fbpx
Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more?

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 07 Dec 2019 21:42 #103023

  • Redifer
  • Redifer's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 861
  • Thank you received: 79
Real talk, not a troll post.

Resolve is free to use to edit and color grade. The color grading is supposedly the best in the entire world. The editing is pretty robust. Of course it doesn't have all of the editing features FCP does... at least not yet. But it has most of the important ones. Even at its most expensive Resolve cost only as much as FCP. Plus it's multiplatform.

I feel that Apple should take every single color-grading feature that's offered in Resolve and put similar tools into FCP. Otherwise they'll soon be outclassed. I know they kind of have here and there with the new color wheels and also the new HSL masks. Hopefully they continue and do it quickly. Moving a project from app to app is annoying and I like things all in one place if I can have them. With Resolve evolving the way it is, what will be the point of FCP existing in the future, especially if Resolve is free? Who WOULDN'T choose that over any other NLE?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 07 Dec 2019 22:35 #103024

  • Oliver Peters
  • Oliver Peters's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Senior Boarder
  • Senior Boarder
  • Posts: 73
  • Karma: 2
  • Thank you received: 5
The current market has 7 "pro" NLEs: FCPX, Premiere Pro, Media Composer, Resolve, Lightworks, Edius, and Vegas. Plus the lower tier: Rush, LumaFusion, and iMovie. Each of these appeal to their respective market segments and while they all share similarities, they also have unique features. Just because you have a powerful, low cost NLE doesn't mean the others no longer have a need in the market.

Resolve is a great color correction tool, but it is not the only one, nor even the best high-end grading tool. Part of the beauty to its color page is the layout, not just the toolset. Simply adding the same tools into FCPX won't make it a comparable grading tool, because the workflow and layout is different. Right now, BMD is headed to making Resolve a good all-in-one tool, but few editors will truly master all aspects of it. However, you can use as much or as little as you're like. Then learn the rest over time.

The bottom line is that people who like to edit in FCPX, because of its unique qualities, won't jump to Resolve, as long as Apple continues its development efforts. However, better interoperability between FCPX and Motion and/or Logic would go a long way towards abating the advantages of Resolve.

- Oliver

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 07 Dec 2019 23:57 #103025

  • cofe
  • cofe's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Expert Boarder
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 146
  • Karma: 2
  • Thank you received: 26
Absolutely no reason to stick with FCPx, or any other NLE for that matter. If price is an issue, you can't beat Resolve right now.
I would argue though that FCPx features are absolutely unique in the NLE market. Keywording, rating your footage, magnetic timeline, the primary storyline structure, a minimal approach with maximum flexibility, strong extensibility to cater for specialized workflows, tight integration with the OS, are some of the points that make me choose FCPx over the rest.
If you're after more buttons and shortcuts, and more everything, Resolve is certainly a winner. I doubt though that any of the added functionality is actually helping you to do everything. There is only so much time in a day I can use to create 5 power windows on every shot for colour grading, plus 5 effects on every clip of audio sweetening, etc. If you have a large crew of specialist that do all these tasks separately, sure it's nice to have it all in one software package, and therefore easier to share.
But I work alone and for me the fewer, but very well designed, functions make my work easier. I will never be able to grade like the teams on a multi-million dollar movie or work for weeks on the soundtrack. So I do not need, or better do not want! all the functionality of Resolve. It would slow me down.
And while on the subject I really, really hope that the FCP team doesn't succumb the pressure of the internet and fall into the trap of adding one feature after the next just for feature sake. I rather have them spent time mulling and re-designing over and over a certain functionality to find out whether it would really be an advancement or just some shiny feature to make us tech nerds happy and have something to talk about.
my 2 cents :-) Carsten

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 08 Dec 2019 01:01 #103027

  • JarrodMFay
  • JarrodMFay's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 168
  • Karma: 2
  • Thank you received: 34
Yeah, editing with Resolve is a completely different experience than with FCPX. Not to mention the hardware requirements are much steeper with Resolve. I do love the node based color correction but I'm way happier editing with FCPX.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 08 Dec 2019 02:00 #103028

  • Redifer
  • Redifer's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 861
  • Thank you received: 79

cofe wrote: So I do not need, or better do not want! all the functionality of Resolve. It would slow me down.


