TOPIC:

Opening and creating projects in Resolve does fill very 90s like. lol

Yes FCPX is phenomenal, it's just reasonable or maybe hopeful to expect that Resolve will continue to evolve and become more X like in fundamental ways. No one knows the future, but it's good to imagine that there could be a healthy alternative down the line in the unlikely event that Apple decides to "shake" FCPX

It'll be interesting to see if FCPx does some work on its colour correction interface given the competition with resolve. With all the new camera announcements making log recording more and more common it would possibly be a bit of a misstep if FCP didn't introduce some sort of native LUT and curves support. Maybe not in 10.1.2, but sometime this year.

Seamusvfx wrote:

It'll be interesting to see if FCPx does some work on its colour correction interface given the competition with resolve. With all the new camera announcements making log recording more and more common it would possibly be a bit of a misstep if FCP didn't introduce some sort of native LUT and curves support. Maybe not in 10.1.2, but sometime this year.

FCPX isn't meant to compete with Resolve in the colour correction space. It's one of the top 2 or 3 grading tools in the industry, regardless of price. Apple can't hope to compete with Resolve in that highly specialized market. Perhaps Apple had an inkling of Resolve Lite coming down the pipe from Blackmagic, and that's why they EOL'd COLOR- they decided that it was impossible to compete with a free offering of that high a quality. Very likely this is the same reason Apple backed away from Shake.


If AutoDesk and Blackmagic continue to evolve the editing capabilities of their specialized tools, it will be interesting to see how the major players react. Only Adobe comes close to offering the whole widget, but even they don't offer a distinctly high end compositing and graphics tool. AE serves most peoples needs, but at the highest end, I believe it's penetration in feature and TV SFX is still fairly slim.

FCPX can't be the best CC tool, or the best audio post tool, it needs to concentrate on being the best organization and editing tool. If it can't do that, then Resolve Lite 2-3 years down the road could make it obsolete; without the gravity of the rest of Adobe's CC products, or the entrenched industry loyalty of AVID.

Interesting times.

I very much doubt they would try to compete one to one with resolve in CC. My thinking was that FCPX has so far been able to be used as end to end post production software for smaller productions. However all the new sub 10 000 cameras announced at NAB bring log images to the low budget market. A 3 way corrector can't really get the best out of those images; you need access to LUTs and Curves so now those productions who want the benefit of log will be obliged to leave FCPX at some point in their workflow, or rely on plugins. But why buy plugins when Resolve is free? Furthermore, if the editing is any good in Resolve, you might find yourself asking why use FCPX at all?

Well Apple Color want to shabby...
I alos don;t see Apple investing in there color corrections side, especially since there is one on the market you can beat with the price.

I do like to see some more workflow and color space option in FCP X and Motion!
In fact I like to see more composting tools in Motion!

That's precisely the challenge Apple faces.

FCPX needs to be indisputably the better editor, with enough of a built-in colour correction toolset to satisfy the majority of users, while making it easy enough to work with high end tools like Resolve if you need it's specialized toolset.

That said, I think the challenge Resolve faces is that it is very deep and can be impenetrable to some users. If someone only needs simple tools, is the depth and complexity of Resolves toolset become a impediment to adoption.

One of the performance enhancement i like to see is acceleration of export, why doesn't Apple use the GPU's like Adobe does now in Premiere Pro CC. I looked ad demo video's and I want that also in FCPX!

Furthermore, if the editing is any good in Resolve, you might find yourself asking why use FCPX at all?

Because it's unique for its organizing capabilities and its trackless magnetic timeline. This is what makes this NLE so fast and so fun to work with. I can easily see myself starting in X and finishing in Resolve/Smoke, but I would never want to go back to creative editing with fixed tracks. IF Resolve's editing capabilities are as good as the demos show you may wonder why you still would use Avid or Premier or any other track-based NLE, but you never should wonder why you want to edit with FCP X.

I very much agree that pure creative editing should be the real focus for FCP X in the future. That's what it does best right now. This should be further developed by even better editing tools, stronger media management and increased collaboration capabilities. And if they keep improving their color correction, keyframing and audio features this wil satisfy a huge part of the NLE user base.

If FCP X continues to shine as an editing application I will be very happy to go to Resolve for higher-end grading and finishing, Smoke for compositing and finishing and ProTools for audio. When you have these 4 top-notch apps working together I would ask myself: why would you use anything else at all?

-Ronny

To be clear, Apple's industry challenge is to keep people buying Macs. Every cross platform NLE opens and exit to Windows.

Resolve, which is cross platform, enters into some feature competition with FCPX and opens yet another door to Windows migration. Apple has to be concerned about that especially if Resolve gives an "FCPX like" experience on Windows.

Of course a difference is "tracks" and that's will be one of the battle grounds for Apple. Keeping people on FCPX means pushing forward the facility of the trackless environment.

The other battle ground will be color correction. While Resolve may be too deep for some, FCPX is too shallow for many and that may push people to Resolve. LUTS are one example. The others include tracking and curves IMHO. Certainly scopes (inability to open multiple) and shot to shot comparison are others.

FCPX does have an advantage with Motion Rigging and Publishing but not having round tripping minimizes that for many. Obviously FCPX has a multi cam advantage as well.

While Resolve isn't FCPX yet, given the big step forward Resolve 11 took, I expect Resolve 12 will weigh heavily and Apple has to know that.

Basically the sooner Resolve adds X like features the sooner that door is opened into Windows for some.

Granted we won't see the "reality" until Resolve 11 is released but I don't doubt Apple is taking note.

