Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

ARobinson

macrumors member
Jun 15, 2011
38
0
Los Angeles, CA
This is hardly a stupid move on Apple's part. Just like they did with OSX, they are putting Final Cut on a path for the future. The old FCP code was not ready for prime time and would've been a mess to continue piling on.

I understand your point, but this particular product is just not yet something professional editors can adopt. Great for consumers, but I wish they didn't release it, cuz it worries us. I am hopeful...but when will these changes come? I pray when Lion is released.
 

tokyojerry

macrumors newbie
Nov 22, 2007
28
0
Final Cut Pro - X will 'Fly'!

Like anything that is first generation, hardware or software, one must allow and recognize required breathing room for evolution and improvement of any product. It was the same with iPhone, iPad, and even Macbook Air for myself. I never buy into 1st generation hardware. The same carries over with software too. Final Cut Pro - X will definitely improve with time. I think Apple has done an admirable job to create a more intuitive user experience and yet at the same time keeping the technology professional enough for the Universal Studios, Hollywoods and Bollywoods of the world satisfied. The streamlining too. The confusion of FCP Server, and the lightweight FCP Express and FCP Studio etc... that all goes by the wayside now in the new era of video production. Now it is Final Cut Pro X. Just like OS-X is OS-X is OS-X. Each iteration improves on the previous.
 

goMac

Contributor
Apr 15, 2004
7,662
1,693
I understand your point, but this particular product is just not yet something professional editors can adopt.

It's version 1.0. It's not meant to be. I'd be worried about anyone adopting 1.0 software on day 1, much less a ground up re-write.

Great for consumers, but I wish they didn't release it, cuz it worries us.

Why? You don't have to use it until it's fixed. And if you're a high end professional, you probably shouldn't. If it offends you by just being a 1.0 in existence.... I'm.... sorry?

I am hopeful...but when will these changes come? I pray when Lion is released.

Basically the problem is that QuickTime is being re-written from scratch. QuickTime X is a dead end, and can't be used for editing at all.

I can't really comment on Lion (developer here, NDA), but Apple has been adding lots of features in to replace QuickTime other places. I think this is going to be an ongoing thing. But it takes a long time to replace over 10 years of QuickTime development.

Quite a few of the features I see that are missing are obviously parts of 32 bit QuickTime, which can't be used for FCP X.
 

the vj

macrumors 6502a
Nov 23, 2006
654
0
I am sure someone at Apple will be fired after this marketing strategy.

Now no one will get FCP X until they see it working just fine by someone else.

Again, people wold rather find a hacked version now just because they wont trust spending $1 for something half way done.
 

lshaner

macrumors regular
Mar 7, 2007
155
1
This is hardly a stupid move on Apple's part. Just like they did with OSX, they are putting Final Cut on a path for the future. The old FCP code was not ready for prime time and would've been a mess to continue piling on.

Following your analogy, even the first cut of Mac OS X had ways to run OS9. Similarly, the first Intel Mac's could run PPC.

They really just needed to hold the release until they could include an import/convert from old to knew -- even with SOME loss of functionality, if absolutely unavoidable...THAT would be better than NO backward compatibilty, whatsoever. But FRANKLY if this were a true UPGRADE, then therenshould be no loss of functionality, only new/additional functionality with the possibility to convert all old content in a way that maps to the new layout / new way of doing things.

They simply washed their hands of the problem and were not NEARLY forthright about it.

This is a completely new product masquerading as an upgrade to the prior version. It is a natural upgrade from iMovie, not an upgrade from FCS.

Sure, in some ways FCPx may prove better than FCP(7), but that would make it an upgrade like going from Windows to Mac OS X is an upgrade -- but at least there, nobody is trying to pass the two off as the same, but evolved product!

No ability to open old FCP/Studio projects is a disappointment.
No ability to at least IMPORT/Convert old FCP/Studio projects is UNFORGIVABLE = REFUND.
 

ARobinson

macrumors member
Jun 15, 2011
38
0
Los Angeles, CA
What a bunch of cry-babies some of those reviewers are.

NO professional software is ready for professional use on day one. Anyone who thought that is either not a pro or maybe just incredibly inexperienced.

I'm really happy that I can have Final Cut today so that I can start learning it. Once it gains more features in a few months I'll know what I'm doing and will be ready to go. The complainers will, I guess, just ignore Final Cut until then and THEN they'll start learning it.

Oh well, some of us will be six months ahead of you. Too bad for you.


I commend your optimism. I plan on doing the same. My only frustration is the fundamental difference in workflows. Sure its like knowing FCP and its opposite Avid, but I suspect it will get annoying using FCP7 for work and a totally different workflow in FCPX. Sure X may take over eventually...its just a big shocker.
 