So you have no desire for FCP to improve at all because it would slow you down? Why not just use iMove instead?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 08 Dec 2019 02:37 #103029

  • FCPX.guru
  • FCPX.guru's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • bbalser.com
  • Posts: 3680
  • Karma: 34
  • Thank you received: 509
I work with a turn around time in minutes. Resolve simply can't do it, nor can PPro. There are huge professional reasons for FCPX to exist. Resolve doesn't work for every situation. No NLE works in all situations. If one did, there'd only be one.

I do not think cofe meant FCP should not improve, not what I interpreted from his post. I think he is simply saying he hopes the FCPX dev team doesn't convolute FCPX into a very complex, unwieldy beast like Avid or Resolve.

Claiming an NLE is "robust" is a subjective statement, not a fact. I don't think Resolve is "robust". It has a lot of tools, but they're not fast, not like FCPX. I don't know any TV stations using it locally. FCPX and PPro own broadcast in all the stations I associate with. I know there are some Grassvalley, some Avids, but Resolve has very few TV stations.

Vegas? Who's using Vegas?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by FCPX.guru.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 08 Dec 2019 04:14 #103030

  • cofe
  • cofe's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Expert Boarder
  • Expert Boarder
  • Posts: 146
  • Karma: 2
  • Thank you received: 26
Of course, I want FCPx to improve, it would be silly to think otherwise.
I guess the difference is what I think would be an improvement and what you think would be one.

Simplicity doesn't equal a lack of capabilities. Done right it actually means the opposite. The same way the best amplifiers in the world have like 4 or fewer things you can change because the rest is optimized and doesn't need interference, the same way FCPx doesn't need a media, cut, edit, grade, mix, and delivery page, and I could go on.
What it has is simple and very efficiently constructed, resulting in a very powerful tool.

For me, a good example is the Cut page in Resolve. It looks like it was created because the main edit page is complicated and might scare some people off. What's next? A simple grade page with no nodes because the full-fledge color page is complicated? Where is the limit for how many sections Resolve should have? 10 or 20 or...

Look at FCP. The same timeline can be used in a almost childlike simplicity, as well do very complicated edits if that's what you need. That's for me is a genius design and that takes time to get right. And it could be easily destroyed by trying to please everybody.

And I do not agree with the argument that every NLE has its place. I think that's a little historic copout starting with the bad rep FCPx got in the beginning. FCPx can edit any type of program that is out there. Even a reality TV show with many collaborators. You just have to know how to set it up. Now you might decide it's too complicated for you personally, doesn't mean it can't do it. And because not everybody needs the sharing functionality it might be better not to build it into the NLE and keep the code cleaner and simpler, but allow hooks from the NLE to 3rd party developers that build the sharing capabilities externally.

The reason different NLEs exist is that people like different things. Like with everything else in life. Somebody thinks they make a better product so they create another one. All NLEs these days can edit any program you like. The question is simply which one you like best. If Resolve does the trick for you then using it is the right choice for you.
I choose FCPx because I think it's the best NLE available right now. If somebody comes up with something better I have a look at it. Right now Avid, Premiere or Resolve do not even come close for me. And I definitely don't want things in FCP that are just a copy of what Avid, Premiere or Resolve does. If I would need, or want them, then I would switch :-)

FCPx is far from being obsolete!

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by cofe.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 08 Dec 2019 12:22 #103032

  • joema
  • joema's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1632
  • Karma: 27
  • Thank you received: 352

Redifer wrote: ... Even at its most expensive Resolve cost only as much as FCP. Plus it's multiplatform.
...I feel that Apple should take every single color-grading feature that's offered in Resolve and put similar tools into FCP. Otherwise they'll soon be outclassed.... Moving a project from app to app is annoying and I like things all in one place if I can have them. With Resolve evolving the way it is, what will be the point of FCP existing in the future, especially if Resolve is free? Who WOULDN'T choose that over any other NLE?


