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? 09 Dec 2019 13:28 #103055

  • joema
  • joema's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1517
  • Karma: 27
  • Thank you received: 329

arc wrote: ... other than a trackless workflow what is the biggest advantage of FCPX over Premiere Pro? ...


Sam Mestman feels the strongest advantages of FCPX are the organizational tools and integrated database. This is in the first few paragraphs of this article: www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/1917-o...-part-2-organization

This thread title is about Resolve, and Scott Simmons wrote a nice article highlighting advances in Resolve data management that are slowly bringing it closer to FCPX: www.provideocoalition.com/davinci-resolv...ge-based-keywording/

Re editing performance in terms of latency and responsiveness, it's difficult to compare without having Resolve and FCPX on the same machine, or at least identical machines running MacOS. Otherwise there are too many variables. There are also performance advances in the paid "Studio" version of Resolve missing from the free version.

I have the full studio version of Resolve, FCPX and Premiere on my 10-core Vega 64 iMac Pro and have done extensive side-by-side tests including major production work with all three. In general FCPX feels the fastest but Resolve Studio 16 is very competitive and actually faster in a few isolated cases.

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

Last edit: by joema.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 09 Dec 2019 13:49 #103057

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

arc wrote: 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?


1. Better performance on the same Macs. Way better.
2. Better stability. Night and day difference.
3. Through skimming in a reasonably big import viewer and later, in Event viewer, in full resolution, a much faster access to the footage (no double clicks, no tiny thumbnail preview, instead continuous playback, which is just like Resolves source clip preview).
4. Smarter media management (last time I checked, did APP improve there?).
5. Simplistic GUI, more or less optimized for single displays. And for, you know, just editing.
6. Easier and more intuitive retiming. Saw an APP tut on time ramps last week, and there were too many steps necessary. I consider retiming a basic editing function.

I like Lumetri better than the FCPX color tools (I use AAE with XtoCC), but I like Resolves Color page the most.

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

Last edit: by Axel.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 09 Dec 2019 15:56 #103061

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

Redifer wrote: 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.


It takes one hour at most to understand nodes, and it's worth the effort. How it differs from the stacking order in FCP?

First of all, the said stacking order is visible in another window within inspector than the, er, Color Tab. You'd have to constantly skip back and forth.

Then it just says Color Wheels 1 or whatever, you can't rename/label it to describe what the purpose at that stage was, let alone that FCP would create a meaningful thumbnail.

And it's just one tool at a time, whereas a node can hold several tools, all of which are automatically shown by a little icon.

Furthermore, the color effects in FCP are not interactive. You can't take a selection only (color mask, shape mask) as an input for the next correction. Or the inverted selection. There are no parallel effects.

Because, whether it is FCP or Resolve, the next effect as well as the next node treats the previous one like an entirely new image. The flow from input-output-input is not represented in FCP, it's just a stupid list with no information as to what happened when. Also, the node itself is a little thumbnail that's instantly recognizable, in case you were too lazy to label your nodes ...

Then the Layer nodes. To pull through something like a composite with selections, you'd need to actually create layers (connected duplicates) in the FCP timeline, mess around with blend modes, what have you. In Resolve, this is very clean and very easy.

But generally, if what you do with your colors is just a good correction, if that's the extent of it, it can be faster or just as good as in Resolve. But better?

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 16:14 #103062

  • joema
  • joema's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 1517
  • Karma: 27
  • Thank you received: 329
Another option is using a color grading plugin with FCPX. Color Finale 2.0 will be released tomorrow and it will include auto-tracked masks, image analysis, Metal 2.0 support, and many other features. This would allow retaining editorial within FCPX without the complexity/uncertainty of round-tripping to Resolve.

The thread title is why not just switch to Resolve, and that is another option. However if you have a major team-wide investment in FCPX library content and workflow and if the main issue is need for better color tools, maybe something like Color Finale 2.0 would give another option.

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? 10 Dec 2019 06:11 #103083

  • arc
  • arc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 253
  • Karma: -2
  • Thank you received: 19

FCPX.guru wrote:
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 don't doubt what you say is true but keep in mind I can assemble, organize, edit and export 42 times faster using Premiere Pro than when using FCPX. Why would anyone use FCPX? Is it possible I know Premiere Pro better than FCPX?

My prior comments were made to demonstrate that simply stating that FCPX or Premiere Pro is faster has no merit without any proof. Having said that could you show us the process you use at work? As far I as I can tell they both work just fine but I could be proven wrong. If I ever see a good reason to switch 100% to FCPX I will do it.

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? 10 Dec 2019 06:41 #103084

  • arc
  • arc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 253
  • Karma: -2
  • Thank you received: 19

joema wrote:

arc wrote: ... other than a trackless workflow what is the biggest advantage of FCPX over Premiere Pro? ...


