project. Changes can still be made to content during color grade and sound mix.
The finished episode is exported as ProRes 4444 for digital delivery to TNT.

dustylense
03-09-2013, 02:52 PM
The fact that you "re-cut" in FCP7 instead of using Xto7 sums it up.

Robert Rogoz
03-09-2013, 05:52 PM
It's near unusable for any workflow that requires more than one human being to access a cut for various jobs. If you need to get an OMF out for Post Audio, or an XML out for VFX, or basically communicate with any other software -- which is basically how everything worth salt's done, then you should not be using FCPX.

IF you're a one man band doing corporate videos, likely doing everything on your own, then FCPX is probably the fastest and easiest way to do that.
That statement is a big pile of garbage, obviously written by someone, who doesn't know what they are talking about. FCPX has one of the most robust XML exports, has plugins to export directly to ProTools. Your statement is absolutely wrong in each and every point.

dustylense
03-09-2013, 06:03 PM
That statement is a big pile of garbage, obviously written by someone, who doesn't know what they are talking about. FCPX has one of the most robust XML exports, has plugins to export directly to ProTools. Your statement is absolutely wrong in each and every point.
+100000000000000000000000000

Kholi
03-09-2013, 06:15 PM
That statement is a big pile of garbage, obviously written by someone, who doesn't know what they are talking about. FCPX has one of the most robust XML exports, has plugins to export directly to ProTools. Your statement is absolutely wrong in each and every point.

Now I understand why people say to stay away from FCPX users, there's a severe lack of communication skills and a lot of personal attacks going on.

The reality is that Apple left it up to a third party to do tasks that should have been standard from the get-go. Being forced to spend additional money on plugins to do what the earlier iteration does, or every other NLE handles natively is not ideal. Every single editor that I know has tried to work with FCPX and dropped it due to lack of accessibility.

And, it's kind of bass-ackward to tell me that FCPX worked flawlessly with every other tool available as far as XMLs go, because it didn't in the beginning (fact) and as far as I experienced in December it didn't then.

If the NLE has been updated to support things natively since December then I would be interested in taking a look at it again, as I clearly said that it was great for one man band usage.

The emotions run wild here. Later.

dustylense
03-09-2013, 06:31 PM
Now I understand why people say to stay away from FCPX users, there's a severe lack of communication skills and a lot of personal attacks going on.

The reality is that Apple left it up to a third party to do tasks that should have been standard from the get-go. Being forced to spend additional money on plugins to do what the earlier iteration does, or every other NLE handles natively is not ideal. Every single editor that I know has tried to work with FCPX and dropped it due to lack of accessibility.

And, it's kind of bass-ackward to tell me that FCPX worked flawlessly with every other tool available as far as XMLs go, because it didn't in the beginning (fact) and as far as I experienced in December it didn't then.

If the NLE has been updated to support things natively since December then I would be interested in taking a look at it again, as I clearly said that it was great for one man band usage.

The emotions run wild here. Later.
More LOL!
Yeah, plug-ins that cost maybe $30-80 bucks. So if you want them, you can buy them. If you don't need them (for the so-called one man band), then you don't buy them and you don't pay for something that you will never use. So you actually CAN save money. With all the plugs KHOLI would NEED to DO what he obviously DOESN'T get, you still come in under CS6 in price. So now you are trying to blame dollars and cents (without sense). LOL

Kholi, you are right to think that FCPX upon launch was to say a slow start. But you're attitude about it today (along with your "friends") is still stuck there.

I really don't care what YOU and you're buddies edit with. But I do care when you state falsehoods over and over and over. Even when people show you, you remain stubborn, or unwilling to learn.

As for editing. JUST EDITING....Once you get it in FCPX, it's really hard to open the other NLE's. But your posts here show me that you're a quitter and uniformed.

Funny when you look at the interface of Resolve and CS6, that they seem to be trying to make it look like FCPX. Or iMovie Pro. However YOU decide to explain it.

LOL, Kholi.

Stephen Mick
03-09-2013, 06:40 PM
Let's tone down the butt-hurt a little bit. Okay? No need for the ridiculous LOLs and antagonistic tone.

