I like it at DVinfo.net

Evan Lloyd · June 25th, 2011, 03:57 PM

I've been reading all of the negative posts about FCPX and many of you have very valid points. If I was a full blown post house with tons of money invested in multiple systems, I would be less then happy...right now.

For me, I love the new FCPX. I learned to edit 8 years ago on iMovie and then transitioned to FCP. I find the new version to be a nice blend of the two. I've just finished my first project on the software and it was easy to use and what I didn't know how to do, was quickly revealed in the HELP pages.

I think people are really focusing on the lack of several features, but I'm stoked on the many new and exciting things I can do with the program. It'll take some time to get used to, but whatever, it's not like I'm starting from scratch.

I am a little bummed that my plugins are gone, but I can just use the old version to tweak certain clips and then import them into X. It's a work-around, but it's doable.

Anyway, I just wanted to share a little love for the new program. I'm happy.

Evan

William Hohauser · June 25th, 2011, 09:48 PM

Look, someone likes it!

Congratulations with FCPX, please pass along any tips you might feel that would help us with this program.

Heath McKnight · June 25th, 2011, 09:56 PM

I'm starting to read positive thoughts on parts of it, so that's good to hear. I never used iMovie in the 12+ years I've been on Adobe and FCP. Should I be nervous about the learning curve?

heath

William Hohauser · June 26th, 2011, 07:49 AM

As someone who only played with iMovie in the past (didn't like it), I can say that X maintains several of the GUI aspects of iMovie when first launched but these can be altered to a more FCP7 like appearance but not by much. There are numerous improvements over iMovie and FCP7 in several places but the inexplicable loss of some useful GUI features of FCP7 should be addressed by Apple as soon as possible.

The learning curve is there but the help menu is very good and generally well-written for the questions I had so far. Believe me, there will be more questions as I work the program. Over the past years I have met a few people who have edited very sophisticated work in iMovie and never touched FCP in any version. It's a different editing method that most people will come to learn over time.

As of now, as someone who generally delivers content by disc, hard drive or FTP, I would have little problem working short projects with X as it stands. A feature documentary? Not yet as I don't know of a way to export an OMF to send to the audio house yet.

Thomas Smet · June 27th, 2011, 06:19 AM

A lot of the stuff in FCPX is done very well. It is the stuff not there that is the problem. The type of stuff you realize isn't there when you really need it. Stuff most of us are used to having. I did download it and it is pretty impressive at what it can do but it is nowhere a revolutionary product. Most of what it can do is being done in other edit programs.

As somebody who has used many other programs out there even on the PC side I would say it is more a cross between iMovie and Sony Vegas.

Michael Dalton · June 27th, 2011, 09:40 AM

I think anytime people compare it to imovie or Vegas it convinces me that I'm going to ditch it and go back to Avid. There is an amature product called imovie, we don't need two. FCP studio was a pro product capable of handling a professional broadcast workflow. I'm getting the impression that FCPX is incapable of doing that now. Trackless editing? How the heck are we supposed to send out our work for post audio. I don't need work arounds. Can't load older projects from FCP? WTF??? I can begin to think how much this will hurt production companies who need to go back to older projects. I have doc series in it's third season, I have massive project file set up with years of sorting b-roll that is being currently used. I can not believe FCP creators would not have considered that.

Thomas Smet · June 27th, 2011, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Dalton

I think anytime people compare it to imovie or Vegas it convinces me that I'm going to ditch it and go back to Avid. There is an amature product called imovie, we don't need two. FCP studio was a pro product capable of handling a professional broadcast workflow. I'm getting the impression that FCPX is incapable of doing that now. Trackless editing? How the heck are we supposed to send out our work for post audio. I don't need work arounds. Can't load older projects from FCP? WTF??? I can begin to think how much this will hurt production companies who need to go back to older projects. I have doc series in it's third season, I have massive project file set up with years of sorting b-roll that is being currently used. I can not believe FCP creators would not have considered that.

I can tell you it is a lot more then iMovie and Vegas itself is a pretty darn decent NLE that many pros use.

FCPX is a pretty decent program it is just missing a few key features right now. I'm still not 100% how I feel about it but I can say it is not an amateur tool or garbage. I just don't think it is ready for primetime yet although it really depends on what you do. Outside of a lack of multi-cam editing I can see a lot of smaller production houses, wedding videographers and indy producers using FCPX with great results. Remember only a tiny fraction of editors use OMF or even XML. I work for a production company that uses Red and now a couple SONY F3's and we never even use that stuff. I do still want to see that stuff added because every now and then we do need it. My point is however that perhaps 98% of all editors never need that stuff and FCPX seems to be rather solid.

I was very critical of FCPX when it first came out but eventually I cooled down bought it and started to check it out myself. There is a lot it can do and it does it fairly well. There are a few holes of course such as multi-cam but we know it is coming at some point. Personally I found the multi-cam editing in FCP horrendous anyway compared to other NLE's so I'm glad they are trying to come up with a better way to do it.

