Time to go back to FCPX

Get answers to your questions about color grading, editing and finishing with DaVinci Resolve.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

dariobigi

  • Posts: 469
  • Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:52 am
  • Location: New York City

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 2:14 pm

Uli Plank wrote:A G5? Last time I've seen one was in the PowerMac.
Terminology for Gen 5 of their build. Not a corollary for a specific piece of hardware. They’re not stupid and would use older technology when they’ve already used something more recent. Your Apple only vernacular/viewpoint is showing.
Consider widening you view and research outside of Apple only marketing. That’s how I learned about the pros (and cons) of owning a PC. In the end, for a bigger budget purchase, I have to differ to practical over emotional choices.
I always try, (try being a key factor) to be objective and push myself to do or try something that is slightly uncomfortable to expand my knowledge. I don’t think there’s growth without some growing pains. That’s why they’re calling growing pains.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[b]Dario Bigi, Colorist
http://dariobigi.com
New York
C: 1-646-436-4600

HPz840 - 2x 14 Core 2.6GHz - 64GB RAM
Windows 10 Pro 20H2
2x RTX 2080Ti (SD 461.92)
Resolve Studio 17.1
Decklink 4K Extreme (12.0)
FSI CM250
Panasonic FZ1000
Mini Panel
Offline

Steve Fishwick

  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2015 11:35 am

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 2:50 pm

I can't speak to the merits of DVR as an editor since 100% of my paid work is on Avid and I don't edit on it, but Resolve is increasingly important in my workflows for other reasons. A lot of these prosumer 'best editing software', articles presuppose that your NLE is a choice. It's a bit like a skilled machinist talking about the best lathe to work on, it's often irrelevant - they work on the one the factory has. If I didn't choose to use Avid, I would get no work. It helps that muscle memory and familiarity have made it very comfortable for me but that's the way it is.

I'm absolutely sure you can edit very well in DVR but I think it's the weakest link in the whole software. The speed editor and fast edit page particularly seem to hark back to gallery tv edit suites of the 80s/90s which is where I suspect Grant Petty drew his inspiration from. Totally irrelevant and useless to what I and most broadcast editors in the UK do. I just don't think they understand editing needs as fully as in the other areas. Though that is not to say that will not change.

As I said although 100% of my paid work is on Avid, I use DVR Studio with it for roundtripping. In other words no client specifically asks, or pays for it, but it helps my workflow so much that I throw it in. I abandoned colour correction in Symphony since it has been left way behind and is a poor shadow of DVR, and I abandoned Pro Tools in favour of Fairlight some time ago - even though it's not perfect, it does so much more than PT for so much less. With 17 there finally seems to be a way to stay completely in DVR now once an AAF is sent there without roundtripping, with the AS-11 Mainconcept plugin. This is why Avid and DVR work hand in hand essentially for me and I could no more think of dumping either, at the moment, because of the reasons I outlined above.

I'll just add in closing, before you fellas jump down my neck, I speak as an offline/online editor only - not a cameraman, not a filmmaker, just a working pro editor. In the UK I have not seen one single job post for an editor to work on DVR - Quite a bit now for Premiere, some FCPX, mainly Avid - even during lockdown and even though you can happily offline in the free Resolve. If I was BMD I would want to know why that is.
Offline
User avatar

Dhaylen

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:02 pm
  • Location: Hungary
  • Real Name: Dalen Johnson

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 4:21 pm

Steve Fishwick wrote:
I'll just add in closing, before you fellas jump down my neck, I speak as an offline/online editor only - not a cameraman, not a filmmaker, just a working pro editor. In the UK I have not seen one single job post for an editor to work on DVR - Quite a bit now for Premiere, some FCPX, mainly Avid - even during lockdown and even though you can happily offline in the free Resolve. If I was BMD I would want to know why that is.


Probably the reason you haven't seen any job listings for Resolve is for the same reason that the whole youtube generation either uses FinalCut or Premiere.
("Avid - what's that?" - forget about names like "Smoke - does it still exist?", etc) lol!

At the end of the day - businesses, tend to go with what is 'known'/'popular'.
(And what the kids learn - Adobe/Autodesk have this covered.) ;)

I remember when Avid was a turn key system and cost about $100k to get into. :p
Then came along Apple Final Cut - which blew it out of the water and made the whole industry re-think things.
(That and a Canon Xl-1 by your side - but whose kidding, it was only 25mb and you would really want DVCPRO 50 or Sony if you were doing Chroma work)

Resolve hasn't reached that critical point that Apple did with Avid - I believe that is mainly due to the extreme price difference between the two... yes, Resolve is 'free', and even then is 'cheap' - but the gap just isn't there for a 'mass exodus'...

(traction is growing, and Resolve is only getting better... so we may see trends changing.)

At the end of the day, if you can edit, its pretty easy going between NLE's.
For me the trick is going from AE to Fusion. :p
Offline
User avatar

dariobigi

  • Posts: 469
  • Joined: Thu Aug 23, 2012 4:52 am
  • Location: New York City

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 4:42 pm

I wouldn’t jump down anyone’s neck. Well stated opinion with context is always worth considering.

To add context to my possible answer to you question, I listen to a lot of social science podcasts about how we think and why. (Hidden Brain from NPR.org)

People have comfort levels, don’t like uncertainty, seek reinforcement of existing beliefs, can be lazy and so on for many facets and factors in their lives.
Many times we,they,I, have been forced to change. Myself needing to upgrade my computer and wanting to maximize my dollar. Others needing to make changes in life during a pandemic.
I know someone who still tries to use FCP7 due to comfort.
I feel a majority of people don’t “lean into change” as a primary response. (To possibly answer your query)

I have been hearing more and more of people using DR for Editoral.
Like all things, a tipping point will happen. Like to Avid from Grass Valley. From FCP7 to Avid. To PPro from FCP7/X. Those all took time.

BMD’s vision, dedication, mostly intelligent decisions and company culture of listening and incorporating (well stated) user feedback have driven massive changes in 10 years (since v.8). I believe they will only improve and become more competitive and desirable. It won’t be the right NLE for every job but it will become an even stronger contender for the top two spots.

For the record, I started on a Sony RM 450 controller and have worked on every linear and NLE (except Sony Vegas). I’ve been on DR since v.8.
Avid is a solid stable workhorse for long form and networked environments.

Just my 2¢ and observations here in NYC from contact with Post Peeps nationally and globally.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
[b]Dario Bigi, Colorist
http://dariobigi.com
New York
C: 1-646-436-4600

HPz840 - 2x 14 Core 2.6GHz - 64GB RAM
Windows 10 Pro 20H2
2x RTX 2080Ti (SD 461.92)
Resolve Studio 17.1
Decklink 4K Extreme (12.0)
FSI CM250
Panasonic FZ1000
Mini Panel
Offline
User avatar

Dhaylen

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:02 pm
  • Location: Hungary
  • Real Name: Dalen Johnson

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 5:19 pm

dariobigi wrote:
People have comfort levels, don’t like uncertainty, seek reinforcement of existing beliefs, can be lazy and so on for many facets and factors in their lives.
Many times we,they,I, have been forced to change. Myself needing to upgrade my computer and wanting to maximize my dollar.


Yep - to all the above... :)
I was a Mac user since 93', only had to use the PC at two job places - and swore I would never own a Windows machine myself...

The moons aligned and I now have two Windows 10 machines. :p
(My dad actually bought one for us when our Mac decided it didn't want to wake up after an update.) :p

Wont lie - it took a lot of getting used to... but now - wouldnt go back.
Mainly due to the fact I got into AI/programming, and game a ton as well on the side... so Nvidia is my personal choice... which Apple no longer supports.

