"Think for Yourself"
Saturday, December 24, 2011 at 08:53AM 
6 months later, and the "discussion" of FCPX has still not quieted down. A recent ep of "That Post Show", as well as a post by Philip Hodgetts, has thrown some fuel into the fire. I was going to post on Philips post, but that has already turned into a god awful mess.
You can find that post here:
http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2011/12/why-do-production-pressures-favor-final-cut-pro-x/
Heres my take, heading into the new year:
It was stated in the "That Post Show" podcast, and it is so true. "The relationship with an editor and his software has to be based on trust." You need to trust Apple and their ideals and philosophies moving forward. No matter what your feelings on FCPX, even Philip admits it is not there, "yet". That is insinuating that the software will eventually get there, meaning he trusts Apple. Thats a big level of trust.
If you are just learning the craft, just getting out of college/filmschool, you have a decision to make. Are you going the "apple" way, or the "traditional" way. (By traditional, I am now referring to any NLE not written by Apple). It is in my opinion, if you lay your cards on the table and learn the new FCPX way of editing, you will be limited. In making that point, I am not even just referring to the fact that technically you cannot get your work in/out of FCPX to go to other software packages. While that is currently the truth, that can ultimately be fixed. XML, OMF, EDL, etc can easily be taken care of in a software update, and I fully expect Apple to add that to FCPX in the future. The bigger issue is the design philosophy of the program itself. Having FCPX on your resume is not getting you into any post house, network TV, or feature film set anytime soon. By choosing that route, you have already capped what you are capable of doing, and for what reason?
I keep hearing "FCPX" is fast. What exactly does that mean? Can you drop an H.26 in the timeline and edit it? Yes. Does that make it fast? I guess to some people. Can I search my iTunes library and bring in a song ? Yes. Does that make it fast ? I guess. I can also hit one button, go eat lunch, come back, and my video is on YouTube or Vimeo. That is fast also. So yes, in many ways, FCPX is fast. If you know how to edit, and you put some effort into actual learning, Avid, FCP 7.0, Premiere Pro, Media 100, Edius, and Lightworks are also fast. You can type paragraphs into Microsoft Word very fast, but how many novels did you write last year?
That brings us to the flip side to all that "Speed"…..Besides the technical workarounds you need to take, the editing workarounds needed are killer. I actually do not even consider FCPX a "Non-linear" editor. It is a HUGE step back in the actual editing process. Those of you familiar with editing will get where I am going……The Magnetic Timeline. Because of the way that the program works, you are now limited to editing decisions that are based on a relationship to the first frame of your project. The whole idea of being non linear is things can go where you want them go, and stay there. I can easily work on the end, go back to the beginning, then the middle, etc. That is virtually impossible with FCPX.
Easy example……lets say you are working on a music video, and the footage has been shot for the "Chorus" parts of the song. There is no way to edit those sections efficiently, leaving black holes for the verses, and going back later. Due to the magnetic timeline, everything wants to insert and ripple. Your workaround is you need to establish a relationship with frame 1. That is stupid and antiquated, and why should I need to have to "think" about what I am doing. Its been said thousands of times, the editing program should be an extension of your mind.
Something as simple as removing a couple minutes from the middle of an edit can't even be done neatly. If you want to remove minutes 4-5, you need to do the compound clip rain dance, make an edit, and prey to the Gods you can get your stuff to un-compound back into some sort of sanity. These are not bugs, these are MAJOR issues due to the way that the program works, that cannot be changed now, without some way to override Magnetic timeline.
No one in their right mind would ask a "professional" photographer to do a job with a point and shoot camera. Why ? Its not because they cannot take great pictures with it, they most certainly can. Its because they cannot have the control they need to deal with any situations they run into, or creative ideals they may have. FCPX is, right now, like the point and shoot camera. I do not want a $299 piece of plastic deciding what Aperture to shoot my picture at, any more than I want a $299 piece of software deciding where in time my footage goes. I do not need that help, and neither should you. You become a better photographer by learning the craft. You become a better editor by learning the craft. Is it easy ? God no. No matter, it should feel easy, because if you truly love doing it, learning the harder parts of an NLE should be fun.
FCPX has some very cool features. I love the Append edit to the end of the timeline. The built in stabilizer is good. I like some of the ability to normalize the audio. I do not like the scrubber, but I do understand that some may like that. Apple knew enough to give the ability to turn it off. There are things here to like. Unfortunately none are even remotely close to enough for me to give up the 100's of things it cannot do.
When "non Professional" tools are chosen for "Professional" projects, it is in service to the end result. For the last three years, people flocked to the Canon 5DmkII for very professional jobs, essentially ignoring the major downfalls that came with that decision, but for a good reason. The camera produced beautiful pictures that were technically impossible to produce almost any other way. Now that more professional alternatives are available, the trend is to find every which way to NOT use a DSLR. A piece of editing software does not give you that luxury. I should be able to watch a piece of media, and have no idea what it was edited on. Its not about that….its about cuts and dissolves, and pacing decisions made by the producer/director/editor. Nothing else. You should never have to "Think" about what you are doing. You need to be able to just do it.