Sam Mestman feels the strongest advantages of FCPX are the organizational tools and integrated database. This is in the first few paragraphs of this article: www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/articles/1917-o...-part-2-organization

This thread title is about Resolve, and Scott Simmons wrote a nice article highlighting advances in Resolve data management that are slowly bringing it closer to FCPX: www.provideocoalition.com/davinci-resolv...ge-based-keywording/


I will try to watch all the videos but I can honestly say everything in the video below could be done using Premiere Pro CS 4 if not CS 3. In fact I think Premiere Pro's GUI gives it an advantage over 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? 10 Dec 2019 07:00 #103085

  • arc
  • arc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 253
  • Karma: -2
  • Thank you received: 19

Axel wrote:

arc wrote: 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?


1. Better performance on the same Macs. Way better.
2. Better stability. Night and day difference.
3. Through skimming in a reasonably big import viewer and later, in Event viewer, in full resolution, a much faster access to the footage (no double clicks, no tiny thumbnail preview, instead continuous playback, which is just like Resolves source clip preview).
4. Smarter media management (last time I checked, did APP improve there?).
5. Simplistic GUI, more or less optimized for single displays. And for, you know, just editing.
6. Easier and more intuitive retiming. Saw an APP tut on time ramps last week, and there were too many steps necessary. I consider retiming a basic editing function.

I like Lumetri better than the FCPX color tools (I use AAE with XtoCC), but I like Resolves Color page the most.


1 On the Mac FCPX might have better performance than Premiere or DR but Premiere Pro and DR are both multi-platform. Some people could not play 4K video clips from the GH5 at full resolution using FCPX on an iMac Pro without dropping frames. My system could play it but it did tax the CPU.

2 On the Mac FCPX is probably more stable although Premiere Pro works just fine on my Mac Mini.

3 Premiere can do the same thing for the most part but I will be willing to state the FCPX might do it better.

4 Premiere Pro CS 4 could do just about as much as FCPX.

5 The GUI of FCPX is horrible. The GUI is the number one thing I like best about Premiere Pro over any of the other NLEs.

6 I have not had to re-time my videos.

To be honest I am not a big fan of Premiere Pro's Lumetri Color Panel. Sure it works great with LUTs but it looks awful.

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? 10 Dec 2019 13:53 #103094

  • Axel
  • Axel's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 559
  • Karma: 10
  • Thank you received: 72
@arc
See?
The comparison is subjective to a point where it stops making sense. Particularly the part about the GUI. If you really find it „horrible“ (without further explanation, but once personal taste is involved, you don‘t need one), then you should abandon FCPX. Because under the hood these apps work similarly, it‘s the interaction with the user where they differ.

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? 10 Dec 2019 20:53 #103103

  • arc
  • arc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 253
  • Karma: -2
  • Thank you received: 19

Axel wrote: @arc
See?
The comparison is subjective to a point where it stops making sense. Particularly the part about the GUI. If you really find it „horrible“ (without further explanation, but once personal taste is involved, you don‘t need one), then you should abandon FCPX. Because under the hood these apps work similarly, it‘s the interaction with the user where they differ.


I agree everything is subjective.I bought a Mac Min and FCPX to be knowledgeable about FCPX and the Mac OS. I have done that. It was money well spent. Having said that I Iike FCPX but I also have criticisms. I also criticize Premiere Pro. FCPX users should learn either Premiere Pro, DR or Avid on the PC side to become more knowledgeable about what the competition can do. Many FCPX users have stated they wished FCPX had a customizable GUI like Premiere Pro. The static position GUI of FCPX is it's Achilles heal but that doesn't mean it doesn't work.

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? 10 Dec 2019 23:37 #103108

  • Domscillator
  • Domscillator's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Junior Boarder
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 26
  • Thank you received: 0
Very interesting discussion.

I guess what is the most worrying thing of all is that DaVinci Resolve and Premiere Pro are constantly coming up with new features and updates and with Final Cut Pro X (pretty much like Logic X), we users are getting really small, incremental updates for years.

When was the last "big" version since 10? It's been 8 years and we're still not on 10.5.
Like many other users mentioned:
-Auto-tracking: we still rely on Mocha engines or plugins that are less than stable
-Better and more flexible masking with color grading
-More comprehensive collaboration options
-Audio engine redesign: Let's face it, the audio engine in FCPX is simply disgraceful. No snap to zero crossing options (hence the audible clicks every time you cut audio), no proper plugin delay compensation, no routing, no bus processing, no ducking or sidechain capabilities- the list goes on). I am an audio guy and I have the apps needed to overcome these issues (namely, Cubase, Wavelab and iZotope RX), but audio is by far the one thing that is really basic in FCPX. And you know what they say about audio for your video...

