Should I Learn FCP7 or FCPX?

[jaadgy akanni]

+1.

If you're still set on FCP training, learning X will be good if/when FCPX becomes a standard, but if your desire is to be proficient in industry standard editing, Avid training is the best option.
't worry about Premiere.

I second that. Learn FCPX 'cause it's the future; but if you need to learn one of those other 20th century platforms that are still doing things the hard way, learn Avid 'cause it still is and will be for a while, the industry standard.

 

[Tim Morten]

The original post specifically asked for an industry recognized package.

It's great that there seem to folks who think FCPX is the future, but it is definitely not the present from a usage perspective across the industry. The fact is, in the here and now, FCPX is rarely used in television or film, and it is debatable whether it ever will be.

The company I work for is moving away from FCP and Apple as a platform, specifically as a result of FCPX. From talking to others, I know that we are not alone in this.

 

[Alexander Thomson]

I think that I've decided on FCP, but I don't know if I should learn 7 or X...

What are your opinions on FCPX in general?

This is why we're all talking about FCPX, Tim. He specifically mentioned FCPX, so this is why we're offering our opinions. If he wants to learn an "industry recognized editing software program" Today that'd probably be Avid MC6. It's the newest NLE, and Avid has both the respect and the user base in the industry. We're not going off topic by talking about Final Cut Pro X. I think the takeaway is that FCPX is a great program to learn, but Avid training will make you bulletproof in the industry. But hey, that's what opinions are for.

 

[MichaelP]

The poster also expressed his desire was to be a DIT/Data Wrangler. I would do a little research with productions that do hire DIT/Data wranglers and find out which NLE is being used and prioritize from there. There are many DIT/Data Wranglers on this forum, so one can quickly get an idea of what that might be.

Michael

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

avid for most DIT jobs in the commercial and feature area. timeline editing is a little bit different (more with short cuts and not drag and drop) i wish i could easier drag and drop multiple clips around though

 

[Cüneyt Kaya]

when the new macpro dissappoints, a general move to PC's is on the horizont for many.
why?
avid is on pc, premiere is on pc, colorgrading suites are also on PC.
most projects are today shot on red or alexa.
you can transcode r3d files on PC too.
Alexa did get an update to shoot on dnxhd (avid) directly....
that leaves prores in nomansland, and since fcp/fcpx is mac only, and if prores isnt needed anymore in a workflow, alot willl skip the expensive apple hardware. (right now i am all mac, which can change depending on the new macpro)

 

[Jeff Kilgroe]

OK, I gotta chime in here with a different point of view... IT DOESN'T MATTER WHICH SOFTWARE YOU CHOOSE TO LEARN!

If you are reasonably competent in your computer skills, you will find it's pretty easy to dive into the common functionality of these programs when you understand the fundamentals of editing and NLE systems. From there, you can explore the uniqueness of each software and dig into the details as needed. But if you're learning about editing, then concentrate on editing techniques, theory and timing. FCP7 and Premiere are so close to one another in how they work, it's hard to recommend one over the other. Premiere also supports all the FCP7 keyboard commands and shortcuts as well. FCPX is a nice system -- it gets a lot of harsh criticism around here, and I'm one of the guilty contributors to that at times. But one thing to keep in mind about FCPX is that all the complaints and problems (at least the legitimate ones, IMO) have nothing to do with what FCPX is, but rather with what it is not. It's great and shows some nice innovations and interface nuances we see in some other software genres that had not yet made it to the NLE world. But it's functionality is crippled in several ways for professional workflows, mostly due to limited format and codec support and very limited resources for moving projects in and out of FCPX within a larger workflow. We now have half-baked EDL support and I'm expecting to see another update, as well as a full-fledged FCPX SDK for developers to use to expand the software, sometime between this month (MacWorld) and April (NAB). Of course, that may not happen, but we have been told it's coming...

If I were to recommend a specific software for you to learn, especially if you're paying for a course to teach you, I say go for AVID. It's long been a front-running industry standard and is a great system. Once you can get your head around working in AVID, it's pretty easy to transition elsewhere with a small learning curve. Most AVID or FCP7 people I know, who actually try it, usually can pick up Premiere and be working fine within a couple days. Premiere would be my second recommendation. FCP7 or FCPX as probably the third on the list...