Stephen Mick
03-09-2013, 07:10 PM
I've actually been thinking of taking another look at FCPX lately. I was an Avid user for years (like 1995-2000), then moved to Final Cut Pro, and now I'm on Premiere. But Adobe just has never felt fully like 'home' for me.

Herb
03-09-2013, 07:33 PM
Gentlemen,

If anyone is thinking of looking at FCPX, I recommend checking Larry Jordan's YouTube videos out: http://m.youtube.com/#/playlist?list=PL090B5735736A2A28&desktop_uri=%2Fplaylist%3Flist%3DPL090B5735736A2A2 8

It's free and demonstrates some of its uniqueness. If memory serves, Larry was less than pleased with FCPX at its introduction.

Thekreative
03-09-2013, 07:42 PM
I freaked a bit when FCPX dropped. Couldn't import old edits etc. I bought it the day it came out and wrote Apple that afternoon complaining. Apple gave me my purchase price in itunes credit without asking and let me keep FCPX. Wow, good on them. I was too busy and too fast in FCP7 to take the time to switch. When I got my BMC I started using FCPX and haven't looked back. I still work on old jobs of FCP7 but it feels like going back to DOS, or System 6. I'm loving everything about it now!

Robert Rogoz
03-09-2013, 08:00 PM
Now I understand why people say to stay away from FCPX users, there's a severe lack of communication skills and a lot of personal attacks going on.
Excuse me- where do you see a personal attack in my previous statement? What a bunch of people said, is that your statement does not represent what FCPX does day in and out. Even more- big parts of your initial statement are flat out wrong. If you don't know how to drive stick, even Ferrari will be a shitty car for you. I tried CS6 recently and I did not like it. But to say for me CS6 is a bad NLE would be a completely misleading. Nobody can make you learn, how to properly work with FCPX, if you don't like it-fine. But don't start posting some flat out crap and expect people just to sit idle and not correct it. And there is zero personal attack in it. And if I lack the "communications skills" on the same level you show lack of knowledge of this particular NLE. I still stand by my statement, that your argument is garbage.

Kholi
03-09-2013, 09:01 PM
But to say for me CS6 is a bad NLE would be a completely misleading. Nobody can make you learn, how to properly work with FCPX, if you don't like it-fine.

Maybe there's a translation issue going on, that might explain it. I didn't realize English wasn't your first language, sorry.

I never said that FCPX was bad, I said that it was nearly unusable for traditional finishing processes as of two months ago, which should have been three months ago (December). It was also plainly stated that I thought FCPX was probably the best choice out there for one man band type stuff.

It seems that a lot has been changed and improved in the last three months, judging from the links that Herb posted. Along with improved third party plugin support for exporting OMFs.

There wasn't a personal attack in your post, but it absolutely was horribly communicated. But, again, I didn't realize English wasn't your first language so my apologies.

Kholi
03-09-2013, 09:11 PM
I freaked a bit when FCPX dropped. Couldn't import old edits etc. I bought it the day it came out and wrote Apple that afternoon complaining. Apple gave me my purchase price in itunes credit without asking and let me keep FCPX. Wow, good on them. I was too busy and too fast in FCP7 to take the time to switch. When I got my BMC I started using FCPX and haven't looked back. I still work on old jobs of FCP7 but it feels like going back to DOS, or System 6. I'm loving everything about it now!


I actually like the interface for FCPX and it is much faster than FCP7, my only sticking complaint at the time was getting material out to other people in the process and I know that I wasn't the only one with that problem. I'm going to look into it again to see what's changed.

RockettMan
03-09-2013, 09:12 PM
I've actually been thinking of taking another look at FCPX lately. I was an Avid user for years (like 1995-2000), then moved to Final Cut Pro, and now I'm on Premiere. But Adobe just has never felt fully like 'home' for me.

My sentiments exactly, Mick. I WILL have another look at FCP. I am open to everything as I don't have to rely on a team, just a couple of peeps. Adobe is awesome, but somehow doesn't feel the way FCP 7 felt. Now, I have spent time in Avid and do not like it for the most part. I know it's the industry standard, but that seems to be slowly changing.