I own the paid version of Resolve Studio and just got through using it side-by-side with FCPX on the same iMac Pro, editing a large documentary. Ironically it wasn't used for color but because the initial editor used Resolve and I had to edit in that until I could finally get the complex timeline moved to FCPX, then merge with another piece of the timeline which was edited in Premiere (which I also have).

After using the latest version of all three NLEs on the same machine, I'd rate the overall responsiveness as FCPX 1st, Resolve 2nd and Premiere a distant 3rd. The XML interchange works better between FCPX and Resolve than between FCPX and Premiere (even if aided by SendToX).

I'm not sure how many FCPX users have switched to Resolve but apparently many Premiere users have switched. You can Google that to see their experiences, what they liked and didn't like.

Resolve is a complex product. The manual is 3,016 pages. It has built-in collaboration (on a LAN), and the image stabilizer is much better than any other I've used. The color features are great. However Color Finale 2.0 will be released in two days and contains advanced features such as tracker, Metal 2 GPU support, HDR support, image analysis tools, film grain emulations, ACES color management, etc.

The "free" version of Resolve is lacking many features, including the below. Not stated in this list is the paid "Studio" version has improved hardware-accelerated encode/decode performance on H.264 and H.265 codecs. Due to the various hardware acceleration configurations on Macs (some have Quick Sync, some have T2, some have both), you'd have to run your own tests on a given version of hardware, macOS and Resolve to be sure.

Features missing from free version of Resolve:

De-interlace
HDR support
HEVC decoding
High 10 Profile (10 bit) H.264 decoding
Multiple GPU support
Dehaze
Face Refinement
Sharpen
Skin soften
Deflicker
Spatial/temporal video noise reduction
Timeline resolution higher than UHD (3840 x 2160)

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 08 Dec 2019 13:28 #103035

  • FCPX.guru
  • FCPX.guru's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • bbalser.com
  • Posts: 3680
  • Karma: 34
  • Thank you received: 509
FCPX is by far the cheapest route, also. Besides the limited free version of others, if you need serious professional level work done. And Apple stated publicly from the beginning that FCPX was a DSLR model of development. They provide the camera body, you go out and purchase the add-ons that you need, don't waste money on things you don't need. Which works for some of us. I will admit I do miss having real professional audio mixing tools. A round-trip to Logic simply doesn't work for me.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 08 Dec 2019 13:45 #103037

  • cseeman
  • cseeman's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 751
  • Karma: 6
  • Thank you received: 60
Apple certainly has a motive for FCPX, Motion, Logic to exist. It's the only professional NLE on Mac that doesn't offer a pathway to Windows.

As a Blackmagic camera user, to take the best advantage of some features in the camera, I'm spending time to learn Resolve, in which the paid license is included with the camera.

But Blackmagic cameras are not the only ones I use, nor are they the only camera source clients give me to do post work on.

One question I can't help but ask is whether Apple appreciates or uses that advantage as well as it can. FCPX's initial release showed major innovation. As time goes on, most of the features added seem to be catch up, adding features already available in other NLEs.

As Resolve improves its NLE and innovates with the Cut Page (which can speed workflow in different ways than FCPX) it becomes a very real consideration for FCPX users.

Whether its Blackmagic cameras or the growth of the use of flavors if "RAW" and Log, color grading has become much more important even for the most pedestrian work.

I think some factors evoke the kind of question we see here. While FCPX had been the better editor (IMHO), Resolve's development on the NLE side appears to be much faster than FCPX is on its color toolset, its audio toolset (and some might argue development on Motion has been stagnant).

I do think some FCPX users are restless and 10.5 will be telling for many of them. I recall Apple saying they had a 10-year plan for FCPX. One might think FCPX is in the legacy FCP 6 to 7 stage at perhaps that's a subconscious concern.

Much of the above is NLE veteran-focused though.