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,966
1,463
Washington DC
I commend your optimism. I plan on doing the same. My only frustration is the fundamental difference in workflows. Sure its like knowing FCP and its opposite Avid, but I suspect it will get annoying using FCP7 for work and a totally different workflow in FCPX. Sure X may take over eventually...its just a big shocker.

Do you use Aperture? I am also apprehensive about having to re-learn Final Cut from scratch...but I am optimistic that they seem to be following Aperture's lead in terms of how you deal with media.

So while I don't understand all this yet, I feel like the video-people are following the photo-people's lead. And given that computer photo management has been far more advanced than video management for several years I feel pretty good about the future.
 

Anaemik

macrumors 6502
Feb 25, 2009
289
0
The editor isn't the colorist or the sound guy, and Apple does not seem to understand that.
.

And in big-budget music production, the writer isn't the programmer or the recording engineer or the audio editor or the mix engineer or the mastering engineer, yet there are countless records produced that start and end their lives in Pro Tools, with all the steps in between being carried out in the same environment.

It's just a case of knowing which features you need and drawing on plugins to augment the standard featureset (assuming all the must-haves are in place to begin with, which admittedly in FCP X they aren't as of right now).
 

DisMyMac

macrumors 65816
Sep 30, 2009
1,087
11
I've gotta say, the people who are defending Final Cut Pro X must be either inexperienced or not working on large productions.

It looks like it's great for cutting together little YouTube videos shot on small-sensor video cameras or whatever. But we work primarily in film still, and cherry-picking some of the broader features from the other applications, cramming them in to FCPX, and doing a way with the original applications is terrible for larger projects like ours. The editor isn't the colorist or the sound guy, and Apple does not seem to understand that.

They have essentially destroyed their future in studio-based motion picture.

I think Apple is betting that your profession is going away, and "prosumers" are moving up.

Professionals in many fields have been bitten this way - they think there is no way that automation or unskilled labor can ever replace them... then one day, technology sneaks up and they become obsolete.
 

ARobinson

macrumors member
Jun 15, 2011
38
0
Los Angeles, CA
It's version 1.0. It's not meant to be. I'd be worried about anyone adopting 1.0 software on day 1, much less a ground up re-write.

Why? You don't have to use it until it's fixed. And if you're a high end professional, you probably shouldn't. If it offends you by just being a 1.0 in existence.... I'm.... sorry?

I know. This is still all a big shocker is all. The future seems so uncertain which worries us.
 

steve123

macrumors 6502a
Aug 26, 2007
891
482
I've read quite a few of the comments here and at the App store as well as some of the blogs. I have not purchased FCPX yet but I am seriously considering doing so, all things I've read so far considered.

I have the following observation. As I recall, Steve Jobs is a Director of Disney. I would think he would have had quite the opportunity to involve a few professional users during the development of FCPX. Steve Jobs is a pretty smart guy. I suspect he did but that is pure speculation on my part.
 

MovieCutter

macrumors 68040
May 3, 2005
3,342
2
Washington, DC
100% of my current workflow requires multi cam, I've already started adapting my workflow to Adobe's suite. This was a piss-poor release for the sole reason that even though the deliberately showed us a project in FCP 7 compared to FCP X at the NAB event, it was completely misleading as I can't open anything in FCP X. If they had released it as a beta, fine...but I paid $300 for software I can't implement into my workflow for another 6-12 months when Apple decides to give me back basic features I have in software from 4 years ago.

I would have been happy to wait 6 months until they had a complete version, but this is bollocks. It's been a fun 10 years Apple...
 

goMac

Contributor
Apr 15, 2004
7,662
1,693
I know. This is still all a big shocker is all. The future seems so uncertain which worries us.

Apple has said they are listening. If you feel you've waited on Apple long enough, by all means switch. There were people who did the same when OS X came out for the same reasons. Some came back later.

Just like OS X, FCP X is never going to look or work exactly like it's predecessor. But Apple has typically brought the tools back up to where everyone expects them to be after a ground up re-write.
 

ARobinson

macrumors member
Jun 15, 2011
38
0
Los Angeles, CA
So while I don't understand all this yet, I feel like the video-people are following the photo-people's lead. And given that computer photo management has been far more advanced than video management for several years I feel pretty good about the future.

I don't have or use Aperture. While I can't compare video to photo management, I hope you are correct. I assume though video is far more complex than photo: more storage is required, files grow corrupt, thousands of assets are associated with a single project, streaming is a beast of a discussion itself. Cant imagine where you are going with this. Explain? Hopefully you'll reassure fcpx's future for me.
 

ARobinson

macrumors member
Jun 15, 2011
38
0
Los Angeles, CA
Apple has said they are listening. If you feel you've waited on Apple long enough, by all means switch. There were people who did the same when OS X came out for the same reasons. Some came back later.