BTW. Didn't mean to ignite a Sh*#t storm with everyone!

dustylense
03-09-2013, 09:18 PM
I actually like the interface for FCPX and it is much faster than FCP7, my only sticking complaint at the time was getting material out to other people in the process and I know that I wasn't the only one with that problem. I'm going to look into it again to see what's changed.

Everything you thought was missing has been there longer than just 2 months ago.

Kholi
03-09-2013, 09:24 PM
BTW. Didn't mean to ignite a Sh*#t storm with everyone!


Not your fault. I forgot how sensitive people can be about their choices, and should have chosen a better way to state what I meant. We've had a number of members stop visiting (including a mod) because of the behavior here and I don't blame them.

IT's a good thread and thanks to Herb I'm seeing a few things that I didn't before in Larry's videos.

MelbFilm
03-09-2013, 09:25 PM
There certainly has been a big shift to Premiere of Late. I used to feel like I was the only one, I got tired of trying to justify it, Apple seems to foster very passionate users, I myself don't know why.

Why Final Cut never worked for me? The way I work just seemed constantly crash it, I used a number of different setups, none seemed stable. I am also a very technical user and prefer to build my own PC's so I can get the performance I desire, RED 5k certainly taxes the system but PPro has a great workflow. Premieres not perfect but its the best out there for the way I work.

funwithstuff
03-09-2013, 10:38 PM
I'm a big fan of FCP X. It was missing a few features in 10.0.0, but they've mostly returned. The best multicam ever, the easiest workflow, nice color correction tools, support up to 5K timelines. For me, though, it's the ability to make your own Effects, Transitions and Titles in the companion program Motion that's the killer. Missing an Unsharp Mask filter? Make one. How about an all-in-one filter to correct BMCC footage? Done. Download my free installer here (https://dl.dropbox.com/u/125405/BMCC-Additional-Effects-v2.zip). Adjustment layers are fantastic for grading, and using them with Auditions is about the best way you can impress a client.

There was a heap of hysteria about FCP X at release, some justified, most not. Here's an article I wrote (http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/fcp-x-busting-the-myths) dispelling much of it. I can't speak to specific problems with some of the add-on tools, but I've certainly brought across some of my old FCP 7 edits without serious problems. And here's a way to share projects with other editors (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hu-ga7fxKh8). My #1 BMCC request would be full access to Raw and 2.5K without Resolve, but ProRes support is (of course) excellent.

It's the interface that throws a lot of people at first. Don't treat it like FCP 7; you'll just drive yourself nuts. And one of the easy things in FCP 7, a music video (just lock the audio tracks!) is actually a bit harder in FCP X, due to the way sync is now local. You can make FCP X work like 7 if you like, but the better answer is to use secondary storylines.

Anyway, if you're stuck, read my six part guide to FCP X (written before the recent 10.0.6 interface changes):

http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-1-import-and-organize
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-2-rough-cut-techniques
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-3-fine-cut-techniques
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-4-primary-and-secondary-grading
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-5-transitions-titles-effects
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-6-export-and-archive (though exporting has changed quite a bit for the better)

If anyone has any questions about FCP X, or if it can or can't do anything in particular, ask away.

Robert Rogoz
03-09-2013, 10:56 PM
There is absolutely ZERO reason to continue this topic. Adobe and FCPX can be downloaded for free for a 30 day trial. Just download the software and see what you like more. I just checked and Avid also has free trial for Media Composer.

Paul Stephen Edwards
03-09-2013, 11:36 PM
It's the interface that throws a lot of people at first. Don't treat it like FCP 7; you'll just drive yourself nuts. And one of the easy things in FCP 7, a music video (just lock the audio tracks!) is actually a bit harder in FCP X, due to the way sync is now local. You can make FCP X work like 7 if you like, but the better answer is to use secondary storylines.

