Final Cut Studio Update Due in Late April? [Archive]

MacRumors

Mar 13, 2009, 12:57 PM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/13/final-cut-studio-update-due-in-late-april/)

AppleInsider reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/03/13/apple_expected_to_release_new_final_cut_studio_near_nab_show.html) that Apple is planning to release an update to their Final Cut Studio professional video editing package in late April, around the time of the annual National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) conference in Las Vegas.While Apple won't be attending NAB, those familiar with the company's plans say it holds ambitions of debuting a new version of Final Cut Studio, currently late in its development stage, at or around the same time the conference kicks off during the third week of April. Further details weren't provided.
Apple had been a regular participant at NAB, announcing a number of Final Cut Pro and Final Cut Studio releases there, put pulled out (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/02/07/apple-pulls-out-of-nab-2008/) of the 2008 conference as part of their continuing shift away from trade shows and conferences.

Previous reports (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/09/march-24th-event-to-focus-on-software/) had pointed to a possible Final Cut Studio update at a rumored March 24th media event that had initially surfaced as a possibility for hardware releases (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/02/apple-event-on-march-24th-other-products-maybe-sooner/). With the introduction of new iMacs, Mac minis (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/03/apple-announces-new-imacs-mac-minis-airport-extreme-and-time-capsule/) and Mac Pros (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/03/apple-introduces-new-mac-pro-with-nehalem-xeon-processors/) on March 3rd and yesterday's announcement of an iPhone OS 3.0 media event (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/12/apple-to-preview-iphone-os-3-0-on-march-17th/) on March 17th, a March 24th event is looking increasingly unlikely.

Article Link: Final Cut Studio Update Due in Late April? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/13/final-cut-studio-update-due-in-late-april/)

isethx

Mar 13, 2009, 01:00 PM

i reallly hope so! great news.

rick3000

Mar 13, 2009, 01:01 PM

Great, it needs an update! :)

FF_productions

Mar 13, 2009, 01:02 PM

I'm still learning FCS2, I'm glad they still care for the pro apps, I thought Apple just made phone software;)

MIDI_EVIL

Mar 13, 2009, 01:04 PM

I'm still learning FCS2, I'm glad they still care for the pro apps, I thought Apple just made phone software;)

Totally!

Good to know they still have an interest.

I too am still getting to grips with FCS2.

Durendal

Mar 13, 2009, 01:08 PM

It's about damned time! FCS2 is a good two years old or more by now. It's in desperate need of an upgrade. BluRay support is a must. I don't care if Apple doesn't like the licensing and other crap. It NEEDS to happen for FCS2 to be competitive. That and Adobe has gotten their butts into gear and are passing Apple up in that realm. My brother is a video guru who loved Final Cut and did all sorts of groovy things with it. Now he's in film school and readily admits that Adobe is stomping FCS2 across the board. Apparently Premiere has more fine-grained controls and well, let's face it, Compressor is an utter joke. I've used free software that kicks it's butt. The only thing Compressor really has is frame controls. Sure, they can deinterlace beautifully (when it works), but you'd better have an octocore Mac Pro if you want it to finish before you collect Social Security.

Now, what would be REALLY cool is support for OpenCL when Snow Leopard hits. Can you imagine what that could do to rendering/encoding times? Apple would nuke the competition!

swatchpost

Mar 13, 2009, 01:12 PM

Maybe they'll make FCP able to export accurate EDLs....

Or revamp their lacking trim-mode....

Or allow users to "Apply to ALL" when setting scratch disks....

<sigh>

but probably not

Chupa Chupa

Mar 13, 2009, 01:14 PM

It wouldn't be totally bizarre for Apple to announce FCS 3 on Monday... to ship in April. Sure it's mixing phone s/w with pro apps but IIRC the original Nano was unveiled at an Apple hardware event.

Frankly if FSC doesn't have Blu-Ray burning support I won't really care. FCS 2 is working great for me except for not being able to burn to HD media.

iMacmatician

Mar 13, 2009, 01:25 PM

Great news!

Note that one (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/09/march-24th-event-to-focus-on-software/) of the March 24 rumors somewhat supports this rumor.

According to Sevenmac, a new version of Final Cut Studio currently exists as an internal beta. The beta version, however, is reported to be buggy, which could force Apple to delay the special event by several weeks.

The AppleInsider report also has a detail on an upcoming version of Aperture.

Another Pro app due for an update is Aperture, with the last 2.0 reference release delivered last February. Aperture is unique among Apple's headlining Pro Apps in that rather than being based on an acquired title and simplified for inclusion in iLife, it was developed internally at Apple as a professional version of iPhoto. The new version will introduce native 64-bit support, mitigating one of the advantages held by Adobe with its rival Photoshop Lightroom software, which gained 64-bit support late last July.

Shookster

Mar 13, 2009, 01:25 PM

Or allow users to "Apply to ALL" when setting scratch disks....

Do you mean "Apply to Selected Project Only"? Apply to All is the current behavior for scratch disks.

swatchpost

Mar 13, 2009, 01:30 PM

Do you mean "Apply to Selected Project Only"? Apply to All is the current behavior for scratch disks.

No, I mean when you're in System Settings it should have a button you can click to apply the Scratch Disk, Waveform Cache, Thumbnail Cache, and Autosave Vault to ONE FOLDER instead of having to click "Set" for each one.

Actually, why can't FCP just be more like Avid....

:D

bigtriece

Mar 13, 2009, 01:32 PM

speakerwizard

Mar 13, 2009, 01:36 PM

asphyxiafeeling

Mar 13, 2009, 01:39 PM

and the naysayers kept saying apple doesn't care about it's pro apps anymore...

Shiner

Mar 13, 2009, 01:40 PM

From what I've heard the new version of Final Cut is going to have a virtual orchestra included, with scoring built into the program, so you will no longer need Logic to score the film project.

It's just a shame that the new imac's and macbook pros are going to struggle to run Final Cut 09, as it will need at least 100gb of hard drive space and an Intel i7 to run this program smoothly. I guess one way would be to build your own computer and use the Phenom II chips which only cost around $150 and are just as fast as the Intel i7s.

Agreed. That is what happens when you use last years mobile processors in everything. Apple forces you to buy a mac pro. Like you said it makes more since to just build your own PC.

numbersyx

Mar 13, 2009, 01:42 PM

Shame it's just Final Cut Studio I was hoping they would release an Aperture update too...

JonasLondon

Mar 13, 2009, 01:43 PM

No, I mean when you're in System Settings it should have a button you can click to apply the Scratch Disk, Waveform Cache, Thumbnail Cache, and Autosave Vault to ONE FOLDER instead of having to click "Set" for each one.
...
:D

And how often do you do this? :-)

I do that once everytime I install it. I.e. get a new Mac Pro. I.e. about every two years. Considering the entire installation can take a few hours, what's the 10 seconds it takes to set the 6-7 scratch disk settings?

you've got to wonder sometimes... :-)

I'm not burning BluRay, and still got plenty to learn about FCS2, which I think is pretty brilliant. Especially together with Shake. Although I AM excited about "Phenomenon" a.k.a. "Apple's Shake", but most of all I look forward to Aperture 3.0 - now that can do with some developer love. Ad Snow Leopard and multi-core glory to all sorts of things. ArenÄt all these soon-coming things exciting? :-) Go :apple:!

JonasLondon

Mar 13, 2009, 01:45 PM

iMacmatician

Mar 13, 2009, 01:45 PM

Shame it's just Final Cut Studio I was hoping they would release an Aperture update too...Probably in the cards too…

Another Pro app due for an update is Aperture, with the last 2.0 reference release delivered last February. … The new version will introduce native 64-bit support, mitigating one of the advantages held by Adobe with its rival Photoshop Lightroom software, which gained 64-bit support late last July.

Small White Car

Mar 13, 2009, 01:50 PM

I'll be happy if it can finally use all my CPU cores to their fullest.

I just LOVE waiting 40 minutes for an export when I can see all my procesor cores working at 45%.

Durendal

Mar 13, 2009, 01:50 PM

From what I've heard the new version of Final Cut is going to have a virtual orchestra included, with scoring built into the program, so you will no longer need Logic to score the film project.

It's just a shame that the new imac's and macbook pros are going to struggle to run Final Cut 09, as it will need at least 100gb of hard drive space and an Intel i7 to run this program smoothly. I guess one way would be to build your own computer and use the Phenom II chips which only cost around $150 and are just as fast as the Intel i7s.
Um...no. The i7 cleans the Phenom II's clock. The Phenom II can match the previous gen Core 2 Quads, but not the i7. The price is a lot better of course, but Intel has the performance crown. That and setting up an AMD Hackintosh is a pain in the neck compared to an Intel system.

mogzieee

Mar 13, 2009, 01:52 PM

This is interesting. I would imagine that any software update that requires the consumer to pay more would have an official release at an event, right? So I would imagine that the forthcoming update will probably be an addition to the 6 apps currently out there, or a complete refresh that improves performance, new features, etc.

Being a FCP user myself I shall look forward to the update if and when it happens.

derek1984

Mar 13, 2009, 01:54 PM

I was able to get Logic Express and Aperture each for $69 preinstalled last night with my MBP. That was with the education discount. I know they can't be updated but I couldn't resist with those being so cheap. Maybe they are so cheap right now because they are going to be updated soon....?

TMay

Mar 13, 2009, 01:56 PM

Dr Strangelove

Mar 13, 2009, 01:56 PM

Does this mean we may see an update to FCE as well?

Durendal

Mar 13, 2009, 01:58 PM

This is mostly nonsense, final cut is better / performing better and sells better than adobe production, also you can render out h264 ready for burning onto blu-ray (which can be done in toast or on a pc) and is a higher quality than what production suite can do. Also i dunno how apple keeps it so cheap, with the inclusion of color the price of studio is unbeatable.
Not my words, but I trust my brother on this one. He used Final Cut for years and learned advanced editing, effects, etc. He bought the whole suite, training materials, and did tons of work on it. Now that he's in film school he's turned a 180. He'll still admit that FCS is better in some ways, but he's sold on the newest Adobe suite. I trust his judgement in that arena, but I suppose mileage will vary depending on what you're doing.

But my point on Compressor still stands as I've used it plenty and gave up on it. If Apple would allow greater control over your formatting and speed the damn thing up a bit, that would be something. Ever tried formatting a video for iPod on it? What an utter joke. And while you can export to H.264 for BluRay, you still can't author or properly burn BluRay from FCS2. It needs real support, not rudimentary roundabouts.

swatchpost

Mar 13, 2009, 01:58 PM

And how often do you do this? :-)

See, this is what I think is the inherent problem with FCP's media management. In order to keep everything organized, and especially when I'm working with multiple projects at the same time, I make a new folder on my hard drive PER PROJECT where I keep all my music, sfx, gfx, etc. and make a folder called FCP PROJECT. This is where I keep the Scratch Disk, Autosave Vault—everything from the System Settings.

