Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Won't the ProRes conversion on Import take care of that? Or does it not even read them enough to do that...?

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Im starting to love this program, been using FCP6 for years and never upgraded to 7 dur to rumours of a revolutionary new version. First impression not being able to import old projects to it, hmm, yes there are some downfalls, no multicam, no idea of duplicate frames being used etc etc. But the benefits far outweigh the faults. Big learning curve, yes but the more I use it, the less I want to revert back to old projects (not completed) to finish them off.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

I haven't gotten X to even 'see' the mxf either from the card or from the camera.

Also, my FCP 7 which once upon a time had no problems to log and transfer the mxf footage, now doesn't. It could be that I didn't manually archive FCP 7 on a separate partition - an advice I read somewhere, but was too late to follow.

I am hoping for some divine intervention for someone (Canon or Apple or an angel) to write the plugin for X to recognise mxf.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

That sucks. Hope they fix it soon!

In the meantime would converting first in something like MPEG Streamclip be a viable workaround? I think that program can convert just about anything into just about anything else. I would think maybe you could turn all you mxf in prores and then ingest into X.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

The following is just a story. Doesn't prove anything inherently "good" about FCPX but shows it ain't a hack.

I had downloaded a copy of FCPX to a Mac I normally use for business administration work rather than operational work (editing and such) only two hours before getting a call. It was a client who needed me to rework a .wmv movie he was using for years. He wanted to add some new clips and photos and change the copyrighted music to something that would pass copyright sensitive prospects to which he was pitching the following day. I was hours away from my edit machine and initially told my client so and couldn't do the job in the next hour or two. He was desperate and I realized I did have a means to edit if not the ultimate in confidence.

IHaving never use the program and only seeing demos from the NAB supermeet and a few minutes of a Larry Jordon FCPX demo, I launched FCPX. First thing, of course, I discovered what I suspected of course that I would need to transcode the .wmv into something I could work. Which I did. After a few minutes of figuring stuff out, I was realizing I was making progress. Muscle memory had me pointing the cursor to empty spaces but once I figured out basic trims and transition applications, I was happily realizing that some new ways to do common tasks were intuitively better than previous FCP versions. In a matter of less than an hour I had made the cuts, transitions, did some color work, inserted some royalty-free music and posted a copy to YouTube for client review who was delighted at the results. Unfortunately, FCPX doesn't output in .wmv so I used another resource to do that.

I'm sure most of us could have done all that but I will say FCPX is far more intuitive and isn't cloaked in what I still think are curiously difficult ways of doing things in previous versions. I still have an old copy of FCP in my back pocket but will start all new jobs in FCPX. I hate not having some capabilities but every time I've faced one, I've found a suitable workaround. No, I haven't had to import .xml but so far so lucky.

Dave Burckhard
PicturePoint On-line

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

I'll tell you once you get used to it it's brilliant.
Why? Here's an example.

You have 3 clips of overlay sitting on top of an interview. This form of editing is the style you've used across your whole timeline. With your interviews in the main storyline and your overlay (b-roll) on top.
Lets say you want to perform a single roller trim on the second of your three clips.
If you do this you know that ALL the clips on that video layer will be moved along. Creating a second storyline make those three shots independent and you can do what ever you like to them without worrying about destroying sync. Even better if you decide to move the interview further down the timeline just drag it down and the second storyline will go with it.

FCP X has a little way to go before it's ready for professional use, but the way it EDITs right now is far superior to anything I've used in the past. It's going to be huge.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Fairly simple in X. Range tool, select door slam, lower audio to zero. If you want ambience after selecting door slam, find ambience in your source clip, mark in, ctrl 3, D.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

For cuts only editing and split edits, X is a breeze. Much better than FCP7. I am having problems with transitions not landing at the cut points correctly or the transition changes the cut points. Perhaps I am doing something wrong. Perhaps it's another version 1 issue.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

have you changed your settings in the editing preferences for transitions from full overlap to available media?

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Just did but I haven't has a chance to work with it. Thanks for the suggestion.

Is there a way to apply transitions to overlay graphics which seem to resist preset transitions unless in the main video track?

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Turn them into a compound clip.

Command -W I think. Then you can add transitions.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Thanks, will experiment tomorrow.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

I curious how FCPX's fast/slowmo compares to Twixtor. I've been in contact with Re:Vision and they tell me that Apple haven't yet given them what they "need to make Twixtor work in FCPX" and want us to voice if we would like Twixtor to work in FCPX here: Apple - Final Cut Pro - Feedback

Perhaps FCPX's built-in fast/slowmo is already as good, if not even better than Twixtor, and that's why Apple is now sitting on the fence..?

