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 :)

NEW FCP is 4k and only $299

michael zaletel said:
I also suspect they may have inadvertently and irreversibly undermined the "brand value" of FCP to professionals by pricing it too low.

-michael zaletel
Click to expand...

I dont think thats much of a problem. FCP has always been the low-price option. If that were true, it would be true for Resolve and would have been true for FCP all along. Low price was it's whole appeal against Avid when it first came on the market.
 
And quite honestly. if you had asked me back in 1995 if I ever though that Avid would be available for under $1,000 with the feature set it has now, I would have thought you were crazy. So price is getting to be less of a factor now. Having said that, there are still many tools in the post production workflow that cost money and because of their power and efficiency separate the professional facilities from the home studios. It's not quite a free ride just yet.
 
Fcp was always scrutinized for trying new things and changing the way we work and edit. They rebuilt this from the ground up, basing it on now truly evolved workflows. I love everything about fcp x and what it stands foe. I feel like apple has a pair again and wants to make something truly unique again for the industry. And knowing it wont break the bank to upgrade is whats makes it the best. RED did something years ago that did something new and was scrutinzed. We learned a love for them, and what they do. In my book this is no different. Fcp x takes common workflows and streamlines it in a new way. Being able to break old habits and making the new work for us to be even better than before is the name of the game. i cant wait for more details, media management especially, and r3d workflow.
 
Steve Sherrick said:
And quite honestly. if you had asked me back in 1995 if I ever though that Avid would be available for under $1,000 with the feature set it has now, I would have thought you were crazy. So price is getting to be less of a factor now. Having said that, there are still many tools in the post production workflow that cost money and because of their power and efficiency separate the professional facilities from the home studios. It's not quite a free ride just yet.
Click to expand...

The number one factor being the power of your machine. FCP X seems powerful, but it also seems like the more cores and ram you're able to afford, the better quality work you will be able to produce in a shorter time. People who can't afford the most powerful machine will not be using it to it's full potential.
 
Liam Hall said:
No. It uses colorsync - one of many reasons I quite like the look of this new version.
Click to expand...

Hi Liam,

can you please elaborate on why that is a good thing? I fear that it will add another layer of gamma frustration for us that have to deliver for all platforms and media.

As long as the 1.8/2.2 gamma issues are there in QT, how can ColorSync prevent FCP/QT to #uck with our gamma?


Cheers!
 
Colorsync is designed to provide color accuracy across multiple platforms... it has also been around for longer than apple has had gamma issues...
 
Fredrik Harreschou said:
Hi Liam,

can you please elaborate on why that is a good thing? I fear that it will add another layer of gamma frustration for us that have to deliver for all platforms and media.

Cheers!

EDIT: To elaborate, as long as the 1.8/2.2 gamma issues are there in QT, how can ColorSync prevent FCP/QT to #uck with our gamma?
Click to expand...

Colorsync manages the ICC Profiles. In theory we should be able to use simple calibration software/hardware, like a Syder3, to set up our display monitors and Colorsync will map the RGB values between apps. All this should work much better in Lion - or so I'm told...
 
Liam Hall said:
In theory we should be able to use simple calibration software/hardware, like a Syder3, to set up our display monitors and Colorsync will map the RGB values between apps.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately none of my clients have even simple calibration software so if this is the solution they are offering it's not going to work. Guess I'll have to wait for more info to be released in the next few months to know for sure...
 
Jake Bastian said:
Colorsync is designed to provide color accuracy across multiple platforms... it has also been around for longer than apple has had gamma issues...
Click to expand...

No offense, but that doesn´t actually convince me of anything. :)

Please enlighten me. I would LOVE it if someone could tell me, with an explanation, that Apple has finally fixed the gamma mess they have accumulated over the years, by implementing ColorSync in FCPx. I say this because I want it to happen. Bad.

EDIT: Jake, didn´t see your second post above. I guess you are not convinced either. ;)
 
Liam Hall said:
Colorsync manages the ICC Profiles. In theory we should be able to use simple calibration software/hardware, like a Syder3, to set up our display monitors and Colorsync will map the RGB values between apps. All this should work much better in Lion - or so I'm told...
Click to expand...

Ok, understand. That will not be enough. There are underlying problems with QT and different codecs that will be the same. I am sure that you are aware that calibrating your own monitor doesn´t help one bit if you client sees something completely different - because he or she is on a PC, or a different version of QT, or a different version of MacOS etc etc etc. And that is not because they haven´t calibrated their monitors.
 
Jake Bastian said:
Unfortunately none of my clients have even simple calibration software so if this is the solution they are offering it's not going to work. Guess I'll have to wait for more info to be released in the next few months to know for sure...
Click to expand...
Jake, your client's don't need it. You only need it on your editing systems where you are doing color-critical work. Once you push it out the door that's it. Done. The problem with the gamma bug is it shifts the gamma curve between apps on the same system. In theory this shouldn't happen with the new FCPX.
 
Fredrik Harreschou said:
Ok, understand. That will not be enough. There are underlying problems with QT and different codecs that will be the same. I am sure that you are aware that calibrating your own monitor doesn´t help one bit if you client sees something completely different - because he or she is on a PC, or a different version of QT, or a different version of MacOS etc etc etc. And that is not because they haven´t calibrated their monitors.
Click to expand...

I used to spend hours grading TV commercials in million dollar telecine suites only for the great unwashed to watch our carefully crafted work on badly set-up TV screens. Yes, that problem is worse with so much legacy software around, but that's got nothing to do with the gamma bug.
 
Liam Hall said:
Jake, your client's don't need it. You only need it on your editing systems where you are doing color-critical work. Once you push it out the door that's it. Done. The problem with the gamma bug is it shifts the gamma curve between apps on the same system. In theory this shouldn't happen with the new FCPX.
Click to expand...

The gamma bug shifts the gamma across multiple systems/platforms/programs - everything. I've solved the issue between programs on my own but when I put out an h264 for client viewing it looks different whether they view it in Firefox, Chrome, Safari, or Explorer. This is the issue that needs to be solved, and I don't think Colorsync does anything to address that...
 
Liam Hall said:
Jake, your client's don't need it. You only need it on your editing systems where you are doing color-critical work. Once you push it out the door that's it. Done. The problem with the gamma bug is it shifts the gamma curve between apps on the same system. In theory this shouldn't happen with the new FCPX.
Click to expand...

The other problem is that a lot of people and companies are not doing color critical work on one system or one OS. This is one of the reasons we work only with DPX files all the way up to final delivery. I can´t remember who said this a couple of months back, maybe Mike Most: "There is no such thing as accuracy in the world of Quicktime." I can attest to that.

I am not sure if there is possible to solve this in FCPx as long as QT is #ucked...
 
Liam Hall said:
The problem with the gamma bug is it shifts the gamma curve between apps on the same system. In theory this shouldn't happen with the new FCPX.
Click to expand...

Now thats would be a dream come true. Mean while I belive it when I se it!
 
Liam Hall said:
I used to spend hours grading TV commercials in million dollar telecine suites only for the great unwashed to watch our carefully crafted work on badly set-up TV screens.
Click to expand...

Sure, been doing that myself for the last 10-15 years. Well, not million dollar suites for a while. But same thing. It is worse now than what it was back in the days of analog transmission and CRT. But that is not what we are discussing here. ;)

Liam Hall said:
Yes, that problem is worse with so much legacy software around, but that's got nothing to do with the gamma bug.
Click to expand...

OK, so you are only talking about gamma issues between apps on the same computer? Fair enough. That is not my biggest issue, though. I guess we can say there are gamma bugs, plural.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top