It's easier organization, and it's much easier to find the things that pertain ONLY to your project than having to go into FCP Documents on your system hard drive and try to find exactly what you're looking for when you're working on eight projects at the same time.

Granted, this is how we do it because I'm a full service post house that runs Avids, FCP systems for offline and online editing—so the level of organization must be greater when handling that volume.

Obviously, for a prosumer user it shouldn't have to be the same. It's just something that my Avid has that makes things much more streamlined and easier to organize for high volume. But it's a good practice to get in the habit of doing, especially when working with FCP.

numbersyx

Mar 13, 2009, 02:00 PM

Probably in the cards too…

Now you've raised my hopes again.....

darthraige

Mar 13, 2009, 02:07 PM

Disc Studio Pro better make its debut. Tired of using Encore as a work around.

TMay

Mar 13, 2009, 02:11 PM

See, this is what I think is the inherent problem with FCP's media management. In order to keep everything organized, and especially when I'm working with multiple projects at the same time, I make a new folder on my hard drive PER PROJECT where I keep all my music, sfx, gfx, etc. and make a folder called FCP PROJECT. This is where I keep the Scratch Disk, Autosave Vault—everything from the System Settings.

It's easier organization, and it's much easier to find the things that pertain ONLY to your project than having to go into FCP Documents on your system hard drive and try to find exactly what you're looking for when you're working on eight projects at the same time.

Granted, this is how we do it because I'm a full service post house that runs Avids, FCP systems for offline and online editing—so the level of organization must be greater when handling that volume.

Obviously, for a prosumer user it shouldn't have to be the same. It's just something that my Avid has that makes things much more streamlined and easier to organize for high volume. But it's a good practice to get in the habit of doing, especially when working with FCP.

Final Cut Server is the add on solution:

http://www.apple.com/finalcutserver/

slimpunk

Mar 13, 2009, 02:13 PM

And forget Premiere, it's time to start taking on Avid now! :)

the vj

Mar 13, 2009, 02:18 PM

1. If Apple comes out with a new version of FCP you will have to wait for the next update because usually a mayor revision comes witha bunch of bugs, you you will have to wait for January 2010 (to give an example) to get the bugs free update.

2. Adobe have been superior always. I have their suit installed, I never use it because the interface is sort of strange and I do not actually need much of the editing lately and FCP would do. But Adobe has a maturity i their software Apple does not.

JGowan

Mar 13, 2009, 02:26 PM

When the new Macs came out, I almost placed a very big order but have held off to hear about all of the annoucements and to see benchmarks on the machines. The order will include Final Cut Studio so I am so glad that I waited. I'm sure there will be lots of people who already placed their order and got the "old" version of the studio... feel bad for them.

Happy for me! :)

Small White Car

Mar 13, 2009, 02:29 PM

1. If Apple comes out with a new version of FCP you will have to wait for the next update because usually a mayor revision comes witha bunch of bugs, you you will have to wait for January 2010 (to give an example) to get the bugs free update.

If by "example" you mean "silly guess" then, yeah, sure.

But in the real world, Final Cut Studio updates tend to come along every 3 or so months in general, and slightly faster after a major release.

2. Adobe have been superior always. I have their suit installed, I never use it because the interface is sort of strange and I do not actually need much of the editing lately and FCP would do. But Adobe has a maturity i their software Apple does not.

Ha ha...so software you don't use is better for reasons you can't explain.

Ok, got it! :p

bigtriece

Mar 13, 2009, 02:32 PM

The main problem with Final Cut (the current version) is that the mobile Intel processors are not powerful enough to run this software, you need at least a quad core to run this effectively.

I think Apple really messed up with their strategy of putting mobile processors in all their products and putting server class CPUs in the Mac Pro, and crucially omitting the standard desktop processors.

Shookster

Mar 13, 2009, 02:40 PM

If Apple would allow greater control over your formatting and speed the damn thing up a bit, that would be something. Ever tried formatting a video for iPod on it?

If you want to speed things up, use Qmaster. And what's wrong with iPod H.264s? They work just fine for me.

Compressor and Qmaster have a lot of reliability issues though.

Lesser Evets

Mar 13, 2009, 02:40 PM

wizard

Mar 13, 2009, 02:40 PM

By that I mean next weeks debut does not imply nothing happening on the 24 th. In fact since next weeks meeting is really targetted at developers I don't see how there would be any relation to product announcements. Maybe nothing will happen on the 24th, I just don't see the relationship here.

As to FCS, which I don't use by the way, two years is not a long time considering the transition Apple is going through right now with it's OS. From the little bit I've heard this is a major rewrite to leverage new tech. The result ought to be a considerably improved application. I do use Apeture and frankly would rather wait on rushed release and instead get a solid and substantial update. Especially if rumors are true about the software targetting Snow Leopard. Even then I would expect some pain when all this new technology hits.

In otherwirds guys let's chill with respect to the whining about updates. Apples pro apps updates will come and hopefully reflect substantial improvements and new technology adoption.

Dave

nontroppo

Mar 13, 2009, 02:46 PM

The main problem with Final Cut (the current version) is that the mobile Intel processors are not powerful enough to run this software, you need at least a quad core to run this effectively.

FCP works perfectly for DV content editing on a 2 year old macbook with puny GMA950, and a MBP works fine on HD content as long as you don't try so many simultaneous video sources, but that is disk-limited.

What FCS needs is to move to Cocoa, and be 64bit native throughout. Color needs to support >2K (4K and 3K RAW cine cameras are proliferating!!!) and 10bit shouldn't be locked to YUV. And it should natively use OpenCL and Grandcentral when Snowleopard arrives. Apple needs to eat its own food and lead by example.

yoak

Mar 13, 2009, 02:49 PM

Really looking foreward to this. I got a copy of FC3 cheap and have been waiting to get FCS until they release version 3.
Soon I can use FCS at home as well.
Looking foreward to BD upgrad as well

the vj

Mar 13, 2009, 03:02 PM

Ha ha...so software you don't use is better for reasons you can't explain.

Ok, got it! :p

Exactly!

I mean, once you get used to FCP, are you going to learn all the shortcuts again with Adobe? I do not have the need right now but I remember well Premiere when I had my beige G3 back in 1999 and it was way better than todays Final Cut Pro. Imagine what would be now.

But basically I am fine with Quicktime pro :rolleyes:

wizard

Mar 13, 2009, 03:03 PM

The main problem with Final Cut (the current version) is that the mobile Intel processors are not powerful enough to run this software, you need at least a quad core to run this effectively.

The problem is this performance gap just gets bigger and bigger. It really does make one wonder what Apple really thinks of the iMac. The problem is applicable to many software packages.

I think Apple really messed up with their strategy of putting mobile processors in all their products and putting server class CPUs in the Mac Pro, and crucially omitting the standard desktop processors.

Yeah I have to agree. It is very bothersome that they went to all the trouble of designing new iMac internals and never recognized the need to actually deliver better performance. Yes I mean better CPU performance. It wasn't something they needed to deliver across the board but the medium and top ends needed more that they got. Apple has very much painted themselves into a corner with the exclusive use of mobile processors.

Note too; I appreciate low power energy saving machines, the Mini being an excellent example of, but a user needs choice and the ability to meet cost and performance requirements. So I'm not at all opposed to Apples use of mobile processors as such, I'm just not happy having a performance gap that you could sink the Titanic in. From the standpoint of engineering quad cores in the iMac should have been a snap, a lay up or freebie. Instead the new iMacs are another example of Apple being to focused on concerns outside of the core reasons for purchasing the hardware in the first place. The reality is that people have broad reasons for looking at iMacs but unfortunately Apple made them into a narrow solution.

Dave

MIDI_EVIL

Mar 13, 2009, 03:04 PM

I'll be happy if it can finally use all my CPU cores to their fullest.

I just LOVE waiting 40 minutes for an export when I can see all my procesor cores working at 45%.

Seconded.

Such a waste!

dvkid

Mar 13, 2009, 03:06 PM

It's about damned time! FCS2 is a good two years old or more by now.

Not quite. FCS 2 was announced at NAB 07 and shipped sometime thereafter. So it won't be two years old until May or June of this year.

Durendal

Mar 13, 2009, 03:13 PM

If you want to speed things up, use Qmaster. And what's wrong with iPod H.264s? They work just fine for me.

Compressor and Qmaster have a lot of reliability issues though.
The degree of control you get over iPod H.264 encoding is pathetic (Compressor doesn't even support bitrates over 1.5Mbps after Apple officially added that to the iPod!) and the quality is significantly lower than a lot of free encoders. QMaster is fine if you're on a quad+ core or a network, but if you're on a dual core, it's not much help.

And yes, there are reliability issues. I've tried running Frame Controls for deinterlacing on 1 minute videos. I wind up with large blocks of combing still in the video when it's done. I don't even know how Apple could let that kind of crap out the door, much less fail to fix it by now.

Ed A.

Mar 13, 2009, 03:18 PM

I'm still learning FCS2

I have mixed feelings about it. It's great that they're releasing a new update of FCS, but I just finished studying to take the FCP6 certification test. Guess I'll have to wait for the new test for FCP7.

SPG

Mar 13, 2009, 03:29 PM

It will be nice to get an update to FCP, but what I'm looking for is some decent support for BluRay. Right now that's a big hole in the program.
As far as the whole Adobe v FCS debate, they have their strengths and weaknesses. FCP beats Premiere hands down no contest and the fact that there is a huge base of users makes it no contest. OTOH, After Effects makes Motion look like a Fisher Price toy.
The fact that we still have two competing suites to keep either company from getting stale is great. Nothing like a little competition to keep the innovations coming.

AidenShaw

Mar 13, 2009, 03:46 PM

Now, what would be REALLY cool is support for OpenCL when Snow Leopard hits. Can you imagine what that could do to rendering/encoding times? Apple would nuke the competition!

You did know that GPU acceleration using CUDA (the Nvidia equivalent of OpenCL) is already available for CS4 on Windows, right?

http://www.nvidia.com/object/builtforadobepros.html

Click the "Premiere Pro CS4" picture to see a graphic of the CUDA-enabled Premiere nuking the competition.

ccuk

Mar 13, 2009, 03:49 PM

FCP works perfectly for DV content editing on a 2 year old macbook with puny GMA950, and a MBP works fine on HD content as long as you don't try so many simultaneous video sources, but that is disk-limited.

What FCS needs is to move to Cocoa, and be 64bit native throughout. Color needs to support >2K (4K and 3K RAW cine cameras are proliferating!!!) and 10bit shouldn't be locked to YUV. And it should natively use OpenCL and Grandcentral when Snowleopard arrives. Apple needs to eat its own food and lead by example.

+1

It will be nice to get an update to FCP, but what I'm looking for is some decent support for BluRay. Right now that's a big hole in the program.
As far as the whole Adobe v FCS debate, they have their strengths and weaknesses. FCP beats Premiere hands down no contest and the fact that there is a huge base of users makes it no contest. OTOH, After Effects makes Motion look like a Fisher Price toy.
The fact that we still have two competing suites to keep either company from getting stale is great. Nothing like a little competition to keep the innovations coming.

