Lowest Priced Class to Learn Final Cut Pro 3
tom
Cerified facility in Orange County.
Learn the latest tips and tricks.
You can even edit your own projects at our DV Lab.
Go to http://www.infocusworkshops.com
or call us today at (714) 774 9818 Ask for Michael Campoine.
Mention this ad and get 15% off your class.
Class today.
Thank you
nappy
Premiere on a 486?OR how to get around the numerous bugs in FCP?
"tom" <c...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:2febd560.02052...@posting.google.com...
Bill Davis
<jos...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Great SPAM! Can you show us how to get FCP to render at least as fast as
> Premiere on a 486?OR how to get around the numerous bugs in FCP?
Knucklehead alert.
I'm not sure who this guy is, or why he has such a bone to pick with FCP,
but he's starting to tick me off.
This opinion is just plain drivel.
I've been making my living making videos since at least 1994.
I've worked for 3 years exclusively with FCP.
It's the single most feature-rich and BUG FREE software I've EVER owned.
That's not to say it's the ONLY good software available - just that
investing in a FCP system puts absolutely NO barriers in the way of
someone wanting to become a professional video editor or producer and make
a great living doing that.
And I can back that up with my own personal results.
This guy hasn't got CLUE ONE about what he's talking about.
--
Bill Davis
NewVideo
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
W. Keith McManus
I don't know if they can, but I can show you that...
In article <R8OH8.513$%f5.60...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, nappy
<jos...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Great SPAM! Can you show us how to get FCP to render at least as fast as
> Premiere on a 486?OR how to get around the numerous bugs in FCP?
>
--
*** remove "_" from reply address ***
WKMPellucid
Documetaries for Education & Television
Complete location DVCPRO package
http://www.keithmcmanus.com
nappy
"Bill Davis" <newv...@amug.org> wrote in message
news:newvideo-250...@d23-osel.phx.fastq.com...
> In article <R8OH8.513$%f5.60...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, "nappy"
> <jos...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > Great SPAM! Can you show us how to get FCP to render at least as fast as
> > Premiere on a 486?OR how to get around the numerous bugs in FCP?
>
> This guy hasn't got CLUE ONE about what he's talking about.
>
> --
> Bill Davis
> NewVideo
Sorry to tick you off Bill. Lets get specific... What happens to your
computer when you try to run your Canvas at 100%? Mine crashes! So does
everyone's at Apple! That's a nastly little bug isn't it! And I spent an
entire day with Apple bringing it to their attention. That was a real waste
of time.. One contact with Apple support and ... it was pathetic..
How often do you work with frame sequences? If you ever do you will find FCP
completely stupid when dealing with them.
Have you ever recaptured a complete batch list from an FCP project?
Ever had FCP get confused about what TC is on a DV tape?
How much of FCP do you use? What kind of things are you cutting? Straight
cuts usually? How much audio? Animation frame sequences?
Ever sat around while FCP is rendering? It really is pathetically slow.
There's no REAL TIME stuff in there at all unless you buy a RT card...
Contrary to their ads.
I could go on.. And I will, thank you. You are free to filter my posts..
Just try not to make it personal.. I am not posting personal insults..just
deep dissatisfaction with the Mac and FCP..
Oh Yeah.. OSX.. ! Don't even get me started there... And the hardware? Had
to take my G4 back within one week to get the logic board replaced...
But my response was to the SPAM.
nappy
The problem I have is that when I have to render even the cimplest
things FCP takes about 4 times longer than Premiere on my PCs. NO fragmented
drives...
"W. Keith McManus" <k_mc...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:250520021644365780%k_mc...@rochester.rr.com...
Bill Davis
> Sorry to tick you off Bill. Lets get specific... What happens to your
> computer when you try to run your Canvas at 100%? Mine crashes! So does
> everyone's at Apple! That's a nastly little bug isn't it! And I spent an
> entire day with Apple bringing it to their attention. That was a real waste
> of time.. One contact with Apple support and ... it was pathetic..
Huh? That's seems to me as patently foolish as asking why a Chevy rattles
when it gets over 120MPH.