* fun note on that... technically speaking, Apple will have Nvidia chips again, as Nvidia bought out ARM, so Apples 'custom' chips - 'Nvidia inside' lol!
Offline

Steve Fishwick

  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2015 11:35 am

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 8:26 pm

Dhaylen wrote:I remember when Avid was a turn key system and cost about $100k to get into. :p
Then came along Apple Final Cut - which blew it out of the water and made the whole industry re-think things.


Not in my world it didn't. And yes I remember the prices since I had 4 of em at one time. I built a post facility for a TV station in Southern Spain and when I got there, there was 1 FCP 7 seat and one Digibeta. I junked the FCP and installed a proper Avid/Pro Tools facility with Editshare server. This was the gear I later bought out. With Avid installed we went from a few hours per month throughput to regularly over a 100, simply because Avid was built to share projects, then as now. The BBC got rid of FCP7 too for that reason. Don't get me wrong it was a great single seat NLE in the DV days but networked sharing at big facilities was and is what it's all about with Broadcast editing.

Dhaylen wrote:At the end of the day, if you can edit, its pretty easy going between NLE's.
Yes you can but as I said, if the work and pay is on Avid, that is what you use. I don't bother with Premiere jobs or FCPX - I would have to if they became the norm. But jobs using those NLEs are below rate and largely non-broadcast.
Offline
User avatar

Dhaylen

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:02 pm
  • Location: Hungary
  • Real Name: Dalen Johnson

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 8:55 pm

Steve Fishwick wrote:
Dhaylen wrote:I remember when Avid was a turn key system and cost about $100k to get into. :p
Then came along Apple Final Cut - which blew it out of the water and made the whole industry re-think things.


Not in my world it didn't. And yes I remember the prices since I had 4 of em at one time. I built a post facility for a TV station in Southern Spain and when I got there, there was 1 FCP 7 seat and one Digibeta. I junked the FCP and installed a proper Avid/Pro Tools facility with Editshare server.

Dhaylen wrote:At the end of the day, if you can edit, its pretty easy going between NLE's.
Yes you can but as I said, if the work and pay is on Avid, that is what you use. I don't bother with Premiere jobs or FCPX - I would have to if they became the norm. But jobs using those NLEs are below rate and largely non-broadcast.


Edited:
* Ok, I see the misunderstanding - not sure how it happened, but it did.

Avid was around $100k pre-Final Cut Pro.
(Your post specifically says Final Cut 7 - that is a lot of time that passed by then, and yeah... Avid was cheap... that was my point, Final Cut shook the market up.)

Check the prices, but Flame/Inferno, etc. was about 300k for a turnkey system.
(They got cheaper afterwards too - well, subs now) :p

I was in Atlanta, built out some studios as well. ;)
Worked amongst a ton of broadcasters -
(We have CNN, Turner, and a ton of media companies supporting Coke, etc)

Saying that to say I clearly remember broadcast 'meetings' where older peeps who invested heavily in equipment were worried about the artist now having access to affordable equipment and an XL-1 (canon) - not that it mattered if you wanted Chroma key.

Final Cut Atlanta and LA groups - and people/companies switching was real.
Sorry it didnt take off in Spain or Europe - different place...

Again, not sure how you missed it, but timing is important before telling someone they are 'wrong'. ;)
My prices may be off some, but the point definitely is there...

Ill give a good date - 1997... now we are on the same page. ;)
(9GB harddrive array - not sure how many 9GBs were in the stack anymore - that you and I could not afford - let alone 4 avid stations.)

Take care!

p.s.
I will add this - after Apples fiasco of dumping Shake, etc. - Avid did rise their prices up a bit.
(Nowhere near the prices of 1997) ;)
Offline

Steve Fishwick

  • Posts: 219
  • Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2015 11:35 am

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 9:43 pm

Dhaylen wrote:gain, not sure how you missed it, but timing is important before telling someone they are 'wrong'.
My prices may be off some, but the point definitely is there...


No Dhaylen I'm never said you were wrong, I said not in my world. Which is principally the UK market, admittedly not the be all end all but that is my world. I think you meant that FCP7 blew away Avid Xpress DV, which it did in a different prosumer context but turnkey Avid Media Composer was left unscathed, until more recent times.

The 100k prices were the 90's but the Avid Adrenaline systems we bought still cost 50K sterling and upwards in the 2000s.

I have been editing on Avid since 1992 but it was not until 10-15 years later that I actually could afford a system of my own. I'm sure we could compare notes about the old days :) Sorry for any misunderstanding that my post may have generated. All the best.
Offline

ricardo marty

  • Posts: 1105
  • Joined: Wed Apr 26, 2017 4:03 am

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 10:05 pm

I remember choosing between media 100, discreet edit and a couple of european systems. Avid was out of the picture because there support was very expensive and we had bad experiences with them. We chose discrete edit with the matrox card running on an intergraph and it was a great but then it was sold to autodesk they canned it then came fcp and nailed the coffin. Not to mention the dot.com, 9-11 and 2008 crash nearly wiped us out. .

We never went fcp instead tried others we wound up with purple, liquid and cinegy extreme which where ok then change to premiere all the way up to dr 12.5 and have never looked back.

We, and then me never looked into fcp because we never liked apple's business model.. Apple ditched all their pro servers and hardware/software. Though we almost changed but then fcpX came out and it convinced us to stay away, Fcp has become a good editor but i don't want to be in their universe.


Ricardo Marty



Ricardo Marty
Resolve Studio 17, Lenovo 7i15, i7-10750H Processor, 6 Cores, Nvidia 2060 6Gb, 16Gb ram, 512 nvme sd. Sony FS700R, Bmp4k, Sony A6600. Focusrite ableton
Offline
User avatar

Dhaylen

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:02 pm
  • Location: Hungary
  • Real Name: Dalen Johnson

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 10:21 pm

Steve Fishwick wrote:
Dhaylen wrote:gain, not sure how you missed it, but timing is important before telling someone they are 'wrong'.
My prices may be off some, but the point definitely is there...


I have been editing on Avid since 1992 but it was not until 10-15 years later that I actually could afford a system of my own. I'm sure we could compare notes about the old days :) Sorry for any misunderstanding that my post may have generated. All the best.


No problems, can easily happen - especially when discussing tech over 25+ year span. :)

Probably the best way to sum up the time frame would be:
Adobe & Autodesk, (practically), bought everyone out and rule through subs. lol!
(Seriously though - remember Avid SoftImage?
Autodesk swiped them up along with Maya and killed the competition in the 3d realm
) :p
Offline
User avatar

Dhaylen

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:02 pm
  • Location: Hungary
  • Real Name: Dalen Johnson

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Mar 27, 2021 10:31 pm

ricardo marty wrote:* I remember choosing between media 100,

* then change to premiere all the way up to dr 12.5 and have never looked back.

We, and then me never looked into fcp because we never liked apple's business model.. Apple ditched all their pro servers and hardware/software.

Ricardo Marty


* Probably the best choice you made not going Media 100.
We had a producer (before I became one) who highly recommended it - we had nothing but grief with it, and ended up with Avid Symphony (I think it was - been awhile)

* Premiere - I have to admit, i was happy when Adobe 're-released' Premiere.
Back around 97' it was 'cool' to learn how to edit with, but no one would/could use it for broadcast...
It was a cute toy to play with... so when they went all Pro, I was pretty impressed.

Though at that time, I was already invested in Final Cut Pro (Had about 10k in a card alone that let us do real time Chroma key playback without render...)