I really hope Phenomenon is still alive and that motion is dumped and replaced with said Phenomenon. Shake is on its last legs, and Motion is quite frankly a joke... A GUI update across the board to make everything coherent, improving stability and interoperability between apps wouldn't go a miss. And whilst I hope/want to see Blu-Ray authoring I am going to go out on a limb and say we won't see it in this next update, but probably in the one after that. Given Apple are still being so stubborn about adding Blu-Ray to their Desktop and Mobile line-up, I really can't see Blu-Ray until well after Snow Leopard has launched.

Durendal

Mar 13, 2009, 03:51 PM

You did know that GPU acceleration using CUDA (the Nvidia equivalent of OpenCL) is already available for CS4 on Windows, right?

http://www.nvidia.com/object/builtforadobepros.html

Click the "Premiere Pro CS4" picture to see a graphic of the CUDA-enabled Premiere nuking the competition.
I figured that they probably would. I guess we'll see how OpenCL stacks up against CUDA, but OpenCL has the advantage of running on more than just Nvidia cards and, if I'm not mistaken, is compatible with a wider range of Nvidia cards to varying degrees, ie, 7x00 line or earlier. I think Apple will have the upper hand as they're part of the group that standardized OpenCL and control both the OS and the editing suite. It'll be interesting to see some benchmarks between the two. Whatever the case, (as someone said above), more competition is a good thing.

bagelche

Mar 13, 2009, 04:01 PM

And how often do you do this? :-)

I work at a public access TV station. We run a couple of FCP edit stations (FCP Studio 1). Users bring in their own drives to store their projects. It would be great to simplify this process as it is done multiple times per day.

In the larger scheme of things, it's a fairly small tweak, but it's those small things that can affect workflow so significantly.

MysterMac

Mar 13, 2009, 04:01 PM

If they do this and close down Logic, while keeping the price of FCP about the same, I will be blown away.

:eek: close down Logic ? :eek:

surely Logic is due an update soon, Cubase is starting to look quite shiny

nuckinfutz

Mar 13, 2009, 04:08 PM

:eek: close down Logic ? :eek:

surely Logic is due an update soon, Cubase is starting to look quite shiny

Final Cut will never have the audio features that Logic Pro does. No worries there.

Logic Studio is due for an update as well.

Digital Skunk

Mar 13, 2009, 04:12 PM

But my point on Compressor still stands as I've used it plenty and gave up on it. If Apple would allow greater control over your formatting and speed the damn thing up a bit, that would be something. Ever tried formatting a video for iPod on it? What an utter joke. And while you can export to H.264 for BluRay, you still can't author or properly burn BluRay from FCS2. It needs real support, not rudimentary roundabouts.

I agree that the Adobe Suite is a dream to cut on and use, but saying that Compressor is slow is utter nonsense. It was the first of the suite apps to be core aware, and if you are cutting on a macbook then sure, it'll be slow.

Macpro, not so much. It's the fastest it's been in YEARS.

As for the update to FCS, I would seriously just want the app to be more like the Adobe Suite, which in terms of the user base is a much better option then even Avid..... given the user base...... USER BASE. Avid is still king, but when it comes to cheap editing suites Adobe smashes FCS right now, especially DVD Studio Pro, Motion, and even the coding of the app. It's much faster and much more user friendly.

AidenShaw

Mar 13, 2009, 04:15 PM

I figured that they probably would. I guess we'll see how OpenCL stacks up against CUDA, but OpenCL has the advantage of running on more than just Nvidia cards and, if I'm not mistaken, is compatible with a wider range of Nvidia cards to varying degrees, ie, 7x00 line or earlier.

OpenCL needs support routines for each card - there's a software layer to map the OpenCL abstraction to the underlying hardware APIs. This layer has to deal with both ATI and Nvidia APIs, and with different capabilities of different cards.

The CS4/CUDA/QuadroCX package, though, is a lower-level interface to the hardware acceleration.

It's somewhat like the difference between writing in C++ and assembler. While you gain portability with C++, you can often get better performance or more features with assembler.

OpenCL is a good idea, but I think that a lot of people are going to be disappointed when it shows up - mainly because of unrealistic hype. They'll be disappointed when it fails to "nuke" everything in sight - especially on some of the less powerful supported graphics cards.

Edit:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/ComboDealDetails.aspx?ItemList=Combo.173441

I'd hope that an $1800 graphics card would get good CUDA performance on CUDA... ;)

sdp

Mar 13, 2009, 04:21 PM

See, this is what I think is the inherent problem with FCP's media management. In order to keep everything organized, and especially when I'm working with multiple projects at the same time, I make a new folder on my hard drive PER PROJECT where I keep all my music, sfx, gfx, etc. and make a folder called FCP PROJECT. This is where I keep the Scratch Disk, Autosave Vault—everything from the System Settings.

It's easier organization, and it's much easier to find the things that pertain ONLY to your project than having to go into FCP Documents on your system hard drive and try to find exactly what you're looking for when you're working on eight projects at the same time.

Granted, this is how we do it because I'm a full service post house that runs Avids, FCP systems for offline and online editing—so the level of organization must be greater when handling that volume.

Obviously, for a prosumer user it shouldn't have to be the same. It's just something that my Avid has that makes things much more streamlined and easier to organize for high volume. But it's a good practice to get in the habit of doing, especially when working with FCP.

Couldn't agree more. I really hope Apple re-works both file management "logic" AND their media manager. It's the thing that Avid has over FCP in a huge way.

To a prosumer this is inconsequential. for say a full service post house it comes close to a deal breaker.

I'm hoping that this version of FCP is a full re-write for snow leopard and they've overhauled their media management system while they were doing whatever is that they do....

swatchpost

Mar 13, 2009, 04:21 PM

Avid is still king, but when it comes to cheap editing suites Adobe smashes FCS right now, especially DVD Studio Pro, Motion, and even the coding of the app. It's much faster and much more user friendly.

Ok...faster and more user friendly—cool. But does that beat out functionality and getting what you pay for when you purchase an Avid?

Frankly, I'd rather pay thousands of dollars more on the front end for an Avid that I know can make accurate film cutlists, make a frame-accurate edit to tape, track metadata accurately for a DI, and has a working flexible trim mode rather than spending thousands of dollars on the back-end trying to fix or find work-arounds for software problems inherent in buying a prosumer application.

...and yes, I would LOVE for Avid to be scriptable and have them open their architecture up so WE the user could make our own tools. But that seems way down the line of possibility at the moment.

Durendal

Mar 13, 2009, 04:36 PM

I agree that the Adobe Suite is a dream to cut on and use, but saying that Compressor is slow is utter nonsense. It was the first of the suite apps to be core aware, and if you are cutting on a macbook then sure, it'll be slow.

Macpro, not so much. It's the fastest it's been in YEARS.

As for the update to FCS, I would seriously just want the app to be more like the Adobe Suite, which in terms of the user base is a much better option then even Avid..... given the user base...... USER BASE. Avid is still king, but when it comes to cheap editing suites Adobe smashes FCS right now, especially DVD Studio Pro, Motion, and even the coding of the app. It's much faster and much more user friendly.
Compressor is certainly slow on a dual core, at least compared to what the final product is. FFMPEG produces superior quality in less time. It's pretty sad when that kind of thing happens. I can't say how well FFMPEG would scale across cores, but it's still something that Apple should address. And frame controls...holy HELL, those are slow on anything. Great quality deinterlacing (when it works right), but unless you have a cluster with major horsepower, it may not be worth the wait.

Durendal

Mar 13, 2009, 04:38 PM

OpenCL needs support routines for each card - there's a software layer to map the OpenCL abstraction to the underlying hardware APIs. This layer has to deal with both ATI and Nvidia APIs, and with different capabilities of different cards.

The CS4/CUDA/QuadroCX package, though, is a lower-level interface to the hardware acceleration.

It's somewhat like the difference between writing in C++ and assembler. While you gain portability with C++, you can often get better performance or more features with assembler.

OpenCL is a good idea, but I think that a lot of people are going to be disappointed when it shows up - mainly because of unrealistic hype. They'll be disappointed when it fails to "nuke" everything in sight - especially on some of the less powerful supported graphics cards.
Oh, there's plenty of hype surrounding OpenCL that is likely unfounded. CUDA will doubtlessly still have advantages, but look at it this way: An OpenCL app vs a non OpenCL app will, in the right circumstances, make one hell of a difference. I can imagine that multimedia will benefit greatly from it. Sure, older video cards may not fare as well as newer ones, but even if it's only a 30% boost, that's still 30%. Better than nothing. Like I said, it'll be interesting to see Adobe and Apple pitted against each other when FCS3 comes out.

nuckinfutz

Mar 13, 2009, 04:40 PM

Adobe has innate advantages with their lineup.

1. They moved to a suite format for their apps a long time ago. This allows them to unify the apps along common pipeline.

2. They don't have to develop an OS so their strictly focused on working with their apps on the two high volume OS.

Apple could be moving to more of a suite packaging for their apps. Final Cut Studio is a suit of apps but it's slowly becoming more than just a bundle of apps and into becoming a workflow.

Apple has advantages in developing their OS but it's a disadvantage as well because they are likely always looking to target the newest OS features but have to wait until the market has seen some penetration of the newest OS.

I expect that we see a much more heavily integrated Final Cut Studio 3. People want extensible workflows with good media mgtmt and roundtripping.

Is there any wonder we haven't seen

A new Logic Studio
A new Aperture
A Shake replacement

Apple could be ensuring that these apps finally work in concert together. Make'em all 64-bit and make managing each asset efficient so that duplication of assets is rarely needed unless requested.

swatchpost

Mar 13, 2009, 05:04 PM

I doubt there will be a Shake replacement now that Nuke is gaining so much ground. It's almost like what would have been Shake 5.

nuckinfutz

Mar 13, 2009, 05:13 PM

I doubt there will be a Shake replacement now that Nuke is gaining so much ground. It's almost like what would have been Shake 5.

It's a prayer. This comment speaks volumes from Ron Brinkmann formerly of Nothing Real and now with the Nuke team.

I really can’t say much about where Apple may or may not be going with future products. Although the fact that I decided it was time to move on might be a reasonable clue as to my confidence level that any alleged ‘next generation’ tool will be focused on the market (high end vfx and animation) that I’m interested in… And why I’m now working with The Foundry on Nuke…
(http://www.digitalcompositing.com/blog/?page_id=4)

OUCH :confused:

Truthfully though I had my doubts from jump that Apple could deliver a Shake replacement from the ground up. I don't think it's in Apple's DNA to do such high end software without acquiring much the app. They do well at improving apps to work in Mac workflows but ground up creation isn't their thing.

twoodcc

Mar 13, 2009, 05:35 PM

yeah i don't see much happening on march 24, but i hope i'm wrong

Digital Skunk

Mar 13, 2009, 05:50 PM

Ok...faster and more user friendly—cool. But does that beat out functionality and getting what you pay for when you purchase an Avid?

