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

Apple Posts Final Cut Pro X FAQ, Promises Updates

samcraig said:
Now tell me again that it isn't telling that the first screen after the splash is a pop up asking you to import iMovie projects and say with a straight face that you don't see the point.
Click to expand...

The first time you start the program or every time? In the former case ... no I don't see the point. In normal usage after first time, the users never sees this. So it has no point.

In the latter case, seems like a preference you'd want to turn off... so it is a bug. This is a "do once" thing. After than the normal process is to create events. Again you have no point.
 
deconstruct60 said:
The first time you start the program or every time? In the former case ... no I don't see the point. In normal usage after first time, the users never sees this. So it has no point.
Click to expand...

im so glad i did not buy fcpx, i have been using friends computer to try it and its absolutely backwards, this is for the ipad, should be a fcp ipad and a fcp pro, this is not pro at all
 
I'm very glad to hear that FCP7 will work under Lion. What Apple doesn't tell us though, is where one can get new copies of FCP7/FCS3. They need to do that.
 
samcraig said:
You don't think it means anything? Ok. You are entitled to think whatever you want. Now tell me what professional video editor has projects in iMovie. Now tell me again that it isn't telling that the first screen after the splash is a pop up asking you to import iMovie projects and say with a straight face that you don't see the point.
Click to expand...

My hypothesis works better than yours. For yours to work, there would have to be actual evidence that Apple intends for FCPX to be a consumer level product. It's not priced like one, it's not designed like one, it's not featured like one and all the missing features either have or will have workarounds, plugins, and eventual full implementations.

It's just the most obvious thing it can import right now, so they put the import in a prominent place *in case* you have something already to experiment with.
 
manu chao said:
So, anybody selling directly to consumers (and being self-employed) is not a professional?
Click to expand...

Manu...deconstruct60....you guys just dont "get it" because you clearly have never worked in broadcast TV / film post production.

You may be a great, artistic editor..as good as any "pro" on the planet. That has nothing to do with this debacle. I happen to think, as many of my colleagues in TV post...that FCP X is awesome in many ways. The bummer is...we can't interface with ANYONE! As someone correctly pointed out in the comments section of David Pogue's (NY Times) blog.. "Apple blew up the bridge to the post production workflow." So it doesn't matter how awesome FCP X is. I can't get my job done using it. "Cutting the story" is a small part of what we need in an editing app.

I don't have the time to list and explain why FCP X is a 100% non-starter for pro editors working in TV broadcast / film workflows that involve audio houses, color correction, etc, etc, etc. The list is simply too long! Go read David Pogue's blog at the NY Times, especially the 15(!!) pages of comments.

Apple, by leaving out these "features" has made their position abundantly clear. They aren't stupid. Apple doesn't care about being part of the tv broadcast / film world anymore. They're targeting editors that want to create content for the iPad, vimeo and youtube. That's a much larger market, so I can't blame them. I just don't think they realize the extent of the backlash this is going to create....not just from pro editors and post houses that have invested massive amounts of $$, but from educational centers that teach FCP (Video Symphony, J&R, etc)...film schools like USC / UCLA. They can't teach an EOL'd product like FCP7 and you can't cut a film on FCPX nor use FCP X in a TV post workflow. They will drop FCP like a hot potato. That will kill FCP demand.

Apple may fix some of the issues, but their FAQ is only going to add fuel to the fire. It was insulting actually. We need 3rd party plugins (bandaids) that make our jobs more complicated in order to use FCP X?? Gee thanks for thinking of us Apple. :rolleyes:

A LOT of trust has been lost and honestly...I think most in the tv broadcast / film worlds feel pretty screwed over. While I could use FCP X at home and enjoy it thoroughly....I, for one, will now purchase AVID media composer for home use because I feel FCP jobs will be in very short supply in the coming years. I need to refresh my Avid skills and be prepared. This is my livelihood. Believe me, I'm not alone.

AVID and Adobe are throwing a big party this weekend.
 
Last edited:
tobyx said:
Not saying that. Excuse my edit above. What if your client asks you "Hm, we really need to work on the color in these shots, I'm sorry."