Anyway, if you're stuck, read my six part guide to FCP X (written before the recent 10.0.6 interface changes):

http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-1-import-and-organize
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-2-rough-cut-techniques
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-3-fine-cut-techniques
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-4-primary-and-secondary-grading
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-5-transitions-titles-effects
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-6-export-and-archive (though exporting has changed quite a bit for the better)

If anyone has any questions about FCP X, or if it can or can't do anything in particular, ask away.

Thanks, Iain. I've bookmarked it. It'll be very helpful as I make the transition from FCP6 to X.

Kholi
03-09-2013, 11:50 PM
I'm a big fan of FCP X. It was missing a few features in 10.0.0, but they've mostly returned. The best multicam ever, the easiest workflow, nice color correction tools, support up to 5K timelines. For me, though, it's the ability to make your own Effects, Transitions and Titles in the companion program Motion that's the killer. Missing an Unsharp Mask filter? Make one. How about an all-in-one filter to correct BMCC footage? Done. Download my free installer here (https://dl.dropbox.com/u/125405/BMCC-Additional-Effects-v2.zip). Adjustment layers are fantastic for grading, and using them with Auditions is about the best way you can impress a client.

There was a heap of hysteria about FCP X at release, some justified, most not. Here's an article I wrote (http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/fcp-x-busting-the-myths) dispelling much of it. I can't speak to specific problems with some of the add-on tools, but I've certainly brought across some of my old FCP 7 edits without serious problems. And here's a way to share projects with other editors (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hu-ga7fxKh8). My #1 BMCC request would be full access to Raw and 2.5K without Resolve, but ProRes support is (of course) excellent.

It's the interface that throws a lot of people at first. Don't treat it like FCP 7; you'll just drive yourself nuts. And one of the easy things in FCP 7, a music video (just lock the audio tracks!) is actually a bit harder in FCP X, due to the way sync is now local. You can make FCP X work like 7 if you like, but the better answer is to use secondary storylines.

Anyway, if you're stuck, read my six part guide to FCP X (written before the recent 10.0.6 interface changes):

http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-1-import-and-organize
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-2-rough-cut-techniques
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-3-fine-cut-techniques
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-4-primary-and-secondary-grading
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-5-transitions-titles-effects
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/a-guide-to-fcp-x-part-6-export-and-archive (though exporting has changed quite a bit for the better)

If anyone has any questions about FCP X, or if it can or can't do anything in particular, ask away.

Thanks for the links, Iain. Looks like that took a while to compile, will go through them after I crash course Larry's material.

RockettMan
03-10-2013, 01:19 AM
Iian,

Thanks for all of that! I just downloaded the trial.
How does your filter work? I downloaded that as well. Don't see it anywhere as a pre set.

Cheers!

funwithstuff
03-10-2013, 04:37 AM
Iian,

Thanks for all of that! I just downloaded the trial.
How does your filter work? I downloaded that as well. Don't see it anywhere as a pre set.

Cheers!

If you install the plug-in (https://dl.dropbox.com/u/125405/BMCC-Additional-Effects-v2.zip), you should see a new category, "Motionally.com", in the Effects and Titles. There should be a few useful things in both those places: Blend Modes, BrightnessGammaContrast and Unsharp Mask in Effects, and an Adjustment Layer in Titles.

Here's an article which shows how to use Adjustment Layers with Auditions (http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/fcp-x-tutorial-using-adjustment-layers-to-audition-effects).

Anything you put on an Adjustment layer applies to all clips below that layer — awesome for grading a scene in one hit. Brightness/Gamma/Contrast and Unsharp Mask should be self explanatory. With Blend Modes, increase the Overlay slider to add contrast in a more "Curves-like" way. Screen lightens and Multiply darkens, also in a curve-like way.