That being said, I am a huge FCPX fan, the stability, speed, rendering times and flexibility with plugins make it really hard to beat and DaVinci will need to fight hard to compete (APP is not even a contender in my opinion, these rendering times are simply laughable).

I would really want to see a FCPX 10.5 knock it out of the park soon. It feels the application doesn't move on with the times if I could say only this about it.

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? 10 Dec 2019 23:59 #103109

  • arc
  • arc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 253
  • Karma: -2
  • Thank you received: 19

Domscillator wrote: Very interesting discussion.

That being said, I am a huge FCPX fan, the stability, speed, rendering times and flexibility with plugins make it really hard to beat and DaVinci will need to fight hard to compete (APP is not even a contender in my opinion, these rendering times are simply laughable).


Using a different video codec and a different hardware configuration will probably yield a different result. I don't think FCPX can edit BRAW can it? Now that Premiere Pro can edit BRAW I am thinking about getting a BMD Pocket Cinema Camera because my system can edit BRAW just fine.

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? 11 Dec 2019 02:10 #103112

  • cseeman
  • cseeman's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Posts: 746
  • Karma: 6
  • Thank you received: 59
With 10.4.8 being released today my guess is 10.5 is not near. My guess is no sooner than February and that would only be 8 to 10 weeks) away.

While the release of Color Finale 2 brings some things closer to Resolve in that department, the upgrade is north of $100 and a new purchase close to $150 (about half the price of the paid version of Resole).

I already have a BMPCC4K (and the older BMPCC) and can't take advantage of the best recording features in FCPX at all although this is more likely due to BMD than Apple from what I hear. It certainly makes Resolve a more attractive option and the paid version is free with the camera.

While I much prefer the FCPX editing paradigm over Resolve, X is now more expensive and lacking features compared to Resolve.

My concern is I'm not sure Apple is listening or committing the resources to FCPX to remain competitive as time goes on.

I'd expect 10.5 will be impressive but even that is speculative and if we're really 10 weeks away or longer I can become competent in Resolve before than (and I've bought the Ripple Training Resolve Tutorials).

Unlike some other NLE developers, Apple is overly silent about FCPX development even with "catch up" features whose announcement wouldn't give competitors an advantage.

I'm an Apple fan. and FCPX fan, I want to believe but my patience wears thin.

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

Last edit: by cseeman.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 11 Dec 2019 02:16 #103113

  • JarrodMFay
  • JarrodMFay's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 160
  • Karma: 2
  • Thank you received: 33
I've used both and FCPX is much faster for me. There are literally no features on Resolve that would make me want to switch over.

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? 11 Dec 2019 06:36 #103118

  • FCPX.guru
  • FCPX.guru's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Platinum Boarder
  • Platinum Boarder
  • bbalser.com
  • Posts: 3530
  • Karma: 34
  • Thank you received: 489
Second that.

Again, this is all just subjective opinions, there's no objective fact making one better than the other. This should seriously have been put (or needs to be moved to) the off-topic section.

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? 11 Dec 2019 06:55 #103119

  • arc
  • arc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 253
  • Karma: -2
  • Thank you received: 19

FCPX.guru wrote: Second that.

Again, this is all just subjective opinions, there's no objective fact making one better than the other. This should seriously have been put (or needs to be moved to) the off-topic section.


I think to some extent a person can prove that one NLE works better for their needs than the others. In fact that should be easy to demonstrate. The problem is that just simply stating FCPX is faster does not prove it. I had asked you to do a tutorial of your workflow at the TV station. I would like to learn something new as would others. I used to work for local cable. We delivered on Betcam and 3/4". I know those days are long gone but I kind of miss those days.

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? 11 Dec 2019 06:58 #103120

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

I guess what is the most worrying thing of all is that DaVinci Resolve and Premiere Pro are constantly coming up with new features and updates and with Final Cut Pro X (pretty much like Logic X), we users are getting really small, incremental updates for years.

When was the last "big" version since 10? It's been 8 years and we're still not on 10.5. "

(...)

"My concern is I'm not sure Apple is listening or committing the resources to FCPX to remain competitive as time goes on."

(...)

"Unlike some other NLE developers, Apple is overly silent about FCPX development even with "catch up" features whose announcement wouldn't give competitors an advantage."

"I'm an Apple fan. and FCPX fan, I want to believe but my patience wears thin.

"


Yeah, audio features like elsewhere, an integrated Mocha tracker (or better? See PS's new Object Selection tool) ...

What you are asking for is a Swiss army knife. Do you realize what this leads to, if you were heard? Bloatware!

If you are expecting any of those features in 10.5, I say, don't hold your breath. It's unlikely to happen.

We will see if Resolve goes the Adobe route and becomes too convoluted.

Imagine you were just an editor, no audio specialist, no colorist, no Andrew Kramer like VFX artist. That's the target group, and within that group there are many who have to rely on other people doing the finishing. Either they can make FCP colaborate with, say, ProTools, or they can't and then they don't use FCP.

