How would you bring FCP into the 21st century?

[Heath McKnight]

Yes it does (little delete key).

You have an interesting issue, that's for sure. I guess you may just have to use a bunch of different tools, like the Select All Tracks Forward or Backward tool.

Heath

[Jeff Krepner]

Originally Posted by Shaun Roemich

Interesting. The day FCP implements those changes, I'm gone as an upgrader. No questions asked. At least the fades. People keep asking for FCP to do cross fades WRONG and I won't stand for it. If you butt end two clips together and there isn't enough media before and after the in points to do exactly as I have asked, DON'T DO THE TRANSITION. In and Out points are sacrosanct - DON"T MESS WITH THEM. To do a 30 frame cross fade, you need 15 frames after the outpoint of the outgoing clip and 15 frames before the in point of the incoming clip.

Shaun, of course none of this actually matters to anyone but us, but as a prior Vegas editor I just wanted to make sure people are clear when they hear "auto transition". The way Vegas works is that it doesn't add anything, no additional material before or after the in/out points are added or removed. Clip A and clip B sit next to each other as a cut and a cut only. Now, if you take clip B and slide it 30 frames to the left (over top of clip A) a 30 frame transition happens. The in/out points are the same in/out you set in Vegas's version of the Viewer. If you slide it another 30 frames to the left now you have a 60 frame dissolve. Move it 10, you get a 10 frame dissolve. A little window pops up showing you the number of frames and opacity handles appear making it obvious what's going on. It also requires a blatant action to this and there is zero danger of it happening by mistake.

It's more natural in many ways and it's only an option if you purposely overlap two clips. Two clips next to each other DO NOT auto cross dissolve. It really makes working with graphics and other CGI elements a snap.

Anyway, I'm 99.9% sure we won't see this feature, but I just wasn't sure if you used it before or maybe hearing "auto" freaked you out. If you have used it and still hate it, then I understand that too ;-)

Take Care,
Jeff

[Randy Johnson]

In Edius you can turn that feature on and off. 1. where it acts like FCP or Premiere does now and 2. where it automaticley ripples back 15 frames off each clip when you drop in a transistion. A HUGE time saver for me. I know we will never see that in FCP.

[Justin McAleece]

There are a lot of glitches that they need to fix that have been present forever.

1. When I am capturing HDV and click outside of the L&G window it will often make that window unable to be closed and I will have to force quit the entire program. That is LAME.

2. Whenever i do have to force quit FCP forgets my window layout and I have to go back in and change it which happens fairly often. PLEASE make FCP remember my default window layout.

3. And speaking of window layouts it really should be able to remember the windows exactly as I place them not moving them over several pixels in either direction or completely moving and resizing the "effects" window that I have set up.

4. PLEASE enable Background capturing. Seriously, I can't capture DV in the BG in 2010?

5. When I set an out point at the end of the clip. DO NOT MAKE THE ACTUAL OUT POINT ONE FRAME MORE. i always have to tell my editors to arrow down or up and then back arrow once to set the out point where they actually want it. That is stupid.

6. Apple Fixed the way that slow-mo is done and the keyframing is great oh yeah except for the fact that the interpolation quality is completely unusable. Why do I have to export clips to compressor and do pixel motion to get them to look right when FCP should have that be a simple checkbox that I will use EVERY TIME.

7. Most importantly for me. FCP started out first and with the most support with regards to RED footage. Now they are DEAD LAST among the major NLE's. WTF, that is a great way to lose a lot of loyal power users who are having to look elsewhere for what FCP promised to be the best at when the RED came out.

[Duncan Craig]

The single most important thing is to get rid of the 'Studio' and have one app that does it all.

I don't want to go round the houses with XML files that don't carry all the information from one app to another, I don't want to have to build properly aliased graphic elements with motion blur and decent scaling in Motion. I don't want to have to keep roundtripping back to Livetype to adjust my type. If I want a logo to gentle keyframe down in size and position, I have to do it in Motion, AE or use a third party plugin.

I've been using FCP as my primary source of income since v4, I make 500+ broadcast commercials a year.
I love FCP and I can live with all the workarounds. But please one app would save so much arsing about with livetype, motion, colo(u)r, and soundtrack project files, then having to keep everything archived and up to date.

One app please Apple !!

[Josh Bass]

That would be super awesome, but if I know the way things generally work in the world, it won't happen. Certain pieces of software are really meant to do certain things, and there's no all-encompassing app.

[Floris van Eck]

Apple already took the first step with BluRay authoring in the FCP timeline. I do think that they are heading this direction. Not sure if it will happen with the next version, but I am sure that is where they are heading. It would be a huge timesaver and I don't see why it is possible. You just need a good way to navigate to the interface (Adobe's way to do this is pretty nice) so you your interface changes with the task you are performing. As they are all sharing codecs, I don't see why it would not be possible.

[Duncan Craig]

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

That would be super awesome, but if I know the way things generally work in the world, it won't happen. Certain pieces of software are really meant to do certain things, and there's no all-encompassing app.

Autodesk Smoke and Quantel EQ are two that spring to mind. Yes I know they are expensive, but they are still sensible examples of what Apple could do with such a big customer base and the applications already in FCS.

I was a Quantel editor when things really changed - Editbox came along, it was 15 years ago and cost £350,000 but that was so much cheaper than a tape suite and had all of the functionality of Henry. Clients loved the flexibility and it was just a single front end. That's what I'm talking about.

[Josh Bass]

Are you saying, though, that you would like to see ALL the features of compressor, DVD studio, Motion, soundtrack pro, and color integrated into one program?

[Duncan Craig]

Um, yes please. That's must be something you either don't want, or don't believe is possible?

I'll leave DVDSP out of the equation for the moment, it's a final stage application not really a creative tool. DVD's follow a very defined set of formatting rules and regulations, they are just a cute delivery method and all look the same.

Certainly all of the traditional editing elements should be in one app. Final Cut, Motion, Colour and STP.
Final Cut needs a proper overhaul to bring all the related apps into one interface.
The current xml workaround solution is totally daft.

Compressor is an engine which operates across all apps, so it should be both separate and linked.

There's no reason why it shouldn't work this way, they all use a timeline interface with very similar operational interfaces. The fact that Apple bought some of the Apps from third parties has meant they've just been a bit lazy and kept them separate. Perhaps it looks like better value for money.

Don't get me wrong, my setup has made me money, helped me to be flexible and cheap enough for a whole range of clients. I really love it. But it could be better, easier and higher quality.

Some things I could do in Editbox would be a nightmare in FCP, but Editbox was a terrible editor, for those that don't know it doesn't have an undo button! Made creativity quite tiresome when the client was paying £300 an hour.

[Josh Bass]

Well, of course! That'd be killer! I just didn't think it was a likelihood. Is anyone else doing that? Premiere and AfterFX are still separate. . Vegas and SoundForge (or maybe not. . .I'm way outta the loop on that one)

[Michael Wisniewski]

It's not impossible, somebody just hasn't thought of how to do it yet (or maybe it's in beta already?!?) My bet is, Apple has already had this discussion internally, and that's why we're seeing job postings for senior pro application interface designers on Apple's website.

My guess is, all the basic underlying functions & commands have been re-written and are ready to go, but the big question for Apple, how the heck to do we make this simple, powerful, and elegant to use? And that's almost all software interface. Would love to see that, those must really be some great brainstorming sessions.

[Michael Wisniewski]

And I also bet we see some interface features plucked out of Sony Vegas and pushed to the next level. I remember the first version of Garage Band was almost an exact clone of Sony Acid, so there are people internally at Apple who did appreciate the elegant interface of Vegas/Acid.

[Michael Wisniewski]

The one interface quirk I hope FCS loses is what I call the "tweaker's delight". It's when you're trying to adjust something in FCP or Motion and you are presented with a dialog of sliders, buttons and text boxes without any graphical interface at all. It's not true of every function, but it still very prevalent in a majority of the functions. Ironic since Apple gets the credit for the graphical interface.

[Duncan Craig]

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

Well, of course! That'd be killer! I just didn't think it was a likelihood. Is anyone else doing that? Premiere and AfterFX are still separate. . Vegas and SoundForge (or maybe not. . .I'm way outta the loop on that one)

I'm way out of the loop too these days, I used to be more interested in what other system were doing, because I found Quantel so backwards. Anyway Apple should THINK DIFFERENT and not be following the herd. We'll see!!