Frankly, I'd rather pay thousands of dollars more on the front end for an Avid that I know can make accurate film cutlists, make a frame-accurate edit to tape, track metadata accurately for a DI, and has a working flexible trim mode rather than spending thousands of dollars on the back-end trying to fix or find work-arounds for software problems inherent in buying a prosumer application.

...and yes, I would LOVE for Avid to be scriptable and have them open their architecture up so WE the user could make our own tools. But that seems way down the line of possibility at the moment.

I was comparing FCS to Adobe Production. Avid is still king, and when I say "the market for FCS/Adobe" I mean those that can't drop the cash on the front end. I learned to cut on Avid and if I had a say in my newsrooms purchases I wouldn't have wasted their time with FCP (that's a whole nother story). But personally, when I have those quick edits for freelance, I turn to FCS for now. When I re-up my hardware and software, I may switch to Adobe ProdSuite CS4/5.

Compressor is certainly slow on a dual core, at least compared to what the final product is. FFMPEG produces superior quality in less time. It's pretty sad when that kind of thing happens. I can't say how well FFMPEG would scale across cores, but it's still something that Apple should address. And frame controls...holy HELL, those are slow on anything. Great quality deinterlacing (when it works right), but unless you have a cluster with major horsepower, it may not be worth the wait.

I would still say it depends on the machine. If you are encoding/compressing 10bit HD footage on a Macbook Pro it WILL take a while. On a Mac Pro, not so much. On a quad core Mac Pro with 8GB and FCS2 then not so much etc. etc.

I use MPEG Streamclip for quick compresses and conversions, and it's just a little faster than Compressor depending on the frame rate, de-interlaceing, etc. I wouldn't downright call Compressor an epic fail. DVD Studio Pro is more of an example of that than compressor ever will be.

SHOlover

Mar 13, 2009, 06:18 PM

It all depends on what you cut and for whom.

Edit on Premiere if you want to produce skateboard and birthday party videos. Edit on Final Cut if you want to produce serious broadcast content or indie films.

CS4 fans drive me nuts! I always ask "name five features cut with premiere"
or "name five post houses that use CS4" hmmm...

Granted, both photoshop and AE are great programs, but premiere is a joke. Also the new transcription add-on is just terrible.

I hope that this next iteration of FCS will blow CS4 out of the water and end the comparisons between Premiere and Final Cut.

/rant

Here is the hierarchy of NLEs based on quality (from collective opinion AND from first hand experience)

iMovie
Vegas
Premiere
Avid Media Composer
Final Cut
Avid Nitris
Smoke

Also, the people that expect mid-to-high end editing software to run on a underpowered computer make me laugh. "Why can't I run Final cut on my eMac???" :p You start to sound like premiere users. "I'll just buy a 600 dollar dell and run CS4 no prob":rolleyes:Learn the craft, then buy the system appropriate for you. It all depends on what you cut.

Okay now the rant is over.

Durendal

Mar 13, 2009, 06:33 PM

I would still say it depends on the machine. If you are encoding/compressing 10bit HD footage on a Macbook Pro it WILL take a while. On a Mac Pro, not so much. On a quad core Mac Pro with 8GB and FCS2 then not so much etc. etc.

I use MPEG Streamclip for quick compresses and conversions, and it's just a little faster than Compressor depending on the frame rate, de-interlaceing, etc. I wouldn't downright call Compressor an epic fail. DVD Studio Pro is more of an example of that than compressor ever will be.
I haven't even done much HD editing and compression. It's mostly SD content and frame controls are still glacial. The epic fail comes in when frame controls don't even work properly, like the blocks of combing I mentioned earlier on short clips. Inexcusable. Also, there is the bit with Compressor not giving pros enough encoding options, ie, the staggering lack of options for iPod encodes. I also use MPEG Streamclip and IT has more options for iPods than Compressor! Extra options often comes out to mean higher quality as you can tweak and adjust. FFMPEG has the best options (and speed, and quality of the encode) of the free encoders that I've tried thus far, but you do need to know what you're doing.

Compressor isn't exactly epic fail, but as a pro app, it's pretty piss poor in many regards. Distributed encoding is hella nice, but it's not much help if you either need more options or don't have a cluster.

iMacmatician

Mar 13, 2009, 07:01 PM

Delays in the pro apps are due to complete rewrites for Cocoa. They will 64 bit, and ready to take advantage of OpenCL and Grand Central when Snow Leopard arrives.

These delays were obvious and necessary, and certainly, if you have been following the Adobe Photoshop CS4 mini-debacle and Shake's rebuild, you would have been aware of this.I believe you, and it fits in with AppleInsider's rumor.

I wonder if there will still be some sort of "Pro event," just in April instead of the originally rumored March. That rumor did say a possible delay too.

It is very bothersome that they went to all the trouble of designing new iMac internals and never recognized the need to actually deliver better performance. Yes I mean better CPU performance. It wasn't something they needed to deliver across the board but the medium and top ends needed more that they got. Apple has very much painted themselves into a corner with the exclusive use of mobile processors.10 more watts (than the 55 W 3.07 GHz in the last revision) for 65 W quad-core. I'm still surprised at why Apple didn't go that route and improve the iMac's cooling. The result of staying at mobile quad-core is a small speed bump for half the iMac line after nearly a year. :rolleyes:

a user needs choice and the ability to meet cost and performance requirementsEven if 10 W was too much, Apple could still have given the mobile (45 W) quad-core as an option, that would likely perform better than fast dual-cores in multithreaded applications. But since they haven't, it looks like the iMac may stay dual-core for another year or two.

thevofl

Mar 13, 2009, 08:24 PM

I just hope that it is reasonably priced. I got FCS1 for $699 (edu discount). I then got CS3 Master Collection for $525 (again with edu discount). When they updated Logic, the edu discount pretty much disappeared ($449 nearly the amount that I got the Master Collection for).

LethalWolfe

Mar 13, 2009, 08:32 PM

CBlakeston

Mar 13, 2009, 08:42 PM

FCP works perfectly for DV content editing on a 2 year old macbook with puny GMA950, and a MBP works fine on HD content

I just had to agree. I produced a few short videos every week, editing in 1080i HDV for around 2 years on a black macbook and everything worked beautifully. I've always thought compressor was an elegant and easy to use solution after coming from Pro-Coder on the windows side of things before making the switch to mac.

And now I have a unibody Macbook Pro, it's not that much faster when I come to think of it. Maybe I'm missing out and an octo-core Mac Pro would blow me away. But its totally unfair to say FCP can't cut it on a mobile system.

snarton

Mar 13, 2009, 09:14 PM

My wish list for FCS3:
1) Blu-ray support
2) Phenomenon/ successor to Shake
3) direct-to-hard drive recorder with scopes and buffer like DV Rack/ OnLocation

Not holding my breath, though.

FF_productions

Mar 13, 2009, 09:19 PM

I have mixed feelings about it. It's great that they're releasing a new update of FCS, but I just finished studying to take the FCP6 certification test. Guess I'll have to wait for the new test for FCP7.

I have the book and everything to get certified, but I waited too long like a moron, by the time I'd ready for the exam, FCS3 will be out.

And for anybody to complain about the price, you gotta be kidding me. I just started diving into Motion 3, I'm stunned that Apple can price it that low and make a good enough profit to support all these pro apps! Shame on the people who pirate these apps and BITCH and COMPLAIN that Apple is not doing a good job with FCS. You sure aint helping! -RANT OVER-

jpine

Mar 13, 2009, 09:42 PM

Apple has given every indication that they are not interested in optical media. The pro app is embarrassingly long in the tooth. iDVD did not receive an update. If DVDSP does not get a major overhaul, surpassing Encore, I will abandon the Final Cut Studio and move to Adobe.

bki122689

Mar 13, 2009, 11:01 PM

new interphase to motion please
and possibly final cut pro

Digital Skunk

Mar 13, 2009, 11:05 PM

I haven't even done much HD editing and compression. It's mostly SD content and frame controls are still glacial. The epic fail comes in when frame controls don't even work properly, like the blocks of combing I mentioned earlier on short clips. Inexcusable. Also, there is the bit with Compressor not giving pros enough encoding options, ie, the staggering lack of options for iPod encodes. I also use MPEG Streamclip and IT has more options for iPods than Compressor! Extra options often comes out to mean higher quality as you can tweak and adjust. FFMPEG has the best options (and speed, and quality of the encode) of the free encoders that I've tried thus far, but you do need to know what you're doing.

Compressor isn't exactly epic fail, but as a pro app, it's pretty piss poor in many regards. Distributed encoding is hella nice, but it's not much help if you either need more options or don't have a cluster.

I can agree about the lack of compression and encoding options for Compressor.

There may be an issue somewhere else on your system with the slow encodes of Compressor. Not that I am supporting the app that much, but I've recently been having WAY TOO MANY app crashes with FCP and Motion. It may be related to that GFX card issue that the Penryn books have, but it just pisses me off.

bretm

Mar 13, 2009, 11:31 PM

See, this is what I think is the inherent problem with FCP's media management. In order to keep everything organized, and especially when I'm working with multiple projects at the same time, I make a new folder on my hard drive PER PROJECT where I keep all my music, sfx, gfx, etc. and make a folder called FCP PROJECT. This is where I keep the Scratch Disk, Autosave Vault—everything from the System Settings.

It's easier organization, and it's much easier to find the things that pertain ONLY to your project than having to go into FCP Documents on your system hard drive and try to find exactly what you're looking for when you're working on eight projects at the same time.

Granted, this is how we do it because I'm a full service post house that runs Avids, FCP systems for offline and online editing—so the level of organization must be greater when handling that volume.

Obviously, for a prosumer user it shouldn't have to be the same. It's just something that my Avid has that makes things much more streamlined and easier to organize for high volume. But it's a good practice to get in the habit of doing, especially when working with FCP.

If apple would simply save the above settings as per project, it would solve 99% of their mm issues. When doing things your way it's great, until you forget to set up all the particulars. Then stuff gets scattered everywhere. Or worse, the next guy mixes his stuff with yours because they didn't bother to change the settings.

brianbobcat

Mar 14, 2009, 12:02 AM

Maybe they'll make FCP able to export accurate EDLs....

Or revamp their lacking trim-mode....

Or allow users to "Apply to ALL" when setting scratch disks....

<sigh>

but probably not

OH DEAR GOD NO!!!! Yah let's just remove everything that makes Final Cut more intuitive than Avid.

No, I mean when you're in System Settings it should have a button you can click to apply the Scratch Disk, Waveform Cache, Thumbnail Cache, and Autosave Vault to ONE FOLDER instead of having to click "Set" for each one.

Actually, why can't FCP just be more like Avid....

:D

If you like Avid so much then why don't you just use Media Composer? For the rest of us that like not needing to be in Trim mode just to move or delete a clip, we'll stay with our Final Cuts, thanks.