The Canvas (and the companion "viewer") in the FCP interface are virtual
digital displays that mimic the actual underlying NTSC content but have
NEVER been anything but fast-refreshng conveniences. If you've been
working with FCP for ANY length of time, you should know better than to
make ANY judgements about ANYTHNG from these virtual displays. So I can't
fathom a SINGLE instance where I'd ever want to blow one of them up to
100%.
I, (and all the other working professionals I know) use broadcast quality
monitors hung off their DV decks to do real time monitoring of the ACTUAL
NTSC signal one is working with in FCP.
The fact that you don't understand even THIS, proves that you don't have a
clue about what you're doing with FCP.
>
> How often do you work with frame sequences? If you ever do you will find FCP
> completely stupid when dealing with them.
I've been making video programs for more than two decades. I can IMAGINE
what you mean when you use the term "frame sequences" but I don't have any
certainty that I'm correct because I've never seen that term used in the
professional video production community. If you're doing something with
laying back annimation, say so. So we'll all know that you're grousing
about something that effects only a tiny fraction of the users of this
stuff. Or am I totally misinterpreting what you mean (big surprise)?
>
> Have you ever recaptured a complete batch list from an FCP project?
At least a dozen times. Flawlessly
>
> Ever had FCP get confused about what TC is on a DV tape?
Only when that tape was shot by an amature and had broken timecode. Then I
solved it like everyone else has to by simply cloning the footage onto
another tape. Or have you found some magic software that can read time
code that isn't there?
> How much of FCP do you use? What kind of things are you cutting? Straight
> cuts usually? How much audio? Animation frame sequences?
As I've noted here before, I use it to make my entire living and feed my
family. I've been working with FCP since version 1. I make corporate
videos. I own the company. I've personally completed more than 75 full
programs on FCP. Budgets have ranged from a low of $1500 up to a high of
$60,000. I've done up to 60 layers of video with multiple cross fades
inside of a dozen floating boxes across motion graphics with moving type
casting translucent drop shadows. FCP has preformed flawlessly through it
all.
>
> Ever sat around while FCP is rendering? It really is pathetically slow.
> There's no REAL TIME stuff in there at all unless you buy a RT card...
> Contrary to their ads.
Yeah, back using FCP 1.0 on a G3-350 I used to wait a lot. You know, it
didn't bother me. I just took it as the cost of getting all the rest of
the power of having an integrated editing/compositing/audio environment in
a single package. The big mistake you're making is thinking that what
matters to YOU *must* matter equally to everybody else.
Here's a clue, it doesn't. Kinda like it's stupid to tell a Rolls Royce
owner that they have a "lame car" because it won't beat somebody's Mazda
in a 0 to 60 sprint.
>
> I could go on.. And I will, thank you. You are free to filter my posts..
> Just try not to make it personal.. I am not posting personal insults..just
> deep dissatisfaction with the Mac and FCP..
>
> Oh Yeah.. OSX.. ! Don't even get me started there... And the hardware? Had
> to take my G4 back within one week to get the logic board replaced...
>
> But my response was to the SPAM.
Yeah, you're entitled to your opinion. You seem to have had it rough. Too
bad, dude. But your experience isn't typical or FCP wouldn't be selling
the way it is. There woudn't be classes going into virtually every
university and community college teaching it.
The simple truth seems to be that you had it, couldn't figure out how to
make it work right, so you've decided that everyone else is
an idiot for using it.
I've just outlined MY credentials for supporting it. I'd be intersted to
hear yours. What kinds of programming do you produce? Are you a working
pro or a hobbyist? What's your experince base to make the claims against
it that you do?
If you just couldn't make it work when everyone else out there obviously
can (the buzz is INTENSE about FCP and growing) that says more about YOU
than it does about the program, doesn't it?
Fair's fair.
nappy
>
>
> > Sorry to tick you off Bill. Lets get specific... What happens to your
> > computer when you try to run your Canvas at 100%? Mine crashes! So does
> > everyone's at Apple! That's a nastly little bug isn't it! And I spent
an
> > entire day with Apple bringing it to their attention. That was a real
waste
> > of time.. One contact with Apple support and ... it was pathetic..
