4 ms·
That's just like saying 'programmers' don't want to learn Logo because they are programming by rote in Java or whatnot. There are many programmers who resist l
by watsix 15y ago
That's just like saying 'programmers' don't want to learn Logo because they are programming by rote in Java or whatnot.
There are many programmers who resist learning another language because it's different than what they originally learned. I believe pg himself wrote an essay about that once. There are absolutely blub video editors.
FCPX might be a good tool for a small time editor that needs an occasional video, but it is not up to professional standards yet.
There are plenty of valid criticisms of FCPX, but this stuff is nonsense: there are plenty of professional editors using it already.
- Keyframe 15y agoThere are plenty of valid criticisms of FCPX, but this stuff is nonsense: there are plenty of professional editors using it already. Where? I know none and I know hundreds of them, hundreds. Not single television network, production company, post production facility I know uses FCPX. AVID is still the king (and always has been), I see lots of FCP7 still around, and new to the production and post production sphere is Premiere, which is getting a lot of traction recently. I have even seen EDIUS around (especially RTL/Bertelsmann/Fremantle group), but I have yet to see one FCPX suite anywhere.
- alexqgb 15y agoDon't know why you're getting down-voted. This is absolutely true. And the reason that it's true is because post houses can't integrate FCP X with the rest of their workflows even if they want to. Apple inexplicably stopped supporting the exchange format that allows this to happen.