TOPIC:

Maybe the update contains something that relates to a new product or service so it can't be shown because it would show Apple's hand. New AppleTV for instance.

Seanus wrote:

Maybe the update contains something that relates to a new product or service so it can't be shown because it would show Apple's hand. New AppleTV for instance.

I like how you think.

Seanus wrote:

Maybe the update contains something that relates to a new product or service so it can't be shown because it would show Apple's hand. New AppleTV for instance.

I'm trying hard to imagine a hardware tie-in. The only thing that might concern both a new aTV and FCP X would be h.254 encoding and delivery.

But several more reputable rumours suggest that neither a new aTV or the fabled iWatch will be making an appearance at WWDC.

Hey everyone, here it is. My long gestating article about my thoughts on Roles, and what they might develop into. Get a coffee [or something stiffer] and give it a read.

disproportionatepictures.blogspot.ca/2014/05/roles.html

Love to hear everyone's thoughts. And let me know if you find any mistakes!

This is a very clear and concise description of how Roles function in Final Cut Pro X. I am impressed with the level of control one has in Logic Pro X, and I also think that color coded, Role-based lanes is an excellent solution, especially if it has some Track Stack mimicry. Thanks for taking the time to illustrate these concepts!

Disproportionate wrote:

Hey everyone, here it is. My long gestating article about my thoughts on Roles, and what they might develop into. Get a coffee [or something stiffer] and give it a read.

disproportionatepictures.blogspot.ca/2014/05/roles.html

Love to hear everyone's thoughts. And let me know if you find any mistakes!

Great write-up, Marcus. Exactly how I feel about Roles and exactly what I wish for. Send it to Apple, the whole container Idea and such!!!

At this point I'm really starting to believe that we'll get the 10.1.2 after or during WWDC. Maybe they're waiting for some other piece of software to be announced or something... Or maybe we're just paying the price for getting 10.1.1 too early.

Vlastavision wrote:

At this point I'm really starting to believe that will get the 10.1.2 after or during WWDC. Maybe they're waiting for some other piece of software to be announced or something... Or maybe we're just paying the price for getting 10.1.1 too early.

Told you guys

Philip Hodgetts mentioned in the comment box at the FCPX Editors in Facebook group couple weeks ago.The next update (10.1.2) won't be a big update as 10.1. Although, there will be some added new features and bugs fixed update. But he didn't mention when it's gonna be available. If it is so? I wonder why is it taking forever?
So I assume, the next update will be a huge surprise update and maybe that time, it will be a paid update(We will see. I could be wrong).

I even said, this next update of FCPX will be a REVOLUTION and some guys said, No. It's gonna be EVOLUTION. lol

I do hope we get a lot of new features too. I know stability is important. But with Adobe giving CC users what seems like a good feature update twice a year, I feel that the last really big feature update was from 10.0.6, in October or November 2012.
I know 10.1 had some new ones too, but it seemed more geared towards the whole new Library model.

Yes, bug fixes and all that. But a couple of very nice juicy features would be very welcome too.

I really think people are going to start to get cranky if there's not a few new impressive features in 10.1.2. Outside the utilitarian change with Libraries there's been nothing for a very long time now.

Don't you feel like switching to Lightworks now that it's going to be OSX compatible? I think it is a very impressive and advanced editor in the last version. it has a free version if you wanna taste it and the paid version it's cheaper than Final Cut Pro X.

raulfballester wrote:

Don't you feel like switching to Lightworks now that it's going to be OSX compatible?

Very funny.

By the way, I don't think Apple does anything without a plan. They are not taking a long time, the update will be pushed out neither early or late, but precisely when they intend it to be.

raulfballester wrote:

Don't you feel like switching to Lightworks now that it's going to be OSX compatible? I think it is a very impressive and advanced editor in the last version. it has a free version if you wanna taste it and the paid version it's cheaper than Final Cut Pro X.