>
> Huh? That's seems to me as patently foolish as asking why a Chevy rattles
> when it gets over 120MPH.
100% means 1:1 pixel ratio. So a 720x480 image should show in a 720x480
window.
That's the equivalent of the Chevy STOPPED.
FCP works FINE when the canvas is blown uip to 200% or 300% or EVEN 101% but
not 100%.
>
> The Canvas (and the companion "viewer") in the FCP interface are virtual
> digital displays that mimic the actual underlying NTSC content but have
> NEVER been anything but fast-refreshng conveniences. If you've been
> working with FCP for ANY length of time, you should know better than to
> make ANY judgements about ANYTHNG from these virtual displays. So I can't
> fathom a SINGLE instance where I'd ever want to blow one of them up to
> 100%.
DUH.. 100% is the native size of the display. If FCP can't handle that
like.. well EVERY OTHER program I have EVER used.... then there's a
problem.. Perhaps you misunderstand what 100% means? At 100% there is NO
math to scale the image. It is 1:1. The simplest code...
I usually use a setting of 100% often .. Especially when I am doing
something like mattes or titles.. Or when I want to actually SEE what I am
working on as I do a comp.. .
>
> I, (and all the other working professionals I know) use broadcast quality
> monitors hung off their DV decks to do real time monitoring of the ACTUAL
> NTSC signal one is working with in FCP.
>
> The fact that you don't understand even THIS, proves that you don't have a
> clue about what you're doing with FCP.
This is a clear indication that you have no idea what I am talking about. I
can't tell you how many people advise NOT using the NTSC while you try to
work because FCP can NOT do the computer display AND NTSC at the same time
without stuttering. .. Like even Premiere.
>
> >
> > How often do you work with frame sequences? If you ever do you will find
FCP
> > completely stupid when dealing with them.
>
> I've been making video programs for more than two decades. I can IMAGINE
> what you mean when you use the term "frame sequences" but I don't have any
> certainty that I'm correct because I've never seen that term used in the
> professional video production community. If you're doing something with
> laying back annimation, say so. So we'll all know that you're grousing
> about something that effects only a tiny fraction of the users of this
> stuff. Or am I totally misinterpreting what you mean (big surprise)?
You don't know what a frame sequence is? And never heard the term used?
That's telling..
So you probably have never had to deal with that part of FCP.
So when you chime in and tell me I have no idea what I am talking about ...
its regarding a part of FCP that you have never used?
OK.
>
> >
> > Have you ever recaptured a complete batch list from an FCP project?
>
> At least a dozen times. Flawlessly
>
> >
> > Ever had FCP get confused about what TC is on a DV tape?
>
> Only when that tape was shot by an amature and had broken timecode. Then I
> solved it like everyone else has to by simply cloning the footage onto
> another tape. Or have you found some magic software that can read time
> code that isn't there?
I asked if you had ever had FCP get confused about WHAT TYPE of TC was on a
tape. DF or NDF. Not whether you had dealt with TC breaks.
Read the review regarding FCP in DV mag. That pretty much explains the
problem FCP can have with TC ..
>
>
> > How much of FCP do you use? What kind of things are you cutting?
Straight
> > cuts usually? How much audio? Animation frame sequences?
>
> As I've noted here before, I use it to make my entire living and feed my
> family. I've been working with FCP since version 1. I make corporate
> videos. I own the company. I've personally completed more than 75 full
> programs on FCP. Budgets have ranged from a low of $1500 up to a high of
> $60,000. I've done up to 60 layers of video with multiple cross fades
> inside of a dozen floating boxes across motion graphics with moving type
> casting translucent drop shadows. FCP has preformed flawlessly through it
> all.
<irrelevant dribble deleted >
Sorry Bill.. You just don't do the same kind of work that I do. But nothing
you have said here changes a single thing.. It just shows that while you are
happy with FCP there are things you have never done with it. Posting your
experience with FCP is valid somehow.. I guess... But I have been editing
and doing motion graphics as long as you have and I still think FCP is a
lame ass program that has only garned acclaim because, aside from AVID, its
all there is on the Apple.