I will say the lack of project settings kind of freaks me out. There is very little experimentation allowed in FCPX. You pretty much have to pick a format and stick with it.

Jason Lowe · June 27th, 2011, 11:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas Smet

I will say the lack of project settings kind of freaks me out. There is very little experimentation allowed in FCPX. You pretty much have to pick a format and stick with it.

FCP X would be happiest in a world where it lives on a single hard drive, imports video directly from a camera, manage its files with its's own system instead of a library of clips, and outputs for electronic distribution only.

I always equate the word "pro" with "options". Once we get used to how FCP X thinks, it probably won't be a huge issue, but this feels like change for change's sake.

Thomas Smet · June 27th, 2011, 01:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Lowe

FCP X would be happiest in a world where it lives on a single hard drive, imports video directly from a camera, manage its files with its's own system instead of a library of clips, and outputs for electronic distribution only.

I always equate the word "pro" with "options". Once we get used to how FCP X thinks, it probably won't be a huge issue, but this feels like change for change's sake.

I have managed to use FCPX with multiple drives. It is just a bit different now. Each project however be on it's own drive. I do wish there were more options so media could be spanned across multiple drives but it is possible to do so. In fact I have two drives right now with imported media and a single project that is using media from both drives. It just takes a bit to get used to it.

It isn't just Apple switching to a tapeless world. I haven't shot on tape for years and even at work where we are using Red we finally upgraded our lower end HD cameras to Sony F3's. So we are now 100% tapeless. Well we do still use our Sony F900 but I foresee it being used less and less and if we do use it we may start using an external recorder. Importing camera media is the way of the future. For those of us still using tape I believe Aja has announced support at some point.

News - AJA Video Systems

Chris Hurd · June 27th, 2011, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Lowe

FCP X would be happiest in a world where it lives on a single hard drive,

Good match for an iMac then?

Jason Lowe · June 27th, 2011, 01:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Good match for an iMac then?

It's definitely laptop friendly too. I wonder if it automatically uses the HDD for media files when installed on a new iMac that's factory equipped with both an SSD and a traditional HDD?

Thomas Smet · June 27th, 2011, 01:57 PM

It is very easy to select which hard drive to use with FCPX. Right now I am using an external FW800 drive for my projects and media. Any external raid or combination of external raids and drives can be used in the same way. You could even set a particular drive to be a library drive that you can pull media into other projects. Now I'm not sure how to move media from one drive to the other yet but you can definitely use multiple drives with FCPX.

In fact this was even possible with iMovie.

Instead of having to setup FCPX with scratch disks you just choose which drive to use when you import.

Brett Sherman · June 29th, 2011, 02:48 PM

My projects tend to span as many as 6 drives, with media pulled from multiple previous projects. Right now I almost bypass FCP bins and just pull straight from the hard drive. I also frequently have to move old media to new drives and reconnect them. Quite simply, will Final Cut Pro X be able to do this?

Ryan Douthit · June 29th, 2011, 04:27 PM

Editing my first project on X right now, and I'm loving the keyword tagging system. I used to sort material by folders in much the same way, so it's really - for me - a case of the software finally working more like I work. I can really see this being useful for sports events I'm filming that require dailies. I can just park a PA to tag everything as it comes in. The ability to tag a portion of a clip is huge for what I do.

I've never used iMovie, so I can't compare the two. Before FCP I edited on Vegas and before that it was Premiere (early 90s). When I went to school we had tape-based edit bays, though there was an Amiga on hand, too, so the transition was just starting to happen.

I still need to figure out how to optimize injest, as it's too easy to get too much working in the background, bogging the system down. But it even seems to work fine editing from USB 2.0 drives, if you can believe it. (just don't try do do anything when it's building proxies)

Ryan Douthit · June 29th, 2011, 04:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

My projects tend to span as many as 6 drives, with media pulled from multiple previous projects. Right now I almost bypass FCP bins and just pull straight from the hard drive. I also frequently have to move old media to new drives and reconnect them. Quite simply, will Final Cut Pro X be able to do this?

You can have X leave content in its original location. It doesn't have to be moved at all. You will need a "home" Event location to save render files, but that's no different than needing to save a scratch locationin FCP 7. And, in fact, is a hell of a lot more flexible. (In my case I use a new drive for each project, and I no longer have to set new scratch locations for each project)

June 25th, 2011, 03:57 PM	#1
Evan Lloyd Regular Crew Join Date: May 2008 Location: Fresno Posts: 111	I like it I've been reading all of the negative posts about FCPX and many of you have very valid points. If I was a full blown post house with tons of money invested in multiple systems, I would be less then happy...right now. For me, I love the new FCPX. I learned to edit 8 years ago on iMovie and then transitioned to FCP. I find the new version to be a nice blend of the two. I've just finished my first project on the software and it was easy to use and what I didn't know how to do, was quickly revealed in the HELP pages. I think people are really focusing on the lack of several features, but I'm stoked on the many new and exciting things I can do with the program. It'll take some time to get used to, but whatever, it's not like I'm starting from scratch. I am a little bummed that my plugins are gone, but I can just use the old version to tweak certain clips and then import them into X. It's a work-around, but it's doable. Anyway, I just wanted to share a little love for the new program. I'm happy. Evan