So - coming back - its kinda odd (not bad) to see how much of a 'staple' it is for most people with PC's.
(Given its humble origins) :)

* Apple servers, dear God... forgot about it, but yes - I agree about the Apple universe.
Im just getting old and forgetting most of why I will not go back to Apple. (Dumping Shake is my summary for it now, when its a lot more - they were on a role, is all i remember, and it kinda... died)

At the end of the day, Im happy for Resolve - hopefully they will keep listening to feedback and make believers out of other editors by giving them what they need... They sold me on the whole ecosystem of 'one app to rule them all'... (What I always wanted Adobe to do back in the days)
Offline

Tim Franks

  • Posts: 55
  • Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSun Mar 28, 2021 2:37 am

Steve Fishwick wrote:Yes you can but as I said, if the work and pay is on Avid, that is what you use. I don't bother with Premiere jobs or FCPX - I would have to if they became the norm. But jobs using those NLEs are below rate and largely non-broadcast.

Interesting, you should get booked for the result and not software you use. ;)

Dhaylen wrote:
* Apple servers, dear God... forgot about it, but yes - I agree about the Apple universe.
Im just getting old and forgetting most of why I will not go back to Apple. (Dumping Shake is my summary for it now, when its a lot more - they were on a role, is all i remember, and it kinda... died)


Well as mentioned in a different thread. Shake was purchased for the technology which is still be utilised in Apples software.
Looking at hardware side I think Apple has proven they defiantly still target the Pro market and how things are going we might see much bigger trend. Let's not forget Macs are still market for content creation.

Dropping the Xserver on the surface definitely was bummer. But with the end of the Xserver it was a easier consolidation into the existing enterprise network. It was around the same time when Snow Leopard was released with Microsoft Exchange support.
It was a given that Apple was never going to replace Linux or Windows servers. What other way to convince any IT department to deploy Macs with easy integration in existing infrastructure. So Apple dropping the Xserve seemed they where giving up on the enterprise. It was actually a bigger step in to dominate the enterprise with Macs for average users.

Also lets not forget it seems Microsoft is also phasing out their on premise solutions. I guess Cloud it is.

Since we already hijacked this thread... I was recently at a small VFX post house and noticed they where using Sonnet racks with Mac Minis and they where pretty convinced and they seemed to spit out the data pretty fast. They called it the Mad Rack Max. :lol:
Offline
User avatar

Dhaylen

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:02 pm
  • Location: Hungary
  • Real Name: Dalen Johnson

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSun Mar 28, 2021 9:58 am

Tim Franks wrote:
Well as mentioned in a different thread. Shake was purchased for the technology which is still be utilised in Apples software.
Looking at hardware side I think Apple has proven they defiantly still target the Pro market and how things are going we might see much bigger trend. Let's not forget Macs are still market for content creation.

I was recently at a small VFX post house and noticed they where using Sonnet racks with Mac Minis and they where pretty convinced and they seemed to spit out the data pretty fast.


........................................
update:
note: Just to be certain, totally respect you [and other peoples] point of view who may have a good experience with various Apple products - also, I do not deny that there are aspects that may be good/better than others - below, Im merely addressing the 'mentality' that turned me away from Apple.
It's not just Shake - it was the whole momentum drop that 'turned me off'... :)

Thanks for the listen/read...
........................................

Some examples:

Hardware:
* Apple Pismo - [The first laptop to 'edit' DV video] ;)
- Swappable media bays and desktop GPU that could be swapped out [fully upgradeable machine]
vs.

Everything after... not to mention the 'trash can mac'
I know, they tried to redeem it with the cheese-grater mac lol!
[Again, its about momentum, and trust...]

Software:
- Aperature
[At the time, there was rumor they may even get a photoshop app]
- Shake
All the pros, at the time, were waiting for 'Apple Phenomenon' to replace Shake.
[Wouldnt be waiting for that if they actually put all the features into FCPro...]
- Color
[One may argue it all went into FCPRO - but, we see most people would use Resolve Color over FC]

* As mentioned, there was a lot of momentum
With iWeb, people were talking about a Dreamweaver competitor, etc.
... along with other potential apps - (I mean, Autodesk bought out SoftImage and Maya... Apple could have easily scooped up the latter - which, some hoped for at the time.)
But it was all around this time things begin to fizzle out.

At some point, Avid, etc. all lifted their prices on their software a bit, as Apple was no longer king of the Pro media line, nor a potential threat.

Now - this little list wont convince anyone... this is just my own journey, but add in there dumping NVIDIA - even if I wanted to love Final Cut... the line is hard drawn in the sand there.
1: AI/programming [Nvidia - for me, at least]
2: Gaming [Old, yeah - but I game like no tomorrow... and that is NVIDIA only]
3: Video... Nvidia - [those guys... yeah, wish they made their own computer... wait, they did have the Shield] :p

* apple customer service:
When I lived in Atlanta, easy to get to... but - some things never change.
They always have issues with their power adapters.

Remember the YO-Yo, clear adapters - real cool, you could see your wires burned out.
Yeah, recall - I went down and said I wanted it exchanged as its on recall, "nah, bruh - its good"
(Waving it in his face, showing the burned wire) - "uh, ok... bruh, guess I will give you a new one"
* surprised by this customer experience.

Then they updated it! With... opaque white adapters - (transparency is not good)
... and people still had issues and do have issues from laptops to ipads with Apple.

Last but not least - upgradability... that flip from fully upgradeable to [we have to replace the batter] = stingy, and not liking it. [i realize many are fine]

The whole point of this... was to say I agree with the former poster...
ITs not that things are 'bad' - they may be actually REALLY good in some areas... but its that whole eco-system/universe mentality they have... dont trust it. ;)

Here's hoping BlackMagic keeps up the good work.

***
Just saw, in another thread, BRAW isnt supported in FinalCut Pro???
Anyway... [guess I shouldn't be suprised at this point]
Offline

drknsss

  • Posts: 61
  • Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2021 2:46 am
  • Real Name: Gordon Culley

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSun Mar 28, 2021 12:45 pm

fiveshorts wrote:Thanks for all the demeaning and insulting and ill-informed responses. Had no idea there were so many self-righteous contributors here.



I think you get what you put out in this case.

I'm not sure people, in general, understand what they are asking their hardware and software to do..., there are endless configurations of hardware that can result in small variances that can make any editing software unstable, and that's just facts. In some cases, your Resolve editing experience can be very unique so the end result is to declare Resolve is "No Bueno for serious work".

Apple optimizes their software like FCP for their computers and then will NOT give Resolve the same optimization support..., this is common knowledge. The Op has invested in BM cameras so why would they expect the Resolve experience to be as stable as a native OSX application?

Apple for the most part gave up on pro editors (Remember FCP7 ?? Even late-night talk show hosts talked about that! ANd now IMO they just sell overpriced hardware for a huge profit margin) Editors who still MACs have a big chip on their shoulders. I get it. It appears the OP is into music production so of course he is a Mac guy and looks down on PCs that are a better overall value.

Today many new filmmakers and editors want their choice of tools to be perfect and do everything for them or even better, they think because it doesn't work for them it doesn't work for anyone so why would YOU use it.
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 4267
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSun Mar 28, 2021 3:07 pm

Steve Fishwick wrote:I'm absolutely sure you can edit very well in DVR but I think it's the weakest link in the whole software. The speed editor and fast edit page particularly seem to hark back to gallery tv edit suites of the 80s/90s which is where I suspect Grant Petty drew his inspiration from. Totally irrelevant and useless to what I and most broadcast editors in the UK do. I just don't think they understand editing needs as fully as in the other areas. Though that is not to say that will not change.


Here's another vote for wishing the Cut page had never happened, and that all the development had gone instead into perfecting Edit, which at the moment is workable but also something of a welter of functions being more cumbersome than they should be and many small impediments. Given the speed of development, this is to be expected and Cut appears to have its fans, but here's wishing....

