Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

Best Software Compatibility.

J

James Propes

Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2015
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hey guys,

I have narrowed down my search and thanks to everyone here I have learned a lot about RED. I am trying to price out my software system and was hoping you could tell me the best setup and if the programs I am working on will be best suited for Red 4k raw.

So here are my two options. (price point 3 years)

Option 1
Adobe CC suite (preimere pro, after effects, etc...)
Magic bullet Looks
Davinci Resolve lite
($1348 over 3 years)


Final Cut Pro X
Motion, Compressor
Davinci Resolve full
Fusion 7
($2400 over 3 years)

I am really only familiar with Premiere and Pro, so I am trying to stand clear of avid or light works. But I Would love any and all input and suggestions. Thank you.
 
Would you recommend another software suit around the same price?
About two years ago I wouldn't have considered apple personally. However something's have changed, not enough to be a forever change but something I'd consider for now.
 
Despite some consistent naysayers and folks who just don't like Apple, there is a lot of momentum around FCPX and a very large number of happy users; yes, even "pro" users. I would do your own research. Perhaps start with Sam Westman, a leading proponent of FCPX.
 
There are almost no high end pro users of FCPX, although I;m sure if you did lots of research you could find one or two. Mostly low end corporates, weddings etc. It designed around speed, not really around fine tuning - so it appeals to the end of the market where they just want it want it fast not particularly perfect. If you have been trained as an editor by apprenticing or going to film school, FCPX is generally repugnant, because it assumes things about he process that do not sit well if you have been trained that way - again - untrained unschooled "pros" are more likely to be working at the bottom of the food chain - so FCPX is perfect for them.

FCPX also has a cheapie aura around it that some clients pick up on and makes them feel you are not top drawer , and so maybe they should pay you less. That used to be true of Premiere, but no longer is. Perception is reality, but in this case reality is reality too..
 
Robert Ruffo New said:
There are almost no high end pro users of FCPX, although I;m sure if you did lots of research you could find one or two. Mostly low end corporates, weddings etc. It designed around speed, not really around fine tuning - so it appeals to the end of the market where they just want it want it fast not particularly perfect. If you have been trained as an editor by apprenticing or going to film school, FCPX is generally repugnant, because it assumes things about he process that do not sit well if you have been trained that way - again - untrained unschooled "pros" are more likely to be working at the bottom of the food chain - so FCPX is perfect for them.

FCPX also has a cheapie aura around it that some clients pick up on and makes them feel you are not top drawer , and so maybe they should pay you less. That used to be true of Premiere, but no longer is. Perception is reality, but in this case reality is reality too..
Click to expand...

Totally disagree but this is an old argument anyway. I suggest anyone do their own research. And, if Sam Mestman and Michael Cioni aren't "pro" enough as vocal supporters of FCPX, then I don't know who would be.
 
Rob as always has his own opinion and is at his best/worst when he's running other people down...


I would consider myself a 'Pro' user - I push out on a weekly basis a number of short form cooking shows that end up being delivered to:
-online media companies like AOL, Scripps, & several traditional media companies for their online publishing arms (websites and E-published magazines).
-OTT VOD set top boxes like ROKU, LUKUP(India) etc.
-Our own dedicated channels on Telecom system OTT like AT&T U-verse, Bell Fibe, Telephonica, etc worldwide.


The same content needs to be delivered in multiple formats: 540p, 720p, 1080p, & 4K.


Right now we're shooting 4k and cutting on FCPX -->CC in Resolve Lite --> finish in FCPX @4K --> Output a 4K 'Master --> compress multiple formats in in compressor. It's an effective pipeline for us, we've never had any trouble, it's efficient and seamless.


Our offline edit is done in a 1080p FCPX timeline -no transcode, FCPX is working straight from the R3D's using the REDRocket. XML gets sent to Davinci, where we jump back to full 4K for colour, then XML back to FCPX where finish and output is done at 4K. Pretty seamless.


Not sure what you are hoping to accomplish, but Resolve lite is Free, and does 95% of the full program. I think it only leaves out surface control, and 3D (?). FCPX is also only $300 - so for us it was a matter of let's try it and see what we can do, if it doesn't work we're not out a lot of money and we can move on. That was a couple of years ago, and we're still using it.


Rob can call me low end at the bottom of the food chain - but I grossed high 7 figures last year creating crappy 'internet videos'. None of the clients gave a toss what I edited on, and I doubt the end user is sitting in their living room dissecting the difference between what was edited on FCPX or Adobe.


In the end Robs advice on filmaking sounds to me a lot like his advice on dating, picking up chicks, and being an Alpha male...


<span style="letter-spacing: 0.0px">


It gets really good around 7:40
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top