The deeper you get into motion, Apple's FCP X seems like a good idea that needs work, or a bad idea that needs a rewrite.
I'm hopping for the former, because when you think about it, a single base software with add on's to take you as far as you want to go could redefine editing to finish.
We just returned with over 16 terabytes of raw footage and when you look at that stack of drives you come to the shuttering conclusion that to get to the final edit is right up there with post produciton of a good indie movie.
It's almost frightening to think of the amount of work that is ahead of us and if FCP X can do anything right . . . it's fast.
Now it just needs to be more professional and flexible which allows more creativity in the edit.
You kind of get the idea that Apple should just write a check (and everybody knows they got the money) to somebody like Avid and say let's make FCP heavy, lay out a road map for app add ons and start selling.
I don't see it James. For many reasons.
Avid or Premiere are getting also more and more simple and in fact, if I keep my head cold and follow the "rational path", you can already do everything to finishing (except heavy fx and some 3D stab that can be added) in Avid without having to open any external software and more importantly, not maybe tomorrow but today for sure.
The grading in Avid is very straightforward and as I experienced with Scratch, where are the differences? None!
Also, remember that Avid "grades" the Red files in Raw. It's like you'd work exactly like with RedCineX but within the Avid Timeline in real time (but with the Avid's cursors). So when you want to push isos or Raw stuff kind of works, you don't degrade. And you don't need anything else than Media Composer, no need to get out of timeline, render or whatever. It's not exactly color correction in the normal sense, it's that you can actually do basically what RedCineX does working on raw datas. In fact it's having the RedCineX functions without the RedCineX step, wich is already very nice.
But here is a cool point: if a truth raw color correction is needed for free
, you can always export an XML from your avid, import in RedCineX and conform from there what you did in Avid, the all sequence.
That's a pretty much straighforward way.
And let's say you need to mask, stuff like that, you can then re-import the raw graded into Avid natively and use then the tools within the timeline, so in fact with 2 softwares a lot can be already done brillantly. I don't even use the metafuze stuff.
Then, about the possible re-write I don't see that the pros who have been feeling spoiled by Apple and already switched will be back again just like that if Apple is putting FCX to pro workflow because then a re-learning etc etc. Because remember that it's not just going to be a FCP8, it's not a continuity but a complete re-learning so when you put that on the table, if a complete re-learning will actually occurs you may want to go stable in softwares that are moving forward for pro needs because Apple has clearly choosen the massificate target, that is good because they needed to be very simple, that is bad because they needed to be very simple. Simple and intuitive yes, but without limitations.
Do we want the KIA NLE? (where all the familly, gran'ma, is sitting with the childs who are screaming with their I.pads games while the dog is barking and mum in front is screaming to the childs while talking to her mum on the I.phone and the big belly dad with the hat is driving guess where...to Miami with the gps activated because reading motorway signs is not the deal and they will take pics and videos of their big bellies eating enormous icecreams colored with their Apple mobiles, edit them in FCPX and press the button "send-to-youtube"). That's more or less the Apple's target. I have serious doubts if they have the will to work more for their former clients.
And there is also this free software wich is a sort of FCPX but featured for pro workflow that is called Lightworks. It has this sort of new-age colored interface that I really don't like but it's not amateur at all and in RedUsers it's been used and for what I read people are happy, it's very good. I've been trying it and didn't like it at all but not because underfeatured but because it's weired, too different and look toy (although it isn't at all). http://reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?43671-Lightworks-to-go-Open-Source&s=271eae7079c00252a653cdfc1e7874d8http://library.creativecow.net/battistella_david/lightworks/1
One thing is sure, we all want something simple, efficient and fast that covers all the pipeline to finishing.