Steve Jobs was the greatest product innovator in the last couple of centuries, and his passing saddened me significantly. My gratitude goes back to his storied commencement address at Stanford University, which unveiled him as a deep and thoughtful man. I stand in awe of his incredible string of product successes, such as the original Mac, iMac, iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, and Apple App Store-in addition to Pixar-along with his ability to produce maniacal, passionate fans. But that doesn’t mean that Personally, i just like any product created under his watch or agree with every product-related decision.
This is particularly so after finishing Walter Isaacson’s outstanding biography, titled simply Steve Jobs, where I learned of two of Jobs’s passions: one for simplicity and the other for controlling the experience. Specifically, I can’t reconcile Jobs’s love for simplicity with Final Cut Pro X.
I recently reviewed the new features in Final Cut Pro X Plugins and discovered them impressive. Overall, though, I abhor the program. Once I run FCPX, my reaction is visceral; I notice the walls pressing in and my blood pressure level rising. I adore the clean slate of Adobe Premiere Pro and its doppelganger Final Cut Pro 7. FCPX has so much structure, a lot of completely foreign concepts, it is like my 31″ monitor has shrunk to 17″. With your a supposed focus on simplicity, how could an organization run by Jobs produce such a program?
Well, if you feel about this, while Apple’s hardware is simple, its software is complex, a velvet chain tying you to definitely Apple’s vision from the “way things should be done.” If you’re on the Windows machine, you can’t drag a novel on your iPod in Windows Explorer; you need to load it into iTunes and synch. That’s not simple. You can’t drag a picture out of your iPhone to your desktop having a file manager; you must load it into iPhoto and save it from that point.
Needless to say, I understand how iTunes is ideal for inexperienced users, and that’s precisely the purpose. With iTunes and iPhoto, as well as the iPad and iPhone, Apple wasn’t selling to experienced users. It was opening new markets. On the other hand, with Final Cut Pro X, Apple was trying to modify the workflows of experts who knew more about video production than any of the engineers who come up with product.
You are able to only impose structure whenever a industry is new or when the advantages of that structure are incremental. And also the more structure you build right into a product, the less it’s prone to interest experienced users in the product it replaces. That’s why most profe
That being said, there are refinements through the entire app, though more with effects than editing. The new version is worth time to upgrade. When you begin using the brand new color tools, you’ll never return. So what in the event you do? If you like being on the leading edge And you also are between projects, upgrade today.
Should you be a died-in-the-wool skeptic, wait a month and find out how this rolls out before committing. There’s no harm in waiting – particularly if you depend on 3rd-party plug-ins and software. What am I likely to do? I’m upgrading my main editing system to 10.4 tomorrow and keeping two backup editing systems on 10.3 for the upcoming month approximately. I love this new edition and I’m looking forward to utilizing it for real productions.
Given how aggressively Adobe and Avid are supporting team editing, especially because Final Cut Pro X is built on the database engine, it consistently surprise me that collaboration is really as difficult since it is.
This is compounded by Final Cut’s limited support for editing libraries using shared storage, even though connected via 10gb Ethernet. Editing teams are available for even small projects today and Final Cut does zhxspu make it easy to share libraries or projects. Media sharing, needless to say, continues to be available since the creation of FCP X.
I am just a massive fan of Roles. They create making many tasks much simpler, especially with regards to exporting – however, not audio mixing. The concept of applying a compound clip to your role in order that we could apply filters towards the compound clip is definitely an exercise in frustration. Audio mixing in FCP X is ridiculously awkward. It really is far faster to export an XML file from FCP X, convert it using XtoCC, import it into Adobe Audition, mix the project, export a stereo pair, import it into FCP X, assign a role to it, then export the finished project rather than make an effort to carry out the add FCP X itself.
I know, I timed it. FCP X is 3-6 times slower than round-tripping in Audition. Roles are wonderful, but not for mixing.
Finally, it could be that Apple has increased the quantity of clips which can be supported in a Library, but I’m getting emails almost every week from editors experiencing performance slow-downs because they have too many clips in a library. Again, FCP X is actually a database, it must be able to handle far more clips without choking.
Pixel Film Studios
120 Vantis Dr.
Established in 2006, Aliso Viejo, California-based Pixel Film Studios is an innovative developer of visual effects tools for the post-production and broadcast community. Their products are integrated with popular non-linear editing and compositing products from Apple FCPX.