Apple Updates Final Cut Pro X, Motion, and Compressor Alongside New Pro Marketing Push

[Mums]

I think Apple is well-aware that it is creating a product for up and coming filmmakers/editors - who, frankly, don't give a **** about "post-houses" and giant, archaic workflows built around an Avid suite.

Old-fashioned editors will continue to piss and moan, but the same thing happened to the newspaper industry and the same is happening to TV. When the day comes that allegedly "professional" film editors are out of job - they'll wonder why they didn't bother to follow the inevitable.

Swester's just speaking the truth. I learned Final Cut Pro on version 1 back in 2000/2001 while interning at Downtown Community Television in New York which was producing quality local television. I've had every version of Final Cut Pro. I watched incredulously when the self-labeled "pros" blew up and went crazy over FCPX.

After learning first in the cutting room (that's film for you know-it-all-pros), then hardware AVID, then software AVID and Final Cut Pro, I've got to say that Final Cut Pro X is the best of the lot bar none & hands down. You can go ahead and call me unprofessional or whatever you want, but I've been making films and video works since 1994 so I'll accept for myself that I know what I'm talking about - regardless of whether you approve of it or not.

It's like Windows users who claim that Windows is for "serious" hackers / gamers / programmers / whatever else - is that true? If it is then let them keep their Windoze because I've been able to use my Macs to produce more content then they could probably ever dream about creating.

Steve Jobs is great for one reason: He bridged the gap between technology and creativity -- ART. I for one will continue to be grateful to Apple for providing me with amazingly excellent tools which would have seemed impossibly futuristic fifteen years ago, which enable me to forget about programming and coding and hacking and fixing, and allow me to CREATE.

I've never been an Apple fanboy, but I grew up with Apple computers in the Bay Area and have seen how they've changed and grown. Even though Apple may have peaked as a giant company, I hope it will adjust and learn to hone itself back into the innovative genius that it still is. It represents the New Age - and has actually been one of the primary movers out of the Old World into the future.

If greedy stick-in-the-mud monopolists want to keep their luddite editing techniques, I say let them! But don't let them inhibit Apple's progress in the direction of increased functionality. I don't want a souped-up version of iMovie any more than the next guy, but the software developers behind these frequent updates to FCPX are proving that they take the software seriously and intend for it to remain professional. I applaud their efforts.

Lastly, anyone who criticizes this for being a long post can move along: I've had enough of your complaining and am happy to be able to tell you in as many words as I deem necessary.

 

[Neuro]

Uggh, release Logic Pro X already.

Yes, but fix Logic 9 on ML first. It's a disaster for many!

 

[deconstruct60]

The problem is that Apple was the king of NLE's with FCP7... they had the lion's share of the pro market.

Not at the high end.

The overall they had numbers. But that is still true with FCP+FCPX if broaden the scope to all NLEs.

Now they are hardly a blip on the radar.

Not hardly if don't prune off FCP 7 and lower. The other issue here is the same reason they would not displace Avid at the very high end in that many folks are conservative adopters. They sit on "stuff that works" for long stretches of time ( relatively to software version turn over.) Never mind proprietary project data lockin forces. [ similar mechanisms that MS Office rolls forward on.]

It's not like they decided to not enter the marketplace with the other players, they essentially left the market which they were dominating.

They aren't as much not entering the marketplace but looking how to expand the markets boundaries to drive growth with folks blocked previously. Selling to the old guard establishment at some points saturates and stagnates. Just go look at Avid's balance sheets for last 2-3 years. Apple from the start has always been about putting better technology at better price points into more peoples hands than kowtowing to the narrowest of monied corporate customers.

They are taking a risk they can get a large chunk of folks to cross the chasm from old style to new but it isn't something they can't pull off if they get the product mix correct. It is relatively myopic that Apple can't bring more users into the NLE space. If they can bring in 1 user for every 1 user that leaves to the "traditional interface solutions" over next 2-3 years they will still be in very good position.

That is all the more likely if the distribution gating problem that almost all content users aren't happy with uncorks.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Yes, but fix Logic 9 on ML first. It's a disaster for many!

What's wrong with it? I finished my last album with Snow Leopard, but I have run it since upgrading to Mountain Lion on my 2008 MBP and I didn't notice anything different. Is it crashing like crazy or what?

 

[6388442]

They have already lost me and also won't get me back unless they create something equal to Photoshop and Illustrator too which integrates into FCP/Motion, also a bit more freedom in terms of not having to transcode before even being able to cut the material and stuff like that. Premiere really is lightyears ahead.

Once you go Adobe, you never go back.
Happy with CS6

 

[JesterJJZ]

Get back to me when I can start a project by making 20 blank tracks...

