Final Cut Pro X question

What it needs to work on is audio, and I think I see this coming from the job posting. I think we'll see roles being used as stems to feed into an integrated mixer with access to Logic effects.

I use roles for the audio tracks... I even use roles for color grading. Pretty nice to be able to bypass 1 of 7 event effects on 200 clips with the click of a mouse ;-)

But yeah... Audio could need improvement - I'd like a little mixer, myself with small faders... But then again I always export a QT movie, pull it into protools and do the editing there and then export the audio backout in a master or stems.. No NLE for that matter will ever be able to replace a DAW ;-)

parker612 wrote:

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Personally, I do not think FCP X will make a come back and be as prominent in the industry as FCP was. However, I do think that other NLEs can learn from a few of the new features in FCP X.

One thing that I just can not get used to is the fact that there are no tracks in FCP X. For me, being able to have several tracks to layer audio and video help keep everything organized.

However, I'm sure if I take a few weeks more weeks working in FCP X, I could get used to it. I still do not like the idea of it though. It's just not for me.

Parker.. Try using roles for tracks... give each audio clip you would want a separate track for a role(you can even use sub roles) then you have them like tracks....

At first I thought... What the heck am I EVR going to use those roles for... One weekend as none of my so-called friends had time to grab a beer, I sat down and drowned my sorrows with a bottle of Brunello, FCPx User Guide, Final Cut Pro & a Larry Jordan Spoon-Fed tutorial... After that I was very thrilled and I have been using roles extensively ever since... I might add, every day I am conjuring up new ways of using those roles ;-)

FCPx can be whatever YOU want it to... Get Creative ;-)

Let me say at the outset that I don't belong in this thread. But that hasn't stopped me before <g>.

All I'd like to say is that I'm a newbie to video editing, and FCP 7 and others scared the crap out of me. FCPX "had me at hello". In my opinion, Apple has managed to create an application that is accessible to true newbies like me, while (apparently) still meeting the needs of many professional editors. Think about that. How many other complex software applications have done that?

Obviously it's not perfect. But look at the improvements Apple has brought, with just 7 "minor" releases. I think they're beginning to get it right.

But what do I know? 😉

Dan

parker612 wrote:

Yes, for people who have not used many NLEs, FCP X is easy to pick up. It caters to the simple needs of smaller projects as well as some professional projects. However, It does not replace Avid when it comes to major broadcast and cinema projects.

I'd put it differently...

PC users coming to Mac (Back in the days as Mac was small) started treating OS X as they would windoze. Big Mistake. They were thinking TOO complicated and therefor tried navigating the intuitive OS X with the brute and clumsy force of windoze.

I'd put FCPx vs. the rest.. into this here analogy. FCPx IS Mac OS and the older NLEs are Windoze...

you say {

However, It does not replace Avid when it comes to major broadcast and cinema projects.

}

I say... It does NOT replace the RELICs USED to AVID Media Composer...

and too, I say {

When those relics return to dust (No disrespect - we all do) they will bring AVID Media Composer with them.

Unless AVID turns Media Composer into something intuitive.

}

one can fight progress as much as he sees fit but he can never stop it !

I hope AVID will and adobe too... The more the competition... The better the products ;-)

Exiting times indeed.

I'm am no Apple fanboy... I am a best-software-for-me fan boy ;-)

If out of the blue... PPRO had FCPx's event library 2morrrow... I'd use that.. Why not... It has superior playback performance due to OpenCL/CUDA Accell...