Apple Announces Final Cut Pro X, Motion 5, and Compressor 4 Available Today

[H. Flower]

Agreed, and I for one don't mind. As long as people are aware of the things that are missing, I really can't see what the problem is.

The problem is Final Cut 7 is severely behind the technology. It's time to move on to something, and as it turns out, Final Cut X won't work for many professionals.

I have no qualms switching over to Premiere (just talked to a friend that works there and he said their inundated with calls today from people wanting to switch over). It's just interesting because I now have to ask myself: if I don't need FCP, why do I need a Mac?

I'm sure FCP will be updated with more professional support in 1,2,3 years, but like I said, we need it now, as 7 does just doesn't "cut it" anymore.

 

[Cory Bauer]

The problem is Final Cut 7 is severely behind the technology. It's time to move on to something, and as it turns out, Final Cut X won't work for many professionals.

That's the real kicker, isn't it? Final Cut Pro 7 is so far behind the times that parts of the interface still retain their Mac OS 9 appearance. And after 2 years of waiting for an update that was supposed to bring Final Cut Pro up to speed with the rest of the NLE world, we get a version that's missing so many features as to be unusable in a professional environment. So now what, we're supposed to keep using version 7 until Apple gets around to putting the Pro in Final Cut Pro X?

I need to demo Premiere. We already own it as part of the Adobe Master Collection, so it's an obvious way to go.

 

[iBug2]

That's the real kicker, isn't it? Final Cut Pro 7 is so far behind the times that parts of the interface still retain their Mac OS 9 appearance. And after 2 years of waiting for an update that was supposed to bring Final Cut Pro up to speed with the rest of the NLE world, we get a version that's missing so many features as to be unusable in a professional environment. So now what, we're supposed to keep using version 7 until Apple gets around to putting the Pro in Final Cut Pro X?

I need to demo Premiere. We already own it as part of the Adobe Master Collection, so it's an obvious way to go.

That's the thing. People have been basically begging Apple for a rewrite on Final Cut Pro, for as long as I can remember, because it still was a carbon app.

Now people are not happy because after the rewrite, it misses a lot.
Apple used to update their FCP suite every 2 years or so.
A major rewrite takes much more effort than an upgrade. And they completed this in 2-3 years, which means that it has to be incomplete, because there isn't just enough time. In 1.5 years or so, FCP X should reach prime time status which isn't as long as people make it out to be.

Eventually all the other NLE programs will have to go through a rewrite as well, because the old code won't be able to support new stuff simply through upgrades. Adobe did this partially with the new Premiere, but only partially.

Avid still has been using decade old code, exactly like FCP 7.

When those apps go through a rewrite like this, the same thing that happened with FCP X will most probably happen with them, or their rewrites would have to take twice as long.

 

[H. Flower]

That's the thing. People have been basically begging Apple for a rewrite on Final Cut Pro, for as long as I can remember, because it still was a carbon app.

Now people are not happy because after the rewrite, it misses a lot.
Apple used to update their FCP suite every 2 years or so.
A major rewrite takes much more effort than an upgrade. And they completed this in 2-3 years, which means that it has to be incomplete, because there isn't just enough time. In 1.5 years or so, FCP X should reach prime time status which isn't as long as people make it out to be.

Eventually all the other NLE programs will have to go through a rewrite as well, because the old code won't be able to support new stuff simply through upgrades. Adobe did this partially with the new Premiere, but only partially.

Avid still has been using decade old code, exactly like FCP 7.

When those apps go through a rewrite like this, the same thing that happened with FCP X will most probably happen with them, or their rewrites would have to take twice as long.

Let's be honest, here. CS4---->CS5, an equally major rewrite, didn't take this long, and it didn't strip away fundamental features.

 

[iBug2]

Let's be honest, here. CS4---->CS5, an equally major rewrite, didn't take this long, and it didn't strip away fundamental features.

CS4 > CS5 a major rewrite? Not really. They added 64 bit (which doesn't mean a major rewrite of the whole thing) and a new render engine.

A rewrite from the ground up means not using the old code and basically writing the new app from scratch.

Adobe did a rewrite on Premiere back in 2002, and since then the new versions were only iterations of the code.

 

[samcraig]

Now people are not happy because after the rewrite, it misses a lot.
Apple used to update their FCP suite every 2 years or so.
A major rewrite takes much more effort than an upgrade. And they completed this in 2-3 years, which means that it has to be incomplete, because there isn't just enough time. In 1.5 years or so, FCP X should reach prime time status which isn't as long as people make it out to be.

Both true and not so true. Fact is - Apple didn't NEED to release it today "as is." Yes, people would complain either way. But they could have waiting 6 months and put features in that - at RELEASE TIME - would have served them better to some/all of the professional editors.

Many would argue (not me) that Apple doesn't release inferior products or ones that don't "just work."

Releasing this version of FCPX (for me) now without multicam support vs releasing it in 6 months WITH multicam support results in the same for me. I still wouldn't use it for 6 months. Oh sure - I could familiarize myself with everything but. But I can wait. And I'm guessing so will other professional users. But that's ok. I think Apple was trying to make FCPX more "mainstream" with this release by adopting much from iMovie. What they (temporarily) lose from professionals, they will gain with prosumers. I just hope that Apple doesn't take the shift in users as a sign they were successful (completely).

Time will tell.

 

[Cory Bauer]

That's the thing. People have been basically begging Apple for a rewrite on Final Cut Pro, for as long as I can remember, because it still was a carbon app.

Now people are not happy because after the rewrite, it misses a lot.
Apple used to update their FCP suite every 2 years or so.
A major rewrite takes much more effort than an upgrade. And they completed this in 2-3 years, which means that it has to be incomplete, because there isn't just enough time. In 1.5 years or so, FCP X should reach prime time status which isn't as long as people make it out to be.

When the last update of Final Cut Pro was released in July of 2009, it was 2 years in the making and had literally only a handful of new features, and very basic ones at that. For that reason, I suspect the Final Cut Pro team has been working on version X since 2007, not 2009. So I'm not impressed that they delivered a half-baked rewrite of the application in 2 years, because as far as I'm concerned they've had 4 years. I believe Apple should have handled this release one of two ways:

1. Delayed the release for another 6 months until they could add basic NLE functionality back in that all pros require (deck control, batch capture, EDL and OMF creation, accessing earlier project files), and get the hardware and plug-in developers up to speed so that their products could be ready for launch.

Or

2. Been publicly up front about the major missing functionality, including a list of what's missing and approximately when it will be available right there on the product page.

It's a total slimeball move that they demoed this product in front of 1,800 professionals at NAB, rolled it out in the store this morning as a revolutionary product, and let their loyal-for-a-decade customers figure out for themselves after dropping $299 that the program is essentially unusable in a professional work environment.

 

[iBug2]

When the last update of Final Cut Pro was released in July of 2009, it was 2 years in the making and had literally only a handful of new features, and very basic ones at that. For that reason, I suspect the Final Cut Pro team has been working on version X since 2007, not 2009. So I'm not impressed that they delivered a half-baked rewrite of the application in 2 years, because as far as I'm concerned they've had 4 years. I believe Apple should have handled this release one of two ways:

1. Delayed the release for another 6 months until they could add basic NLE functionality back in that all pros require (deck control, batch capture, EDL and OMF creation, accessing earlier project files), and get the hardware and plug-in developers up to speed so that their products could be ready for launch.

Or

2. Been publicly up front about the major missing functionality, including a list of what's missing and approximately when it will be available right there on the product page.

It's a total slimeball move that they demoed this product in front of 1,800 professionals at NAB, rolled it out in the store this morning as a revolutionary product, and let their loyal-for-a-decade customers figure out for themselves after dropping $299 that the program is essentially unusable in a professional work environment.

Whether or not they worked 4 years on this we'll never know.

But you are incorrect on one thing. Nobody in their right mind would pay up 299$ the first day without actually reading something about this. Most professionals won't switch from a release to the next release the first day, not even the first month, let alone to a totally new application like this.

And keep in mind that, the insights we had on this product from people who have been shown or used the beta, already implied that it won't be ready for prime time use. So everyone who was following the news on this knew that.

What Apple has done is, in my opinion, the best way. Release it early, let people get familiar with it, and they'll add features according to industry's needs.

If they released this in 6 months or a year, they would have added more stuff, but the first release would be worse compared to what this will be with all the feedback in 6 months or a year. Industry feedback is what keeps these pro apps develop.

Many would argue (not me) that Apple doesn't release inferior products or ones that don't "just work."

I don't think anyone would argue that dot zero releases of Apple are solid.

Apple didn't NEED to release it today "as is." Yes, people would complain either way. But they could have waiting 6 months and put features in that - at RELEASE TIME - would have served them better to some/all of the professional editors.

Surely they didn't need to, but releasing it early always is good. Now they can get the entire industry's feedback, which is many times better than getting feedback from only a roomful of professionals.

 

[Cory Bauer]

But you are incorrect on one thing. Nobody in their right mind would pay up 299$ the first day without actually reading something about this. Most professionals won't switch from a release to the next release the first day, not even the first month, let alone to a totally new application like this.

At 8AM this morning when the program went available for sale there was nothing to read apart from Apple's marketing speak, which made no mention of the absent basic functionality; the only way to learn about it was to try it. Myself, and I'm sure many others were prepared to start trying this thing on day one. Every other version of Final Cut has added features, not removed them, so how can you blame the Final Cut Pro owners for assuming this new version would not be able to do something so basic as access a previous version's project?

And keep in mind that, the insights we had on this product from people who have been shown or used the beta, already implied that it won't be ready for prime time use. So everyone who was following the news on this knew that.

I had been actively seeking out everything I could about Final Cut Pro X since the demo at NAB, and I never heard anything about it not being ready for prime time use. So how could "everyone" know that? Given the number of one-star reviews on the Mac App store and the level of frustration in the Apple support discussions, I don't think anyone knew that.

 

[iBug2]

At 8AM this morning when the program went available for sale there was nothing to read apart from Apple's marketing speak, which made no mention of the absent basic functionality; the only way to learn about it was to try it. Myself, and I'm sure many others were prepared to start trying this thing on day one. Every other version of Final Cut has added features, not removed them, so how can you blame the Final Cut Pro owners for assuming this new version would not be able to do something so basic as access a previous version's project?


I had been actively seeking out everything I could about Final Cut Pro X since the demo at NAB, and I never heard anything about it not being ready for prime time use. So how could "everyone" know that? Given the number of one-star reviews on the Mac App store and the level of frustration in the Apple support discussions, I don't think anyone knew that.

I'm not an editor, and even I knew that it was missing features. How can "you" as an editor not know what I do? There were articles posted on this website. Larry Jordan did a 2 hour interview which you could watch for free explaining all the missing stuff and how it won't be ready. All this happened since the April preview.

 

[filmantopia]

Nice price. WAsn't the gimped version of it $200 before?

Yes, it was. What was it called again? 'Final Cut Gimp'?

 

[glossywhite]

That's the real kicker, isn't it? Final Cut Pro 7 is so far behind the times that parts of the interface still retain their Mac OS 9 appearance. And after 2 years of waiting for an update that was supposed to bring Final Cut Pro up to speed with the rest of the NLE world, we get a version that's missing so many features as to be unusable in a professional environment. So now what, we're supposed to keep using version 7 until Apple gets around to putting the Pro in Final Cut Pro X?

I need to demo Premiere. We already own it as part of the Adobe Master Collection, so it's an obvious way to go.

You really could do a LOT worse than using Premiere Pro CS5.5. I consider myself an amateur, and yet it & Ae are SO SO powerful and easy to use. I use all Adobe stuff daily!

 

[Tobsterius]

Can't find a audio mixer either, always do a quick pre-mix of the source before dropping it on the timeline if levels aren't done by a pro sound engineer or the interviewer has crap mic technique

Well, you can't find the audio mixer because it doesn't exist-- at least I don't think. I haven't downloaded FCP X but I've spent a better part of the day searching the help file/manual for features that I hoped made it in to the new version... an audio mixer isn't one of them.

Still hating the no old FCP files...

As for this... I really could have sworn that Apple showed this feature in the NAB '11 demo. I find it really odd that you can import/open iMovie projects but not FCP 7 projects... really messed up.

 

[Cory Bauer]

I'm not an editor, and even I knew that it was missing features. How can "you" as an editor not know what I do? There were articles posted on this website. Larry Jordan did a 2 hour interview which you could watch for free explaining all the missing stuff and how it won't be ready. All this happened since the April preview.

Apparently I didn't get the memo. I check this site daily and never saw anything about Final Cut Pro X being incomplete at launch time.

I find it really odd that you can import/open iMovie projects but not FCP 7 projects... really messed up.

I think that speaks volumes about where their priorities are.

 

[mBox]

Apparently I didn't get the memo. I check this site daily and never saw anything about Final Cut Pro X being incomplete at launch time...

Well if I did my research even though I was at the Super Meet. Everything I excepted was there except for R3D support. However version 7 and lower didnt have that either.
Were not all tape-based, plug-in luvin, cutting Social Network film size users you know
Hi my name is Eric and Im a somewhat pro FCP user and yes I approve this app

 

[samcraig]

Well, you can't find the audio mixer because it doesn't exist-- at least I don't think. I haven't downloaded FCP X but I've spent a better part of the day searching the help file/manual for features that I hoped made it in to the new version... an audio mixer isn't one of them.



As for this... I really could have sworn that Apple showed this feature in the NAB '11 demo. I find it really odd that you can import/open iMovie projects but not FCP 7 projects... really messed up.

I think that speaks volumes in that they aimed this release more for the prosumers. People who wanted more power than iMovie but found FCP to "pro" and cost prohibitive.

 

[linuxcooldude]

I'm a new user to FCPx, coming off of iMovie. I found it an excellent program for the Price. It imported my files immediately. It took me around an hour-hour and a half to figure out and edit a twenty minute movie. there were no laggs and was fast through out the whole process. Except getting to the render part it slowed down till the option window came up. Render was 11 minutes?!? Seemed to be still rendering even when the file seemed done and could play back in quicktime player.

I had no bugs or crashes like anybody else and wondering since i'm using 8 core Mac Pro ( 24 GB RAM ) is making a difference then say a dual core machine. But more then likely they are bugs as I have not used all the features to there full potential.

I could easily see this as a must have program going from iMovie to a more advanced editor. I can see where professionals might be reluctant to switch over easily do to missing/unfamiliar features. But considering its a brand new, rewritten software its understandable.

It does seem some people are way too quick to pass judgement on something they have not even spent a day on yet. At least give it a solid week or two before making a decision.

I'm finding people who say it can't do this or that, only to find out they can, because either they have not tried it or not spent enough time to learn it well enough.

 

[H. Flower]

Well if I did my research even though I was at the Super Meet. Everything I excepted was there except for R3D support. However version 7 and lower didnt have that either.
Were not all tape-based, plug-in luvin, cutting Social Network film size users you know
Hi my name is Eric and Im a somewhat pro FCP user and yes I approve this app

Don't you have clients?

How are we supposed to show clients our work with no I/O?

 

[tcampb01]

I'm a new user to FCPx, coming off of iMovie.

And this is exactly the ONLY sort of user who would like the app. Someone who had only used iMovie and was looking for "iMovie Advanced".

But for anyone who was expecting a pro quality app... this ain't it.

Let me just save everyone who hasn't yet purchased the app from blowing $300 by suggesting that you stick with either your old version of FCP -or- just stick with iMovie if you're needs aren't that advanced. If they had marketed this as "iMovie Advanced" and only bothered to charge people about $50 for the app then I'd say it might be a good deal. But by charging $300 and calling it a 'pro' app... it's a rip-off.

 

[shaunsindelman]

For those looking for a way to I/O with high end tape decks AND get playback on an external monitor for client viewing...

AJA has released a workflow for being able to a) ingest and export from tape decks using VTR XChange and b) do playback on external monitor of the Viewer so your client sitting at the back of the room can see the output of your timeline.

http://www.aja.com/pdf/FCP_X_and_AJA.pdf

 

[K.B.]

This was fun to watch http://www.zacuto.com/

That was great. THANKS for the link!

The DSLR one from last year is great too.

Could not agree with you more! when will Apple learn that color and edit are not the same jobs!

Things like this make me question FCPX - I was thrilled when Apple worked hard to make FCP a professional level product that could compete with AVID and even DaVinci but some of the things missing and some of the things that are 'rolled into' the main product (Having not worked with it yet I don't want to say 'dumbed down') makes me wonder if the pros needs have been shunted to the back for now.

Editors using FCP mean more macs sold, more macs in the entire pipeline and across whole productions. I'm a little confused but I'm happy to see I can run the old version of FCP Studio along side this new one.

 

[dbattle]

I just wanted to point out in case no one else had. Once you've installed FCPX and Motion be sure and go to "download additional content" this is under the FCPX tab (before file). You'll get sound effects for FCPX and templates for Motion. It's almost 2gb worth of additional content.

 

[mBox]

That was great. THANKS for the link!

The DSLR one from last year is great too.

Ill be watching this over and over

Things like this make me question FCPX - I was thrilled when Apple worked hard to make FCP a professional level product that could compete with AVID and even DaVinci but some of the things missing and some of the things that are 'rolled into' the main product (Having not worked with it yet I don't want to say 'dumbed down') makes me wonder if the pros needs have been shunted to the back for now.

Editors using FCP mean more macs sold, more macs in the entire pipeline and across whole productions. I'm a little confused but I'm happy to see I can run the old version of FCP Studio along side this new one.

Were an Avid studio first, FCP second and a slew of CS Master installed across many Macs.
I welcome Apples entry (well they stumbled a little) into 4k.
Avid to date does not do 4k and the work around to get R3D files back and forth is scary.
The only good thing for us here is we dont do film (yet).
We shoot with RED MX and down to HD.
Now if we only had FCPX, were still good.
I had to test this right away so I can get some editors on it.
Why dont we just use PPro. Those are dedicated Motion design boxes.
Not enough editors to want to learn it.
Most of them were turned off from the old days of Premiere (before Pro).
Well so far its been 6 to 8 hours of testing this baby and it seems to work fine.
Just doesnt work the way everyone on Earth wants it too.

 

[Atlantico]

It was rumored more than a year ago that this would be exactly what to expect: thus it is hard to agree that this is "just version 1.0" and more features will come later to match what FCP7 offers.

Apple's Final Cut Studio suite of video post production apps is getting a significant makeover to better target the software to the mainstream of Apple's customer base rather than high end professionals.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...g_final_cut_studio_apps_to_fit_prosumers.html

Well, that's exactly what was delivered. A prosumer FCP, or an iMovie Pro, if you will.

 

[linuxcooldude]

And this is exactly the ONLY sort of user who would like the app. Someone who had only used iMovie and was looking for "iMovie Advanced"

After reading some reviews in the app store and other places, there are professionals who do like it, even though its still missing features. They are going to be adding more in future updates.