AVID and Premiere are cross-platform, as Kaya and others have mentioned. Most production houses are cross-platform these days, even small boutiques. Too many reasons to not establish oneself on a single platform.

Editors are a funny breed. They tend to harbor more unwavering loyalty to a single software package than any other type of software user. I try to tell most of my editor clients that they need to think more like a CG/VFX artist. Us CG guys jump between tools and change software more often than we change underwear. Most of us are not loyal to any one modeling or animation package as not any one software can do everything we need for every job. That doesn't mean we don't have certain apps we prefer over others or one animation or modeling package that is a favorite. But you will be hard-pressed to find many CG artists who solidify themselves within one modeling and animation package while adamantly refusing to learn others -- which is something many "editors" tend to do. I have no explanation for this phenomenon...

 

[Paul Toth]

I agree with Jeff. I use Premiere primarily these days, but also use Avid. Both are great systems and the nice thing about the Adobe suite is it's integration with the other components like After Effects and Photoshop. But at the end of the day it's understanding how to edit on a non-linear system. I've had to sit down on NLE software I've never seen before and complete an edit, so if you understand how these things work moving from one to another shouldn't be too difficult.

 

[Kalechi Noel]

Hey, coming from someone who edits music videos for a living... i can say with confidence that fcpX is the future. I shoot Epic, Broll with 5d....we use FCP, Color, XML to After effects...

I can say that FINAL CUT X HAS COMBINED ALL OF THOSE SOFTWARES, and has NO RENDERING, AND SUPER FAST.

"Colorista"?? - FCPX Built in Primary and Secondary Color correction has replaced colorista II... Not as robust, but its GETS THE JOB DONE VERY WELL, VERY FAST, WITH NO RENDERING!
"Magic Bullet Looks"?? - Built In "Looks filters", has replaced my FCP7 magic bullet Looks - All Looks customizable and editable in MOTION 5.
"Optical Flares?? mFlare plugin is directly editable in FCPX therefore no need to XML to AFter effects, apply Optical flares effects, then re import ProRes back in FCP. SIMPLE AND FAST.
"Chroma Key- I shot three different subjects, three different takes.... combined them INTO ONE COMPOUND CLIP.... and Key'd the entire compound clip, as opposed to the 3 diff clips. - AMAZING

THE ICING - MOTION 5 ($50), allows creative individuals to create their own transitions, effects, generators for FCPX with click of button. Therefore there are thousands of create plugins, that are customizable, available on web for free. AND NO RENDERING.

Its only been out for about a 7 months now and can do all that.... Imagine when it fully matures and does r3D natively!!??? (keeping fingers crossed)

Again, everything IS DONE IN FCPX!!, Blazing Fast!! NO RENDERING. Buy or Download Ripple Training CD, and learn software. at $299, can't go wrong.

 

[Colin Sheldon]

FCP7 and Premiere are so close to one another in how they work, it's hard to recommend one over the other.

I agree with you Jeff except for this one point. On an interface level you are absolutely correct, they are extremely similar. For me though, that makes it easy to recommend Premiere. Why would anyone go with FCP7 when Premiere has such significant performance advantages? No trans-coding, Mercury, memory and processor support, not to mention updates, patches and an upgrade path.

 

[Paul Provost]

back to the DIT thing. editing per se (should we use this over the shoulder shot or the 2 shot?) is not really the point. it's all workflow. so you really need to learn the workflow intricacies of the different platforms - which can be really different. you need to know what the avid guys need, the fcp guys need, what the offline and finishing workflow will be. so this means learning rcx pro and davinci resolve for dailies, after effects, just as much as the editing software. and all the different file formats and how they are handled (DPX vs proves 4444 etc.

 

[Desmond Ford]

Thanks for all the responses, gentlemen. I'm glad to see such a lively interest was taken in my original post. Your thoughts and suggestions are all well taken.

I've decided that it's best not to pigeonhole myself into any one platform or program, whether it be Mac or PC / Avid or FCPX. To that end, I think it best to learn both FCPX and Avid. I believe this will keep me future proof and versatile, as well as ready for anything that a DP will through at me as a DIT.

I'm going to take a 3 day intensive course on FCPX starting in less than two weeks which will be followed by another Advanced FCPX 3 day intensive two weeks later. In the meantime, I just purchased FCPX and I'm going to be doing as much reading up and toying around with it as possible. Once I feel comfortable with it, I will move on to Avid which I assume will be some time around March or April.