And all this comes before there could be any thought to introducing the kind of innovations Apple brought to FCPX. In seeking to establish an industry-standard product, BMD wouldn't seem to have that kind of freedom. Unlike Apple, it's main business isn't telephones and related services.
Offline

Tim Franks

  • Posts: 55
  • Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostWed Mar 31, 2021 8:07 pm

Dhaylen wrote:........................................
update:
note: Just to be certain, totally respect you [and other peoples] point of view who may have a good experience with various Apple products - also, I do not deny that there are aspects that may be good/better than others - below, Im merely addressing the 'mentality' that turned me away from Apple.
It's not just Shake - it was the whole momentum drop that 'turned me off'... :)

Thanks for the listen/read...
........................................


Yes Apple has dropped application in the past and will do so in the future, we just can't forget that Apple is still a business and make decisions what is in their interest. Like any other Company.
Remember Adobe dropping Premiere on the OSX platform and many many other applications.
BlackMagic Design is also starting to migrate their Application in one package. How I often I heard Fusion users complaining about blotted software .And I could see a subscription model coming soon.

Not sure how iWeb was a competitor to Dreamweaver. The way websites are designed today there is no need for an application for the level iWeb was presented. This was a trend back then and this is one example how the faith was decided on other applications.

The NVIDIA subject is very deep subject. I recall talking to one of the adobe After Effects developers at their after party during the NAB back in 2010.
Issues was more quality control... :?

You will find many threads with no BRAW support as no ProResRAW support in Resolve. :mrgreen:

Cheers ;)
Offline

leeharris

  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: Thu Mar 25, 2021 12:12 pm
  • Real Name: Lee Harris

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 1:02 pm

Here's another vote for wishing the Cut page had never happened, and that all the development had gone instead into perfecting Edit, which at the moment is workable but also something of a welter of functions being more cumbersome than they should be and many small impediments. Given the speed of development, this is to be expected and Cut appears to have its fans, but here's wishing....


Having just switched to Resolve from FCP I can happily say "I love the cut page!" It makes more sense if you have the speed editor of course, but its magnetic time-line feels familiar and I like how it eases you into editing which is something that always fills me with dread, initially.
Offline
User avatar

joe12south

  • Posts: 734
  • Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:14 pm
  • Location: Nashville, TN
  • Real Name: Joseph Moore

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 3:38 pm

I made the switch to Resolve from FCPX a little over 2 years ago. While being able to work end-to-end in one system is the right choice for me, I think many here are dismissing the reality that FCPX "just works" - effortlessly - in a way that Resolve, or any other NLE on any other system, simply does not.

A 4K project that doesn't cause a relatively old MacBook Pro to break a sweat with FCPX, is brought to its knees by Resolve - even with all the usual workarounds to squeeze as much performance as possible. With Resolve I have to use a beefy desktop workstation with 2 GPUs to get a LESS smooth editing experience than FCPX on that ol' MacBook.

FCPX engineers likely have access to under the hood knowledge that no 3rd party developer does.

PS. I was one of the poor unfortunate souls that invested in the Media 100 back in the day. There should be a trigger warning before mentioning that thing!
Pocketluts: Purpose-built LUT system for the Black Magic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 4K
http://www.pocketluts.com/
Offline

Rohit Gupta

Blackmagic Design

  • Posts: 1412
  • Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 5:00 am

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 4:04 pm

joe12south wrote:A 4K project that doesn't cause a relatively old MacBook Pro to break a sweat with FCPX, is brought to its knees by Resolve - even with all the usual workarounds to squeeze as much performance as possible. With Resolve I have to use a beefy desktop workstation with 2 GPUs to get a LESS smooth editing experience than FCPX on that ol' MacBook.


Are you able to share details? Were you working in Full Quality in FCPX? Also, have you compared the recent versions of Resolve?
Rohit Gupta

DaVinci Resolve Software Development
Blackmagic Design
Offline
User avatar

joe12south

  • Posts: 734
  • Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:14 pm
  • Location: Nashville, TN
  • Real Name: Joseph Moore

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 7:08 pm

Rohit Gupta wrote:
joe12south wrote:A 4K project that doesn't cause a relatively old MacBook Pro to break a sweat with FCPX, is brought to its knees by Resolve - even with all the usual workarounds to squeeze as much performance as possible. With Resolve I have to use a beefy desktop workstation with 2 GPUs to get a LESS smooth editing experience than FCPX on that ol' MacBook.


Are you able to share details? Were you working in Full Quality in FCPX? Also, have you compared the recent versions of Resolve?

I haven't done a comparison between the most recent FCPX and Resolve 17 because I'm wholly invested in Resolve at this point and to switch back and go through round-tripping would be too painful. I don't think I've opened FCPX in over a year.

That being the case, I don't think I can give you meaningful specifics to test...but I can tell you that much of it is related to UI responsiveness, not actual processing performance.

As an example, it is quite common for Resolve operations to make the app "beachball" (sign of a locked UI thread) with no warning. These instances are usually for very brief periods of time...seconds...but they do create micro-interruptions and leave the user with the perception that the whole app could come down at any time. By comparison, it's hard to do anything in FCPX to make the actual UI unresponsive. It just seems to handle internal process/thread management better.

I should put my money where my mouth is, though, and re-test current versions with some tough footage like 8K RAW from the R5. When I do, I'll post back here.
Pocketluts: Purpose-built LUT system for the Black Magic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 4K
http://www.pocketluts.com/
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 4267
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 8:00 pm

joe12south wrote:That being the case, I don't think I can give you meaningful specifics to test...but I can tell you that much of it is related to UI responsiveness, not actual processing performance.

As an example, it is quite common for Resolve operations to make the app "beachball" (sign of a locked UI thread) with no warning. These instances are usually for very brief periods of time...seconds...but they do create micro-interruptions and leave the user with the perception that the whole app could come down at any time.


There are functions I wish were snappier on Resolve, like switching between timelines via tabs, but I don't see anything like this on 9-year old PC hardware. Yours is not the first report of such behavior, but it's not "normal". On a PC you'd look to video drivers or conflicts between two GPU cards.
Offline

fiveshorts

  • Posts: 158
  • Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:06 pm
  • Real Name: Trevor Gilchrist

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 10:10 pm

[quote=There are functions I wish were snappier on Resolve, like switching between timelines via tabs, but I don't see anything like this on 9-year old PC hardware. Yours is not the first report of such behavior, but it's not "normal". On a PC you'd look to video drivers or conflicts between two GPU cards.[/quote]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

fiveshorts

  • Posts: 158
  • Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:06 pm
  • Real Name: Trevor Gilchrist

Time to go back to FCPX

PostWed Apr 07, 2021 10:26 pm

It’s certainly “normal” on any Mac other than maybe a 10k iMac Pro or $20k+ MacPro.

I too made a “commitment “ to Resolve, as I was (am still) extremely happy that I committed to their hardware over the years.

I then committed to learning it properly and accepting that it would have idiosyncrasies and flaws as all paradigms do. I invested in the Editor keyboard, then sold it after a couple of months, then bought the Speed Editor, which is much better.

I went through the entire v17 beta program, holding faith that it’s performance was symptomatic of the major upgrade process. But the full release of 17.1.1 is still no better. Each install was clean, not an update. My machine is used for nothing else.

I can take a single group of 4K ProRes 422 clips with audio, open them in each app (FCPX latest and Resolve latest) and even simple scrubbing and playback is fundamentally better in FCPX. FCPX is butter smooth and effortless. Resolve I have to immediately drop to half res in the timeline playback and even optimize to half size or LT to get close. This is all before the work begins.

And this is on a 2020 iMac i9 with 32gb ram and clean SSDs running over thunderbolt 3 with short, certified TB3 cables.

I’ve been doing this a long time. And despite my gripes, I’m no troll. I actually WANT Resolve to be good. I switched because I was already roundtripping (with difficulty) to Color and to Logic.