The ideal tool, one that really can accomplish anything, is Blender. It's cross-platform and it's modular. And it's free. It has the steepest learning curve imaginable. It's like studying physics (which for some CGI you actually have to do).

The NLE compartment of FCPX is also disputable. I wrote above that it's the fastest to *execute* a concept. This is not for everyone. Some editors reject the idea of a storyline altogether. They want, they need independent tracks to find their approach. They like to organize their assets as they go, and some of them are real gurus (like, I mentioned this before, Walter Murch). It's not so much about taste or just personal preference, it's their way of thinking. The reason why they strongly dislike the magnetic timeline is that they don't want things to stick.

That's totally fine. You can't have it both ways.

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

Last edit: by Axel.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 11 Dec 2019 07:42 #103121

  • arc
  • arc's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Gold Boarder
  • Gold Boarder
  • Posts: 253
  • Karma: -2
  • Thank you received: 19

Axel wrote:
We will see if Resolve goes the Adobe route and becomes too convoluted.


Could you please explain what you mean by convoluted? Having said that do you own Premiere Pro?

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? 11 Dec 2019 09:47 #103122

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

arc wrote:

Axel wrote:
We will see if Resolve goes the Adobe route and becomes too convoluted.


Could you please explain what you mean by convoluted? Having said that do you own Premiere Pro?


I subscribe to PS (although I also have Affinity) and AAE (although I also have Motion), both because I sort of "grew up" with them. My older brother was a Mac guy and a graphic designer and owned both long before there even was a Windows version (afaik) - or at least at a time where no professional used anything else. But it was him also who told me to go with (legacy) FCP. I am not sure about the version history, but I think Premiere by then didn't use the term "Pro".

My best friend uses Premiere, and when FCPX came out I was looking for an alternative. I took some lessons and found it to be similar enough. However, I soldiered on with FCP 7 in Studio 3, because it ran better on my old machine.

Every now and then, I load the APP trial version through CC installer, which seems to be reseted with every upgrade. I test some features out of curiosity but never subscribed.

With "convoluted" I am referring to Adobes habit to add new features that are not fully integrated, that look promising but are no real answer. FCP 10.4 imo did the same by adding a set of color tools that feel alien to the rest of the program.

Because, if it was the definitive answer, why would anyone even consider roundtripping to Resolve or buying a $ 100-150 plugin like Color Finale?

Lumetri I tested at once when it came out, and I found it a worthy successor to the old color effects in Premiere. Although, this being Adobe, their skeletons are being stored forever in case someone needed to open an old project. Therefore, the source code never gets rewritten, the whole compilation is always hastily overhauled for each upgrade, resulting in suboptimal performance and stability.

The last really good upgrade of FCP was 10.3.

It laid the groundwork for improving the audio section. But apparently the need to stay competitive (or whatever) led to a half-baked color-appendix in 10.4 . A wrong direction.

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

Last edit: by Axel.

With Resolve being free, is there any reason for FCP to exist any more? 11 Dec 2019 10:54 #103123

  • Domscillator
  • Domscillator's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Junior Boarder
  • Junior Boarder
  • Posts: 26
  • Thank you received: 0
I respectfully disagree.

Proper audio is by no means a secondary issue or something you should have to go to ProTools or another Audio editor to do a proper cut without clicks and pops. It's called snap to zero crossing and it should be there.
Proper handling of audio plugins is also something that should be there as a way to do ducking or sidechaining. And proper routing.

Final Cut Pro has a huge marker in the YouTube community and independent filmakers. If you send me an audio file cut in FCPX and all to edit in ProTools or Wavelab I am unable to do anything about this if there are clicks due to the destructive audio editing process in FCPX.

I can understand that not all features can be added but audio is a hugely important issue(and not all independent creators have their own "audio guy") so I DO hope we will be heard. :)

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? 11 Dec 2019 11:32 #103125

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

Domscillator wrote: I respectfully disagree.

Proper audio is by no means a secondary issue or something you should have to go to ProTools or another Audio editor to do a proper cut without clicks and pops. It's called snap to zero crossing and it should be there.
Proper handling of audio plugins is also something that should be there as a way to do ducking or sidechaining. And proper routing.

(...)

I can understand that not all features can be added but audio is a hugely important issue(and not all independent creators have their own "audio guy") so I DO hope we will be heard. :)



I am sorry.
You are right. Audio (though I'm not an "audio guy") should be the priority for 10.5 !!!
It's an essential editing basic, whereas color or tracking is not (to that degree). And for those you can buy plugins already.
There should be a preference that audio edit points go through the zero crossing on the subframe-level. And all the other things you audio guys demand.

It'd be a big update, just like 10.3 was.

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

Last edit: by Axel.