Final Cut Pro 5.2.1 - - Beta?????

Discussion in 'Digital Video' started by ammon, Aug 7, 2006.

  1. ammon macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado
    #1
    Okay. When the mac pro web site was first brought online this morning I went see the performance benchmarks. I was thrilled to see that the MPEG-2 encoding was so fast! But I noticed something in the foot note

    "Final Cut Pro 5.2.1"

    Huh? What on earth is that??? I am running 5.1.1 currently!

    I did a search on their website and found nothing. I did some searching here and also came up with nothing.

    This evening I went back to see the site and verify that I wasn't seeing things. It now says: "Mac Pro testing conducted with a beta version of Final Cut Pro."

    WOW! So, does this mean that there is a 5.2.1 beta version floating around that will significantly increase performance on the Intel Macs??? Any guess as to when we will get it?
     
  2. simie macrumors 6502a

    simie

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Sitting
    #2
    I have just ben looking at the same page - This could be an update for the Xeon Processors for compatibiliy. Saying that there is also mention of aa beta version of Logic Pro
     
  3. ammon thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado
    #3
    So I wonder why they put up a version number just to take it down a few hours later and replace it with the "beta" wording?

    And I wonder when we will get to have it????
     
  4. ammon thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado
    #4
    Okay. I guess no one really cares that this is out there and Apple is trying to cover it up... Obviously this new version of FCP is much faster than the current one on Intel chips. And I want it!! :)

    But here is one of my biggest concerns - I just spent $49 to go from 5.0 to 5.1. Do you think they will charge me again to go from 5.1 to 5.2 ????

    I have a new Mac Pro on the way, so I really would prefer to have 5.2 if it faster in any way. (I believe it will be, or else why would they have used it for benchmarking??)
     
  5. digitalprimate macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 8, 2006
    #5

    I'm NOT a Macrumorist or anyone who follows these things, but the crossgrade program is valid until 20th of december (has to be at Apple on 29th of december) - So I'm guessing only after that the 5.2 will surface. Which makes it in time for, let's say... MacWorld SF?
     
  6. OldCorpse macrumors 65816

    OldCorpse

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    compost heap
    #6
    Actually, it means that the long-awaited FCS 6 will not arrive this year. Logically, it'll probably appear in time for NAB 2007 (sometime in April). Who knows, maybe they'll wait until Leopard comes out. What a pity. There's a lot that needs fixing in FCS, none more so than Compressor 2.1 which is actually worse than Compressor 1.2.1 in some ways. In general, outputting is the big weakness of FCS. Of course, if a point release like FCP 5.2 fixes Compressor, that would be nice. Sadly, for heavy duty work, Compressor is useless... many editors have moved to other encoders such as BitVice. Apple - c'mon, do something about the disgraceful output situation!
     
  7. bigbossbmb macrumors 68000

    bigbossbmb

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Location:
    Pasadena/Hollywood
    #7
    I think you'll be fine...I don't think that Apple usually charges for .1 updates on their apps (though I could be wrong) and you probably won't have to pay for an upgrade til FCS 6. 5>5.1 had a price because it was really a significant upgrade to a product.

    My crossgrade just shipped and i'm definitely excited to get it loaded up. (I'm coming for 4.5)
     
  8. ammon thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado
    #8

    I had no idea! I've never used any other version of Compressor, so I have been quite happy with it.

    What exactly are its most significant downfalls?
     
  9. OldCorpse macrumors 65816

    OldCorpse

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    compost heap
    #9
    A better question would be "what's good about compressor" and the answers is "not much". It is so full of bugs, it's not even funny. Go to Apple's discussion forum for compressor, and read the tales of woe:

    http://discussions.apple.com/category.jspa?categoryID=173

    Apart from that, Compressor has tons of limitations. F.ex. it's worthless for footage shot in low light:

    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=2261238&#2261238

    The way it handles stills in footage is particularly lame. The fact that it often can't chew gum and walk at the same time: encoding both picture and sound... that's the problem I've encountered most often: if I export from FCP to Compressor, the resulting dolby2 is useless and I have to separately encode the aiff again (it was fine in Compressor 1.2.1, but the bug turned up in compressor 2.1).