-Brian

brianbobcat

Mar 14, 2009, 12:11 AM

And how often do you do this? :-)

I do that once everytime I install it. I.e. get a new Mac Pro. I.e. about every two years. Considering the entire installation can take a few hours, what's the 10 seconds it takes to set the 6-7 scratch disk settings?

I'll admit I'm constantly doing this because I have 3 separate hard drives that I use for different projects, so having the option to set a scratch disk per project would be nice, but yes, it's all of 10 seconds. Big deal.

you've got to wonder sometimes... :-)

I'm not burning BluRay, and still got plenty to learn about FCS2, which I think is pretty brilliant. Especially together with Shake. Although I AM excited about "Phenomenon" a.k.a. "Apple's Shake", but most of all I look forward to Aperture 3.0 - now that can do with some developer love. Ad Snow Leopard and multi-core glory to all sorts of things. ArenÄt all these soon-coming things exciting? :-) Go :apple:!

Those improvements would certainly be awesome. I am wanting to burn Blu-Ray as I have 2 HDV camcorders and would love to add Blu-Ray authoring to my list of services. Final Cut is a beast to learn, and I'm still learning parts about it, but new features are always nice to have.

-Brian

brianbobcat

Mar 14, 2009, 12:13 AM

Mariusz1977

Mar 14, 2009, 12:21 AM

With this upgrade I wonder if they will take the opportunity to shut the door on new Mac Mini & Macbook users who planned on using FCS for cheap editing stations (by building in a "do not install" for 9400M-only GPU systems.)

brianbobcat

Mar 14, 2009, 12:23 AM

The main problem with Final Cut (the current version) is that the mobile Intel processors are not powerful enough to run this software, you need at least a quad core to run this effectively.

I think Apple really messed up with their strategy of putting mobile processors in all their products and putting server class CPUs in the Mac Pro, and crucially omitting the standard desktop processors.

Excuse you? I'm running FCP 6.0.4 on a Rev. 1 17" MBP, and have been for the past 2 1/2 years. Right now I'm working on a 4-camera Multicammed project off of an eSATA drive via eSATA ExpressCard. I can watch it all in full-quality and real time. Even Motion works pretty well. Sure it's no Mac Pro, but I got a laptop knowing full well it's strength and shortcomings.

-Brian

brianbobcat

Mar 14, 2009, 01:36 AM

I haven't even done much HD editing and compression. It's mostly SD content and frame controls are still glacial. The epic fail comes in when frame controls don't even work properly, like the blocks of combing I mentioned earlier on short clips. Inexcusable. Also, there is the bit with Compressor not giving pros enough encoding options, ie, the staggering lack of options for iPod encodes. I also use MPEG Streamclip and IT has more options for iPods than Compressor! Extra options often comes out to mean higher quality as you can tweak and adjust. FFMPEG has the best options (and speed, and quality of the encode) of the free encoders that I've tried thus far, but you do need to know what you're doing.

Compressor isn't exactly epic fail, but as a pro app, it's pretty piss poor in many regards. Distributed encoding is hella nice, but it's not much help if you either need more options or don't have a cluster.

Many editors I know swear by TeleStream's Episode now. They say it's fast, scalable, and has plenty of presets and custom controls for everyone. Sounds like Apple needs to make Compressor into a new Episode.

-Brian

Durendal

Mar 14, 2009, 01:54 AM

Many editors I know swear by TeleStream's Episode now. They say it's fast, scalable, and has plenty of presets and custom controls for everyone. Sounds like Apple needs to make Compressor into a new Episode.

-Brian
I've used Episode. It's not bad. The deinterlacing algorithms are pretty good, but they do give you a significant quality hit. If they can address that, then it's great. They have a good number of options without making it needlessly complicated. I use it for bigger projects, but smaller encodes usually go through FFMPEG.

GentleGim

Mar 14, 2009, 01:55 AM

I'm hoping the new version will have upgraded all templates to 1080p. There is simply no reason to keep SD media. You can always down-res but going the other way is rarely acceptable.

Some simple 3D capability in Motion would be killer. It doesn't need to be a full CGI workstation. But allowing lights to cast shadows and automate reflections, allowing text and objects to interact in a true 3D environment with apparent thickness, not just a simulation... Being able to curve media.... that would be a great value.

Very interested in the the "Puppet" feature in After Effects.

A version of Premiere's transcription feature that actually works and is editable and exportable would be awesome.

The ability to deal with (or at least transcode and then deal with) MPG and MP3s is long over due. How strange that one has to harness the FREE iTunes and MPEGstreamclip apps to prepare media for a $1000+ application.

Of course, any improvement in the way the apps work together would be appreciated. I can't make Soundtrack work as advertised, the Motion roundtrip is often buggy without workarounds (like exporting to a QT movie) and the Color workflow is a space hog and counterintuitive. (How great would it be if the Color grades could be turned on and off like filters directly in the FCP viewer and only rendered upon export?)

Blue Ray? sure... why not... I use toast when it comes up... but it almost never does. DVDs are still ubiquitous and no client of mine has yet asked for a BR delivery or archive. Apple is a member of the Blue-Ray consortium but they haven't shown any interest in the format. They might know something we don't.

Fingers crossed for April. :)

Alpinism

Mar 14, 2009, 02:01 AM

A new storyboard program for FCS 3 and also usb and/or firewire support for Apple color going out to CC console hardware. Might include native RED editing straight to final cut as well.

maldoblaz

Mar 14, 2009, 02:54 AM

http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/13/final-cut-studio-update-due-in-late-april/)

AppleInsider reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/09/03/13/apple_expected_to_release_new_final_cut_studio_near_nab_show.html) that Apple is planning to release an update to their Final Cut Studio professional video editing package in late April, around the time of the annual National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) conference in Las Vegas.
Apple had been a regular participant at NAB, announcing a number of Final Cut Pro and Final Cut Studio releases there, put pulled out (http://www.macrumors.com/2008/02/07/apple-pulls-out-of-nab-2008/) of the 2008 conference as part of their continuing shift away from trade shows and conferences.

Previous reports (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/09/march-24th-event-to-focus-on-software/) had pointed to a possible Final Cut Studio update at a rumored March 24th media event that had initially surfaced as a possibility for hardware releases (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/02/apple-event-on-march-24th-other-products-maybe-sooner/). With the introduction of new iMacs, Mac minis (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/03/apple-announces-new-imacs-mac-minis-airport-extreme-and-time-capsule/) and Mac Pros (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/03/apple-introduces-new-mac-pro-with-nehalem-xeon-processors/) on March 3rd and yesterday's announcement of an iPhone OS 3.0 media event (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/12/apple-to-preview-iphone-os-3-0-on-march-17th/) on March 17th, a March 24th event is looking increasingly unlikely.

Article Link: Final Cut Studio Update Due in Late April? (http://www.macrumors.com/2009/03/13/final-cut-studio-update-due-in-late-april/)

FInalCut Studio really needs an upgrade, I would think of:

Blu Ray authoring
Motion and Shake integration with advanced Fx's
Soundtrack and Logic better integration
Maybe a new bundled 3D software -Modo like- tool?
Compressor needs better render times using all cores
Color should work as a standalone solution (if possible)
DVDstudio pro NEEDS pro subtitling tools and DTS audio compression

I think also that this new version would need Snow Leopard and would eat lots of RAM. I've heard a couple of years ago that a FinalCut Extreme version was in it's works, How about 3 FinalCut flavors: extreme, pro and express??

RyanR.

Mar 14, 2009, 02:55 AM

I'm still learning FCS2, I'm glad they still care for the pro apps, I thought Apple just made phone software;)

Didn't you know ... the new final cut software will only make movies/video to be watched on a mac/:apple:tv/iPhone. You can then put it on the iTunes store as long as its in SD.:rolleyes:

But seriously maybe this will include some blue ray support? ;)

hiimamac

Mar 14, 2009, 04:16 AM

Does this mean we may see an update to FCE as well?

Fwiw and probably not true. Iet this guybwho said last year, FCP looked a lot like iMovie but still very deep. Hmmmmm

bobbleheadbob

Mar 14, 2009, 06:32 AM

Great news. I've been hoping for an update for a while now.

slackpacker

Mar 14, 2009, 08:28 AM

FC needs an interface overhaul. What we are using is many many years ancient.

swatchpost

Mar 14, 2009, 09:58 AM

It all depends on what you cut and for whom.Here is the hierarchy of NLEs based on quality (from collective opinion AND from first hand experience)

iMovie
Vegas
Premiere
Avid Media Composer
Final Cut
Avid Nitris
Smoke

Before you make a broad statement like that about "collective opinion" maybe you should support your findings....

How in the world could you ever put Final Cut BEFORE Avid Media Composer on your "hierarchy?" Final Cut can't even make accurate EDLs and cut lists. Not until v6.0 was FCP able to make OMFs for Pro Tools without having to run it through Automatic Duck!

Just because Avid Media Composer might be a little more difficult to learn for the film school kids used to their drag-and-drop mentality of FCP and because it forces you to think like a film editor, doesn't mean it's a worse NLE than FCP.

princigalli

Mar 14, 2009, 10:03 AM

It's needed. Waiting any longer would mean killing the Mac platform for professional video editing. But even if they update, I really hope it will be a good update. Not like the DVD Studio Pro remaining the same from FCS1 to FCS2.

swatchpost

Mar 14, 2009, 10:11 AM

If you like Avid so much then why don't you just use Media Composer? For the rest of us that like not needing to be in Trim mode just to move or delete a clip, we'll stay with our Final Cuts, thanks.

-Brian

You obviously don't know how to move or delete a clip in Avid then....

I DO use Media Composer. But I also use FCP. It depends on the project. For the time being, I would NEVER consider cutting or assisting on a feature film shot on 3 and 4 perf 35 and S-35mm film on FCP. There's too many inherent problems with FCP's media management, metadata tracking, and EDLs and cutlists to use it for something of that caliber of a project.

However, FCP shines on easy imports and easy exports. When you need to do a quick project that needed to get done yesterday, it exceeds all expectations. The difference essentially is in the project. Would I use FCP to do a feature film? NO. Would I use FCP to cut music videos, industrial videos, and some docs, YES.

I'm not trying to be out here on this forum hating on FCP. I've been a FCP user for 10 years. However, I've just been waiting for a really long time (I learned FCP before I learned Avid) to have professional features be put into FCP and with every release FCP continues to disappoint. When are they going to stop making minor upgrades that only fix support for HDV formats and minor (under-the-hood) tweaks, and really give us an intuitive editor that takes the best of FCP and the reliability of Avid into one NLE?

THEN—they would have much more of the professional industry in their grasp.

afrowq

Mar 14, 2009, 12:54 PM

Or allow users to "Apply to ALL" when setting scratch disks....

Amen to that one, brother

zedsdead

Mar 14, 2009, 01:02 PM

Native AVC-HD editing would be nice so no transcoding has to take place.

The interface needs a facelift as well.

