Re: Final Cut Pro X
- The other thing to bear in mind is that FCP7 hasn't died despite being killed off. It still works, and will continue to for the immediate future. There'll be a point where things like new codecs and tapeless utilities will require updates to your system which will break FCP7 - but in the meantime, it continues to rule.
I've been testing Premiere for a broadcast client this week, using it in place of all the things they do on FCP, so that they know if they can switch when FCP7 stops working.
In lots of areas it doesn't quite match up to FCP7 for that environment at the moment, particularly with things like broadcast monitoring, multicam and grading - even some little things like the way it handles audio tracks and keyboard shortcuts - but for most users, it's fantastic. Particularly for videobloggers.
It integrates really well with After Effects - and it comes free if you've already bought the Creative Suite for PS, AE, etc. Adobe are putting a lot of R&D into it at the moment, and I think that Premiere CS6 will bring more significant improvements next year.
FCPX seems like it's built for people who do what we do here. You can chuck in clips from all kinds of cameras without transcoding them first, cut them up and send them straight to web very quickly. And, like with Premiere, the metadata tools will be increasingly useful in the next few years.
But I've been using traditional timelines for so long that I still use iMovie 6 instead of the new iMovie interface when I want to quickly cut some videoblog clips.
So it might take a while before I prefer FCPX to Premiere, FCP7 or even iMovie 6. I envy those who are coming to FCPX fresh, who don't have to rethink the way they edit.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Brook Hinton <bhinton@...> wrote:
> I'm in the other camp. Gone back to Avid and Premiere after a decade of
> being primarily FCP-based.
> The FCPX interface is pretty nifty and fast for some types of short work -
> I would not want to do long form work on it - but it just doesn't do much
> of what I need, and going to Avid & Premiere is less of a shift from FCP7
> than going from FCP7 to FCPX. I'm also influenced by being a teacher in a
> film program, where we have to teach industry standards - FCPX's may someday
> become that, but the whole idea of it is based on throwing OUT many of those
> standards. (We've switched, for now, to Premiere at the school, which was
> firmly an FCP and its accompanying programs - based program for post).
> Since I was on one of the internal editorial teams for the first FCP release
> and have used it and even evangelized for it ever since, it's all been a bit
> Premiere sure has come a long way since I last used it. Other than some
> missing / unassignable keyboard shortcuts (I try to edit mouse-free for the
> sake of my hands as well as speed) and a lackluster equivalent to the very
> nice database-style FCP7 Browser, it's basically what FCP8 might have been,
> plus a few of the nice features of FCPX as a bonus (e.g. Metadata support).
> Dynamic linking makes After Effects basically a giant plugin for Premiere
> as well. Native file support seems a little better than FCPX too.
> I think it's more expensive than FCPX once you leave academic land though.
> Avid certainly is. (299 + four years of free upgrades vs. over $2000 and no
> free upgrades). Avid is still the quick cutting tool of choice for long-form
> work - and will now probably monopolize that field since FCP was its only
> real competition...
> ...except for....
> Which IS used to cut many features and has gone open source. Windows only at
> the moment but the Mac and Linux betas are coming soon.
> But make no mistake, for fast editing of short work that is primarily linear
> and only needs a few tracks of video and audio (well, it doesn't use tracks,
> but that's another "storyline" <rimshot>), and assuming you don't finish
> audio in ProTools/Logic and aren't doing a broadcast or exhibition-quality
> color correction and mastering session, FCPX is pretty darned neat and will
> probably become the tool of choice. But it has nothing to do with anything
> else that has been called "Final Cut".
> On Thu, Oct 6, 2011 at 7:15 PM, theurbanreporter <amani_c@...> wrote:
> > **
> > We have few FCP X tutorials on http://www.webvideochefs.com
> > Let me know if you need any help or have questions!
> > Amani Channel
> > http://www.youtube.com/webvideochefs
> > --- In email@example.com, Caleb Clark <calebjc@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I got a copy and am trying it. I have to say, it's really cool, very
> > fast,
> > > no rendering really. But also, it's a HUGE UI change and I'm sure
> > > professional Final Cut users are effected in huge ways.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Caleb Clark
> > > Educational technology program director
> > > Marlboro College Graduate School, Brattleboro, Vermont, USA.
> > > http://gradschool.marlboro.edu/academics/edtech
> > > calebclark.org <http://plocktau.com>
> > > "The problem with communication is the assumption it has been
> > accomplished."
> > > * - G. B. Shaw.*
> > >
> > >
> > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> > >
> Brook Hinton
> Moving Image and Sound Maker
> Associate Professor / Assistant Chair
> Film Program at CCA
> California College of the Arts
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]