Today Apple seeded 10.9.3 Build 13D43 to Developers asking them to focus on, among other things, 4K support and graphics drivers. This leads me to believe that we won't see FCPX 10.1.2 before OS X is updated to 10.9.3.

Possibly. Though I think this is mostly about more viewing options for 4K displays. Anyone who bought one of those Sharp monitors Apple is selling is looking at a pretty tiny FCPX interface. Just like with the Retina laptops, the idea is to provide a SHARPER interface, not more real-estate per-se. So I don't think the dev team would need to code a new "Retina ready" FCPX update like they did when Apple first debuted Retina (with 10.0.5, I believe...)

But perhaps there's more enhancements on the way. It doesn't seem like we moved to Mavericks that long ago... and now we're just over a month away from our first 10.10 preview at WWDC.

I agree with you that if they didn't launch the new update during NAB they could do it anytime. Today, tomorrow, in a month, in two months...
It's interesting that I use Avid almost as much as FCPX, but I'm always euphoric about FCPX updates, and I don't care much about Avid updates! One of the reasons is of course that I prefer editing on FCPX and I want to see it get to the level where I won't have to edit on anything else. But the main reason, I think, is because Avid is what it is, it will stay the same, no matter how much you update it it won't change much. FCPX, on the other hand, has the potential to become so many things, it could easily change and evolve and with every update it could become so much better and it could be so much more than it is now.

The greatest advantage of FCPX is that it lends itself to evolution much more easily than any other software. It has the potential to evolve, and to adapt to anything in todays ever changing film-video environment . Every update is like an evolutionary step forward, where as with the other systems, to me at least, it seems like every update is like a new set of clothes, or a new haircut. Hence the huge suspense and anticipation on this forum!

The greatest advantage of FCPX is that it lends itself to evolution much more easily than any other software. It has the potential to evolve, and to adapt to anything in todays ever changing film-video environment .

I totally agree. Avid, PPro, Lightworks, etc…, and possibly also Resolve now, are all good NLEs but fundamentally they are very similar and they cater the same relatively small user base. If Resolve also would get some powerful compositing tools in the future (which I expect it will) I think Adobe and Avid are the ones that should be worried most, not Apple. Because the FCP X ecosystem is totally different: it is highly accessible even for someone who has never edited before, and it is powerful enough for hard-core professional users. It also has the highest growing potential of any NLE and I think right now we are only scratching the surface of what FCP X can become.

-Ronny

" all good NLEs but fundamentally they are very similar and they cater the same relatively small user base."

...and boy, does that user base whine a lot! lol

Not surprisingly, I agree as well. What I find interesting, is that the majority of people whinging about FCP X, and swooning over PR CC and now R11, are former FCP "classic" users. I think FCP X is, in some ways, easier to understand if you come from Media Composer, at least in terms of how the primary storyline works. Having used, or still using multiple NLE's, I can't understand how anyone could think having fixed tracks is "better". At least in the initial creative part of cutting. Mixing? Onlining? Sure. But for the actual creative process X can't be beat IMHO.

I think Autodesk Smoke has much more to be concerned about RE: Resolve 11 than Apple does. I agree with Ronny that Resolve will probably focus in on adding in the compositing features based on it's world class tracking system over more advanced editing tools. I feel like Resolve is positioning itself as the Online Editor. The fact that the free version does all this and tools like Smoke cost $3500 (or $149/month now to rent) means the post industry yet again is going to see some major changes.

I'm looking at using Resolve as the on-set and final online tool in my workflow and leave the creative storytelling stuff up to FCPX (for which IMO it is unmatched by anyone)

I actually just bought FCP X today (was previously using the trial version).

I love the magnetic and trackless timeline, it really does help to fuel the creativity. I was a member of Creative Cloud until yesterday when I decided I just couldn't stand Premiere Pro anymore - it felt too limiting having tracks, and I couldn't edit in it nearly as fast as I can in FCP X.

I do hope that Resolve 11 helps push Apple to add some more features into FCP X, like better color correcting or perhaps even better DVD burning support!

Welcome to the club Jeremy!

Magnetic timeline was a stroke of genius. We already have so many editors with tracks, why make another one?

I agree with many here that Apple's next step with FCPX should be to improve the roles, and as a result give us a solid sound mixing feature. Detachable windows, and the ability to choose colours for clips in the timeline, like in Logic Pro X, would be great. And I'd like to see both trim monitors when trimming frame by frame, using "." and "," not only when dragging. That would be my top list of features. Some nice surprise features are always welcome!
And a ShakeMotion X that Alex 4D talked about, that would be a dream come true!
Who knows what we'll get next, I just hope it's soon.

Cutting without the magnetic timeline is like editing with only one arm for me. When the project gets complex, having to worry about eight things for every cut I make is beyond tedious.

I found out at NAB that the magnetic timeline (just like the magsafe connector is patented. Meaning it will not be in any other non Apple NLE. For everyone else, tracks are here to stay.

Darren wrote:

Cutting without the magnetic timeline is like editing with only one arm for me. When the project gets complex, having to worry about eight things for every cut I make is beyond tedious.

I found out at NAB that the magnetic timeline (just like the magsafe connector is patented. Meaning it will not be in any other non Apple NLE. For everyone else, tracks are here to stay.

Yeah, that's how I felt after getting used to (and falling in love with!) the magnetic timeline - once I went back to track-based editing, it felt incredibly unintuitive and cumbersome.

Glad to see Apple patented it, though I wouldn't be surprised if other editors at least try to figure out a way to copy it into their systems.