 

[SDAVE]

Obviously Apple is catering FCPX to a different crowd. The DSLR enthusiasts or what-not.

Certain big name films are still being edited on FCP 7 and the bigger crowd either moved to Premiere Pro CS6 or back to Avid.

Either way, you can probably do the same on FCPX as you can on Premiere Pro, etc...but studios invest in equipment and only switch when necessary...

 

[nubero]

Ok, great...Apple continues to create the ability to mix new movie files. Happy for you. Can you generate a proper EDL, Change List, Cut List, Optical Pull List, proper AAF for export to ProTools, proper programs to get your film/TV show ready for the DI? No? ...R-i-g-h-t. Any users out there that want to make a comment...if you have no idea what the hell it is I am talking about, then you have no reason to be posting a reply to my comment.

Sure...this program might work wonders for industrials or small video production houses...maybe wedding videos. And yes...there is maybe 1 program out there that has been publicized as using FCPX and their show is on cable TV. They also keep everything in house and self contained and it is their 1 show that they do.

We're a small house with seven seats and we switched to Premiere too…
People don't get that it's not about radio button features, but about the whole concept of FCPX that is deeply flawed.

----------

Check out the "final cut pro in action" page.

iMacs and MacBook Pros.

Really seems that the Mac Pro is "old skool"

How nice these people never have to do any compositing or they would rather miss the 20 CPU cores they could have.

 

[ee13lbp]

I think we're looking at the iPad Pro here, people. Why else would Apple care about professional apps?

A 12 inch screen, and Octa-core processor. It'll take any creative challenges that you through at it. As long as you can meet those challenges with the new iMovie Pro and iMotion

With over 12 professionally designed templates, being a creative professional has never been so easy.

In all seriousness, I think applications like Motion or FCP would actually translate pretty well into a touchscreen environment, as long as Apple dosen't remove any more features from them than they already have.

I am unsure however if something like the A6X would even be able to handle these types of applications though, since I still experience some slowdown on my mini..

 

[plysat]

also a bit more freedom in terms of not having to transcode before even being able to cut the material and stuff like that. Premiere really is lightyears ahead.

Once you go Adobe, you never go back.
Happy with CS6

You don't have to transcode most formats before cutting it in X. If you're happy with Pr, that's cool, it's a fine NLE. FWIW, here's what'll play natively in X, no transcoding needed:

H.264 from GoPro and iFrame cameras.
H.264 from DSLR cameras.
DV, DVCAM, DVCPRO, DVCPRO 50, and DVCPRO HD.
HDV.
Panasonic AVC-Intra, including AVC-Intra 100 and AVC-Intra 50.
Sony IMX, XDCAM, XDCAM EX, XDCAM HD, and XDCAM HD422 import supported with additional Sony software.
Sony XAVC import up to 4K supported with additional Sony software.
Canon XF MPEG-2 import supported with additional Canon software.
JVC-created XDCAM EX.
AVCHD, including Panasonic AVCCAM and Sony NXCAM.
REDCODE RAW (.r3d) files up to 5K with optional background transcode to Apple ProRes 4444. Playback, transcode, and render accelerated by RED ROCKET card.
Uncompressed 8- and 10-bit SD and HD.
Apple Intermediate Codec.
Still images including PSD, BMP, GIF, RAW, JPEG, PNG, TGA, and TIFF.
Compressed audio including AAC, AIFF, BWF, CAF, MP3, MP4, and WAV.
Broadcast Wave Format.
SDII audio files.

 

[plysat]

People don't get that it's not about radio button features, but about the whole concept of FCPX that is deeply flawed.

What is this concept that you believe is flawed?

 

[wikiverse]

I can honestly say, after being initially skeptical at NAB when it was released, FCPX is the fastest NLE on the market. I can get to the heart of the story and really play around with the edit. It truly is the future of editing.


Lightworks is the future of editing.

Why pay $300 for X, when you have Acadamy Award winning software for $60 a year (or free if you're just using basic codecs)?

Plus, with Lightworks you can organize your files as you see fit, move the project file and media to another computer, even have an assistant editor working in the same project file at the same time. And you can use Avid footage straight out of Alexa.

With Linux and Mac versions out this year and a free version that students can learn, it won't be long before Apple is dropping FCX completely...

On the plus side, Lightworks might actually make a new Mac Pro worth buying

 

[nubero]

What is this concept that you believe is flawed?

There’s multiple actually. The whole project, asset, and file management thing. The Magnetic timeline which is utter garbage. The markers and metadata…
In the end it boils down to the question what makes a pro app “pro”.
In my opinion that is to let different people use one application in different ways to let each of them deliver his or her best.
FCPX has a few nice ideas but all of them are straightjackets by design.

 

[plysat]

There’s multiple actually. The whole project, asset, and file management thing.