June 25th, 2011, 09:48 PM	#2
William Hohauser Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New York City Posts: 2,650	Re: I like it Look, someone likes it! Congratulations with FCPX, please pass along any tips you might feel that would help us with this program. __________________ William Hohauser - New York City Producer/Edit/Camera/Animation

June 25th, 2011, 09:56 PM	#3
Heath McKnight MPS Digital Studios Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Palm Beach County, Florida Posts: 8,531	Re: I like it I'm starting to read positive thoughts on parts of it, so that's good to hear. I never used iMovie in the 12+ years I've been on Adobe and FCP. Should I be nervous about the learning curve? heath __________________ My Final Cut Pro X blog

June 26th, 2011, 07:49 AM	#4
William Hohauser Inner Circle Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: New York City Posts: 2,650	Re: I like it As someone who only played with iMovie in the past (didn't like it), I can say that X maintains several of the GUI aspects of iMovie when first launched but these can be altered to a more FCP7 like appearance but not by much. There are numerous improvements over iMovie and FCP7 in several places but the inexplicable loss of some useful GUI features of FCP7 should be addressed by Apple as soon as possible. The learning curve is there but the help menu is very good and generally well-written for the questions I had so far. Believe me, there will be more questions as I work the program. Over the past years I have met a few people who have edited very sophisticated work in iMovie and never touched FCP in any version. It's a different editing method that most people will come to learn over time. As of now, as someone who generally delivers content by disc, hard drive or FTP, I would have little problem working short projects with X as it stands. A feature documentary? Not yet as I don't know of a way to export an OMF to send to the audio house yet. __________________ William Hohauser - New York City Producer/Edit/Camera/Animation

June 27th, 2011, 06:19 AM	#5
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	Re: I like it A lot of the stuff in FCPX is done very well. It is the stuff not there that is the problem. The type of stuff you realize isn't there when you really need it. Stuff most of us are used to having. I did download it and it is pretty impressive at what it can do but it is nowhere a revolutionary product. Most of what it can do is being done in other edit programs. As somebody who has used many other programs out there even on the PC side I would say it is more a cross between iMovie and Sony Vegas.

June 27th, 2011, 09:40 AM	#6
Michael Dalton Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Torotnto, Canada Posts: 139	Re: I like it I think anytime people compare it to imovie or Vegas it convinces me that I'm going to ditch it and go back to Avid. There is an amature product called imovie, we don't need two. FCP studio was a pro product capable of handling a professional broadcast workflow. I'm getting the impression that FCPX is incapable of doing that now. Trackless editing? How the heck are we supposed to send out our work for post audio. I don't need work arounds. Can't load older projects from FCP? WTF??? I can begin to think how much this will hurt production companies who need to go back to older projects. I have doc series in it's third season, I have massive project file set up with years of sorting b-roll that is being currently used. I can not believe FCP creators would not have considered that. __________________ www.digitalcrossing.ca www.4kafrica.com documentary filmmaker/screen writer

June 27th, 2011, 01:57 PM	#12
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	Re: I like it It is very easy to select which hard drive to use with FCPX. Right now I am using an external FW800 drive for my projects and media. Any external raid or combination of external raids and drives can be used in the same way. You could even set a particular drive to be a library drive that you can pull media into other projects. Now I'm not sure how to move media from one drive to the other yet but you can definitely use multiple drives with FCPX. In fact this was even possible with iMovie. Instead of having to setup FCPX with scratch disks you just choose which drive to use when you import.

June 29th, 2011, 02:48 PM	#13
Brett Sherman Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Mount Rainier, MD Posts: 428	Re: I like it My projects tend to span as many as 6 drives, with media pulled from multiple previous projects. Right now I almost bypass FCP bins and just pull straight from the hard drive. I also frequently have to move old media to new drives and reconnect them. Quite simply, will Final Cut Pro X be able to do this?

June 29th, 2011, 04:27 PM	#14
Ryan Douthit Major Player Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Kirkland, WA Posts: 474	Re: I like it Editing my first project on X right now, and I'm loving the keyword tagging system. I used to sort material by folders in much the same way, so it's really - for me - a case of the software finally working more like I work. I can really see this being useful for sports events I'm filming that require dailies. I can just park a PA to tag everything as it comes in. The ability to tag a portion of a clip is huge for what I do. I've never used iMovie, so I can't compare the two. Before FCP I edited on Vegas and before that it was Premiere (early 90s). When I went to school we had tape-based edit bays, though there was an Amiga on hand, too, so the transition was just starting to happen. I still need to figure out how to optimize injest, as it's too easy to get too much working in the background, bogging the system down. But it even seems to work fine editing from USB 2.0 drives, if you can believe it. (just don't try do do anything when it's building proxies)