-- peer

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Don't make a compound clip, make a secondary storyline cmd G.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

FCPX optical flow is as good as it gets for slomo IMHO.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

That's interesting. I tried using the optical flow slowmo for a clip, and found it to be the worst of the two options. It had all sorts of crazy motion artifacts like you typically see from bad twiddle clips. But when i slowed down to the same speeds with the other two options, they both looked better, which was confusing to me. Are there certain situations where optical flow doesn't work as well as the others?

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

The best is Kronos, a plug-in from The Foundry which utilizes the GPU to accelerate it.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

That works fine. However it seems that the program defaults to "full overlap" at every boot. A nuisance but workable.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

I would suggest trashing your preferences and see what that gets you. I'm about to try Preferences Manager, a free app from Digital Rebellion to use for saving mine.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Have you done a comparison between Optical Flow and Twixtor?

-- peer

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

For me this one is easy...

All NLEs can Cut,Slide,Slip,Roll etc along with standard Timeline operations.

IMO - the greatest/superior NLE is the one that enables you to find the clip that you need, when it pops into your head.

FCP X's Event Browser along with skimming and Keywording does just that. I have never been able to work faster than I do today on FCP X. And more importantly, with FCP X I NEVER loose that momentum when I cut a story.

That was my biggest gripe in Premiere Pro.. And FCP7. It was NOT a visual workflow. Searching a clip involved looking at clip-icons and reading text. In FCP X - I dont look at clip-icons and read clip names I watch them and skim thru' them. FCP X is the only NLE with a visual/interactive source management

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

I agree 100% with all of that ^^^^^.

The visual presentation of assets in FCPX is a probably a huge part of why I like it so much.

But the other part is that everything just feels so intuitive to me. I feel like there used to be a middle man between what I wanted to see and do what it took to see that thing. It feels like that's gone now. FCPX feels like a much more direct connection between what I envision, and what's on my screen.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Lightworks has a similar system with their Multi-split screen Viewer, where you can compare a selection of shots that you can play side by side. A slightly different way of displaying it, but basically, this does the same thing.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

For those using FCP X professionally now, how would you rate its stability compared to 7. And, if you've tried them, compared to Avid and PP.

I've been using FCP through 7 since I started doing this work, but got some inexplicable error messages last time and I hobbled to the finish. Now, faced with a new project. am willing to consider a clean slate.

Not too interested in fancy effects, but just knowing I can get a project done with minimal tech headaches.

P.S. I'm using an 8-core Mac Pro with Lion.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

FCPX vs FCP7 - much better except when you need the things they left out: Discreet audio tracks, non-buggy graphic file handling (photoshop files work but don't try any modest transitions between layers), strange track behavior in relation to the primary storyline track. The program is still version 1.

FCPX vs PP5 - Not much of a comparison except for a few functions PP has over all FCP versions anyway, primary is the clean integration with other Adobe products. The file codec transparency that PP5 has over FCP7 is not much of issue with FCPX although apparently a few codec variants that work in PP will not presently play in FCPX without conversion. The FCPX interface, in my opinion, is light years better than PP5.

FCPX vs AVID - Avid always beat FCP7 and PP in terms of file management for long feature projects or shared series projects. My recent experience with AVID has been very, very limited but I have not seen anything in FCPX that addresses shared projects very well if at all. FCPX's keyword system can be extremely useful for managing your own projects but my experience is that a feature length project in FCPX might be a little tough at the moment (due to memory bugs mostly) although the audition feature, in theory, seems great for sifting through alternate takes.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Very useful comparison, WIlliam.

Let's say you're doing a project that's basic enough not to stretch the capabilities of any of the programs, but you want the best chance of avoiding crashes and corruption as you work. Would you bet on FCPX?

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

That's an interesting call. FCPX's dynamic saving makes crashes not much of a worry. Corruption has not been an issue for me but neither was it in FCP7 for years.

The main issue I would pose to you is the leaning curve FCPX requires. It does not behave like the traditional NLE in many ways. You need to allot time to learn the program, search the internet for hints and perhaps take a couple of on-line classes.

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

Well, first things first. Was a living in a fool's paradise, thinking I had 8GB of RAM installed. It's only 5! Not good, not good at all!

Re: Tell me what is GOOD about FCP X
 

I'm still curious to know if someone has done a comparison between Optical Flow and Twixtor.

-- peer