It seems my only choice now is to abandon Macs and to endure the virus-infested, grotesque world of Windows and the build-your-own (cross your fingers) PC. A sad prospect I’ve managed to avoid for my whole career.

Ironic and suspicious that it’s Resolve that Apple uses to demo on its site more than their own FCPX.

Tough times.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline
User avatar

Dhaylen

  • Posts: 99
  • Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2019 9:02 pm
  • Location: Hungary
  • Real Name: Dalen Johnson

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostThu Apr 08, 2021 7:12 am

fiveshorts wrote:
It seems my only choice now is to abandon Macs and to endure the virus-infested, grotesque world of Windows and the build-your-own (cross your fingers) PC. A sad prospect I’ve managed to avoid for my whole career.

Ironic and suspicious that it’s Resolve that Apple uses to demo on its site more than their own FCPX.

Tough times.


Used Apple (professionally) from 93' until a few years back...
(owned a lot of shares for many years as well - point is... was a believer)

Few years ago, got my first PC with windows 10...
Now have my second, both with nice juicy NVIDIA cards...

I will NEVER buy another apple computer again.
Unless they put NVIDIA back in - I may consider... unlikely.

The whole Windows Virus meme is 'old' - I mean, you mentioned that you dont do anything with your mac but edit - so there is like "0%" you would get a virus. :p

The whole Mac interface is better - well, look at iOS after Steve passed away to see they copied Android to get a 'bigger' market of Android users who wanted that look on their new iOS devices. (Which they bought to 'look cool' as Apple was going main stream)

Point is... Apple - not the same company... I mean, they still are over priced.
I remember my Apple laptops - (always pro top end) were crap compared to PC laptops...
They put mediocre parts in there at best, and you can no longer truly customize it like with the Pismo (thats back in 99)

I mean, Im sure they still 'get some things 'right' - some of you are really still on about Final Cut being better - and I wont argue its not, but - just not worth it.

Programming with Python/C++, art/video, GAMING - all on my sweet NVIDA chip -

* I know exactly what its like to be an Apple fan boy and to toss comments out about Windows... but you know - its not necessarily the issue many make it out to be.

Sure, I know my mother-in-law and neighbor got viruses on their PCs and probably would have been protected on their ipad, etc - but they literally think that everything that can be clicked on must be.
Again, you wont have to worry about that, Im sure... ;)

All the best - and yeah, if they are advertising Resolve that is funny...
Offline
User avatar

carlomacchiavello

  • Posts: 1430
  • Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 6:04 pm
  • Location: italy

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostThu Apr 08, 2021 11:44 am

fiveshorts wrote:It’s certainly “normal” on any Mac other than maybe a 10k iMac Pro or $20k+ MacPro.

I too made a “commitment “ to Resolve, as I was (am still) extremely happy that I committed to their hardware over the years.

I then committed to learning it properly and accepting that it would have idiosyncrasies and flaws as all paradigms do. I invested in the Editor keyboard, then sold it after a couple of months, then bought the Speed Editor, which is much better.

I went through the entire v17 beta program, holding faith that it’s performance was symptomatic of the major upgrade process. But the full release of 17.1.1 is still no better. Each install was clean, not an update. My machine is used for nothing else.

I can take a single group of 4K ProRes 422 clips with audio, open them in each app (FCPX latest and Resolve latest) and even simple scrubbing and playback is fundamentally better in FCPX. FCPX is butter smooth and effortless. Resolve I have to immediately drop to half res in the timeline playback and even optimize to half size or LT to get close. This is all before the work begins.

And this is on a 2020 iMac i9 with 32gb ram and clean SSDs running over thunderbolt 3 with short, certified TB3 cables.

I’ve been doing this a long time. And despite my gripes, I’m no troll. I actually WANT Resolve to be good. I switched because I was already roundtripping (with difficulty) to Color and to Logic.

It seems my only choice now is to abandon Macs and to endure the virus-infested, grotesque world of Windows and the build-your-own (cross your fingers) PC. A sad prospect I’ve managed to avoid for my whole career.

Ironic and suspicious that it’s Resolve that Apple uses to demo on its site more than their own FCPX.

Tough times.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I use both, Mac and win, from ... 1991 (yes I’m old)
I would remember to you that are many pro builder for windows workstation from hp to Boxx which is focalized to pro workstation for windows from since 25 years.
I suggest you to NEVER build your pc, it’s not a simple put together piece and hope, you should study very well architecture to build a good workstation to have good performance.
Windows is not hell (sometimes) but if you work like pro you build and use like pro is not a bad system (like is not a good system... But never exist perfect work machine).


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk
Offline
User avatar

Leslie Wand

  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2013 5:56 am
  • Location: rural nsw, australia

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostThu Apr 08, 2021 12:33 pm

i can't speak for more recent mac's, but running hp workstations alongside, and now exclusively, i've found them to be more reliable than i remember my macs being.

of course there are fanboys on both sides, extolling the praises of their respective boxes, whilst damning the others... nothing is ever going to change that. however, if you buy a stock 'pro' system, and use it exclusively as an nle, it's highly unlikely you'll ever have hardware or virus problems, unless of course, you go looking for them ;-)

i've always been of a mind that as soon as you start squeezing any system to get that 'little bit' extra out of it, you generally lose it to troubleshooting...
www.lesliewand.com.au
Offline
User avatar

joe12south

  • Posts: 734
  • Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:14 pm
  • Location: Nashville, TN
  • Real Name: Joseph Moore

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostThu Apr 08, 2021 1:27 pm

John Paines wrote:
joe12south wrote:That being the case, I don't think I can give you meaningful specifics to test...but I can tell you that much of it is related to UI responsiveness, not actual processing performance.

As an example, it is quite common for Resolve operations to make the app "beachball" (sign of a locked UI thread) with no warning. These instances are usually for very brief periods of time...seconds...but they do create micro-interruptions and leave the user with the perception that the whole app could come down at any time.


There are functions I wish were snappier on Resolve, like switching between timelines via tabs, but I don't see anything like this on 9-year old PC hardware. Yours is not the first report of such behavior, but it's not "normal". On a PC you'd look to video drivers or conflicts between two GPU cards.

The items I'm talking about aren't "glitches"...they are the result of how the app has been developed. A great example is backing-up a database: Instead of any indication that a lengthy process that can't be interrupted is in progress (of which there are several ways to indicate, even if the length of time is "indeterminate") the UI simply locks. Is it working, is it crashed? Who knows. How long will it take? Who knows.

That's an obvious, extreme example, but the UI is littered with minor examples. Resolve COULD feel a lot more smooth and solid if the dev team would make a pass through it protecting the UI thread and giving the user more indication when something heavy needs to happen.

Then there are the weird UI decisions that thumb their nose at any OS's patterns. Click and drag over multiple nodes on the Color page and copy. Are multiple nodes copied? Nope. Just one.

I could go on and on, but the net result is that Resolve offers up a lot more "friction" than FCPX. When you spend 8-16 hours a day in an app, these micro-agressions add up.

To put it yet another way: I use Resolve because I NEED to. I used FCPX because I WANTED to.
Pocketluts: Purpose-built LUT system for the Black Magic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 4K
http://www.pocketluts.com/
Offline
User avatar

joe12south

  • Posts: 734
  • Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:14 pm
  • Location: Nashville, TN
  • Real Name: Joseph Moore

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostThu Apr 08, 2021 4:04 pm

John Paines wrote:
joe12south wrote:The items I'm talking about aren't "glitches"...they are the result of how the app has been developed.