I have to admit, I chose to learn FCPX first for the simple reason that I can purchase it ($300) and two separate 3 day intensive training courses ($900 each) for less than the price of the Avid software ($2,500) alone.

Bear in mind, I'm interested in becoming a DIT, not a professional editor. Perhaps I was unclear in my original post, but it isn't necessary for me to use industry standard right now, but rather what's important 6 months from now when I hope to be ready to start as a DIT. I want to be future proof and despite all the praise I see of FCP7 here and elsewhere, I think it imprudent to start learning a program that is no longer being updated, supported or expanded upon. I don't want to be a dinosaur before I've even started! I hope that makes sense...

So after considering all the great advice everyone has given me here on Reduser, I'm going to learn both FCPX and Avid.

Also, since I'm aiming to be a DIT, I will be learning Resolve and RCX-Pro. I think with these four programs I should be able to handle just about any job as a DIT...

If you have any more thoughts or suggestions on my decision, let me know. Thanks again!

 

[Paul Provost]

$1800 to train on a consumer editing program? seriously, nobody is going to ask you to prep files for fcp x.
im in the LA market and i have NEVER heard of any job being done on fcp x EVER.
why don't just check out lynda.com and watch a few lessons on the different programs. subscription $25 a month. and you can download a full working demo of avid mc 6 free. same for adobe and apple...

 

[Desmond Ford]

$1800 to train on a consumer editing program? seriously, nobody is going to ask you to prep files for fcp x.
im in the LA market and i have NEVER heard of any job being done on fcp x EVER.
why don't just check out lynda.com and watch a few lessons on the different programs. subscription $25 a month. and you can download a full working demo of avid mc 6 free. same for adobe and apple...

I don't doubt you at all. I don't know of anyone using FCPX now either... but I bet they will be quite soon once Apple restores all the missing features. At the end of the day, I guess I'm just betting on FCPX as much as anyone else is betting against it. I think it will improve and become an industry standard. Either way, I doubt anyone will be using FCP7 two years from now, probably even less.

Yeah, I agree that $1,800 is a lot of money and more than I should spend, but that's just how much these courses cost in NYC. I've tried Lynda.com, it's great, but I just can't learn that way. I have to have someone to talk to, interact with and answer all my questions. I do think Lynda puts out some pretty awesome tutorials though. It just makes me fall asleep after an hour.

 

[Tim Morten]

I don't doubt you at all. I don't know of anyone using FCPX now either... but I bet they will be quite soon once Apple restores all the missing features. At the end of the day, I guess I'm just betting on FCPX as much as anyone else is betting against it. I think it will improve and become an industry standard. Either way, I doubt anyone will be using FCP7 two years from now, probably even less.

Yeah, I agree that $1,800 is a lot of money and more than I should spend, but that's just how much these courses cost in NYC. I've tried Lynda.com, it's great, but I just can't learn that way. I have to have someone to talk to, interact with and answer all my questions. I do think Lynda puts out some pretty awesome tutorials though. It just makes me fall asleep after an hour.

There is no indication that Apple will retarget FCPX for film and television, nor is there any certainty that those industries would welcome Apple back if they did. Honestly, Apple is making so much money in consumer markets right now, there is very little financial incentive for them to return to niche professional markets. There are plenty who are keeping the faith, but you are making a large (and I personally think losing) bet on FCPX being an industry standard in the future. No doubt the Apple faithful will chime in to disagree with me, but I encourage you to think long and hard before investing in FCPX training.

 

[Subhadip Sen]

Editors are a funny breed. They tend to harbor more unwavering loyalty to a single software package than any other type of software user. I try to tell most of my editor clients that they need to think more like a CG/VFX artist. Us CG guys jump between tools and change software more often than we change underwear.

