speaking as someone who uses FCPX on a day by day basis, I can honestly say the program works; FOR WHAT WE NEED (sorta).  We shoot everything in quicktime on SDHC or SDXC cards.  We work on the previous generation of the iMac.  We just copy the footage from the card to an external hard drive (We can't put footage on a server because FCPX won't recognize it.)  I do everything in FCPX; cutting, audio (which takes some getting used to...) and all my color correction (why on Earth did Apple decide to use a color BOARD instead of a color WHEEL?).  We export for the web using h.264 and to DVD.  Once we are finished with the project, the raw footage goes bye-bye and the project is deleted.  This is mainly due to the fact that we haven't found a good, cheap archiving solution other than external hard disks, and our budget is limited.  It took some time to learn to edit fast in FCPX honestly.  Once you learn the keyboard shortcuts, cutting can be a breeze, but that's true of any editing program.

coupla things to keep in mind:

1.my boss likes FCP, a lot
2. I do multicam quite frequently.  FCPX can do this, but sync hasn't always been spot on in my experience (I know this because I am hearing impaired, and one of the skills you learn early on is to LIP READ like crazy))
3.we only work in quicktime 1920x1080i, 1280x720p, and SD formats, but we have to capture tape on a different software program.
4. DVD creation is laughable on FCPX.  you have very little control over the dvd creation process.
5. FCPX outputs to a small number of file types.  ProRes and h.264 being the main ones.
6. the software wants EVERYTHING to be prores.  It really doesn't like anything else.
7. You can't "Instantly" work with your media, sure you have background processing, but you are really working with proxy files of your media while FCPX imports the file.  Depending on what you asked FCPX to do to your media, it can take anywhere from a half an hour to 6 hours for your footage to import. (This is on an iMac 27" with 8 gigs of RAM from a generation ago).  If I import something, I usually do so before lunch.  Once I start the import process, I go to lunch, and my footage is imported and ready to work smoothly once I get back.
8. once you start working in the timeline, all background processes except transcoding pause until the timeline is idle.  BTW, if you finish your edit, before FCPX has finished importing and transcoding, you can't export your project.  It's the old pay now or pay later paradigm.
9. if you work in multi cam, I advise you to create proxy media. ( this will take some time depending on the number of clips and how long they are.)  I once had to wait 10 hours for FCPX to create proxy files for a 4-camera, 2 hour clip.
10. The latest release of FCPX is good, but is still missing some key stuff.  True external monitoring being one of the big ones.
11. Lower thirds, or any graphics of any kind really, are a joke in FCPX.  You have your stock garbage sure, but it's garbage.  If you really want something that works, you need to get motion.  I've tried importing photoshop graphics into FCPX, and found that layered support is a joke.  It changes the color of your graphics!  I've settled for exporting to .png for FCPX.

I would not use FCPX on my own short film, documentary or long form narrative projects.  Not even for commercial spots.  If I were doing a news spot or story maybe; but again no external monitoring.  The FCC and SMPTE have very specific parameters for broadcast signal, and I don't even know how FCPX holds up on that end.

If all you want to do is put stuff on the internet or do a family party or wedding or whatever, FCPX may be the right tool.  Beyond that, you are very limited in what you can do.

Last edited by switch (2012-10-31 04:26:02)

Sam, how much experience have you had actually using FCPX?  Do you use it for work currently or for play?  In regards to your comments,
1. See next post.  I have 8 gigs of RAM in my machine. It would appear, the more RAM the better for FCPX.
2. I never said that NLEs do good graphics, I was simply commenting on the so called layered photoshop file support in FCPX.  Don't put words into my mouth. 
3. Your right to say that X can only export to a small group of files, but consider that in 7 you had more file types you could export out to without going to Compressor.  In Premiere, you can export to almost anything under the sun provided you have the codec on your comp.  Avid also has more export formats available than FCPX.  I was not comparing FCPX with FCP7 at that point, just pointing out the limited number of options for export file type.
4. Again, not comparing to 7.  Just throwing a fact about FCPX when in use.  the whole "background rendering" isn't true background rendering either.  True background rendering wouldn't effect playback of the timeline from time to time as it does with me and many others that I have talked to (and those others may have had more RAM in their machines).
5. When it comes to the server issue, we have actually sorta figured a workaround.  Copying the footage from the server to the local HDD.  Still not anywhere near what Premiere or Avid is capable of.  FCP6 was able to recognize footage on a server FCOL!

Last edited by switch (2012-10-31 04:40:55)

I've used FCPX for nothing you'd call "professional". Just some videos for my church to show on Sundays and uploaded to vimeo. I'm not a professional, in fact I'm a computer science major, not planning on going into the video field. I'm more of a hobbyist.

Sorry if I came off as rude, I didn't mean to. I don't think I put any words in your mouth. I just commented on what you said about lower thirds or any other graphics being a joke in FCPX. As far as layered psd files go, I haven't had this problem. Maybe I'll play around with them a little bit more to see if I notice something.