If you work from centrally stored shared media, and don't copy source files to the local event folder on import, it is exactly the same as FCP 7 and others. Explain to me why you think it is different. Honestly, I'd really like to know why it seems different at all.

The Magnetic timeline which is utter garbage.

You think it is utter garbage, I think it is great. No patching tracks, no timeline tetris if you want to move chunks of video and audio. I'd agree that there are some features that need work, mostly related to visual organization, but cutting in it is a pleasure.

The markers and metadata…

Are a huge timesaver. Huge. At least for what I do. I'm doing a gig now, a sizzle reel, which has 24 full length features as source, so like, 40-50 hours of material. Gotta go through all of it and find good dialog, good shots of multiple types etc. These gigs make me want to scream doing them in NLE's where I have to make sub clips, or cut selects sequences, or just add markers, and then a month later try to find that one shot from some random source that I vaguely remembered putting somewhere. In, X, skimming, key wording, marking favorites etc, and then being able to use a global search function to find anything I want? Amazing.

In the end it boils down to the question what makes a pro app “pro”.
In my opinion that is to let different people use one application in different ways to let each of them deliver his or her best.
FCPX has a few nice ideas but all of them are straightjackets by design.

Really? So an NLE where you can cut in a freeform timeline like FCP7 or Pr (using connected clips) or using an always on Ripple mode timeline like MC (using the storyline) is limiting? How?

 

[Small White Car]

Are you trying burn TC to source clips? Right click master clip in event and choose "open in timeline"...

Thanks for this. I don't know why this isn't more widely known. I searched Google a LOT for a solution and you're the first person I've found who knew of a way.

Haven't done much multi cam, but can't you just make markers on each clip to use as a sync point? I'll defer this one to someone who knows...

The issue isn't syncing, but rather 2 things:

1) The inability to separate stereo audio in a multi-track project. Works in a normal project, but not in a multi-track project. So if you apply a filter to the left channel, the right one will get it too. No way around it.

2) The inability to pick more than ones source for audio. You can only pick ONE camera to get sound from, and that's it.


I've solved both problems by making a compound clip that contains all the audio, synced, and I tell the multicam project that the compound clip is a 'camera.' It works, but it REALLY slows down the workflow. Every audio edit that used to take 5 seconds now takes 1 minute because I have to drill down from the multicam project to the angle editor, then drill down to the compound clip, then find the exact spot I was in and make the edit there, and then go back up to the angle editor, and then go back up to the project.

Big, big waste of time, and all because multicam projects have weird limitations on them that regular projects don't.

 

[plysat]

Thanks for this. I don't know why this isn't more widely known. I searched Google a LOT for a solution and you're the first person I've found who knew of a way.

The issue isn't syncing, but rather 2 things:

1) The inability to separate stereo audio in a multi-track project. Works in a normal project, but not in a multi-track project. So if you apply a filter to the left channel, the right one will get it too. No way around it.

2) The inability to pick more than ones source for audio. You can only pick ONE camera to get sound from, and that's it.


I've solved both problems by making a compound clip that contains all the audio, synced, and I tell the multicam project that the compound clip is a 'camera.' It works, but it REALLY slows down the workflow. Every audio edit that used to take 5 seconds now takes 1 minute because I have to drill down from the multicam project to the angle editor, then drill down to the compound clip, then find the exact spot I was in and make the edit there, and then go back up to the angle editor, and then go back up to the project.

Big, big waste of time, and all because multicam projects have weird limitations on them that regular projects don't.

Glad it helped. I do wish it would "stick" without having to export/reimport when you cut it into a sequence. That's a pretty common request, I wouldn't be surprised to see it solved at some point. So you can't just reassign the audio to dual mono in the inspector with a multicam clip? Can you do it to the source(s) before you make the clip? As I said, not a big multicam user, though I do have something coming where I'll use it so i'm curious. Have you asked about the multicam audio thing on the fcp.co forums?
http://www.fcp.co/forum/4-final-cut-pro-x-fcpx
I feel like I've seen this issue discussed over there, and there are a lot of folks who use multi-cam on their boards...

edit: I had, kind of old, but I think someone used a post you made somewhere as an example...
http://www.fcp.co/forum/4-final-cut...lticam-with-separate-audio-tracks-in-one-clip

 

[nubero]

Are a huge timesaver. Huge. At least for what I do.

That and your other comments (and your whole being here – seems you just signed up to the forums to defend FCPX) just confirms what I said. Great that it is a great tool for you. For us it wasn't and we switched seven stations.

May I ask how wide-ranging your work is and how many other post production people you work with daily?

 

[CmdrLaForge]

I have a FCP X wedding project that I may burn in BlueRay but I have never done it before. Did you send the project to compressor first or did you burn it straight from the "share" option? And was the quality much better then DVD when you played on TV? Thanks.

