Jump to content


Photo

Final Cut Pro X


  • Please log in to reply
155 replies to this topic

#41 private_stock

private_stock

    Newbie

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 18 April 2011 - 11:43 PM

I don't think most people here realize Avid's true strengths. I think I've posted this here before. In a medium/large sized post house, with many Editors and Assistants working on the same project, an Avid operation is truly unbelievable. Where I work, we have an ISIS storage system with Interplay. The Avid propreitary codecs are rock solid for an offline/online workflow. An assistant can be prepping footage for an editor in an offline project, save the bin, and voila, the editor has what they need. In environments like reality programming with up to 100 hours of footage for every hour of tv, and the growing use of tapeless media and various random formats (helmetcams and such), Avid is next to irreplacable.

I understand that if your only use for it was once trying to cut together a mograph reel, you might be underwhelmed. But don't write it off until any other software can cater to the big post houses.

#42 superegophobia

superegophobia

    MoGraph Megastar

  • Members
  • 296 posts

Posted 19 April 2011 - 01:36 AM

In a medium/large sized post house, with many Editors and Assistants working on the same project, an Avid operation is truly unbelievable. Where I work, we have an ISIS storage system with Interplay. The Avid propreitary codecs are rock solid for an offline/online workflow. An assistant can be prepping footage for an editor in an offline project, save the bin, and voila, the editor has what they need.

Has anyone used Final Cut Server before? I hadn't even heard of it till now.
http://www.apple.com...erver/features/

#43 C.Smith

C.Smith

    Sermonizes Mograph to the Masses

  • Members
  • 2,929 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Santa Monica
  • Interests:Keepin it real.

Posted 19 April 2011 - 01:40 AM

I don't think most people here realize Avid's true strengths.


Many people don't. We've heard that saying about Macintosh, "It just works". That's how I feel about Avid vs FCP. FCP was always a nightmare, slow, problems with reconforms, codecs, etc, etc. The Avid just always works.
chris smith :: some of my work

#44 Sao_Bento

Sao_Bento

    Sermonizes Mograph to the Masses

  • Admin
  • 5,083 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco Bay Area
  • Interests:At this point, pretty much nothing.

Posted 19 April 2011 - 04:51 AM

You guys should do tech support or something. I recall much recouped free time due to "the Unity is down again!".

Many people don't. We've heard that saying about Macintosh, "It just works". That's how I feel about Avid vs FCP. FCP was always a nightmare, slow, problems with reconforms, codecs, etc, etc. The Avid just always works.


As the warrior-poet Ice Cube once said "If the day does not require an AK, it is good"

 

#45 ChrisC

ChrisC

    MoGraph Demi-god

  • Members
  • 510 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brighton, UK

Posted 21 June 2011 - 02:04 PM

... aaaaaaaaaaand, here it is.

Motion for thirty quid? Might give it another ride.

#46 monovich

monovich

    Mograph Deity

  • Members
  • 879 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Colo-rad-o
  • Interests:shiny things, shiny graphics, shiny bikes

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:36 PM

The hardware limitation is weird. The new Mercury playback engine is fantastic, and it works on all CUDA cards... then they go and artificially disable support on almost all of them. The fact that you have to sneak into the Premiere directory and change a text file just to get the better playback engine is... weird.


Wait, what? how do I find out if my CUDA is being used? I don't have a Quadro so it probably isn't. What do I need to change?

Here I was all ignorant and happy...

Edited by monovich, 21 June 2011 - 03:38 PM.


#47 J Montreuil

J Montreuil

    MoGraph Demi-god

  • Members
  • 708 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:43 PM

No 3rd party hardware is currently supported but will come in an update. I think there's a lot of pro-editors that aren't going to be happy with the current release...

#48 Todd Kopriva

Todd Kopriva

    Adobe Mastermind

  • Members
  • 754 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA, USA

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:45 PM

Wait, what? how do I find out if my CUDA is being used?


Just check to see that Mercury Playback Engine GPU Acceleration is set for Renderer in the Project Settings dialog box.

See this page for details about CUDA in Premiere Pro, including answers to frequently asked questions---such as why we don't officially support the use of CUDA processing on all Nvidia cards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Todd Kopriva, Adobe Systems Incorporated
After Effects quality engineering
After Effects team blog
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#49 wysee

wysee

    MoGraph Regular

  • Members
  • 93 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:53 PM

As a pro-editor, I on't like that no 3rd party hardware is suported yet.. but as a pro-editor I don't expect to work on final cut pro X before next version at least.. so it's not a big deal.
I'm more concern about no mention of RED file support; wich has been introduce during the preview.. I'm sure a few stuff were left but will come very very soon in next update.

#50 beckmanvfx

beckmanvfx

    MoGraph Superstar

  • Members
  • 180 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston, MA

Posted 21 June 2011 - 04:34 PM

I've only been working with FCPX for a couple of hours now, but so far I am not much of a fan. It feels anything but pro.
I was going to give it a shot on an upcoming project. nuts to that, no XML in or out, so I couldn't move my project over to another platform even if I wanted to (God forbid if I HAD to). Oh wait, at least you can import iMovie sequences. Phew.
-Looks like my Premiere/AE workflow is safe for now. Adobe might want to jump on this chance to point out their differences.