Also, Final Cut's "Open Timeline" is no where on par with Avid's.

I agree with the Avid comments above. Final Cut can really infringe on Avid if they can get their Media Management a little more stable. That seems to be the biggest complaint from feature film editors.

sdp

Mar 14, 2009, 01:19 PM

You obviously don't know how to move or delete a clip in Avid then....

I DO use Media Composer. But I also use FCP. It depends on the project. For the time being, I would NEVER consider cutting or assisting on a feature film shot on 3 and 4 perf 35 and S-35mm film on FCP. There's too many inherent problems with FCP's media management, metadata tracking, and EDLs and cutlists to use it for something of that caliber of a project.

However, FCP shines on easy imports and easy exports. When you need to do a quick project that needed to get done yesterday, it exceeds all expectations. The difference essentially is in the project. Would I use FCP to do a feature film? NO. Would I use FCP to cut music videos, industrial videos, and some docs, YES.

I'm not trying to be out here on this forum hating on FCP. I've been a FCP user for 10 years. However, I've just been waiting for a really long time (I learned FCP before I learned Avid) to have professional features be put into FCP and with every release FCP continues to disappoint. When are they going to stop making minor upgrades that only fix support for HDV formats and minor (under-the-hood) tweaks, and really give us an intuitive editor that takes the best of FCP and the reliability of Avid into one NLE?

THEN—they would have much more of the professional industry in their grasp.

This.

SPG

Mar 14, 2009, 02:29 PM

I'm really surprised to hear all the talk of Premiere on this thread. I'm not saying that my experience is universal, but I don't know a single editor using it. I work with about two dozen productions per year, and all but two (on Avid) are on FCP. All three studios that I'm friendly with have FCP and Avid.
I'm not saying it's not a good program, but just that in my experience it isn't being used professionally.
The user base of FCP editors is huge. Any studio can easily pull in a freelancer to work on a project if they're running FCP. Avid, smaller base, but generally more professional freelancers. Premiere? Honestly no idea because I've never heard of it happening.
I have CS4 which I use daily for Photoshop and After Effects, maybe I'll have to launch Premiere and check it out.

backdraft

Mar 14, 2009, 03:27 PM

So is the Shake rewrite finally taking place? I'm learning Nuke now though Im a Final Cut user so I want something that integrates nicely.

SimonMW

Mar 14, 2009, 04:30 PM

LethalWolfe

Mar 14, 2009, 05:15 PM

So is the Shake rewrite finally taking place? I'm learning Nuke now though Im a Final Cut user so I want something that integrates nicely.
There is no Shake rewrite. More Shake code will probably appear in FCP and/or Motion, but the odds of Apple making a true successor to Shake, a true competitor to Nuke, from the ground up are between slim and none on a good day.

For those that keep demanding Blu-Ray, are your clients actually asking you for it? If they are then why haven't you just bought a different NLE that does support it so that you can satisfy all those clients?
That's what people are doing, but that doesn't mean it wouldn't work out better if Apple offered up a more elegant solution.

Lethal

Sirmausalot

Mar 14, 2009, 06:00 PM

The main problem with Final Cut (the current version) is that the mobile Intel processors are not powerful enough to run this software, you need at least a quad core to run this effectively.

I think Apple really messed up with their strategy of putting mobile processors in all their products and putting server class CPUs in the Mac Pro, and crucially omitting the standard desktop processors.

Are you kidding me? If it's not working well for you then it's not configured right or you simply don't know what you're talking about. I used the suite on a mbp core duo. It runs well on my current iMac -- though as others point out compressor is slow. Get a raid.

monster620ie

Mar 15, 2009, 01:40 AM

I am still using FCS and trying to save up the money to move up to FCS 2. I wonder what the upgrade price would be to go from FCS to FCS 3 ?

dAlen

Mar 15, 2009, 06:22 AM

zedsdead

Mar 15, 2009, 07:56 AM

I am still using FCS and trying to save up the money to move up to FCS 2. I wonder what the upgrade price would be to go from FCS to FCS 3 ?

http://store.apple.com/us/product/MA888Z/A?mco=MzE2OTkyOQ

It will be between $499-699 depending on how Apple decides to treat you. Take at look at the other upgrades they have now.

MacProPIMP

Mar 15, 2009, 10:34 AM

http://www.larryjordan.biz/index.html

Why I Don’t Believe the Rumors
Posted by Larry on March 10, 2009
Earlier today, I was reading some rumor sites speculating that Apple may be releasing a new version of Final Cut Studio at a media event on March 24.

I don’t think these rumors are true and wanted to share my thinking with you so you can decide yourself.

First, a very important point: Apple HAS NOT told me what they are doing. In fact, they have not even dropped any hints in my direction. If they had told me, it would violate our agreement for me to even tell you that I know what they are doing. I don’t know — this blog is simply my thinking about the situation Apple finds itself in.

Let’s look at where Final Cut stands today. The last major upgrade was two years ago, with a series of minor upgrades over the last 18 months. So, Final Cut is due for a significant upgrade sometime this year.

However, the current version of the operating system is 10.5.x. Apple has already announced that a brand new, optimized, OS 10.6 will be out this year. Why would Apple make a major release of Final Cut Studio to support an operating system that is about to be replaced? While no one knows when 10.6 will be released, March strikes me as a poor time when Apple could wait a couple of months and release it, with great fanfare, to all their developers at the World Wide Developer Conference (WWDC) later this spring. There’s nothing going on in March that is so compelling as to force Apple to release the OS early.

The new OS will have, according to Apple, an entirely re-engineered version of QuickTime (QuickTime X) in it. Since Final Cut and QuickTime have been conjoined since birth, this means that Apple would have to make two major FCS releases: one to support the version of QuickTime current in March, and a second major release to support QuickTime X released with OS 10.6. Apple is a huge company with vast development resources, but two major releases in the same year for Final Cut Studio don’t make any sense to me.

As well, two new features in OS X 10.6 are also relevant: 1. Snow Leopard will only run on Intel/Macs, and 2. It only uses Cocoa in its user interface. The impact of these two statements on Final Cut is profound.

First, because Final Cut runs on both PowerPC and Intel systems, it will need to be significantly tweaked to run Intel-only. Second, Final Cut’s user interface is written entirely (or darn near entirely) in Carbon, a soon-to-be-outdated programming language. Both of these statements mean that for the last couple of years, Apple’s developers have been very, VERY busy re-programming almost every line of code in the application to convert the application to support Cocoa and Intel. This is a HUGE project, affecting millions of lines of code. The process of getting the bugs out will be lengthy. To do all this work, simply to release a “temporary major release” in March doesn’t make sense.

So the reason I tend to think we won’t see a Final Cut Studio release in March — or April, for that matter — is that there is no benefit to Apple to release a new version of Final Cut until after the new version of Snow Leopard (10.6) is out. Releasing a new version now, means Apple would need to release a second major update in a couple of months.

While Apple has the ability to do this, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense when trying to allocate development resources.

So, if you want my opinion of what is going to happen – AND REMEMBER, NO ONE HAS TOLD ME ANYTHING - I think we will see Snow Leopard in June and a shipping version of Final Cut Studio in July.

xbjllb

Mar 15, 2009, 11:34 AM

For those that keep demanding Blu-Ray, are your clients actually asking you for it? If they are then why haven't you just bought a different NLE that does support it so that you can satisfy all those clients?

The ones who have (and they are legion) don't waste time here anymore to even hear your question, let alone answer it.

:apple:

SPG

Mar 15, 2009, 01:18 PM

For those that keep demanding Blu-Ray, are your clients actually asking you for it? If they are then why haven't you just bought a different NLE that does support it so that you can satisfy all those clients?

Good question. Some of clients do ask for it. I'm able to do it for them with a variety of tools, but frankly I don't like the ones I've got and would hope that a DVD SP upgrade would actually do BluRay well.
DVD authoring is still my bread and butter, and though I don't use DVD Studio Pro at all for this, my hope is that Apple would offer a functional solution that would give BluRay the bump that it needs. Of course, this is all hope. DVD SP has always disappointed me and Compressor's MPEG2 engine is junk, but I can always hope, right?
When Steve Jobs mentioned the licensing issues with BluRay I believe he was mainly talking about what it would involve to get playback capabilities into the Mac, but the other end of the BluRay production also has major licensing headaches. For someone to take a BluRay to manufacturing will cost $4500 in AACS licensing fees alone the first time, then $1500 each time after that. That's not manufacturing cost, but just licensing before you can get a master made. That's nothing in the budget of a release like Wall-E, but for someone who is selling a more reasonable number, say 10,000 DVD and now wants to make 1,000 BluRay to go with it the costs are substantial. With those license fees and BluRay's higher cost, 1,000 BluRay can cost the same as 10,000 DVD by the time they're ready to ship. This is a big reason why you don't see much BluRay content outside of major studio releases.

CmdrLaForge

Mar 15, 2009, 04:20 PM

AidenShaw

Mar 15, 2009, 05:55 PM

In addition I hope they finally rewrite the app and I really hope for fewer bugs then the last release - drove me crazy.

Unfortunately, "rewrite" usually means "keep the same features and add bugs".

By "features" I mean "things useful to the end user".

Rewriting to use Cocoa doesn't add much that's useful to the end user, but gives lots of opportunities for introducing new bugs.

Digital Skunk

Mar 15, 2009, 06:55 PM

I wish for better triming and media management in FCP 7 and my main wish - much better roundtriping between apps !!!

I can agree to that as well. There are times when making a change to a motion clip and switching back to FCP will crash the app. Rarely it does this, but it shouldn't do it at ALL!

timseley

Mar 15, 2009, 08:29 PM

Was about to point out Larry's post but someone beat me to it. Excellent arguments against an eminent release.

iMacmatician

Mar 15, 2009, 08:48 PM

So is the Shake rewrite finally taking place? I'm learning Nuke now though Im a Final Cut user so I want something that integrates nicely.Apple will no longer be selling maintenance for Shake and no further software updates are planned as we begin work on the next generation of Shake compositing software.

But there haven't been any news/rumors I've heard about, besides that Phenomenon one.

And by the way, what happened to "Final Cut Extreme (http://www.macrumors.com/2006/01/04/final-cut-pro-6-final-cut-extreme-xserve-raid/)"? :D :p

CmdrLaForge

Mar 16, 2009, 02:32 AM

Unfortunately, "rewrite" usually means "keep the same features and add bugs".

By "features" I mean "things useful to the end user".

Rewriting to use Cocoa doesn't add much that's useful to the end user, but gives lots of opportunities for introducing new bugs.

I know - I know. That happened with iMovie 07, less features (not so many bugs) But I guess it has to happen at one point in time.