Just like OS X, FCP X is never going to look or work exactly like it's predecessor. But Apple has typically brought the tools back up to where everyone expects them to be after a ground up re-write.

I have never considered investing in any other NLE until today. Always planned on owning Avid, because all aspiring feature editors like myself should, but never thought I would feel as I did earlier. The shock has left and am comfortable with using FCP7 and slowly letting X grow on me. Thanks.
 

Small White Car

macrumors G4
Aug 29, 2006
10,966
1,463
Washington DC
I don't have or use Aperture. While I can't compare video to photo management, I hope you are correct. I assume though video is far more complex than photo: more storage is required, files grow corrupt, thousands of assets are associated with a single project, streaming is a beast of a discussion itself. Cant imagine where you are going with this. Explain? Hopefully you'll reassure fcpx's future for me.

You're talking about the technical stuff behind the scenes.

I'm talking about how you relate to the media from a UI perspective. Final Cut X (and Aperture) seem to take the viewpoint that the things in your photos and video are what you actually care about. In other words, the people and places you shot. Not the files themselves which are often just based on things like when you had to switch your memory chip. (Why should that matter?)

The old Final Cut (and, let's say, Finder for photos) was more concerned with individual files. What bin do you want it in? What title do you want to give it? Is there a lot of stuff in there? Should I sub-clip it for you thus making even more clips and more bins?

Aperture did away with the 'find your file' concept by managing the files and letting you sort, label, and edit based on what your photos are about. (And I'm not saying Aperture was first program to do that. It's just a good example of how the photo-people were getting into this years before us video folks were.) You want to do 8 versions of that one shot you love? Go ahead, Aperture will deal with where the actual file is...you'll just see your 8 versions, or if you prefer, you can collapse it back into a single photo to keep things neat. You wanna keyword it and then search by a string of perimeters? (All shots of Phil with James that I took with the 7D.) Easy!

Now, you may say "Final Cut Pro always managed my files for me too!" Sure...it hid the files and folders from you, but it just turned them into 'clips' and 'bins.' It dressed everything up in the same costume it wears in Finder. Not really a change, just different names. What I'm talking about here is a real change...something that's not at all like how Finder sorts Quicktime files.

There's a lot to Final Cut X that's changed, but I think the most important thing to understand is the range-based keywords. Is it the biggest feature? No, but I really believe it's the most influential feature. Wanna know where the future of Final Cut is headed? Think about range-based keywords and you'll get some clues.

Range-based keywords is to Final Cut as 'the finger' is to the iPhone. Everything flows from that concept.
 

dkouts

macrumors member
Apr 20, 2009
31
0
Boy - what a difference between the reactions today and the standing ovation we saw during the LA FCP user group demo???

How could there be such a discrepancy?

Some points to bear i mind:

1. Never buy the 'worlds first' anything.

2. Exec's at Apple decided to release FCPX in time for the end of financial year so this quarters figures got a boost right before July 1, whether or not it was 100% ready.

3. People are inexperienced at using THIS NEW software and instead of approaching it like "how-does-this-work?", they try to shoehorn the old system into the new. Just hang onto FCP7 for now and gradually make the change as updates come down the line.
 

rimcrazy

macrumors member
Jul 27, 2010
85
69
For real pros its a joke, for pro-sumers its great.

Yes, I own it. Downloaded it this morning. Have a project on it already. On the plus side, it is pretty quick. I have it on a 2yr old MBP and it's editing a 1080p project I have. The steadycam and rolling shutter are a nice feature and I find the UI actually fairly easy to navigate. But.......

Some of the other stuff with this app is just completely nuts if you are a pro.
1) As said, no multicam
2) Better be sure you have backups of the files you import. If you decide you don't want a clip in your "Event" and you delete it, it wipes it off your hard drive.
3) You can't even mute an audio track if it coupled with a video track! You have to be frigging kidding me. You have to separate the audio from the video and then disable that audio track. Don't want to hear any audio. Too bad. You have to disable all of the audio tracks or mute the audio to your mac.
4) Weak support for multi-monitor. Basically you can put either, not both, your file viewer or viewer window on a second monitor. That is it.

For simple editing it won't be bad. If I worked in a major studio, production house, etc. I doubt you will be seeing this in there any time soon.
 

ckelley

macrumors regular
Aug 25, 2003
140
236
Austin, TX
"Everything just changed in post."

Pretty fitting, eh? And you really didn't think they were going to do it their way, even if it means spitting in the face of your way that you've become so accustomed to? That you didn't see how radical some of the changes were a few months ago during the demo? That maybe, just maybe, things would be different?

All these professionals, buying new software without waiting for reviews or reading anything about it... tsk tsk.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.