And it is slow as piss.
But you really should not take it personally.. If you have a problem with it
.. that's ok too. I sense that your next tactic will be to insult me
more.. but that won't make your point either. Let's not go 'round and 'round
on this.. If you have a problem with my posts.. just fucking filter them ..
nappy
Jim Harvey
and doesn't rattle even a little bit... Maybe you don't know how to build a
good one? :^)
Jim Harvey
"Bill Davis" <newv...@amug.org> wrote in message
news:newvideo-250...@d119-osel.phx.fastq.com...
nappy
yowza... Yur Chevy doesn't rattle at 200? Or is that small block so loud
that you can't hear the rattles up there...
nappy
"Jim Harvey" <sick.o...@nomorecrap.com> wrote in message
news:XiXH8.147125$ja.41...@news02.optonline.net...
Jim Harvey
there at the end so they MUST be tight!!
Jim "Ok, I'm deaf" Harvey
"nappy" <jos...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:WoXH8.647$%n.703...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com...
Bill Davis
I do occassionally fall into the trap of writing things here that can be
construed as "insulting" to individuals such as yourself, but usually only
when they say something patently false and unsupportable.
I, as a longtime successful user of FCP know that your constant assertion
that FCP is bad software is patently and completely foolish.
Jeez, dude, I know for a fact that the main guy who wrote your oft-lauded
Adobe Premier feels that FCP is a superior program.
I'm know that, cuz the main guy who wrote the code for Premier, ALSO wrote
the code for FCP!
The marketplace also obviously agrees with my view as FCP continues to
attract droves of new users even tho it runs on hardware that has only a
small, specialized market share.
It's equally obvious that in your view I'm simply wrong, but I've got to
tell you that since I started using FCP less then two weeks after it was
released at NAB in '99 I'm pretty sure I have MORE FCP experience than you
do. And I know that it's a stable, productive, world class editing
package. PERIOD.
> .. that's ok too. I sense that your next tactic will be to insult me
> more.. but that won't make your point either. Let's not go 'round and 'round
> on this.. If you have a problem with my posts.. just fucking filter them ..
>
> nappy
Again, the only problem I have with you (leaving aside my continuing
problem with people who insist on posting under "handles" instead of
standing behind their posts with real names) is that you keep promulgating
opinions that just don't jibe with the real world.
Go back and re-read what you've written in this discussion. If you truely
believe what you've written on the subject of FCP, you're simply
dillusional. If it's as bad as you say, the FCP users community would
resemble the poor saps who are trying to stumble along with crap like the
ill-fated Trinity. But know what? That's just not the way it is.
Bottom line, you keep saying that FCP is bad software and you are simply,
unsupportably, patently, and completely WRONG.
Yes, life would probably be easier if I just killfiled you. But as long as
you keep spouting nonsense and trashing a perfectly good editing system
falsely, I'll stick around here to correct you. After all, I've been a
regular contributor here for a lot of years. Quite a bit of what you've
posted has been like some angry kid writing on the walls. And I kinda
figure my "civic duty" is to pitch in and help paint over the more
offensive graffiti.
See you around.
W. Keith McManus
Dear, Nappy...when I tried the same thing with my Mac and FCP it worked
just fine...so, Nappy it must be you that is causing the problem...
In article <NUWH8.637$Oj.70...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>, nappy
nappy
a known bug. And since its a MAC you can't say its my 'system' .. Not sure
what the relevance of saying that I caused the problem is.. I'll just ignore
that as it makes no sense.
"W. Keith McManus" <k_mc...@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
news:260520020809103582%k_mc...@rochester.rr.com...
nappy
post as much fluff as you wish.. But I just offer the facts as I see them.
You spend an awful lot of time puffing your chest out about how much
experience you have.. I have not done so because
it is irrelevant.. So I am not going to elaborate on the work I do.. I am
happy that you think that corporate video is the end all.. I have done
quite a few.. but they just don't pay much compared to my usual work.. ..