I would love if they would create a one stop box that conains all Pro Apps ( maybe called Studio Pro) including the Final Cut Pro Studio and Logic Pro Studio and maybe even Aperture apps.

xbjllb

Mar 16, 2009, 03:47 AM

When Steve Jobs mentioned the licensing issues with BluRay I believe he was mainly talking about what it would involve to get playback capabilities into the Mac, but the other end of the BluRay production also has major licensing headaches. For someone to take a BluRay to manufacturing will cost $4500 in AACS licensing fees alone the first time, then $1500 each time after that. That's not manufacturing cost, but just licensing before you can get a master made. That's nothing in the budget of a release like Wall-E, but for someone who is selling a more reasonable number, say 10,000 DVD and now wants to make 1,000 BluRay to go with it the costs are substantial. With those license fees and BluRay's higher cost, 1,000 BluRay can cost the same as 10,000 DVD by the time they're ready to ship. This is a big reason why you don't see much BluRay content outside of major studio releases.

Interesting, but I know there are plenty of "private" "one-off" Blu-ray discs floating around, both for delivery of product to clients, burgeoning filmmakers, and bands selling discs to fans and giving them away for promotional purposes. That's the market that Apple should be addressing, not the companies with the means to mass market discs at Wal-Mart.

:apple:

SimonMW

Mar 16, 2009, 06:34 AM

Actually, why can't FCP just be more like Avid....

You mean buggy as hell and crashes simply for putting a window in the wrong place? Bugs never getting fixed with Avid employees telling you to work around the issues rather than updating the software. Yeah, it would be great if FCP was like that!

but frankly I don't like the ones I've got and would hope that a DVD SP upgrade would actually do BluRay well.

The biggest problem with Blu-Ray isn't so much the licensing, but jobs that don't require that licensing such as video on BD-R discs. Many players simply won't play them and there are incompatibility issues across the board.

I would prefer to give the client a WD Media Player as part of the package. This is portable, can be hooked up to any display and I can give them future productions on portable media that can be plugged into the device. It's a very neat solution.

MomentEye

Mar 16, 2009, 06:52 AM

I work at a public access TV station. We run a couple of FCP edit stations (FCP Studio 1). Users bring in their own drives to store their projects. It would be great to simplify this process as it is done multiple times per day.

We do this as well. We have external drives dedicated to projects.
The media path ought to be owned by the project. You can get by with diligence but where's the fun in that;)

Check out the guys over at http://www.reduser.net/
They are talking about Premiere as well - and they are well above and beyond HD. {2k, 4k, 5k, etc.} ;)

Moore's law says the final winner will be After Effects. The only thing holding it back is speed.

my main wish - much better roundtriping between apps !!!

Roundtripping is the dirty secret of FCS.
It doesn't work. You just can't rely on it but it would be lovely if it did.
I have to pretend that it does to pass my Apple Pro Exams but then I go back to work and go around them as much as possible.

Digital Skunk

Mar 16, 2009, 08:44 AM

I would love if they would create a one stop box that conains all Pro Apps ( maybe called Studio Pro) including the Final Cut Pro Studio and Logic Pro Studio and maybe even Aperture apps.

Now that would be wonderful. Hopefully not the only thing to come out of Cupertino in terms of Pro apps, but would be nice to go along with such and update.

Every Pro app gets their tweaks and fine tunes, DVDSP gets 80% overhaul as does Compressor, Shake, Color. Then users have the option to grab the Apple Production Suite for $1999 which will include..... all Apple Pro apps.

That would keep me from dropping $2500 on the Adobe Master Collection.

You mean buggy as hell and crashes simply for putting a window in the wrong place? Bugs never getting fixed with Avid employees telling you to work around the issues rather than updating the software. Yeah, it would be great if FCP was like that!

I know that it does depend on what system you run Avid on. I hated Avid back in the 90s until I ran it on a Mac then fell in love. Switched to FCP only because I was pricing my own system and Avid was just too costly outside of the student versions.

As for Avid support, I've never run into an issue where their techs say to "work around an issue" and their updates come at regular intervals, much like FCPs.

nuckinfutz

Mar 16, 2009, 10:21 AM

The biggest problem with Blu-Ray isn't so much the licensing, but jobs that don't require that licensing such as video on BD-R discs. Many players simply won't play them and there are incompatibility issues across the board.

I would prefer to give the client a WD Media Player as part of the package. This is portable, can be hooked up to any display and I can give them future productions on portable media that can be plugged into the device. It's a very neat solution.

I'm seeing a lot of people in your shoes choosing to utilize the WD Media player and simply flash drives. Frankly Blu-ray's problems extend beyond licensing for playback. The AACS fees for delivering your project are unavoidable because the BDA saw fit to mandate copy protection (which I think is damn near collusion of illegal proportion) and other attendent fees make delivering on Blu-ray a poor solution for indies.

As for FCS

My fave speculation :

http://blog.latenitefilms.com/2009/02/21/final-cut-studio-3-predictions/

I'd buy it.

RogueWarrior65

Mar 16, 2009, 11:15 AM

The question is whether or not Apple abandons the function of the Final Cut user-interface for the form of Aqua (not really impressed, btw).

nuckinfutz

Mar 16, 2009, 11:33 AM

The question is whether or not Apple abandons the function of the Final Cut user-interface for the form of Aqua (not really impressed, btw).

The Apple Pro Apps use their own interface that is unavailable to 3rd parties. This is witnessed by the gray UI in Aperture and many of the Final Cut Apps.

Final Cut Pro 6 hasn't had a significant UI change in years. I expect that changes with the next revision.

brianbobcat

Mar 16, 2009, 12:34 PM

Was about to point out Larry's post but someone beat me to it. Excellent arguments against an eminent release.

I HIGHLY respect Larry Jordan, but one possibility he didn't entertain was that Apple announces and even demos the Apps at their event, but doesn't release it yet, ala Final Cut Server. Hopefully these apps wouldn't be plagued by as long of a delay as Server had, but I can fully respect missing a deadline in order to keep quality control tops in importance. This way they can still get their publicity and talk around town before NAB and possibly even have private demos in Sin City all while maintaining just the one release, say in July like he suggested. One major holdup I see with adoption of FCS3 is I know that many post people and houses like to wait anywhere from a couple months to a year or two before upgrading OSes, so while I'm sure there will be some of us who will buy it shortly after release, I think the rate will be a slow and gradual one climbing over a 1 years span. Now if the improvements are Really Impressive, that may cause a post house to update one or two machines to be used for Compressor for the time being, and that seems like the best way to gain speed without compromising stability.

-Brian

LethalWolfe

Mar 16, 2009, 12:51 PM

As for FCS

My fave speculation :

http://blog.latenitefilms.com/2009/02/21/final-cut-studio-3-predictions/

Ugh. That sounds like a giant, bloated, hideous mess of a program to me.

I HIGHLY respect Larry Jordan, but one possibility he didn't entertain was that Apple announces and even demos the Apps at their event, but doesn't release it yet, ala Final Cut Server.
Actually that is what Larry said and it's also Apple's typical MO. They'll announce a product first and then release it at a later date. Typically there is a month or so lag for FCP between announcement and release, but if this version of FC Studio is 'tied' to Snow Leopard then obviously SL's development will influence the release date of the next FC Studio.

Lethal

iMacmatician

Mar 16, 2009, 12:55 PM

As for FCS

My fave speculation :

http://blog.latenitefilms.com/2009/02/21/final-cut-studio-3-predictions/

I'd buy it.That would be AWESOME!

I think something like this will happen, even if it's not to that extent (I'm trying not to be too optimistic), but I hope things are going in that direction.

nuckinfutz

Mar 16, 2009, 01:10 PM

Ugh. That sounds like a giant, bloated, hideous mess of a program to me.

Actually that is what Larry said and it's also Apple's typical MO. They'll announce a product first and then release it at a later date. Typically there is a month or so lag for FCP between announcement and release, but if this version of FC Studio is 'tied' to Snow Leopard then obviously SL's development will influence the release date of the next FC Studio.

Lethal

Apples not going to tie a major revision of a large app like FCS 3 to an untested OS like Snow Leopard. They never have and never will.

That would be AWESOME!

I think something like this will happen, even if it's not to that extent (I'm trying not to be too optimistic), but I hope things are going in that direction.

Who knows. They've had to rewrite major portions of the code in Cocoa for 64-bit support and ProRes 422 may give them the recommended codec for creating virtual "rooms" that all share the same pipeline. Seeing what Apple did to reign in Logic Pro and distill it down to a single window leads me to believe that it's not beyond possibility to distill running FCS3 in a single window with tabs on the sidebare for engaging Motion, Color etc.

brianbobcat

Mar 16, 2009, 01:48 PM

Apples not going to tie a major revision of a large app like FCS 3 to an untested OS like Snow Leopard. They never have and never will.

I'm curious to know where you stood when the image and video of the new Mac mini came out, were you a believer or a "faker"? I was unsure and made claims on both sides, but I leaned towards real because I know how much work would've needed to go into making the video look real. Here I am again waging my bet that the pro apps update will be influenced in some way by Snow Leopard. Do I think it will be Intel only? Yes. The MacIntels have been out now for more than 3 years, and if a pro isn't on a MacPro yet, well then speed obviously isn't their most important factor anyways. Do I think it will be Snow Leopard dependent? This is a tough one, but again I'm leaning towards yes. There's a running joke in my local FCPUG that says "Let Gary try it first because he can fix it." I used to go to the latest OS and FCP version as soon as I got my hands on it, but not anymore. I was told quickly to wait and let the bugs get hammered out. I went to Leopard in late January after it's release, so like 3 months later. By that point, at least 10.5.1 had come out, maybe 10.5.2 and several Pros online had now tested it and said it was safe to go there. So anyone besides Apple running FCP7.0 on a brand new 10.6.0 system better have a backup of their previous system drive or this better be a test machine. Apple will be using it and people will be reporting bugs, and in a month or so 7.0.1 and 10.6.1 will both be out and FCP users will then know that it's safe(r) to migrate to that. Maybe APple will delay shipment of FCS until August or even September if that means making it rock solid. Either way, I'm sure we'll enjoy what ships when all it said and done.

-Brian

nuckinfutz

Mar 16, 2009, 01:57 PM

I'm curious to know where you stood when the image and video of the new Mac mini came out, were you a believer or a "faker"? I was unsure and made claims on both sides, but I leaned towards real because I know how much work would've needed to go into making the video look real. Here I am again waging my bet that the pro apps update will be influenced in some way by Snow Leopard. Do I think it will be Intel only? Yes. The MacIntels have been out now for more than 3 years, and if a pro isn't on a MacPro yet, well then speed obviously isn't their most important factor anyways. Do I think it will be Snow Leopard dependent? This is a tough one, but again I'm leaning towards yes. There's a running joke in my local FCPUG that says "Let Gary try it first because he can fix it." I used to go to the latest OS and FCP version as soon as I got my hands on it, but not anymore. I was told quickly to wait and let the bugs get hammered out. I went to Leopard in late January after it's release, so like 3 months later. By that point, at least 10.5.1 had come out, maybe 10.5.2 and several Pros online had now tested it and said it was safe to go there. So anyone besides Apple running FCP7.0 on a brand new 10.6.0 system better have a backup of their previous system drive or this better be a test machine. Apple will be using it and people will be reporting bugs, and in a month or so 7.0.1 and 10.6.1 will both be out and FCP users will then know that it's safe(r) to migrate to that. Maybe APple will delay shipment of FCS until August or even September if that means making it rock solid. Either way, I'm sure we'll enjoy what ships when all it said and done.