First - the video was shot in a AVCHD codec in 1080p50i and then transcoded to ProRes 422.

The Project was set as 1080p25.

I have a LG Bluray burner connected to my MBP. The Bluray was burned directly from FCPX using the share option and played back then on a Sony Bluray Player connected to an Epson Cinema Projector and viewed on a size approx 3 by 2 meters (of course in 16:9, I didn't do the exact math)

The video looked fantastic.

I did not burn a DVD but from my experience the DVD on that size looks much worse. At least commercial discs do.

I don't like compressor and ain't use it if I don't have to.

Hope that helps.

Cheers
LaForge

 

[knightsy4940]

Export Errors

I have just updated my final cut suite (incl compressor and motion) and now when I'm trying to export straight from Final cut I'm getting errors.

A restart fixed it temporarily, but now its back!

My first export was a picture, then I just tried to go to vimeo and once again no luck. Is anyone else getting this?

 

[WigWag Workshop]

I have just updated my final cut suite (incl compressor and motion) and now when I'm trying to export straight from Final cut I'm getting errors.

A restart fixed it temporarily, but now its back!

My first export was a picture, then I just tried to go to vimeo and once again no luck. Is anyone else getting this?

Yes, I am getting errors, no matter what export option I choose

 

[reel2reel]

Final Cut X is a steaming mess. I'm moving our shop to Premiere Pro. I've been on Final Cut Pro since v.1.0 and it was revolutionary. Final Cut X, not so much.

Just looking at the interface is enough to give you a headache. Hardly conducive to creative thinking. The whole media management scheme is a pain, also. The app is really made for a single user with one or two small projects at most, not a team environment putting out high-volume long-format shows.

Final Cut X is what it is: a limited app for small projects. I always have a good laugh, though, when someone who dabbles in hobby projects tells me that X is for a "new generation" and that the "old people" just don't get it. Sure, tell yourself that if it makes you feel special, but it has nothing to do with actually getting work done.

 

[plysat]

That and your other comments (and your whole being here – seems you just signed up to the forums to defend FCPX) just confirms what I said. Great that it is a great tool for you. For us it wasn't and we switched seven stations.

It's perfectly reasonable to not use it because it doesn't meet your needs, but to carry that over to an indictment of the entire concept of the app is a stretch. Some of your comments are legitimate issues, but many seem to me to be your opinion. I just happen to have a different opinion and think it's worth putting it here for those who may not have much experience with X.

As to your concern about my history at macrumors, I've been reading and posting here off and on pretty much since the site first appeared, but it has been a while since I participated in the forums. I couldn't remember the email and/or password i had used, so I just made a new one for this thread. And I'm not blindly defending anything. I'll be the first to admit that FCP X isn't perfect. But there are a lot of misconceptions about it, as well as a blind belief that the only people who use it aren't "real" pro's.

May I ask how wide-ranging your work is and how many other post production people you work with daily?

You may. 5 or 6 editors on a day to day basis, 2 or 3 major finishing houses on a weekly basis depending on workload, and post dept's at 3 or more major studios here in LA as needed. My work ends up on television and/or in theaters. Generally in North America, but often in all major international markets as well. What's your point in asking that by the way?

 

[plysat]

Final Cut X is a steaming mess. I'm moving our shop to Premiere Pro.

If X doesn't meet your needs, that's fine. But a steaming mess? I don't think so.

Just looking at the interface is enough to give you a headache. Hardly conducive to creative thinking. The whole media management scheme is a pain, also. The app is really made for a single user with one or two small projects at most, not a team environment putting out high-volume long-format shows.

Your last point here may be a legit gripe based on your workflow, everything else is totally subjective. I feel exactly the opposite, and I'm actually cutting in X (and FCP 7 and occasionally Pr and MC) Those last 3 give me a headache but that's my opinion, they're all great NLE's in different ways.

Final Cut X is what it is: a limited app for small projects. I always have a good laugh, though, when someone who dabbles in hobby projects tells me that X is for a "new generation" and that the "old people" just don't get it. Sure, tell yourself that if it makes you feel special, but it has nothing to do with actually getting work done.

Other than the first sentence, which again is your opinion, I agree. The fan boy arguments are just as ridiculous and useless as the "X is garbage!" arguments.

 

[The Mad Kiwi]

But there are a lot of misconceptions about it, as well as a blind belief that the only people who use it aren't "real" pro's.

I for one aren't a "real" pro, I just use it to produce content for my customers ;-)

 

[reubdoglives]

...and still no worky with Xsan/Stornext or other SANs. "Pro" lololol.

It works with Xsan. We use it everyday with 10 editors.