I'm not here to defend the product, I have my own quarrels with it, but you're the guy who was complaining about "beachballs".... How you concluded that this behavior, which to the best of my knowledge is not the norm, "even on Macs", is the result of "how the app has been developed", I don't know. I guess it's true in the literal sense -- whatever goes wrong is self-evidently "how the app has been developed", but you seem to mean something bigger and grander than that, based on limited personal experience and an imperfect grasp of how things work, blame who you will for the confusion.

I conclude it because I've been doing software development for 30 plus years, including two stints as a CTO. I've been an Apple Developer since System 6.

When an application beachballs, but is actually still working, that is almost always because of poor threading. A heavy task has been left on the same thread as the UI. It's not a "bug", it's a design choice. (Or the lack thereof.) If the operation can still cause the app to become temporarily unresponsive or for some other reason you need to not allow the user to interact while something completes, then it is good form to inform the user of as much, and MacOS guidelines provide several standard ways to do this. To put it more simply, Resolve still has room for optimization.

I can't say that reconnecting a database ever caused me any grief, it never occurred to me to try to connect to the Projects folder, but there's no fighting against a user's experience. If it happened to you, it would doubtless happen to others. OTOH, it's an application which assumes a certain, well, "application".

Because an app is for "pros" is no excuse for a bad user interface. It is not reasonable to expect an end user to both remember the name of a db and know to choose the parent of the parent of the parent of the parent of the folder that contains the db, not the db.[/quote]

Meanwhile, your generalities don't help the developers.

I gave a very specific, very common example: backing-up a db. How is that not helpful? if someone from the dev team wants to contact me and work on these issues, I'd be happy to spend the time to list all of the other times the app behaves similarly.
I wouldn't dispute that there are many "microagressions" in a day's work, needless small frustrations, but this is the way of the world....

Micro-aggressions are a term of art in the UI discipline. Resolve is full of them, and someone on the team should be devoted to excising them. When the same action is needlessly different on the edit page vs the color page vs the fusion page because that's how the inherited code works, not because it's what's best for the user...that's a micro-aggression. That's friction. When an app needlessly deviates from the standards of the OS it is running on, that's a micro-aggression. They are tiny cues that tell the end user that the software doesn't care enough about their experience. And these are the sort of things that when Apple is on their game, they excel at eliminating.

You can't have it all, unfortunately. Or until that happy date when you can....

Well, you can get close. You just have to want to.

All this said, I am truly thankful for all of the hard work that the Resolve team does, and I rarely hesitate to recommend it to someone starting out or looking to switch. When I critique the app, I do so with the hopes to make it better, not to tear it down.
Pocketluts: Purpose-built LUT system for the Black Magic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 4K
http://www.pocketluts.com/
Offline

John Paines

  • Posts: 4267
  • Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 4:04 pm

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostThu Apr 08, 2021 4:24 pm

Joe, you may have noticed, I took down my post, before you responded to it -- on the delayed conviction that these discussions are more apt to bring out the pontifical in everyone, rather than help in actual product development.

What's useful, in my view, is making a list of your discontents. And then wait for half the regulars here to tell you how wrong you are.

The developers can probably manage without the larger pronouncements, views on software design, etc.
Offline
User avatar

joe12south

  • Posts: 734
  • Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 4:14 pm
  • Location: Nashville, TN
  • Real Name: Joseph Moore

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostThu Apr 08, 2021 5:14 pm

John Paines wrote:Joe, you may have noticed, I took down my post, before you responded to it -- on the delayed conviction that these discussions are more apt to bring out the pontifical in everyone, rather than help in actual product development.

What's useful, in my view, is making a list of your discontents. And then wait for half the regulars here to tell you how wrong you are.

The developers can probably manage without the larger pronouncements, views on software design, etc.

It's really easy for anyone to ignore any of this if they aren't interested. ;)
Hardcore developers tend to focus on under-the-hood performance that they can measure, not perceived performance which is difficult to quantify. It's not a bad thing for a more "product" or UI focused voice to chime in beyond the usual bug reports & feature requests.

I think this discussion is germane because the Resolve team clearly cares about how Resolve performs compared to FCPX, and rightfully takes pride in the great strides they've made. But for whatever reason, they haven't yet addressed many of these "soft" issues that make FCPX *feel* more performant.
Pocketluts: Purpose-built LUT system for the Black Magic Design Pocket Cinema Camera 4K
http://www.pocketluts.com/
Offline
User avatar

waltervolpatto

  • Posts: 8664
  • Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 5:07 pm
  • Location: 1146 North Las Palmas Ave. Hollywood, California 90038 USA

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostThu Apr 08, 2021 7:39 pm

Seriously though - remember Avid SoftImage?
Autodesk swiped them up along with Maya and killed the competition in the 3d realm


I remember when Softimage was not avid and you needed a full blown Silicon graphic Onyx just to start that sucker!!!!

I loved softimage and the little Eddie compositor....
SuperServer 5039AD-I
C9X299-PGF - DDR4-2400 16x4 GB
i9-7920xCPU 12c 2.90GHz Water cooled
2x 1080ti DeckLink Studio 4K (11.5.1)
W10-1903 - BMR St. 17.2.011
nvidia: 462.59 studio
Offline

Tim Franks

  • Posts: 55
  • Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostThu Apr 08, 2021 8:17 pm

waltervolpatto wrote:
Seriously though - remember Avid SoftImage?
Autodesk swiped them up along with Maya and killed the competition in the 3d realm


I remember when Softimage was not avid and you needed a full blown Silicon graphic Onyx just to start that sucker!!!!

I loved softimage and the little Eddie compositor....

Ah SGI, good old days.
Remembering the coffee table Onyx 2 and PowerAnimator and Maya.
Isn’t Google now where SGI HQ used to be?

BTT, I was wondering what Hardware we are taking, cause from my experience FCPX performs much smoother then DaVinci. 8-)
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 10169
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostFri Apr 09, 2021 3:30 am

Oh, the granddads having a chat? Count me in. Actually, Microsoft first laid their hand on Softimage just to prove you can do 3D on a PC. Once they had shown that to the public, they sold it to Avid, who killed it off slowly and painfully. I loved it on SGI (Eddie too).
Don't approach Resolve with your expectations from other NLEs! They are all different.
Resolve Studio 17.2 and Fusion Studio 17, macOS 10.15.7
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM, 32 GB RAM
2018 Mac mini 16 GB RAM, eGFX Breakway RX 580 MacOS 10.15.7
Offline
User avatar

Leslie Wand

  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2013 5:56 am
  • Location: rural nsw, australia

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostFri Apr 09, 2021 4:10 am

Uli Plank wrote:Oh, the granddads having a chat? Count me in..


time to go back to sony bve 3000...
www.lesliewand.com.au
Offline

hansinla

  • Posts: 29
  • Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2020 10:25 pm
  • Location: Los Angeles
  • Real Name: Hans van Riet

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostFri Apr 09, 2021 4:38 am

Steve Fishwick wrote:If I didn't choose to use Avid, I would get no work. It helps that muscle memory and familiarity have made it very comfortable for me but that's the way it is.


So true, thank you for pointing that out.
    ******************************************
      Mac mini, Apple M1 CPU - 16GB
      Mac OS 11.2.3
      DaVinci Resolve Studio 17.1.1
      Speed Editor
    ******************************************
Offline
User avatar

Big_Murch

  • Posts: 7
  • Joined: Sun Apr 11, 2021 5:01 am
  • Location: Los Angeles, CA
  • Real Name: Rahim Anderson

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSun Apr 11, 2021 7:54 am

I have edited on FCP and then FPX and Premiere for 15 years. I have an eye on DVR primarily due to its superior controls over color. That said, I began plugging away at the manual and doing tutorials to see if I could really replace FCPX as my NLE of choice.