If I were a newbie entering the "getting serious" stage and purchasing a BMD camera with full Resolve Studio why would I consider buying FCPX, possibly with the additional cost of plugins? If I were buying one of the more affordable cameras with the intent of shooting log why would I purchase FCPX when I can download and jump into Resolve?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 08 Dec 2019 15:02 #103039

  • Axel
  • Axel's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 559
  • Karma: 10
  • Thank you received: 72
Obviously I'm an FCPX fanboy. Wasn't from the start, it took some time. Before, all of a sudden, I wholly embraced the idea of *not longer having to manage tracks*

It'd be hard for me to go back, but perhaps it'd be wise to be able to. No one knows whether Apple will stay committed. No one knows if the way things develop will suit my or your needs a few years from now.

As I see it, BM with Resolve is very innovative, and there are many things I like in the new Cut page. But others are missing - like no smart folders in the Cut page? WTF?

And then, I can't for the love of God come up with one justification why there should be tracks. Nor can anybody. And I did read what wise, experienced cutters had to say in defense. And I understood it. But I don't agree, it's not for me.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 08 Dec 2019 21:52 #103041

  • FCPX.guru
  • FCPX.guru's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • bbalser.com
  • Posts: 3680
  • Karma: 34
  • Thank you received: 509
Just as FCPX helps Apple sell computers, Resolve helps BMD sell its hardware, as Resolve won't work with non-BMD hardware.

NLE's are subjective, this debate is all about a subjective matter, so no consensus will be reached at all.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 08 Dec 2019 23:39 #103042

  • AV-Ultra
  • AV-Ultra's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Fresh Boarder
  • Posts: 18
  • Karma: -1
  • Thank you received: 2
As others mentioned. I think 10.5 will be very telling of what Apple is planning going forward.
With a push to services- I could see FCP being free but multiuser, iCloud proxy libraries, and better tracking being subscription services.

I don't know if Gamesack will be the same without FCP!
Also I really like your stacked slice transitions lately.

Personally I see Frame.io being a full online, multiuser realtime editor for newsrooms in less than 5 years.
Those are the people I'm keeping my eye on.

The future I see, doesn't require any kind of desktop or any specific OS.
Just a web browser.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 09 Dec 2019 02:15 #103044

  • Redifer
  • Redifer's Avatar Topic Author
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 861
  • Thank you received: 79

cofe wrote: For me, a good example is the Cut page in Resolve. It looks like it was created because the main edit page is complicated and might scare some people off. What's next? A simple grade page with no nodes because the full-fledge color page is complicated? Where is the limit for how many sections Resolve should have? 10 or 20 or...

I agree that Resolve sort of seems cobbled together, combined with a rather high learning curve. A curve so high that Ripple Training figures they can get $200+ for their Resolve tutorials. In my personal experience, I can get better color grading results with FCP than I can get with Resolve, but I don't know Resolve that well. But I still want the tools and I feel that what FCP has them integrated better than the same thing in Resolve. Nodes? What's that? How does that differentiate between stacking order in FCP? I still do not know.


Joema wrote: I'm not sure how many FCPX users have switched to Resolve but apparently many Premiere users have switched.

I know one Premiere user who is trying to switch as he is sick of Premiere. I don't know of any FCP users who have switched. I haven't. Like pretty much everyone else here, I like the editing experience best in FCP.


FCPX.guru wrote: Resolve helps BMD sell its hardware, as Resolve won't work with non-BMD hardware.

lolwut? I've imported footage from Panasonic GH5S, Canon C100 Mark 2, and an Arri Alexa into Resolve and it works. Maybe you mean "works best"?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Redifer.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 09 Dec 2019 04:31 #103047

  • arc
  • arc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: -2
  • Thank you received: 22

cofe wrote:
Look at FCP. The same timeline can be used in a almost childlike simplicity, as well do very complicated edits if that's what you need. That's for me is a genius design and that takes time to get right. And it could be easily destroyed by trying to please everybody.