(My old site, Motionally.com, is way out of date and is due for a relaunch, so not much to see right now.)

dustylense
03-10-2013, 05:59 AM
And here is how to save effects into a "favorites" folder. I name mine "A-favs" so it pops up first in the effects column. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3Rkql2_aaE4
Also, this is one of my faves for primary grade for BMC Film-log. Works a real treat and has a contrast with pivot tools. http://www.cineflare.com/white-balancer/

Brian@202020
03-10-2013, 07:30 AM
FCPX is simply the most efficent piece of software I've ever used period. I import and export XML's, OMF's, and EDL's daily via third party plugins without a hitch. People should really take another look at it.

funwithstuff
03-10-2013, 08:16 AM
And here is how to save effects into a "favorites" folder. I name mine "A-favs" so it pops up first in the effects column. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3Rkql2_aaE4
Also, this is one of my faves for primary grade for BMC Film-log. Works a real treat and has a contrast with pivot tools. http://www.cineflare.com/white-balancer/

That second link rubs me up the wrong way; it looks like about 10 minutes work in Motion. If you create an Effect and add the Color Balance filter, you get the key feature of that plugin. Brightness/Gamma/Contrast with Pivot etc. is similarly easy. Sure, if you put together a pack of a lot of these utility plugins or make some useful innovations yourself, that's different, but $49, for one? Grr. Motion itself costs $50!

Ripple Tools is a better buy, for example; $29 for much more. http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/ripple_tools_stone.html

Hearnia
03-10-2013, 08:55 AM
I prefer Premiere because of the tighter after effects integration, better warp stabilizer (check the side by side tests) and the fact that it natively edits DSLR files rather than encoding them to prores in the background.

Andrew_HD
03-10-2013, 09:22 AM
Then you don't know what you're doing, OR you THINK you know what you're doing!
Pretty easy:

Workflow
Portland, OR
Shooting on the RED EPIC camera at 4K and 5K.
Dailies shipped to Hollywood arrive a day later on hard drive.
Each episode includes seven days of shooting, generating 1400 video files (200 per day).
Hollywood, CA
All RED .r3d files are converted to ProRes Proxy using RED ROCKET cards at faster than real time.
RED files are archived while ProRes files are synced with audio using Intelligent Assistance Sync-N-Link X, named based on scene and take number, and checked against shooting logs. All dailies are placed centrally on an Xsan network.
Organized dailies are further prepped by the editor’s assistant to customize the material according to the individual editor’s requests. Multicam Clips are created.
Dailies arrive every day for seven shoot days and are merged with the main Final Cut Pro X event each day.
Dailies are made available for the individual editors to begin cutting in the afternoon of the first day. Each of several editors works on an entire episode that consists of six acts.
Editors review the cut with the director and then the network sees changes and comments.
Picture is locked.
Finished XML is sent through Marquis X2Pro Audio Convert to Pro Tools for sound mixing.
XML is also sent to the DaVinci Resolve color grading suite for the final grade. The edit reconnects to the original RED .r3d files, which are graded and rendered out as ProRes 4444 files.
Color-graded and audio-sweetened files return to be combined in Final Cut Pro X and checked against the original offline project. Changes can still be made to content during color grade and sound mix.
The finished episode is exported as ProRes 4444 for digital delivery to TNT.


What if I want high-end finish (not ProRes)- does FCPX offer fully uncompressed pipe at 444 10bit (or more )? It means no ProRes or even v210 intermediate renders in background.

Willian Aleman
03-10-2013, 09:47 AM
IF you're a one man band doing corporate videos, likely doing everything on your own, then FCPX is probably the fastest and easiest way to do that.

I totally agree with this. I'm in New York. 100% of the recent postproduction job interviews I'm applying as an assistance editor are asking for AVID, FCP7 as NLE apps and After Effect as a plus. They are not interested in FCPX, which for them, as one interviewee told me when I asked about the app, she responded: "FCPX here, no. Editors and assistance editors joke here all the time about it: -"The "P" in FCPX stands for "Poor" and since it was no FCP 8 ether 9, the "X" makes no sense to us because it was not a major upgrade". We laughed. It seems that for marketing purposed Apple was concerned about calling the new app 1.0. About the job. No. I didn't get it, because they are transitioning from FCP7 to AVID, they need someone who knows the two NLE apps mentioned above, plus AE.

gsbe
03-10-2013, 10:54 AM
Very useful, thank you
And here is how to save effects into a "favorites" folder. I name mine "A-favs" so it pops up first in the effects column. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=3Rkql2_aaE4

SConnor
03-10-2013, 11:24 AM
I prefer Premiere because of the tighter after effects integration, better warp stabilizer (check the side by side tests) and the fact that it natively edits DSLR files rather than encoding them to prores in the background.

AE integration is probably the number 1 feature of Premiere Pro and warp stabiliser is absolutely amazing, but you are incorrect about FCPX having to transcode h264s from DSLRs, you can CHOOSE to transcode them or work with them natively.

SConnor
03-10-2013, 11:33 AM
What if I want high-end finish (not ProRes)- does FCPX offer fully uncompressed pipe at 444 10bit (or more )? It means no ProRes or even v210 intermediate renders in background.

422 only in uncompressed, 4444 is in Prores

Andrew_HD
03-10-2013, 11:52 AM
So the only way to deliver 444 is through ProRes- this is sometimes not good enough for high-end workflow.

dustylense
03-10-2013, 01:56 PM
That second link rubs me up the wrong way; it looks like about 10 minutes work in Motion. If you create an Effect and add the Color Balance filter, you get the key feature of that plugin. Brightness/Gamma/Contrast with Pivot etc. is similarly easy. Sure, if you put together a pack of a lot of these utility plugins or make some useful innovations yourself, that's different, but $49, for one? Grr. Motion itself costs $50!

Ripple Tools is a better buy, for example; $29 for much more. http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/ripple_tools_stone.html
What does is matter how long YOU think an effect took to make. The end of the story is, "does it work". I have yet to see a single person offer a contrast with pivot (YA KNOW the kind you find in Davinci under the LOG color tab???). Then on top of that, a white picker. The effect is for primary color, NOT grading.

I also have the RT color balance. It's alright and it works. Maybe he put 15 minutes into making the plug. But the CFcolor work far better for primary coloring BMC log footage.

Iain, I just loaded your Plug. It's 90% the same as CF color without the white picker. Nice on loading the pivot mode though. Thats the most important part in combo with the contrast slider. But let me ask you, why dont you combine the BMCC defilm and the B/G/C into a single filter? Oh that's right, I'll just open up in Motion and do it myself. The power of FCPX and Motion Ya' All! I'll even add a temperature slider. And a sharpening function, and..... The white picker.

Robert Rogoz
03-10-2013, 03:16 PM
What if I want high-end finish (not ProRes)- does FCPX offer fully uncompressed pipe at 444 10bit (or more )? It means no ProRes or even v210 intermediate renders in background.
If you drop the first clip as uncompressed into the timeline, it will set up the whole timeline to your first clip settings.

Andrew_HD
03-10-2013, 04:45 PM
But it does not have anything better than v210 as a render format. Can FCPX import anything which is 444 10bit+? Internal engine is 32bit float, but so what if the best rendering format is 10bit 422. Can I drag and export anything which is 444 10bit+ without going to ProRes or 422 precision at some point?
Apple treats ProRes as something "the best what you need". As far as in many cases it's way good enough in high-end finish is not good enough.
If I want to eg. create SR tape later than I need something better than SR, ProRes is already <SR quality.

funwithstuff
03-11-2013, 04:17 AM
But it does not have anything better than v210 as a render format. Can FCPX import anything which is 444 10bit+? Internal engine is 32bit float, but so what if the best rendering format is 10bit 422. Can I drag and export anything which is 444 10bit+ without going to ProRes or 422 precision at some point?
Apple treats ProRes as something "the best what you need". As far as in many cases it's way good enough in high-end finish is not good enough.
If I want to eg. create SR tape later than I need something better than SR, ProRes is already <SR quality.

You can choose Custom settings for Render Format (even if your first clip doesn't match what you want to output) and you can choose ProRes 4444 or Uncompressed 10-bit 4:2:2. I can only guess Apple made the decision that if you want Uncompressed 4:4:4, you're relinking to Raw footage in a separate app like Resolve.

funwithstuff
03-11-2013, 04:20 AM
Iain, I just loaded your Plug. It's 90% the same as CF color without the white picker. Nice on loading the pivot mode though. Thats the most important part in combo with the contrast slider. But let me ask you, why dont you combine the BMCC defilm and the B/G/C into a single filter?

Wrote an article about doing that already for macProVideo.com, and I shouldn't really jump the gun. When it goes live, I'll let you know. :)

KyleMcConaghy
03-11-2013, 09:25 AM
Sorry for not taking the time to open the links, but what is the improved plugin for omf support? I've gotten used to exporting audio for mixing using roles-- but an omf plugin would be even better!

PaulDelVecchio
03-11-2013, 02:34 PM
Sorry for not taking the time to open the links, but what is the improved plugin for omf support? I've gotten used to exporting audio for mixing using roles-- but an omf plugin would be even better!
An OMF plugin is necessary. Exporting by roles will flatten each together and you don't want that. You need access to the original media so you have handles. You need handles and you need the tracks laid out and organized properly so everything stays in sync. My big gripe is with stability on larger projects in FCPX. It still chugs along once you get past the 10-15 minute mark (at least in my experience on my system). I'm sticking with Avid and Premiere for now.

funwithstuff
03-11-2013, 04:45 PM
Sorry for not taking the time to open the links, but what is the improved plugin for omf support? I've gotten used to exporting audio for mixing using roles-- but an omf plugin would be even better!

I don't use OMF myself, but X2Pro Audio Convert is available. It's apparently possible (though not ideal) to go via another app like Premiere or Logic.

funwithstuff
03-11-2013, 11:03 PM
Wrote an article about doing that already for macProVideo.com, and I shouldn't really jump the gun. When it goes live, I'll let you know. :)

And here it is: http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/motion-and-fcp-x-correct-flat-picture-profiles-automatically

Stephen Mick
03-24-2013, 05:20 PM
Just a follow-up on this thread…

I downloaded the FCPX trial yesterday so I could play with it and test it out. I worked with some ProRes footage shot on the C100 with a Ninja-2 recorder. I followed along with a few tutorials to get the hang of the interface, and after some trial and error, I was editing faster and more efficiently with X than when I first started learning any of the other NLE apps (Avid MC, FCP, and Premiere).

The upshot…? There's a lot to love in the latest FCPX release, and I'm considering switching to it full time.

funwithstuff
03-25-2013, 12:04 AM
Just a follow-up on this thread…

I downloaded the FCPX trial yesterday so I could play with it and test it out. I worked with some ProRes footage shot on the C100 with a Ninja-2 recorder. I followed along with a few tutorials to get the hang of the interface, and after some trial and error, I was editing faster and more efficiently with X than when I first started learning any of the other NLE apps (Avid MC, FCP, and Premiere).

The upshot…? There's a lot to love in the latest FCPX release, and I'm considering switching to it full time.

Good to hear, Stephen. I find it's easier to teach and easier to learn than FCP 7 was. Tricky if you're expecting FCP 7.5 though.

dustylense
03-25-2013, 12:36 AM
Good to hear, Stephen. I find it's easier to teach and easier to learn than FCP 7 was. Tricky if you're expecting FCP 7.5 though.

Pretty much. People that wanted an FCP7.5 or v8 were in for a big surprise. FCPX is a whole new mindset to editing. The "editing" part though is what makes FCPX. So intuitive and quick. It becomes background to the imagination and creative process. Here's hoping for a new and more powerful update coming along. It's been a long time since the last update so that tells me Apple and FCP is up to something big.

Frank Glencairn
03-25-2013, 05:25 AM
To be fair, it's not SUCH a new mindset.

In the late 90es/early 2000s I worked on a NLE called Speedrazor, that had the same "mindset".
Actually FCPX looks and feels like a bit updated version of my ole Speedrazor with some cosmetic changes in the interface.

mhood
03-25-2013, 06:21 AM
I remember Speedrazor well. Between it and my PVR card, I was often cut to ribbons. ;-)

Peter J. DeCrescenzo
03-25-2013, 05:27 PM
I'll be interesting to see what Lightworks announces at NAB 2013, especially if they announce shipping a Mac version, and if it supports popular Mac laptop GPUs.

funwithstuff
03-27-2013, 12:40 AM
I'd love to see native Cinema DNG RAW support in FCP X. The BMCC and the Digital Bolex would both benefit. The native RED support helps a lot, even if you have Resolve. Check out this story of a RED/FCP X 4K workflow: http://www.fcp.co/render-fodder/videos/1069-marty-knapp-a-beautiful-short-film-shot-on-a-red-scarlet-and-post-produced-in-4k-on-final-cut-pro-x

zwarte_kat
03-29-2013, 03:08 PM
I kind of like FCP X now, a lot of the old way of doing things can still be done, just differently. For example, if you don't like that magnetic timeline, then there is that other arrow tool which is basically the old one. Media manager has been largely automated, which I found irritating, but once you figure out what it does behind the scenes (I haven't yet 100% myself), it is workable I think.Title editor is way better, and I like the basic color correction tools and the project window with the clip browser.

I can see people using both Premiere and FCP X, depending on the project. FCP X for very smooth general editing, and Premiere when more precise adjustments and integration with motion graphics tools and files is needed. I have never understood why people complain that Adobe's Dynamic Link sucks. It may not be perfect, but nothing else comes even close. You can even import After Effect sequences straight in Premiere.

In the end, I use FCP 7 for some clients work, because that is what they still use, and Premiere for my own work or when the client doesn't touch the project. I would like to use FCP X more, but I have the 2008 Mac Pro with upgraded NVidia card. Premiere is superfast on this machine, while FCP X wouldn't even export my movie! I notice in general that all CUDA supported apps fly (Premiere/Resolve), while OpenCL supported apps feel like they are indeed running on a 5 year old computer (including Premiere plugins like Magic bullet and neat video)

I also really like the adjustments layers in Premiere. I don't think FCPX has these, but I could be wrong.

It is kind of a tough choice, because it seems Blackmagic wants us to go with Apple and FCPX, while Premiere runs better on a machine optimised for Resolve.

ianim8
03-30-2013, 12:24 AM
it never fails when it comes to Apple products.
so much passion and angst ;)
anyhoo I hope the news at NAB this year will make us all forget 2011.
Im there, anyone else going?

Cya at the SuperMeet ;)

funwithstuff
03-30-2013, 04:54 PM
I kind of like FCP X now, a lot of the old way of doing things can still be done, just differently. For example, if you don't like that magnetic timeline, then there is that other arrow tool which is basically the old one. Media manager has been largely automated, which I found irritating, but once you figure out what it does behind the scenes (I haven't yet 100% myself), it is workable I think.Title editor is way better, and I like the basic color correction tools and the project window with the clip browser.

I can see people using both Premiere and FCP X, depending on the project. FCP X for very smooth general editing, and Premiere when more precise adjustments and integration with motion graphics tools and files is needed. I have never understood why people complain that Adobe's Dynamic Link sucks. It may not be perfect, but nothing else comes even close. You can even import After Effect sequences straight in Premiere.


Integration with Motion is one of FCP X's key features. Motion 5 lets you make Generators, Titles, Effects and Transitions which are instantly accessible in FCP X.



In the end, I use FCP 7 for some clients work, because that is what they still use, and Premiere for my own work or when the client doesn't touch the project. I would like to use FCP X more, but I have the 2008 Mac Pro with upgraded NVidia card. Premiere is superfast on this machine, while FCP X wouldn't even export my movie! I notice in general that all CUDA supported apps fly (Premiere/Resolve), while OpenCL supported apps feel like they are indeed running on a 5 year old computer (including Premiere plugins like Magic bullet and neat video)


You could upgrade your video card? I'm running a GTX 570 in my 2009 Mac Pro for Resolve support, and FCP X works well.



I also really like the adjustments layers in Premiere. I don't think FCPX has these, but I could be wrong.

It is kind of a tough choice, because it seems Blackmagic wants us to go with Apple and FCPX, while Premiere runs better on a machine optimised for Resolve.

FCP X does indeed have Adjustment Layers. Here's an article I wrote discussing how to combine them with Auditions to instantly switch through different looks for your entire edit:

http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/fcp-x-tutorial-using-adjustment-layers-to-audition-effects