    I have had endless trouble with Compressor encoding project longer than 2 hours.

    The algorithms used for compression in Compressor give poor quality results. All in all, this app should be junked, and Apple should start from scratch.

    Now, for small projects, or working with amateur home videos that are not too complex, Compressor will do. But for heavy duty or pro stuff - stay away.
     
  10. ammon thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado
    #10
    That must be the key. I just finished putting together the longest project I've worked on. The final video was 1 hr 34 minutes. It had multiple motion projects in it, a few rendered Lightwave 3D scenes, and a lot of filters/color corrected clips/effects/etc.

    On the highest quality setting it took just under 6 hours to encode the MPEG-2 and AC3 files. Everything pulled over into DSP without any issues. n All other projects I have worked on have been home-videos and under 40 minutes. Although a lot of my home videos have pretty decent quailty.

    I haven't tried encoding anything that has been shot in low light yet...

    Hopefully I don't run into any of these issues. I don't have the $$ to go and purchase something else!


    I wonder why the performance benchmarks on the website specified Final Cut Pro 5.2.1 MPEG2 encoding? Why didn't they use Compressor? Hmmm... Maybe this explains why.
     
  11. OldCorpse macrumors 65816

    OldCorpse

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2005
    Location:
    compost heap
    #11
    Right. That's the boat I'm in. Most pros I talked to use BitVice 1.6 to encode, but that's several hundred $ I can't spare. However, let's not be too harsh on Compressor - it is after all part of a semi-pro editing software that's just amazing value for the money, and performance that nearly matches systems that cost multiple times more. Professional DVDs made of Hollywood movies use comprssion software that's 10's of thousands of dollars - sure it's better than Compressor, but gee, for that kinda money it better be.

    For most uses, Compressor is just fine - including shops that make a living off of them (video houses, pro wedding videographers etc.). However, when you are talking top of the line pro - Hollywood level stuff, obviously, Compressor is not the right tool. Having said that, with the rate at which Apple is improving FCS, I wouldn't be surprised to see it take over Hollywood completely away from Avid... heresy just a few years ago, but striking distance today.

    On a final note, although I'm very pro-Apple (just from the basic belief that competition is good, and any monopoly, including Windows is unhealthy), I must admit, that there are way, way, way fewer options for mac users compared to widnows. Before I finally broke down and shelled out for DVDSP, I searched far and wide for DVD authoring software that was worth anything at all... my project was 140 minutes, so iDVD wasn't useful. Mac simply has NOTHING apart from DVDSP and mac version of Toast 7 for that task. Toast 7 encoding engine is poor, worse than DVDSP. DVDSP is currently unavailable separately, and when it was, it was several hundred dollars. Meanwhile, just do a google search - the windows world has a TON of DVD authoring solutions of various quality at various price points. It's like comparing an ocean to a street puddle. That's the essential weakness of the mac platform in general compared to windows.

    And that's why it is essential for Apple to fix this issue as a mac user really has few options.
     
  12. ammon thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado
    #12
    I would have to agree with you there. However, I have yet to find anything as powerful, complete and easy to use as DSP for Windows. Before I was able to save up and afford my first Mac I had to do all video editing and DVD authoring on my Windows box. It was a nightmare! I tried 4 different major applications before I finally gave up and borrowed my friend's Mac every time I needed to author a DVD.

    I didn't mind editing with Avid Xpress too much, but it is no where near as nice as FCP. Although I might be biased... I've been using FCP proffesionally since version 1.0!

    Well, I will be "stuck" with Compressor for years to come. But like you said, hopefully with the new "beta" (5.2.1) version of FCP an update to Compressor will aslo be right around the corner...
     
  13. ammon thread starter macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2005
    Location:
    Colorado
    #13
    I found a screenshot someone (smarter than me) took.

    So, will 5.2.1 come out soon??? I sure hope so! (At least by the time I get my Mac Pro...)
     

    Attached Files:

Share This Page