The horrible GUI of FCPX is why I still use Premiere Pro as my main NLE. Having said that the GUI is the most important aspect of any program.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 09 Dec 2019 04:35 #103048

  • arc
  • arc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: -2
  • Thank you received: 22

FCPX.guru wrote: I work with a turn around time in minutes. Resolve simply can't do it, nor can PPro.


I have FCPX and Premiere Pro both. What can FCPX do that Premiere Pro can't do other than offer trackless workflow which I don't need? I want to learn.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 09 Dec 2019 04:35 #103049

  • Karsten Schlüter
  • Karsten Schlüter's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Moderator
  • Moderator
  • Posts: 3687
  • Karma: 61
  • Thank you received: 662
Interesting, very interesting discussion!

From my POV as a non-pro user:
Looking jealously to the many ‘marvel’ features Adobe software offers, such as auto-masking, auto-selecting, auto-filling, auto-deleting… (don’t now AP offers all those, but Adobe at last show such techniques on its many conferences).

Will be interesting wether these ’smart’ features will translate any given time, partly already existing on IOS devices to macOS/FCPX, beginning with a smart_Tracker (tracking objects, not dots), smart_Selecting (one click, not drawing), or smart_Keying (using depth-info, not color) …

'Nodes' would be handy in a from-the-ground-new MotionX …

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 09 Dec 2019 04:57 #103050

  • Axel
  • Axel's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 559
  • Karma: 10
  • Thank you received: 72

arc wrote:

FCPX.guru wrote: I work with a turn around time in minutes. Resolve simply can't do it, nor can PPro.


I have FCPX and Premiere Pro both. What can FCPX do that Premiere Pro can't do other than offer trackless workflow which I don't need? I want to learn.


Okay, you are now officially the ambassador for Premiere. Perhaps you can explain why you prefer tracks. Or why we miss something without them.

But to your question: I prefer a primary storyline with connected clips for two reasons:
1. It‘s easier and faster to execute a concept.
2. No track-management needed.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 09 Dec 2019 05:20 #103051

  • arc
  • arc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 248
  • Karma: -2
  • Thank you received: 22

Axel wrote:

arc wrote:

FCPX.guru wrote: I work with a turn around time in minutes. Resolve simply can't do it, nor can PPro.


I have FCPX and Premiere Pro both. What can FCPX do that Premiere Pro can't do other than offer trackless workflow which I don't need? I want to learn.


Okay, you are now officially the ambassador for Premiere. Perhaps you can explain why you prefer tracks. Or why we miss something without them.

But to your question: I prefer a primary storyline with connected clips for two reasons:
1. It‘s easier and faster to execute a concept.
2. No track-management needed.



Perhaps you read what I posted wrong. I didn't say I prefer tracks but for my workflow tracks work just fine. I don't doubt for some a trackless workflow might have an advantage but I asked other than a trackless workflow what is the biggest advantage of FCPX over Premiere Pro? Your answers ties into the trackless workflow doesn't it?

Having said that this thread seems like it should be in the Off Topic Forum.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 09 Dec 2019 13:25 #103054

  • FCPX.guru
  • FCPX.guru's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • bbalser.com
  • Posts: 3680
  • Karma: 34
  • Thank you received: 509

Redifer wrote: lolwut? I've imported footage from Panasonic GH5S, Canon C100 Mark 2, and an Arri Alexa into Resolve and it works. Maybe you mean "works best”?


It won’t work with video conversion and I/O hardware from any other company but BMD. It won’t work with AJA hardware, will it?

And yes, this clearly should have been put in the Off-Topic category. It's an endless debate, it's all subjective, no one can give hard proof of anything.

I can assemble, organize, edit and export faster in FCPX in our professional broadcast TV station than I have been able to in PPro or Resolve. We've tested, FCPX gives us the fastest workflow. That's just us in a live TV station. Other stations use other NLEs. It's all so, so subjective.

I am teaching other editors we just hired, who are PPro and Avid users, and they are all loving how fast and easy FCPX is for our environment. But, that's just us...

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by FCPX.guru.