FCP is not a program that takes years to learn.. just a week or so and its
pretty much all there.. its just an editing program.. .. not nearly as
involved as Maya or Max or Combustion.. or even AE for that matter.. (that's
the place those 'frame sequences' come from Bill..)
As far as who I am.. you can contact me via the mail address used here.. but
its NOYFB who I am.
As someone with 25 years of programming experience I could care less who
wrote what. If a program sucks or is slow and buggy..its not always a single
programmers fault. Few programs anymore are written by one person anyway so
the fact that someone who did code for Premiere is now doing code for FCP
doesn't change any of the facts that I posted.
Do you really want to go on and on with this? Just because you have had FCP
since V1 and have a real problem with anyone who is not as happy about the
program as you seem to be.. Maybe its BECAUSE you haven;t used any other
programs that you fail to understand what I am talking about.. As we
discovered earlier you weren't even familiar with some of the terms I was
using...
So I get your point.. thanks a bunch.. now you can go away.
"Bill Davis" <newv...@amug.org> wrote in message
news:newvideo-260...@d201-osel.phx.fastq.com...
Jay Rose
> That's telling..
> So you probably have never had to deal with that part of FCP.
Gee. I've been in this business 30 years and never heard the term.
So I just picked up my copy of the FCP3 User's Manual, Volume 2
(editorial), and looked for it in the index.
Guess what? Apple doesn't know about that part of FCP either.
--
Correct address is jay AT dplay DOT com
Clio- and Emmy-winning sound design
Learn audio for video at www.dplay.com
Jim Harvey
finding a subject in the User Manual of ANY software package is hardly the
definitive proof that the subject doesn't exist. If the manuals were so all
inclusive, the aftermarket books wouldn't have a market.
Jim Harvey
"Jay Rose" <SEE-S...@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:SEE-SIGFILE-26...@192.168.1.100...
W. Keith McManus
<jos...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> If you were using FCP3 and OSX you would have experienced the problem. Its
> a known bug. And since its a MAC you can't say its my 'system' .. Not sure
> what the relevance of saying that I caused the problem is.. I'll just ignore
> that as it makes no sense.
>
Nappy,
For pitty sakes, it must be you and whatever you have set up, since it
doesn't appear to be a universal problem.
Go ahead and ignore it....enjoy
nappy
> In article <ZT8I8.536$uR2.10...@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>, nappy
> <jos...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
> > If you were using FCP3 and OSX you would have experienced the problem.
Its
> > a known bug. And since its a MAC you can't say its my 'system' .. Not
sure
> > what the relevance of saying that I caused the problem is.. I'll just
ignore
> > that as it makes no sense.
> >
>
>
> Nappy,
>
> For pitty sakes, it must be you and whatever you have set up, since it
> doesn't appear to be a universal problem.
>
> Go ahead and ignore it....enjoy
>
what is pitty? I know what potty is. Maybe you meant pity. Anyway.. you are
lying if you say you are in OSX and you did not see the bug. Apple knows
about it. And again.. its a Mac, right! They just work right?
Haven't used the Mac since A couple days after I bought it. Its just too
pathetically slow. It just sits there looking cute while I do real work on
my other machines.
nappy
put up or shut up.
nappy
sequentially represent an animation. Its been in the Premiere manual since
Day 1. Sequential Images.. animations..
Let's say you want to composite something. And you are generating that
something with a 3DProgram.. or even a vector animation program...
You render (you know that word right?) a frame sequence of R,G,B and Alpha
data. (The reason for the FRAME SEQUENCE is that most CODECS don't carry
alpha..
Once your sequence is rendered then you IMPORT it into your FCP project...
oh shit why am I explaining this..??
ITS ON PAGE 304 of the Final Klutz Pro 3 Manual.VOLUME 1 .... "Importing
Numbered Image Sequences"
Anyway.. FCP does a shitty job of handling them.
pretty cheezy Jay. I expected more from you ...
"Jay Rose" <SEE-S...@rcn.com> wrote in message
news:SEE-SIGFILE-26...@192.168.1.100...