-Brian

Chalk me up with the people that thought the mini was real. It only made sense seeing as how Apple said the mini was till alive and the movement towards Nvidia chipset in the Macbook. The mini (which I own) is a great starter Mac and until the iMac goes Quad Core I think it's a better value for people that don't need gaming or higher end 3D performance.

I think Final Cut Studio 3 will be Leopard only but it may support PPC. Think about it from a developers perspective. You have Leopard that is going on its 7th revision. It contains no showstopper bugs and makes for a great platform to drop updates to Final Cut Studio, Logic Studio and Aperture. Then Apple can work on getting these apps ready for Snow Leopard.

Imagine the bug chase they'd have trying to debug a new NLE sitting on top of a new OS that is undoubtedly going ot have bugs itself. Recipe for disaster.

iMacmatician

Mar 16, 2009, 03:17 PM

Apples not going to tie a major revision of a large app like FCS 3 to an untested OS like Snow Leopard. They never have and never will. And FCS 2 was released almost half a year before Leopard. Looks like the same thing may happen with FCS 3 and Snow Leopard, except that the time gap is a few months less.

hsilver

Mar 16, 2009, 11:18 PM

FYI Those of you wanting FCS3 to do a better job of managing scratch disks for individual projects, in the interim, there is a plug-in called EM Scratch ($55.) at www.editmule.com that does what you're looking for. I haven't used it personally but if you are anxious to keep track of projects, it looks like it may answer your needs.

IndaPooper

Mar 18, 2009, 11:45 AM

I wish for better triming and media management in FCP 7 and my main wish - much better roundtriping between apps !!!

In addition I hope they finally rewrite the app and I really hope for fewer bugs then the last release - drove me crazy. Besides that - I am already happy.

Does anyone on this board actually *use* Final Cut Suite??? Do you mean trimming in the timeline? You've got ripple, roll and a live trimming window? What more do you need???

As for Media Management, this has never ever been a problem for me. I've consolidated very complex shows without a problem. You've got to pay attention to what you're doing, though. The problem with adding advanced features like the media manager is that so many idiot users don't take the time to learn the process and just screw everything up. They're the ones you see on support forums ranting about how terrible FCP's media management features are. They've been doing this for years now (some things never change).

And to all those that say roundtripping doesn't work, there are many possible reasons why it doesn't work for you. But I've never had a problem. I must be the luckiest guy in the world, because I don't encounter the problems these people do. The truth is, I learn the proper workflow and run well-maintained systems. If you're having problems, you've got to ask yourself why so many don't and solve your problems instead of just ranting about them.

Digital Skunk

Mar 18, 2009, 06:16 PM

Does anyone on this board actually *use* Final Cut Suite??? Do you mean trimming in the timeline? You've got ripple, roll and a live trimming window? What more do you need???

As for Media Management, this has never ever been a problem for me. I've consolidated very complex shows without a problem. You've got to pay attention to what you're doing, though. The problem with adding advanced features like the media manager is that so many idiot users don't take the time to learn the process and just screw everything up. They're the ones you see on support forums ranting about how terrible FCP's media management features are. They've been doing this for years now (some things never change).

And to all those that say roundtripping doesn't work, there are many possible reasons why it doesn't work for you. But I've never had a problem. I must be the luckiest guy in the world, because I don't encounter the problems these people do. The truth is, I learn the proper workflow and run well-maintained systems. If you're having problems, you've got to ask yourself why so many don't and solve your problems instead of just ranting about them.

You missed the point my friend.

Most of us having issues with the suite or certain aspects of it know it well. Well enough to find fault with those aspects.

For me, round tripping works great. But there are times when even my Mac Pro (at work) with 8GB of RAM will stall going from Motion to FCP. On my MBP it will just crash.

Many of us work with various NLEs during the day/week/month. As a freelancer, I cut on what the boss gives me. Prayerfully it's one of the big three (Adobe, Avid, Apple) and I can jump right in. When using multiple and varying apps, you see the strengths and weaknesses of them all.

Most of us know the proper workflow, and there's always room for improvement.

CmdrLaForge

Mar 18, 2009, 06:43 PM

Does anyone on this board actually *use* Final Cut Suite??? Do you mean trimming in the timeline? You've got ripple, roll and a live trimming window? What more do you need???

As for Media Management, this has never ever been a problem for me. I've consolidated very complex shows without a problem. You've got to pay attention to what you're doing, though. The problem with adding advanced features like the media manager is that so many idiot users don't take the time to learn the process and just screw everything up. They're the ones you see on support forums ranting about how terrible FCP's media management features are. They've been doing this for years now (some things never change).

And to all those that say roundtripping doesn't work, there are many possible reasons why it doesn't work for you. But I've never had a problem. I must be the luckiest guy in the world, because I don't encounter the problems these people do. The truth is, I learn the proper workflow and run well-maintained systems. If you're having problems, you've got to ask yourself why so many don't and solve your problems instead of just ranting about them.

Good for you that you are happy with the apps as they are. Others are not that happy. Just don't upgrade.

I had many many crashes in Motion and on roundtriping and my system is very well maintained.

The main point of my post is that instead of adding many zippy and flashy new features I would like to that they get some of the basics right.

And yes - I mean trimming in the timeline - I think the new iMovie does this even better then FCP.

LethalWolfe

Mar 18, 2009, 06:53 PM

Does anyone on this board actually *use* Final Cut Suite??? Do you mean trimming in the timeline? You've got ripple, roll and a live trimming window? What more do you need???
Ever used the trim mode on the Avid? There is a reason why Avid users love it and why Avid users who migrated to FCP keep asking for it.

As for Media Management, this has never ever been a problem for me. I've consolidated very complex shows without a problem. You've got to pay attention to what you're doing, though. The problem with adding advanced features like the media manager is that so many idiot users don't take the time to learn the process and just screw everything up. They're the ones you see on support forums ranting about how terrible FCP's media management features are. They've been doing this for years now (some things never change).
The Media Manager tool is better than it used to be, but it's still a weak link in FCP. It didn't earn the nickname 'Media Mangler' in professional circles for nothing. Talk to almost anyone who uses FCP day in and day out and improved media management will be high on their request list of fixes. A better multiuser environment would be welcome as well. And the ability for FCP to properly play an interlaced video clip in reverse.

And to all those that say roundtripping doesn't work, there are many possible reasons why it doesn't work for you. But I've never had a problem. I must be the luckiest guy in the world, because I don't encounter the problems these people do. The truth is, I learn the proper workflow and run well-maintained systems. If you're having problems, you've got to ask yourself why so many don't and solve your problems instead of just ranting about them.
Round tripping between FCP and Color is ridiculously problematic.

The problem w/assuming that what works for you works equally well for everyone else is that, well, you're basing your beliefs on an assumption. Are there people who have trouble w/FCP because of ignorance? Yes. Are there people who have trouble w/FCP because their workflows are pushing the limits of the application? Yes. If one isn't as demanding a user it makes sense that one is less likely to run into problems.

Lethal

MomentEye

Mar 19, 2009, 02:51 AM

And to all those that say roundtripping doesn't work, there are many possible reasons why it doesn't work for you. But I've never had a problem. I must be the luckiest guy in the world, because I don't encounter the problems these people do. The truth is, I learn the proper workflow and run well-maintained systems. If you're having problems, you've got to ask yourself why so many don't and solve your problems instead of just ranting about them.

Seriously?
So you never send slow-mo's to Color?
Or re-adjust your noise reduction in Soundtrack?

Everything is fine under proper workflow conditions.
However the realities of client changes, multiple projects running concurrently, mixed formats and other unforeseen circumstances require flexibility.
And unfortunately the round-tripping is consistently the first thing to break.

LethalWolfe

Mar 19, 2009, 03:19 AM

Seriously?
So you never send slow-mo's to Color?

Or sped up clips. Or multicam clips. Or freeze frames. Or still images/gfx. Or nests. Or clips w/different frame rates. Or clips w/different frame sizes. Or clips with different codecs. Or interlaced footage. Or clips not in the handful of codecs Color supports. Or 50hz footage. Or use the re-conform function. Or...

I can easily spend more time prepping a timeline to be round tripped to/from Color than I do actually color grading the material.

Lethal

Digital Skunk

Mar 19, 2009, 06:03 AM

Or sped up clips. Or multicam clips. Or freeze frames. Or still images/gfx. Or nests. Or clips w/different frame rates. Or clips w/different frame sizes. Or clips with different codecs. Or interlaced footage. Or clips not in the handful of codecs Color supports. Or 50hz footage. Or use the re-conform function. Or...

I can easily spend more time prepping a timeline to be round tripped to/from Color than I do actually color grading the material.

Lethal

Nesting in general can be a headache at times.
:mad:

pmdiaz23

Mar 19, 2009, 11:20 PM

I'd like to see a Floating Timecode window, Curves CC inside FCP, and Rolling TC while capturing.....

Media Manager is not horrible FCP, but could be better. Trimming is ok, I know Avid is better but FCP is not that bad and moving between Apps can be flawed at times.

IronRoses

Apr 12, 2009, 11:55 AM

nuckinfutz

Apr 12, 2009, 02:44 PM

Is it me or am i finding this a little bit odd.

FCS3 will have blu-ray support.

Thats all god Apple, but... I thought blu-ray was a "bag-of-hurt"

And macs don't even have the support for blu-ray drives.

I know, they're gonna release a new load of macs with the blu-ray support.

Thanks, once again, for ripping me off apple!!

The "bag of hurt" reference was regarding Blu-ray licensing.

If FCS3 has blu-ray it doesn't change anything because FC3 is an expensive
software app aimed at Pro users who not only need Blu-ray support but they need blu-ray recorders which is the opposite of most Blu-ray enabled computers in PC land. Most only have players which if of little use to those pros who need recorders.

xbjllb

Apr 13, 2009, 11:21 PM

Is it me or am i finding this a little bit odd.

FCS3 will have blu-ray support.

Thats all good Apple, but... I thought blu-ray was a "bag-of-hurt"

And macs don't even have the support for blu-ray drives.

I know, they're gonna release a new load of macs with the blu-ray support.

Thanks, once again, for ripping me off apple!!

It's your own fault for not keeping up with the forums here and ignoring the nonstop fights video editing pros have been having with anti-Blu-ray fanbois and buying too soon. I've been waiting now to upgrade to a Blu-ray Mac Pro for TWO YEARS. And complaining every step of the way.

OF COURSE Apple will be implementing Blu-ray just as fast as their dropping high end workstation numbers can force them, no matter what all the anti-Blu-ray "experts" on here proclaim. And on that day they I get my five- figure BTO Pro and Apple finally gets my money.

:apple: