Fuji X-T3 released

markfpv said:
I'm not sure what you're saying here... but just as an fyi to make sure you're aware - I can import 1tb worth of HEVC footage - and just simply check the "create optimize media" button under "transcoding" in the media import window. And I can start editing that footage immediately on the timeline. The transcoding happens in the background while I edit. Sure, I could go wait... but I don't have to.
Click to expand...
I tried editing my HEVC footage by attaching proxies in Premiere Pro (similar to what FCP X does I guess) and my whole system froze for like a half hour. I was lucky to be able to force quit. I guess PP isn't up to the task yet...
 
scorsesefan said:
I tried editing my HEVC footage by attaching proxies in Premiere Pro (similar to what FCP X does I guess) and my whole system froze for like a half hour. I was lucky to be able to force quit. I guess PP isn't up to the task yet...
Click to expand...

(sorry for the thread derail) I've not really tried editing any HEVC directly in FCPX - so can't report how it runs on my late 2012 iMac. Keep meaning to test this - but have always transcoded for my paid work. (transcoding is different than using proxies).

puredrifting said:
On my 2017 27" iMac, it works exactly this way. You just see the image a bit softer until it's all converted. But as far as editing, you can begin immediately, that's one of the best things about FCP X.
Click to expand...

Yes - one of...As a former happy PP, Avid & other edit software user, I can honestly say (now anyway because it took me some time - and honestly the first few updates to come around to X after it was first announced) that I feel I'm most productive & fastest using that magnetic timeline for the majority of my work. I know it's not a popular opinion... but once you get past that initial "this is so different from any other software I've used" mentality, it can be eye-opening. Background rendering & transcoding but also metadata support for most LOG footage is superb. YRMV
 
Oh, it's popular once most come around (including myself who had the same initial thoughts).

Apple knows what they are doing and even though they aren't always right, I'm assuming they researched this one heavily. It just all really works much better this way, but some never end up liking it (understandable of course).
 
NorBro said:
Oh, it's popular once most come around (including myself who had the same initial thoughts).

Apple knows what they are doing and even though they aren't always right, I'm assuming they researched this one heavily. It just all really works much better this way, but some never end up liking it (understandable of course).
Click to expand...

Not sure if you guys have seen Off the Tracks but had a chance to see it and to chat with Randy Ubilios at the LAFCPUG.org meeting a few months ago and every editor should see it.
What Apple did was actually pretty gutsy, they shifted the editing paradigm. A lot of editors hate it and Apple alienated a lot of pros but as a long term decision, FCP X was a brilliant move.
Old habits die hard and older editors are definitely divided but a hint, if you are an older pro editor, FCP X was not conceived with you in mind. I'm an older editor and while certain things about
FCP X drive me insane, overall, it's what I edit on simply because its faster and simpler than the competition. If I was cutting a network show, I would use AVID, but for what I and the majority of media content
generators need, FCP X is hard to not like.

FCP X is much better positioned than Adobe, AVID and to a point, even BMD, to be the editing tool of choice into the future but you'll have to watch the documentary to really understand why.

https://offthetracksmovie.com/
 
dcoughla said:
(Mods, please let us know what we need to do to in order to get a dedicated forum for the XT-3 here at DVXUser so we can start categorizing information by topic instead of trying to find it in this gigantic thread. It would be a huge help to the existing community and probably draw some new members as well!)
Click to expand...

Not a dedicated forum to the X-T3, but a dedicated forum to Fuji would indeed be wonderful!
 
FCP-X may be a great product but I think Apple lost all goodwill from pros and a lot of high-end market share. If it had been called iMovie Pro, and if the development and support for the old FCP was continued, it would have been a brilliant move. As it stands, it's a strong shift towards the consumer market and away from the pro market. Personally, I don't like it, but it's definitely more complex than just "good" or "bad".
 
This video is a MUST WATCH for all Fujifilm video shooters:

It explains and offers solutions to a colour shift issue that affect red and green hues in Fujifilm internally recorded video files

 
Samuel H said:
.... As it stands, it's a strong shift towards the consumer market and away from the pro market....
Click to expand...

Don't want to reanimate a flogged-and-dead-horse debate. And I very much respect your knowledge and extensive contributions, but I cannot let that statement stand.

You are perpetuating the "fake news" spread by those that don't like the paradigm shift. You don't have to like it, but it's far from a consumer product (that would be iMovie).
 
IronFilm said:
Not a dedicated forum to the X-T3, but a dedicated forum to Fuji would indeed be wonderful!
Click to expand...

We've been asking that from about 50 pages back, ain't happening.
I started a FB/IG/Twitter for Fujifilm Pro Video Shooters, imaginatively called www.facebook.com/fujifilmprovideoshooters @fujifilmprovideoshooters
Please stop by and contribute. Just doing it for fun and mainly because they won't give us a Fujifilm board here.
 
Samuel H said:
FCP-X may be a great product but I think Apple lost all goodwill from pros and a lot of high-end market share. If it had been called iMovie Pro, and if the development and support for the old FCP was continued, it would have been a brilliant move. As it stands, it's a strong shift towards the consumer market and away from the pro market. Personally, I don't like it, but it's definitely more complex than just "good" or "bad".
Click to expand...

Watch the film if you want to understand why they did this. Shrewd marketing move.
 
stoneinapond said:
Don't want to reanimate a flogged-and-dead-horse debate. And I very much respect your knowledge and extensive contributions, but I cannot let that statement stand.

You are perpetuating the "fake news" spread by those that don't like the paradigm shift. You don't have to like it, but it's far from a consumer product (that would be iMovie).
Click to expand...

Exactly. The very definition of what a "pro editor" is is quickly becoming irrelevant in today's media landscape and definitely in tomorrows.
Apple positioned themselves very smartly to capitalize on this while the other three are still somewhat stuck in the past.
How many of us need tape capture, film output conform, Cinema Tools, etc. anymore? You don't have to like it and can deny it all you want
but the fact is what an editor is today and what an editor will be in five years from now is radically different.

AI will take over AE functionality (Adobe Sensei anyone?) and will handle all of the borin, dreary parts of editing like media ingest, conforming, transcription and will eventually
do full rough assembly (Editors will turn more into programming media asset managers to an extent), telling the program to look for key emotional arcs/characteristics/
What we know is being a video editor is radically changing. Sure, there will always be the traditional way of editing but a lot of it will become AI powered.

In the end, do you like editing because of all of the tedious mechanical functions of it, or do you like editing because you like telling great stories? If the answer is the former, then
the future isn't bright for that mindset. If the latter, the new paradigm and tools will be a mixed bag but like it or not, editing as a function, is undergoing a seismic shift and as we
the olds die off, who will be "editors"? Right, people who were born with a mobile phone in hand, playing video games more than watching filmed entertainment. What FCP X will
become is totally, 100% aimed at that audience, not at us. Brilliant marketing move. AVID (if they survive), Adobe and BMD will catch up to this if they are to survive but Apple is
pretty well positioned for this change already and was moving toward it a decade ago.
 
Last edited:
I may be wrong about that (I can be wrong, it has happened before). Still, the initial reaction by most pros was "this is for consumers, not for me, and the way they handled it makes me feel betrayed". I've never used FCP-X, I'm just reflecting on those initial reactions.
 
Samuel H said:
FCP-X may be a great product but I think Apple lost all goodwill from pros and a lot of high-end market share. If it had been called iMovie Pro, and if the development and support for the old FCP was continued, it would have been a brilliant move. As it stands, it's a strong shift towards the consumer market and away from the pro market. Personally, I don't like it, but it's definitely more complex than just "good" or "bad".
Click to expand...

It wouldn't have been brilliant; it would have slowed them down until they just couldn't support it anymore.

Apple gave FCP a 12 year run. Made the software a beautiful legend.

But it was time to move on. And I think the biggest problem was that people were just not ready for it.

I can only imagine how difficult it is to develop software like this with so many moving parts (thousands of intricate details/functions), and I think everything just couldn't make it into the new version.

Essentially the same thing happened with the $500 Sonys you use to make your short films. Life changed and these cameras (technology) were made available to consumers for much less money. I know it's not an accurate comparison, but the initial distaste for FCP X is actually very similar to the general feelings about the barriers to entry for what's now considered professional production equipment.

I think 99% of the world was super miffed back then and it's more than okay to be disheartened by losing your favorite features that may have made your editing life so much better, but if you're still on this notion of a "consumer vs. professional market" then maybe it's time to consider that a professional market for these products does not exist anymore.
 
Samuel H said:
I may be wrong about that (I can be wrong, it has happened before). Still, the initial reaction by most pros was "this is for consumers, not for me, and the way they handled it makes me feel betrayed". I've never used FCP-X, I'm just reflecting on those initial reactions.
Click to expand...

100% agree, there was a huge shift, which is why Premiere Pro is even considered a viable product today because Adobe essentially turned it into FCP 8.
Before FCP X, Premiere was a buggy, unstable app mainly for hobbyists. It was Apple's shift that left the gate open for Adobe to take a lot of editing platform market share.
You have to examine the bigger picture. Most established high profile editors are not kids, they are in their 40s-70s. They are not staying in the workforce much longer,
not to mention dying. So Apple examined a long term game plan and implemented, fully knowing they would piss off a lot of pros. It's funny Samuel, watch the film and
youll see that FCP X IS iMovie Pro and while today's editing pros will scoff at that, there is an entire generation of new content creators who bought a Mac, intuitively learned iMovie
but now need a more robust editing program. FCP X is PERFECT for them and there are millions of them.

Like I said, "Pro" editors as we know them today are shrinking as an audience through attrition. Pro content creators, however, are growing exponentially and FCP X is the perfect tool for them.
FCP X does many "Pro" features very well now like simple CC and grading, simple motion GRFX, more with Motion, multi cam is excellent, Compressor is awesome for what I use it for.
Granted, IMHO, Resolve is a more robust and visually sophisticated tool and BMD are taking an aggressive approach to gaining market share. But FCP X is much easier to learn and become proficient on than any other editing program,
ESPECIALLY if its your first pro editing program. Most people who have issues with FCP X are older, established editors like me, where I get frustrated because it can't do things in the same way that I used to do them in FCP Studio and on AVID. Who cares, users like
me are rapidly becoming irrelevant to the landscape.

I recently took a multi-day workshop on FCP X at Canon in Burbank and the power in FCP X is understanding how it works, accepting how it works and being a fanatic about your metadata input and utilization, basically like a DIT. If you are willing to do that,
FCP X, IMHO, is the most powerful editing app on the market by far, when the Metadata functionality is fully utilized. The other big three programs support Metadata in some interesting and varied ways but FCP X is 100% built as a metadata driven app. Many people who don't "get" FCP X aren't willing to put in
the time to learn how it works, they just want it to be FCP 8 or AVID MC and it is so NOT either of those programs. If you want FCP 8, you'll much happier in Adobe's Extortion priced CC and if you want AVID MC, you want an AVID and gotta pay the monthly ransom to AVID. Resolve is kind of an outlier and in a way
demands the same abandonment of what you already know and you have to embrace the node based workflow and the Resolve way of doing things.

I'm not saying that as pure editing programs, ANY of them are better or worse. I find the great stuff to like in all of them, even Premiere CC, they all have pluses and minuses and all can be used to edit almost anything. I have been in this
business long enough though to know that the majority of editing pros who hate FCP X, just simply hate the paradigm shift in content creation that is happening and sweeping them toward irrelevancy.

Oh yeah, getting back on topic to the Fuji X-T3, anyone hear when we are getting our new firmware update?
 
NorBro said:
But it was time to move on. And I think the biggest problem was that people were just not ready for it.
I think 99% of the world was super miffed back then and it's more than okay to be disheartened by losing your favorite features that may have made your editing life so much better, but if you're still on this notion of a "consumer vs. professional market" then maybe it's time to consider that a professional market for these products does not exist anymore.
Click to expand...

^This. Totally agree. Perhaps the biggest issue was lack of backwards compatibility. That really hurt any editor/user - who had lots of projects that might eventually need updated totally disgusted upon the announcement ( I was one of them frankly.) How will I edit that 10 minute corporate video with the new footage and logo - if I can't import that project into the new update? And that would seem to affect the "pro" market more than the "consumer" market - or did back then anyway. But that line is no longer distinguishable in any meaningful way with nearly any equipment. Is GoPro footage "pro" because so many professionals use them? There's a long list of of "old" lines being crossed all the time.
 
NorBro said:
haha, dude...you cannot be speaking about it then.

(Reflecting on others' reactions is terrible. You're much smarter.)
Click to expand...

Especially with how aggressive they've been with updating FCPX (and for free). A while back there was an FStoppers article ripping FCPX and it turned out a lot of the complaints were relevant a year before the article, but had been resolved.

FCPX is very different now than it was at launch, but hasn't shed the initial shock because people (understandably) don't keep up with software they hated. I'd almost think it'd be in Apple's best interest to release a new numbered version just to reset the rep.

Easy to forget FCPX came out nearly 8 years ago (June 2011.)

EDIT: Not to pile on you Sam; a lot of people have older or 2nd hand impressions of FCPX.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top