This is very true! Going through these FCP X threads, I get the feeling Editors are eternal optimists. Rationally speaking, FCP 6 was quite obsolete by early 2009. Vegas Pro 9, 64-bit, multi-core aware, native R3D support with real-time performance, etc. CS4 made real-time R3D editing possible too. But FCP users hoped for great things from FCP 7. That came and went with very little change, and everyone hoped for a great FCP 8 in 2010. Logically, CS5 should have been the final nail in the coffin. Nothing happened in 2010. Then FCP X was deemed to be revolutionary. Still nothing. Even today, a whole 7 months FCP users are absolutely confident about FCP X. I have little experience with FCP X but do feel it's a dramatic step forward from FCP 7. It has the best interface on OS X - and the best overall after Vegas Pro, which it is "heavily inspired" by. Had it not been missing so many essential features, I would definitely prefer to use FCP X over FCP 7, Avid MC or Premiere Pro. Today - FCP X is a very capable little editor for quick, short form material shot on DSLR.

I am optimistic for the future, but I don't understand why this hope should affect today's decisions. Use what is the best solution today, when and if FCP X does become a compelling alternative, reconsider. Unfortunately, putting my realist hat back on, I don't think this will happen anytime soon - perhaps in 2013 with FCP X 10.2, but one might question where the likes of PP CS 6.5, MC 7 and Vegas Pro 13 will be by then.

 

[Desmond Ford]

There is no indication that Apple will retarget FCPX for film and television, nor is there any certainty that those industries would welcome Apple back if they did. Honestly, Apple is making so much money in consumer markets right now, there is very little financial incentive for them to return to niche professional markets. There are plenty who are keeping the faith, but you are making a large (and I personally think losing) bet on FCPX being an industry standard in the future. No doubt the Apple faithful will chime in to disagree with me, but I encourage you to think long and hard before investing in FCPX training.

You're right, I am making a bet, but I'm not putting all my chips on FCPX by any means. I will learn at least two NLEs: FCPX and Avid... and maybe I'll get into PP eventually too.

I hope you're wrong about Apple retargeting FCPX for film and television and the industry embracing it once again. Consumer market or not, I'm sure Apple pursues a zero sum strategy in product development and market share. If they give up their pro-user market, they lose the hardware sales as well. I don't think they are in any sort of dilemma that would cause them to have to make sacrifices like that, but we'll see...

This will be an interesting experiment, so to speak. I'll be sure to keep everyone updated on my progress.

 

[Kalechi Noel]

Buy The Ripple Training Series ..... Comes with sample footage and tackles almost every kind of job. Theres also a newly released green screen compositing lesson ($40). Go through all the lessons. After which you will be fine. Anything you still don't understand, use YouTube!

$1800 is over kill.

Also be sure to pickup Motion 5

 

[Desmond Ford]

Buy The Ripple Training Series ..... Comes with sample footage and tackles almost every kind of job. Theres also a newly released green screen compositing lesson ($40). Go through all the lessons. After which you will be fine. Anything you still don't understand, use YouTube!

$1800 is over kill.

Thanks for chiming in Kalechi.

Yeah, $1,800 is definitely a lot! Who knows, maybe after I take the first 3 day intro course, I'll realize that I don't need the advanced course and save myself $900. Having said that, I do believe that in-person training is a valuable service worth paying for. The instructors have a useful skill for which they deserve a good salary. I can't begrudge a man his day rate, cause god knows I have mine too!

Truth is, I'm really intimidated by the software. I am literally a complete beginner. The only editing I've ever done was years ago on film with scotch tape and razor blades... and it was a process I thoroughly enjoyed! I really do love that "crunchy" sound of a razor splicing film! LOL! But NLE software is completely new and frightening to me...

I already signed up for Lynda.com so I'm going to finish their program first before I try Ripple. However, I'm definitely going to give Ripple a chance because I've heard so many wonderful things about it from so many people. I have a lot of time and I'm patient. I like to do be thorough in everything I do. My biggest fear would be to show up on set and not know how to do something necessary and important. I would be utterly ashamed and embarrassed all to hell!

So I'm sure that by this summer I will have a very good understanding of FCPX and Avid as well as Resolve and RCX-Pro. It just took me some time to design my program of study and it's still a work in progress.

Thanks for all the advice, Kalechi!

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

I want to learn the most useful and practical, as well as industry recognized editing software program.

"Most useful and practical" is a subjective thing.
Industry recognized are Avid and FCP7. You can do a good cut on Premiere and Vegas as well.
It would be wise to test all and see which logic fits best in the start.

I am literally a complete beginner.

It doesn't matter. If you enjoy it and really interested, principles and techniques will sink in.


You are wasting your money on learning courses for FCPX.
It is not a great choice for developing editing skills because a lot of its principles are not using them.