And your computer should definitely be more powerful than mine. I've got a 15" 2010 MacBook Pro with top of the line processor, 8GB of RAM, and surely an inferior graphics card. I use an internal SSD but my footage plays fine even from a firewire HDD. We probably we use different codecs though. I use 24mbps AVCHD from a Sony FS700 and an NEX-5N, and I don't need to transcode. I assume you use a more robust codec?

About the limited output types, again, Compressor was written as a companion of FCPX to do any advanced encoding you need. Yes, it would definitely be nice to have more output options in FCPX itself, but I would consider that to be a "would have been nice" feature, and not a necessary one. But I'm assume you were looking at it that same way too. I just don't see it as a deal breaker. The pros outweigh the cons for me.

thanks for the info vidina.  Unfortunately, I don't have final say in what machines we purchase at the office.  I will keep that info in mind when I make my PC purchase in 2014 though.  Does the Quadro 3000M do well for CUDA?

Hackintoshes are fun if you like that kind of thing, but I've never been excited by the idea of using one as a production machine when any update may break it. They're just not reliable enough in my experience.

*cough*
I opted for a different setup. There's an iMac 27" previous-gen being sold for appr. $1049 which has way better specs than the new one, which means I won't be getting the newer generation.

Pros related to the 27":
3,1GHz CPU(vs 2.5GHz on the new 21,5")
12GB RAM (vs 8 on the new one)
An optical drive (I might actually need one at one point)
27 inches. (this one's pretty self-explanatory)
User-accesible RAM.

Cons:
No USB 3. I don't know if I'll ever need one, but it'd be nice to have.
It's not as thin. (kidding, guys, I don't care about that)

You agree, right? I'm getting the top-of-the-line previous-gen 27" iMac for LESS than a new 21,5" entry-level iMac.
And checking the prices for a new one, I'm saving shitloads, and getting a better computer.

Nope. But it isn't on the entry-level new iMac either.

Yeah I put an SSD in my MacBook Pro. Major speed difference.

I got this one:

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a … 6820227820

No, but opening video editing apps will. And indexing the database/bin.
My PC had an SSD mounted in it after awhile, and Premiere went from 14-ish seconds to load, to a mere 3.

Oh, of course not. Having an i7, a quadro card and some 16GB+ of high-speed RAM sure speeds things up, if you're not running some sick $4000+ editing supercomputer.

On a related note, I sort of bought an iMac - grabbed a MacBook Pro Retina for the wife. It has a pretty screen.

Alright, minor update here.

Compared to the latest iMac, mine is better specced than the entry level ones(2011 27" top of the line model), and I've been using it almost two months for editing and VFX. (Actually a lot of music "production" and other stuff as well, but that's irrelevant in this scenario).

Let's start with launch times. AE CS6 takes about 12 seconds to launch. That's on a 7200RPM hard drive. The new 21,5" iMac ships with a 5400RPM HDD, so expect it to take longer. It's not an extremely slow process, but it's tedious nonetheless, compared to 3 seconds on a fast SSD. When working with RED Scarlet footage, it's actually pretty snappy, but once you throw some actual effects into a 4K RAW comp, things start to move at Teague speed(pun related to road trip video). In general though, it behaves pretty identical to my i7 PC that clocked in at 3.4GHz, and this iMac sports an i5 running at 3.1GHz.

The biggest difference I'm noticing, is actually GPU related. My PC had an Nvidia card, utilizing CUDA and openGL, and even though the Radeon 6970M installed is pretty good for gaming, it's not really meant for video stuff, and leaves me wondering what Apple had in mind. Especially when the entire Adobe suite is geared towards Nvidia. Also taken into consideration that AMD owns ATI, and apple is running Intel CPU's in their computers. Oh well. It's not that bad.

Using Final Cut Pro X(hey, I like it, alright? latest update, 10.6, I believe, or 10.0.6, I'm not entirely sure), .R3D files run smoothly at 1/2 resolution, without stuttering. As is expected from FCP, it doesn't matter what effects or grading you throw on to the footage, the background rendering is snappy, and takes care of anything you throw at it without a hassle.

I've also tried using DSLR footage, to which it responds like a dream. No issues there, at least in the NLE bit of things.

So, in short; as an editing machine, it'll probably fulfil your needs perfectly. As a VFX computer, however, it falls short if you want to get things done quickly. If you get paid by the hour, you should expect to get more money, if your employers will accept the longer hours.

For VFX, I'd recommend(if you're going about it the apple way) a mac pro, maxed out. 32GB ram, 12-core Xeon CPU's, and SSD drives. At least for cache and system. Of course, that sets you back a million dollars, but so will an HP Z820 workstation. But also, the HP at least comes Nvidia Quadro cards, whereas a Power Ma- ehm, a Mac Pro ships with Radeons.

In the end, I guess it's all up to you, but for editing, the iMac will work like a charm.

Got any questions? Let me know what to test, and I'll give it a whirl. Keep in mind that if you're going for the entry-level 21,5", my results will be a tad better than that.