If I were an Adobe Premiere editor I'd certainly be thinking about Lightworks. As a FCPX editor however, not so much. Because FCPX editors are FCPX editors because they've moved away from the track editing paradigm and don't necessarily feel the need to go back to it. If, however, the only reason you're editing on FCPX is its affordable price, then, by all means Lightworks is a great alternative.

ejis1979 wrote:

Philip Hodgetts mentioned in the comment box at the FCPX Editors in Facebook group couple weeks ago.The next update (10.1.2) won't be a big update as 10.1. Although, there will be some added new features and bugs fixed update. But he didn't mention when it's gonna be available. If it is so? I wonder why is it taking forever?
So I assume, the next update will be a huge surprise update and maybe that time, it will be a paid update(We will see. I could be wrong).

I even said, this next update of FCPX will be a REVOLUTION and some guys said, No. It's gonna be EVOLUTION. lol

You're a bit off in your quoting. Philip didn't say that 10.1.2 specifically WOULDN'T be a big update, he said that typically 10.1.X updates shouldn't be expected to be as big as 10.X updates. Even if Philip knew specifics about the next update, he wouldn't be posting about it.

After 10.1, I think it's entirely unlikely that ANY update for the foreseeable future will be a paid update. Maybe, but it will be YEARS from now.

And while structurally 10.1 made some big changes, in terms of features added, 10.0.3 and 10.0.6 were quite healthy as well- and I'd be thrilled to see that kind of update for 10.1.2.

Well, I'm using FCPX since the beginning, I don't like Premiere. However, I think Lightworks is a very differnte program from Premiere, far better and more elegant. I don't think track paradigm in Lightworks would be annoying for most editors. (I haven't used Lightworks, just watching a lot of tutorials). Just want to know your opinion about it

raulfballester wrote:

Well, I'm using FCPX since the beginning, I don't like Premiere. However, I think Lightworks is a very differnte program from Premiere, far better and more elegant. I don't think track paradigm in Lightworks would be annoying for most editors. (I haven't used Lightworks, just watching a lot of tutorials). Just want to know your opinion about it

I edited a feature documentary on Lightworks a year ago, and I much prefer it to Premiere for many reasons, however, lack of third party plug in support was a big problem then. As far as offline editing is concerned it's very good. With the controller I'd even prefer it to Avid for long narrative work. Generally, I prefer it to Premiere, but not to FCPX.

Response

That's a great article Marcus. I really like how you thoughtfully balanced out all the pros and cons. As the concept of roles are in their terrible two’s phase, they have a lot of maturing to do.

The only thing I’d argue is "A Track is really just a folder of audio or video, laid out across a sequence of time.”

When Avid first came out in 1989 they had to replicate how a Steenbeck, a gang synchronizer and a trim bin* worked as a GUI. Since most editors born after 1980 haven’t even seen a working flatbed, these rules no longer apply.

See the comment on this 1989 Avid promo at 2:37, the rest is worth a watch too.



Being called tracks are a holdover from film being an actual track. Heck even editing sound in film is called a 'mag track' because the sprocket holes lined up with the film sprockets to stay in synch.

Sound mixes had to have tracks on separate ‘film dubbers’ according to dialogue, sound effects, and music because the eq settings on the mixers would be set for the different tracks. No automation, no digital anything, they would have to physically put that sound effect on a different roll to keep going. It was all ‘live in concert’ so to speak.

I’m glad there is an alternative to tracks, personally I get more done when the project gets more complex since I don’t worry I’ve bumped a music track far below out of whack with my edit because I forgot to unlock it.

The iPhone has been out for seven years, I don’t hear anyone complaining about the lack of physical keyboard anymore. Once tracks are no longer needed in audio mixing, I’ll be happy for it.

* A bin is literally an actual bin on wheels with hooks for your film trims. How quaint!

Hey Darrin. Thanks for your comments.

Though the digital transition was already underway when I was in Film School in the early '90's, I put my fair share of time in on Steenbecks.

RE: my comment about Tracks. I think my original idea was a track was a "Bin across time". I guess I was just trying to push the parallelism between what FCP X did with Keywords in the Event Browser and what they could do with Roles info in the timeline. Imagine if we were just able to apply Keywords, but there were no Keyword Collections. Right now there's no visual container for Roles in Projects.

BTW, thanks for the shoutout on FCPX Grill! That's two now- but neither time can people remember my name.

And if you haven't had enough of my mad prognostications, I whipped up this article about my idea of CLIP LINKING to enhance Connected Clips-

disproportionatepictures.blogspot.ca/2014/05/clip-links.html