Re: "X" & multiclip

"X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 06:45AM) David
Can it be true?? Multiclip editing coming to "X"? Crow will never have tasted so... (gulp) good.

Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 06:48AM) Ken Stone Admin
Hi David,

But ....... how well does it work?

Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 07:40AM) jlcinc
Watching the video of multi clip editing was pretty impressive.


Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 07:43AM) Ken Stone Admin
Hi John,

But does it work as advertised?

Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 08:10AM) ronny courtens
Hi Ken,

Yes it does.

Best wishes,

Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 08:15AM) Ken Stone Admin
Hi Ronny,

Fantastic news. Have you see a 'What's New' anywhere? I would love to see what other features have been added or bug issues address.

Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 08:51AM) ronny courtens
Only thing I can tell from what I see here is that it runs faster on Lion, the bug we had with the timeline not scrolling properly when zoomed in at a certain level seems to have been addressed, importing layered Photoshop files is a fact, relinking media works as expected, the code definitely has been optimized (titles and effects are faster and RAM is used more efficiently), new keyframes are now automatically added in the Inspector, the advanced chroma keyer outperforms any give NLE and even challenges professional hardware keyers (no kidding here, I have been testing it the whole day) and of course there is multicam which is quite spectacular as well. Broadcast monitoring works but has not been optimized yet. It works with our AJAioXT box with the latest drivers installed. BM and Matrox will follow very soon. You need Lion to make the AV out work because the new driver technology is no longer based on QuickTime but on the CoreMedialO services that are only active under Lion. This should sustain color fidelity much better than it was under QuickTime.

Best wishes,

Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 12:10PM) Ken Stone Admin
Hi Ronny,

All good news. But .... can we now add In and Out points on the timeline?

Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 07:19PM) ronny courtens
Hi Ken,

Never say "In and Out" again, that does not exist anymore gggg. No my friend, no way yet to select parts of your timeline for exporting. Apparently this feature isn't high on the priority list.

IMO there are several features we were used to that won't reappear in the same form as we know them. Fortunately, as I see it now, the alternatives that are added again are better than the original features. Multicam is one of those. The "send to" feature could reappear with the release of Logic X, which would make sense. Once we get this back, sending selections to Motion (or to a QT Movie) could become possible again, but I hope in a much better way than they worked in FCP7.

Best wishes,

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 01, 2012 05:24AM) Ken Stone Admin
Hi Ronny,

I am happy with what we got but I was expecting that a few of other issues would be addressed (In and Outs, AutoSave Vault, etc). This does beg the question, how long will we have to wait for the next update. I'm thinking that it will not be happening soon.

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 01, 2012 12:20PM) Craig Seeman
Ken the pattern for updates seem to be about every 12 weeks or a little bit less. That would make the next update between mid and late May. Or maybe they'll have a cool update just to rattle some cages for NAB goers (although that would be too soon based on their update pattern).
Re: "X" & multiclip (February 01, 2012 12:51PM) Ken Stone Admin
Hi Craig,

I must admit that I'm please with what we just got.

I can wait.


Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 06:09PM) Gypaetus
Ronny Courtens
You need Lion to make the AV out work because the new driver technology is no longer based on QuickTime but on the CoreMedialO services that are only active under Lion.

I read the first time about this (CoreMedialO) and have no idea what's that about, what are the consequences, how is it compatible with QT (files), and how to approach generally...

Please enlighten me.

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 03, 2012 05:01AM) steve douglas
I've never found X to be slow, just the opposite and now I am looking forward to Matrox updating their drivers for my MXO2 box so I can monitor externally. Would really like to see a scrolling timeline eventually introduced as that was one of the features that legacy users were always clamoring for. Would also like to set ranges for multiple clips at a time when importing from a card. You can do that in X but for only one clip at time and it is a multiple step procedure. This way I wouldn't have to import footage I don't want just to then have to create the ranges in my event library. But we are making progress and it is long past the time that the whining needs to stop. Yes, there are plenty more things I would like to see added, the Boris text for one, my 3 way color corrector for another, but the more I use X, the more I am comfortable with it and like it.
Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 01:07PM) David Harbsmeier
Way too little ... and way too late. Apple has lost many important customers (read: customers that spend big $$$) for life.

Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 07:29PM) Craig Seeman
Radical Media/OutPost Digital (NY & LA) going to FCPX approximately 100 seats.
The Solar Odyssey, a reality show (not sure where it'll be running) is going to be cut on FCPX (Philip Hodgetts is listed on the crew)
Gary Adcock, Studio 37, seems to be liking it.
It'll be a small number but it'll start to creep in as some of the early facility pioneers report.
Many won't come back but new ones springing up may consider it.
Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 04:54PM) Joe Redifer
They should have waited until it was ready before releasing. It's still not quite ready. Apple went full retard. Until it can do every single thing without exception as FCP7 and more, then what's the point? Too bad Apple doesn't have people on staff to ask these kinds of questions.

Re: "X" & multiclip (January 31, 2012 09:50PM) ronny courtens
Hi Reg,

I hope I haven't over-simplified but these are the basics:

Core Media allows video hardware devices to capture and playback to software applications in Mac OSX and it's the future of video API's on the Mac OS X platform. Core Media IO (io) creates a direct pipeline between the Core Video layer in Mac OSX and external hardware without having to pass via QuickTime. This ensures better performance and better color fidelity. Thanks to this new API developers can design modern 64 bit video software (e.g. new drivers for a video card) to get better performance capture and playback to hardware.

You will see that many new plugins and applications that appear for FCPX will be Lion only. I think that's a good thing. Lion is full 64-bit and has all the core frameworks for audio and video inside the OS. Dropping Rosetta support was a painful but necessary move to break with old technologies that could interfere with the new framework. When you develop an application that is based on state of the art technologies (which is a good thing if they are better, which they clearly are in this case) you want to avoid old technologies breaking or slowing down your pipeline. I have some PPC applications that I occasionally want to go back to, but for this I have a separate system running SL and it works fine. This does not prevent me from using FCP10 in the best possible conditions on a Lion machine. If you are a professional and you make a living with your hard- and software (and above all with your skills) nothing prevents you from running different systems at the same time to get the best out of every system.

This said, the new Lion API's seem to please professional developers. I have received an e-mail from Gen-Arts (a high-end plugin developer) saying that Sapphire Edge will be available soon for FCPX, Lion only.

Best wishes,

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 01, 2012 05:07AM) Gypaetus
Sorry, "reg" was meant for regards - maybe lousy English..., my actual name is Herbert (My nick refers to the 'Lammergier', a nearly lifetime film and photo project of mine).

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 01, 2012 07:00AM) ronny courtens
Hi Ken,

Agreed. Although Ins and outs for export are no priority for me, the lack of a reliable project backup is high on my list. More than multicam, but I guess everyone of us has his particular priorities. Autosaves should arrive together with a better implementation of Versions in Lion.

From the start the "pros" have been shouting the hardest for multicam, XML and broadcast monitoring, so IMO this has been addressed first. This is not a major update, it's a free .0 one and I expect another one will follow sooner than we expect. I have sent you a PM.

Best wishes,

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 01, 2012 12:27PM) Craig Seeman
Sapphire Edge was released with 10.0.3 yesterday as did the compatible version of Red Giant Magic Bullet Looks. I contact BorisFX about Continuum and they said "sooner rather than later" so that's going to be another high end plugin developer coming to FCPX.

BTW it does do a "backup" now every 15 minutes but that's only for emergency recovery and not like the old AutoSave Vault.
Re: "X" & multiclip (February 02, 2012 06:44AM) XGTV
I have to agree with DH's comments, the damage is done. You can't pull the rug from under the big players and get a second chance.

However, something of interest to the X'ers that I heard today...


Best wishes.
Re: "X" & multiclip (February 02, 2012 08:24AM) dkag7
i wonder if the translation tool works the other way around as well... from X to 7.
mainly just to use the multicam sync tools in X, then export a xml to open in 7.
a fast way to sync...