As an editor, story is the primary thing we're responsible for. To get to that story we need organizational tools. Most "edits" are actually simple. You're performing a straight cut, a J cut or an L cut.

It's the PROCESS of wrangling control over your footage that is the most time consuming challenge. You want to be able to strip away all the unnecessary information and get to that which is essential. Editing is really about stripping away the unessential.

The tools that help us to strip away the unessential are the most important. Metadata and organization are keys to help transform huge projects into easily searchable moments in time.

That's my issue with DVR as I've gone through the tutorials. There are too many bugs that make it so the advertised features do not even work.

Here's a simple example: The cut page and the speed editor are interesting to me, but as of now, I cannot use markers to mark any of the clips i scrub through. As I've looked through the forums, I see that this has been a problem of one kind or another for a LONG time. If I add a marker, it literally vanishes and cannot be found anywhere in the program. That's unacceptable. People have pitched workarounds to me and I get it. But that's the thing - I don't want to have to fight the application AND the mountain of footage I have to work through.

In working through another tutorial, following along step for step with the instructions, I attempted to use the "CLOSE UP" feature but the resulting clip is stuck in place. I literally did everything the tutor did - yet the result I got was wildly different.

That's the second bug and I'm not even at the halfway point of the tutorial. The marker issue however is much more troubling. That is a key feature for an editor. It's supposed to work - and - it just doesn't.

I reset the CPU. Reset DVR....etc, etc. But at some point I began to feel the juice is not worth the squeeze.

Then other behavior that is not buggy is still just off from an editors standpoint. The default behavior of subclips is to restrict their boundaries. If you need more source material on either side of the boundaries, you're stuck. Need more time for a transition? Stuck. Want more of the moment? Stuck. By default anyway.

Of course you can change the default behavior of the subclips to extend the limits but there is no universal preference you can enable to do this. So this means that you have to go clip by clip and engage in a series of 4 clicks to simply enable a behavior that should be enabled by default. (I hate to say it - but kinda like FCPX does).

There are exciting features of DVR for editors, but it's not really ready for the big time in my view. I've never gone through a tutorial for ANY app and the prime features being taught simply didn't work. If you're being objective, you have to accept that this is a problem.

I want to use DVR. I want it to get better and be the one stop shop of my dreams. BELIEVE me I DO! There are some interesting innovations that I really LOVE. The problem is - to many basic things just don't work and that has been a let down.

I will use DVR for color grading. So the app is not a waste for me, but when turnaround times are vital it's great to have all the bells and whistles - but as DR J once said - you've got to master the fundamentals....and that's where I find DVR lacking as an NLE.

When they sort those issues out - I'll be all in. Until then, I'm with the original poster - it's "Time to go back to FCPX"
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 10169
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostThu Apr 15, 2021 5:00 am

Unfortunately, you're right.
I also found bugs when only going through the Fusion tutorials or trying a Fusion project that is part of BM's website as a demo. Of course, I posted the logs for the developers. And, believe me, I like a node based compositor much more than dozens of nested compositions in AE (apart from Adobe taking my work for a hostage). But Apple Motion is no alternative in this case.
Don't approach Resolve with your expectations from other NLEs! They are all different.
Resolve Studio 17.2 and Fusion Studio 17, macOS 10.15.7
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM, 32 GB RAM
2018 Mac mini 16 GB RAM, eGFX Breakway RX 580 MacOS 10.15.7
Offline

Tim Franks

  • Posts: 55
  • Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 8:58 pm

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostFri Apr 16, 2021 3:11 pm

Uli Plank wrote:Unfortunately, you're right.
I also found bugs when only going through the Fusion tutorials or trying a Fusion project that is part of BM's website as a demo. Of course, I posted the logs for the developers. And, believe me, I like a node based compositor much more than dozens of nested compositions in AE (apart from Adobe taking my work for a hostage). But Apple Motion is no alternative in this case.



I thought the same, coming from Shake, I have been using Fusion for some projects that allow the "testing by doing". But, I am myself surprised how much animation and cop work I have been doing Apple Motion.
Actually haven't open up After Effects for two years. Again, I had other reasons for Apple Motion and not After Effects.
Offline

Trensharo

  • Posts: 422
  • Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:20 pm
  • Real Name: Nate Doucette

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostFri Apr 16, 2021 3:51 pm

I probably game more than anyone in this thread, two fold, so reading gaming is all Nvidia is lulzworthy. I have no issue with an AMD card.

Thats like saying gaming is all Intel.

Welcome to 2021.

Even the little Navi cards were good unless you wanted AAA 4K gaming.

Full time streamers use a separate PC for that, though, so it doesn't really matter at that level as a 1660 or 2060 is good enough.

If you play exports games, you barely need GPU horsepower for those, unless pushing 240+ FPS.

And most gamers play at 1080p, anyways.

People go Nvidia for NVENC, as its simply better for streaming and video capture than AMD; but full time streamers use a separate PC for streaming and a 1660/2060 in some i5 machine is good enough for that.
Offline

fiveshorts

  • Posts: 158
  • Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:06 pm
  • Real Name: Trevor Gilchrist

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostFri Apr 16, 2021 5:13 pm

Wrong thread, I think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

fiveshorts

  • Posts: 158
  • Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:06 pm
  • Real Name: Trevor Gilchrist

Time to go back to FCPX

PostFri Apr 16, 2021 6:15 pm

Thank [mention]Big_Murch [/mention] for that eloquent summation.
As the OP, it’s been interesting to see the spectrum of reactions that have been expressed. I want to reiterate that I too WANT Resolve to be my NLE. It’s a strange declaration to make, isn’t it. To want something I’m ostensibly criticizing to be the center of my working world. But it’s true.

That said. All of [mention]Big_Murch [/mention] experience complaints are very real and lead me to wonder the following:

Have you noticed just how few tutorials (on YouTube or whatever), focus on ACTUAL editing. Storytelling. Media management. Logging. Trying alternatives. All the work that precedes sound and color work. All the work that precedes motion design. All the work that precedes any concerns about meeting Netflix delivery standards.

Actual editing.

As I said before, Resolve’s Color is beyond criticism. So I’m not going to go there. But is this not a case of people predominantly interested in THAT (resolve color), who are just glad to have a Premier/Avid-like editor available, so that the edit is closer to them than an .xml import.
Perhaps the resistance to FCPX is because people are thinking color (a justifiable resistance, obviously), whereas people resisting Resolve are thinking Editing.

I know from multiple personal encounters, that there are many editors who have still never even TRIED the magnetic timeline, or keyword logging, and are stuck in the stubborn belief that FCPX is just a gimmick. A toy. And that the premature release of the platform (and it really was premature), is still something worthy of discounting it altogether.

Let’s face it, only film, commercial and TV editors even need Resolve color. The color tools in any other editor are enough for any normal use. The color tools in FCPX are not THAT different to Resolve’s, just less well implemented and lacking the wonderful tracking etc.

Resolve wins out in every way by facilitating the correct and infinitely customizable control of color space and standards. But now BRAW is useable in FCPX, that too is not a such a huge dominance.

Fairlight gives you a sort of “buggy ProTools” built in.

I still find it more work overall than roundtripping the (superb) audio roles out of FCPX to Logic. Unless it’s a very simple little piece.

Now, perhaps if I had Mostyn’s 20k MacPro or a tricked out mega PC, I would find things less buggy, but neither would stop the track ‘n’ bin-based editor from being old “old school” and not at all forward thinking.

I fear for FCPX’s future, re: Apple’s gradual move to consumer homogenization. Will iMovie and FCPX get folded into one? Who can tell.

I have the Speed Editor. I committed to a week of muscle memory training to work in the Cut Page. I’m still twice as fast in FCPX. What use is the cut page without a proper logging integration (and markers that work properly, and audio that works properly etc). Just merge the cut page into the Edit page and be done with it already. The cut page does poorly what the magnetic timeline already does SO well.