#51 Todd Kopriva

Todd Kopriva

    Adobe Mastermind

  • Members
  • 754 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA, USA

Posted 21 June 2011 - 04:37 PM

Adobe might want to jump on this chance to point out their differences.


You mean like the fact that Premiere Pro can import FCP 7 XML projects? ;)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Todd Kopriva, Adobe Systems Incorporated
After Effects quality engineering
After Effects team blog
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

#52 beckmanvfx

beckmanvfx

    MoGraph Superstar

  • Members
  • 180 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Boston, MA

Posted 21 June 2011 - 04:50 PM

You mean like the fact that Premiere Pro can import FCP 7 XML projects? ;)


funny, isn't it?

#53 anothername

anothername

    MoGraph Demi-god

  • Members
  • 765 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:15 PM

nuts to that, no XML in or out


Really? They removed already existing functionality from a previous version, that's absurd. So there is no way to get your edit out of FCP and into another app (except for color and motion, I guess) how are you supposed to finish a project then?

#54 the_Monkey

the_Monkey

    simian

  • Members
  • 2,011 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Brooklyn, NY

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:53 PM

I'm not sure what people thought was going to happen.

Quicktime 7 -> Quicktime X = Glossier interface with reduced functionality
FCP 7 -> FCP X = Glossier interface with reduced functionality

I'm going to be so pissed if Quicktime 7 doesn't work in Lion.

-m

#55 J Montreuil

J Montreuil

    MoGraph Demi-god

  • Members
  • 708 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 07:45 PM

I'm going to be so pissed if Quicktime 7 doesn't work in Lion.

-m


I'll riot with you if that happens.

#56 Sao_Bento

Sao_Bento

    Sermonizes Mograph to the Masses

  • Admin
  • 5,083 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco Bay Area
  • Interests:At this point, pretty much nothing.

Posted 21 June 2011 - 07:49 PM

Their own guy said it wasn't ready for professional editors (I would assume that is attributable to the lack of project I/O, as mentioned here, as well as the lack of support for third party hardware, third party plug-ins, etc.). Think of this as the public beta, which will probably meet all the needs of the hobbiest DSLR crowd.

As the warrior-poet Ice Cube once said "If the day does not require an AK, it is good"

 

#57 Duder

Duder

    Loser

  • Members
  • 2,014 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 June 2011 - 08:27 PM

fuck apple

#58 AromaKat

AromaKat

    Mrowwr!

  • Members
  • 1,856 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Los Angeles, CA

Posted 21 June 2011 - 08:38 PM

fuck apple


:lol:

"Early to bed, early to rise, work like hell, and advertise."
- Ted Turner


#59 jayfaker

jayfaker

    MoGraph Megastar

  • Members
  • 200 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Utah

Posted 21 June 2011 - 08:39 PM

Quicktime 7 -> Quicktime X = Glossier interface with reduced functionality
FCP 7 -> FCP X = Glossier interface with reduced functionality


Well, it is a ground-up (ish) rewrite, though, right? That's why it took so long to make. They didn't cut out features, they started from scratch and now have to add those features back in. It may be disappointing to have to wait yet more time to see if FCP X can hack it professionally, but at least Apple is trying to innovate here. They'll add the features that we want back in. At least, I hope they will.

I mean, we all complain about the rusty-old-bloated Adobe apps because they were written in the 90s (80s?) by companies that no longer exist, and have never truly been updated for the 21st century. Instead, Adobe just keeps piling on the features, which are nice, but do not fix some of the core issues with the software.

So when Apple comes along and does just that with FCP X, we complain? Maybe because we find out what it really takes to rewrite a piece of software from the ground up? It takes years? It takes a software-update hiatus? It takes everyone online questioning the company's dedication to their pro user-base? I guess it does. It sucks, but there you go.

I dunno, maybe it will end up being a toy. I hope not.

Edited by jayfaker, 21 June 2011 - 08:41 PM.


#60 Duder

Duder

    Loser

  • Members
  • 2,014 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 21 June 2011 - 08:45 PM

So when Apple comes along and does just that with FCP X, we complain? Maybe because we find out what it really takes to rewrite a piece of software from the ground up? It takes years? It takes a software-update hiatus? It takes everyone online questioning the company's dedication to their pro user-base? I guess it does. It sucks, but there you go.


I think it has to do with how long it will take to add all those features which are already available in said software. Maybe another 7 versions to get all the features back.

What do the end users gain? Especially editors who already know all the work arounds and can move around FCP as if they're cutting buttered bread.

If Apple came out with an application that was written from scratch and contained majority of the most important features of FCP7, then people wouldn't complain.

In any case, it takes guts to rewrite software from scratch. It's been known that Apple is slowly shifting away from pro's to consumers. It's a business in the end, so it's understandable.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users