X is OK, but for me it is a memory hog and over all slow... still prefer 7 much more.
Re: "X" & multiclip (February 02, 2012 08:59AM) XGTV
dkag7, Xto7 does that apparently.
Re: "X" & multiclip (February 03, 2012 01:13AM) dkag7
Hi Ronny,
The memory hogging up is what makes it slow. As the memory increases (usually right from the start of opening the app), Dragging transitions, editing filters & Titles etc... get 'stuck'. Then things eventually catch up .
That is what i mean by slow.
its annoying to get this on a project that is 1 minute long with nothing but a few dissolves, forget about 3rd party stuff.
i am on a macPro 3,1
10.6.8 SL
8GB ram
2X 2.8 CPU
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 285
4 or 12 HDD raid clips reside on

It is nice to know that it will work in reverse (the xmls), ill check it out..

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 03, 2012 01:37AM) ronny courtens
Hi Kurt,

Have you updated to 10.0.3 yet? Your system specs are good, except perhaps for the 8GB RAM which is just enough for running 64-bit video apps. There is a known issue with FCP10 not automatically clearing its RAM cache, which can lead to the memory hogging up as you describe. Posters stated that switching the app off and on solved the problem.

I haven't experienced any such issues myself. Our FCP10 systems have at least 16 GB RAM and ATI cards, which IMO are better for Open CL. We finish 35' HD shows with FCP10 on a regular basis now and I must say the systems run quite smoothly, even with titles and stacked filters. There are some stability issues I would like to see improved instead of adding features we already have in other applications, but I feel it's going the right way.

BTW Avid has released its editing app for the iPad. This "iAvid" is quite basic but it made me smile. For 7 dollars you now have Avid editing on your iPad. The times are definitely changing.

Best wishes,


Re: "X" & multiclip (February 03, 2012 02:22AM) dkag7
actually, after i wrote my reply, i said to myself, 'that dont seem right'...
I should have 16GB ram...
I am copying over some files that is going to take another hour or so... then it looks like i need to open this beast up again to see what is going on.. It should be 16GB.. one of the memory sticks is dead or not making contact...

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 02, 2012 09:20AM) ronny courtens
You can say anything you like about FCP10, but absolutely not that it is slow. The editors working on our FCP10 bays for broadcast production say it is the fastest system they have ever worked with, this has been my experience as well and it has been confirmed by all post houses I know that already use it. So if it is slow for you there definitely is something wrong with your system setup, or you are not familiar enough with the app yet. You are correct that it is a memory hog, all 64-bit applications are.

Xto7 should work fine for synchronized clips, there are however some features that won't translate:


Best wishes,

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 03, 2012 02:33AM) dkag7
Also i am thinking of updating to lion after I make a clone of the OS system.
I am searching on line to see what i may loose in the update to lion.
I have FCPS7, FXPX (10.0.3), CS5.52, and a ton of other editing tools.
Most worried about plugins and FCP7 and premiere.
I also want to add lightworks to the mix once the MAC version is released (not sure yet if it will be lion only or not)
I was actually running it on parallels desktop and it works quite well (the windows version), except i can only edit DV in the windows version..its still beta anyway but quite a good editing app.. reminds me a bit of liquid

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 03, 2012 03:02AM) ronny courtens
Hi Kurt,

A faulty memory stick can cause problems, so yes you should check that. If you put Lion on top of SL you won't lose anything. If you do a fresh Lion install you should check which PPC applications you have that require Rosetta because you won't be able to re-install them. I have made the choice not to mix older and newer technologies on the same machines, this always leads to conflicts and slowdowns. My new Lion machines only have FCP10 and a bunch of other professional apps, the FCP7 bays are on SL. Premiere does not meet our quality standards.

Lightworks was quite a decent app, I hope they get it up to date and running again on newer systems. But I'm afraid their editing technology is a bit outdated for our future needs.

Best wishes,

Re: "X" & multiclip (February 03, 2012 03:12AM) dkag7
i like premiere because it can import m2t and m2ts files. There is no need for the whole complete directory structure.
they just import like any other file... most of my work lately has been coming in on HDDs with files like this.

lightworks being open source is in my opinion a good thing.. lets wait and see... the editing functions i like alot on the timeline.
it is behind a couple of months now with a beta for mac release.. but soon i guess we can test it out..

time to dismantle this computer now to see whats up with the memory...
hopefully you will hear from me again :)

Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login