And yet I’m happiest in Color and frustrated in FCPX color.

It’s nuanced.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 10169
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostFri Apr 16, 2021 11:40 pm

Did you try Color Finale with FCP-X?
Don't approach Resolve with your expectations from other NLEs! They are all different.
Resolve Studio 17.2 and Fusion Studio 17, macOS 10.15.7
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM, 32 GB RAM
2018 Mac mini 16 GB RAM, eGFX Breakway RX 580 MacOS 10.15.7
Offline

fiveshorts

  • Posts: 158
  • Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:06 pm
  • Real Name: Trevor Gilchrist

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Apr 17, 2021 12:17 am

Yessir. Wasn’t fond of it, tbh. Didn’t like the scopes. Also tried Nobe and one other. If I was a developer, I’d be trying to emulate the precision of Resolve color as a plug-in. If I was Apple ID be simply making the curves detachable and larger (the scopes are already really good). Add a log capability.
The nodes are quite easily replicated using stacked adjustment layers on the timeline, though obviously nowhere near as pro or elegant. I haven’t tried third party trackers for FCPX yet, but I think I will.
You have the Timeline/clip adjustments using adjustment layers. Combos can be saved as compound clips to apply to other similar clips, but not the same as pulling a grade from a grabbed still or applying to a group etc.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

fiveshorts

  • Posts: 158
  • Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:06 pm
  • Real Name: Trevor Gilchrist

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Apr 17, 2021 12:21 am

Let me take that back. I just went and looked to remind myself. I haven’t tried v2 as yet. So I withhold judgement until I’ve given it a chance. It certainly looks better than I remember, and has color management right in there. I’m kinda excited to try it now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Offline

Trensharo

  • Posts: 422
  • Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:20 pm
  • Real Name: Nate Doucette

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Apr 17, 2021 12:42 am

I fear for FCPX’s future, re: Apple’s gradual move to consumer homogenization. Will iMovie and FCPX get folded into one? Who can tell.

iMovie is basically Final Cut Pro with tons of functionality pruned from it, the same way GarageBand is Logic Pro with tons of functionality pruned from it.

The point of them existing is to provide a good base functionality for free to those who buy Apple hardware. People who learn the basics on iMovie and GarageBand are more likely to go to Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro due to familiarity. The latter basically function more or less the same - there is just gobs of other features added on top of what people already had. This creates a situation where there is very little learning curve going from the entry-level product to the [more or less] professional products.

This is common in software. Many product lines have a setup similar to this, both in the Video and Music Production markets.

Final Cut Pro is not a beginner product. It's certainly not aimed at the same market that Final Cut Pro 7 was aimed at, but to call it a "consumer" product is somewhat misleading. Final Cut Pro does not exist in the same market as (e.g.) MAGIX Movie Edit Pro.

iMovie exists for those people, and they don't have to pay for it - at least not directly. They just have to own an Apple device.

Consumers aren't really caring about color grading and all of that other stuff. They just want to drag photos and videos onto the timeline, trim, add transitions, and render out a video. The level of controls these people want/need before they become completely overwhelmed is minimal.
Offline

fiveshorts

  • Posts: 158
  • Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2020 8:06 pm
  • Real Name: Trevor Gilchrist

Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Apr 17, 2021 12:52 am

OMG. Color Finale 2.3.3 is really good. LOL
There goes my weekend.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by fiveshorts on Sat Apr 17, 2021 2:20 am, edited 1 time in total.
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 10169
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Apr 17, 2021 12:59 am

Trensharo wrote:The level of controls these people want/need before they become completely overwhelmed is minimal.


So true, if you look around here. It's a handicap for BM that they don't have an "iMovie" version of DR for beginners (which should have hardware decoding on PCs, though, even at a minimal charge). Even the free version is too demanding. Unfortunately, very few beginners care to work through the free tutorials these days, they are actually quite good.

Regarding trackers, it's a pity Mocha never made it's way into FCP-X, it can't be beaten.

I'm not that afraid of Apple killing FCP-X any time soon, it is getting developed regularly and is a showcase for their hardware. Why would they have made it native for M1 from the start? This could have been a point when to break away from it if the wanted to. The could easily have said: "There is this new iMovie (or whatever call it) and you're gonna like it, it's so easy, yadda yadda". Yes, FCP-X is a professional product and is perfectly optimised for Apple hardware. It's stability can only be matched if you stay as conservative as Avid, but neither DR or Premiere "Pro" is close.
Don't approach Resolve with your expectations from other NLEs! They are all different.
Resolve Studio 17.2 and Fusion Studio 17, macOS 10.15.7
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM, 32 GB RAM
2018 Mac mini 16 GB RAM, eGFX Breakway RX 580 MacOS 10.15.7
Offline
User avatar

Leslie Wand

  • Posts: 498
  • Joined: Wed Jul 24, 2013 5:56 am
  • Location: rural nsw, australia

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Apr 17, 2021 5:11 am

for once i feel compelled to disagree with uli....

the idea that bm, or any other 'professional' software come to that, should produce a 'simple' version just to satisfy people who don't need, or want to learn a more complicated version seems to be wasting the time and effort of their developers. true, many aspiring companies try to 'hook' future users with stripped down versions, adobe / elements, vegas / movie, etc., etc., and perhaps it works, but i don't see lamborgini making a simplified huracan to entice wannabe racers...

what more could you ask for than a FREE working version along with a great manual, and endless video tutorials (some brilliant, some not so) with which to learn and expand your capabilities? and, if it's all too much (man), there's a plethora of simple off the shelf nle's to be tried.

i've worked my way through countless supposedly 'pro' nle's, working on both pc and mac, and all have had their own brilliant idiosyncrasies, as much as their, sometimes, fatal flaws. i'm sure we'll never achieve a perfect nle simply because every user's use and methodology is somehow different, or as the saw goes, one man's meant is another man's poison ;-)
www.lesliewand.com.au
Offline

Wouter Bouwens

  • Posts: 109
  • Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2017 7:53 pm
  • Location: Alkmaar, Netherlands

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Apr 17, 2021 5:50 am

Isn't the cut page sort of a simpler way to edit?
Medion Erazer X7853 Gaming Notebook
Windows 10 Home 64-bit
Intel Core i7 7700HQ @ 2.8 GHZ Kaby Lake 14nm Technology
48GB Dual Channel 1197MGZ (17-17-17-39) (2x8 and 2x16)
Medion P670HSGM (U3E1)
Nvidia GeForce GTX 1070 8GB
476GB SAMSUNG MZVLW512HMJP
Offline

Uli Plank

  • Posts: 10169
  • Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 2:48 am
  • Location: Germany and Indonesia

Re: Time to go back to FCPX

PostSat Apr 17, 2021 7:41 am

Sure it is. OTOH, some folks already complain that it's too 'different', even if it is far less "Think Different" than FCP-X.

But for DR you still need to have a basic understanding of technical things like containers, codecs and color. Maybe, Leslie, you didn't see where I suggested Filmora to a beginner who needed a solution right away ;-)

And, I can agree very well with what you wrote here.
Don't approach Resolve with your expectations from other NLEs! They are all different.
Resolve Studio 17.2 and Fusion Studio 17, macOS 10.15.7
iMac 2017 Radeon Pro 580 8 GB VRAM, 32 GB RAM
2018 Mac mini 16 GB RAM, eGFX Breakway RX 580 MacOS 10.15.7
PreviousNext

Return to DaVinci Resolve

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: chooeybooey, cyberphile, Mike Warren, RikshaDriver, Roger Singh, Shrinivas Ramani, Tim.Willis and 84 guests