I wanted Apple to get this right, I still want them to make this right. At this point, I have still not seen a good argument why we should have the trust that the FCPX way is the future. Its not about the "No XML"…."No Broadcast Out"……"No paste Attributes"…….those are features. Those can be added. Its about philosophy.
I'm not willing to go back to a linear world. If I put a piece of video at 2 minutes, 10 seconds, 5 frames, it damn well better be there when I come back.
Thank you for the lifeline Apple, but I am a good enough editor, I can think for myself.
Reader Comments (17)
Hi,
You need to apply a bit more thought when starting a new way of editing. Dismissing something as non professional when it doesn't work the way you are used to is the easy way out and who can blame you, life is hard enough.
In your example of editing a music video, just put the song in the primary storyline. Use connected clips and secondary storylines for all the video. Personally I find this actually preferential and more robust than a traditional timeline.
Cheers,
Jeff
You say you can't edit certain sequences together separately? Have you heard of gap clips? And the position tool? It's actually very simple. You can also move the connected point of a clip very easily using the CMD+OPT keys.
Your argument that FCP X is not a non-linear editor is completely unfounded. If you don't like how it works, then fine. Calling FCP X a linear editor is ridiculous.
Hello Ryan, and thank you for your comment. Just realize this post was not written blindly, as I spent ALOT of time getting to know FCPX inside and out. I would love to have any discussion about it you like.
I do understand the position tool, I'm thinking you missed the point.The idea of the connection point is exactly what I'm talking about.
Just a question for you. If you take a piece of footage, and position it at the 2 minute mark, can you give me the exact steps you take to edit the previous 1 min and 59 seconds without that moving?
Cheers to you also Jeff!
I am totally up for new ways to edit, I even embrace it. I first edited on film on a flatbed, then spent years on 3/4" tape. Went from Media 100 to discreet Edit, Premiere, Schitex Stratosphere, Avid, and FCP. My current "side" project is learning Lightworks. I live and breath editing, and live all the new toys you'll give me.
That said, in it's current state, editing in FCPX to the secondary storyline is extremely hobbled and inefficient. Unless Apple takes a drastic change in design structure, that will not get better. Right now you cannot even use many of the keyboard shortcuts to any storyline other than the primary.
I'm 16 years old and even I realize that FCPX is extremely annoying! I first edited with premiere elements (back when it was more like premiere rather than....what it is now) and then I used FCPE. I tried FCPX for a little while but I could not stand it! It's like you have to really think about every action you take in it, while in every other NLE it just works. I've been trying out Premiere CS5 and I really like it... I think professional editors and even prosumers are going to be leaving Final Cut as long as it's like this.
I really enjoy reading your blog, I would love to be in commercial post-production some day. Thanks for posting.
Just curious - which tutorials did you use to learn FCPX? Is this review based on 10.0.2? What kind of mac are you using and with what set up?
I wouldn't go as far to call this a review, it's more of a state of the union address from my perspective. That being said, I am running the most current version, on several machines. My main one being an 8 core Mac Pro with 24 gigs of ram.
Have a happy, safe holiday!
What you pay is what you get. $300 is what apple think of the new "PRO" software they created is worth. I think that says a lot. Don't you?
Sure it's POSSIBLE to edit a music video in FCPx as Jeff says. You can edit anything in FCPx. The problem with something like a music video where you need specific pieces to stay put at a specific place in time is you have to work too hard at it in FCPx. Keeping track of different story lines and clip connections defeats the purpose of the NLE getting out of the way when you have to thing about it too much.
Hey Art,
thanks four your article and thoughts about the current state of FCPX.
In the comments you wrote:
"Just a question for you. If you take a piece of footage, and position it at the 2 minute mark, can you give me the exact steps you take to edit the previous 1 min and 59 seconds without that moving?"
This is how I would tackle this task in FCPX:
1) Position the playhead at the 2 min mark
2) Set In- / Out-Points for the clip in the Event-Browser
3) Insert clip into timeline with shortcut "D" (override edit)
–> FCPX positions the clip at the 2 min mark and creates a gap clip.
To edit the previous 1:59 min I have two options, I guess:
Either
work with Connected Clips
or
insert more clips via the override edit function into the timeline. This way the video clips replace the portions of the gap clip.
And if I want to delete a clip or portion of the clip in the Primary Storyline I have to use the shortcut "Shift - Backspace" which again creates a gap clip for every video clip I delete so the clip at the 2 min mark stays in place.
The functions "Extract from Primary Storyline" (alt - cmd - up-arrow) and "Override with Primary Storyline" (alt - cmd - down-arrow) are also helpful to master the editing in the Magnetic Timeline.
That said, I totally agree that it's a totally different way of editing in the magnetic timeline. But it's possible and I think the ones who are interested in it and / or like will get used to it very soon.
Take care
Sebastian
Hello Sebastian,
Thank you for the in depth post, especially on thie holiday. Your ideas on the way to answer my earlier question are spot on. In a way, I sort of asked the question more in a rhetorical way, because once you stop and write down the steps needed to accomplish what I consider to be one of the most remedial tasks of non-linear editing, it starts to become more clear how things are not right.
You even started your answer with "I guess"....in other words, you has to actually think about it. That should not be, there is an inherent design problem.
In any other editing program, you wold simply lock the tracks, and move on.
There is a decent solution, I just am not sure if Apple will go this way. If they ever allow a secondary, (or third, forth, etc) storyline to be treated 100% equal to the primary, it would solve the whole thing. In order to do that, they would sort of be allowing "tracks", so they will probably not go that way
Hey Art,
Apple introduced a new editing paradigm or philosophy like you noted yourself. I think it's normal that you have to think about some things at first but once you get used to the way things work in FCPX I'm sure it will be as intuitive as it is now for us with FCP7, Premiere oder Avid.
I totally agree that Apple should consider to offer the possibility to add a second or third "primary storyline" or simply offer an on/off switch for the magnetic timeline – like snapping. :-)
Furthermore the safest way for folks who want to learn the craft of editing is "to pick two" like Richard Harrington said. And in the end the NLE is a tool to tell a story and it's up to you which you consider the best tool for the job.
I'm really looking forward to 2012: great cameras, great NLE choices... now it's time to get some creative stuff done. :-)
Take care
Sebastian
Aloha Art,
I totally understand the frustration, having gone through the same frustrations transferring from the sony BVE 9100 to the AVID then changing from Avid to FCP 6. You hit it on the head, you have to think about what used to be so intuitive. When FCPX came out, I could have gone back to AVID which I love, but the overhead was too much, I still have a Media Composer 1000 with Pizza box collecting dust, A Meridian NT collecting dust, the upgrade path was $15k. I own MC 5.5 but I haven't paid the $600 or so to upgrade to MC 6... yet. I spent the past 4 months learning and now teaching FCP X. Newbies get it right away and are able to put together a show. Seasoned editors have a way more difficult time. for all the reasons you stated, not to mention the change in nomenclature. That was tough. Over all your best point is trust. Do we trust any corporation?
I knew if I was going to change I had to let go of what I learned and relearn, I tell other editors who want to learn FCPX to forget everything they learned and start new. I remember screaming while learning FCP 6, "On AVID this is so much easier" But on AVID if you wanted to view on HD that was $15k - AJA was $1200... so FCP won.
Hell, give me 2 VHS decks and I can tell a story.
Again, Trust me like you trust a Bank, or any corporation. ;-)
Best,
Stephen
As an optimist, I can only hope that the same thing that happened with MobileMe happens with FCPX. Someone higher up will wake up and see how bad an idea it was to rebrand iMovie as Final Cut Pro. I can only hope that Apple's Job-less management team had the brains to keep the original team of FCP developers intact, working on the current code base, to migrate it to 64 bit and will figure out some 'insanely great' features that the customer will actually want. I can only hope that a new version of Final Cut Studio will be released that is faithful to the original vision and maintains the original codebase. Clearly, I am not the kind of Apple fanatic who thinks, "Hmm, if Apple thinks this is better, then they must be right". Apple sometimes makes really bad mistakes. Remember the Newton?
Hello Art. I admire your bravery. Now run for your life! Apple Certified Apologists will hunt you down for daring to defy the "truth" and their "jobsian" bs... Don't you just love the Mac Cult?
My solution? One cooler Master Storm Trooper case (room for a dozen drives!!!) with i72600K CPU, Sabertooth mobo (already has Intel RAID 0controller), 32GB RAM, PNY NVideo FX 4800, HM CPU cooler, overclock to well above 4,2 GHz, etc. Plus Adobe CS 5.5 and Avid 6.0 upgrade I'll also install lightworks. Will run 2 boots so that I haveMC 4.x and 6.0. When windows 8 comes by will virtual machine the whole thing. All for about the price of a comparable Mac workstation and zero software. . Ridiculous. Apple just went arrogant as hell. HAD a good idea, screwed it up straight from roll out. The only Apple I'll keep is my Mac Classic, and run the 99 bottles of beer on the wall program for parties.
I still edit FCP 7 at main client. Sorry folks but editing for more than 30 years I was one of the first on an EMC and edited an entire videowall on Avid 4.3.nearly 20 years ago,. What I don't like? What I really hate? Niggling aforementioned workarounds on FCP X plus a lot of the don't haves but will haves. I cannot wait. . Sorry but Apple had mature platform, and by rumor a 64 bit FCP 8 ready to go. I would have bought a Mac for that.
Annoys me greatly that they put out a program that they are now desperately trying to update to address a myriad of issues that would not have been necessary if they thought to include real world working editors in the development and LISTENED TO THEM.
I work overseas a lot and sometimes have to edit on funky stuff. In Kenya I had to shoot with an ipad and edit in imovie because my interface cords didn't come with the camera I was sent to use. Could I do it YES! But why the hell would I want to? I can play a Sears Guitar if I have to but you know, after 5 minutes my fingers hurt and it all starts to sound the same with no real artistic nuance. Now give me my $5000 guild and I can produce some sweet original music and play for hours. It's the same here. You can use FCP X and if that is all you have it is better than not editing at all. But why would you want to except when you had to?