Are they going to say "Sorry, can't do that, I worked in a software that doesn't allow me to hand this over to something more sophisticated. I'm kind of locked in... Hm..." ?
Click to expand...
What you describe could be the difference between a good professional and a not-so-good professional. I am simply saying that even the not-so-good professionals can make a living and are thus by definition professionals. And therefore FCP X can be used successfully by professionals, just not the sort of professionals you have in mind.
 
WestonHarvey1 said:
My hypothesis works better than yours. For yours to work, there would have to be actual evidence that Apple intends for FCPX to be a consumer level product. It's not priced like one, it's not designed like one, it's not featured like one and all the missing features either have or will have workarounds, plugins, and eventual full implementations.

It's just the most obvious thing it can import right now, so they put the import in a prominent place *in case* you have something already to experiment with.
Click to expand...

Apple intends FCPX to be a prosumer app which they are hoping (at this point) professionals can use too or in the near future based on their updates. So your hypothesis (and that's all it is) is based on an incorrect assumption that I (or anyone) stated that FCPX was for consumers. I know I didn't say that.

P.S. It is designed like one. And while not an entry level price - it's priced smartly so that any Prosumer (or Consumer for that matter) can justify the additional expense for more powerful tools that iMovie allows. Especially if they were holding out because FCP was too expensive at $999

Again - do the math.
 
WestonHarvey1 said:
My hypothesis works better than yours. For yours to work, there would have to be actual evidence that Apple intends for FCPX to be a consumer level product. It's not priced like one, it's not designed like one, it's not featured like one and all the missing features either have or will have workarounds, plugins, and eventual full implementations.
Click to expand...

The evidence is in this release. FCP in the past has been geared to broadcast professionals. FCPX as it stands now isn't. They tried to marry their consumer product with their pro product, but somehow lost a ton of the pro features along the way.

Your mention of workarounds, plugins, and eventual full implementations are all speculative at this point.

As for pricing (which I don't think is a real argument anyway), how is $300 not more in the consumer price range?
 
jaduffy108 said:
Apple may fix some of the issues, but their FAQ is only going add fuel to the fire. It was insulting actually. We need 3rd party plugins (bandaids) that make our jobs more complicated in order to use FCP X?? Gee thanks for thinking of us Apple. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

So wait. What you are saying is that this doesn't "just work" ? ;) ;) ;)
 
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8J2 Safari/6533.18.5)

arn said:
vjl323 said:
If I'm reading the FAQ correctly, multicam support won't be something that a free update will provide, but rather a major release? Does that mean another year+ away?
Click to expand...

It's not entirely clear. You can't charge for updates on the App Store. So Apple would have to put out an entirely new FCP app in the app store to charge people. Apple hasn't run into this yet. I'd guess that the next major FCP update will be free, and given the wording of the FAQ, I'd say that's pretty likely.

arn
Click to expand...

In app purchase for extra bolt-ons?
 
manu chao said:
What you describe could be the difference between a good professional and a not-so-good professional. I am simply saying that even the not-so-good professionals can make a living and are thus by definition professionals. And therefore FCP X can be used successfully by professionals, just not the sort of professionals you have in mind.
Click to expand...

oh Manu...

Cutting a student film?...FCP X=great.
Cutting a wedding video?...FCP X = awesome.
Cutting a low budget doc?...FCP X = fantastic.
Are you being paid for your editing skills? Yes...congrats, you're a professional editor.

You are exactly the "pro" Apple is targeting with FCP X. Enjoy it. FCP X is a well designed, thought out application for **you**...the "one-man-show" editor.

I love student films and low budget docs. Really.

I think we need to distinguish between "pro editor" and "pro workflow". It's the later that is a disaster.
And a LOT of people have invested blood, sweat and tears(!)...plus post houses, schools, etc have invested 100's of thousands of $$ into FCP because we/they were told it was a long term solution, that it would be supported, etc. Apple just f'd us.
 
Last edited:
handsome pete said:
The evidence is in this release. FCP in the past has been geared to broadcast professionals. FCPX as it stands now isn't. They tried to marry their consumer product with their pro product, but somehow lost a ton of the pro features along the way.

Your mention of workarounds, plugins, and eventual full implementations are all speculative at this point.

As for pricing (which I don't think is a real argument anyway), how is $300 not more in the consumer price range?
Click to expand...

They didn't try to marry the products. iMovie was R&D for FCPX. A proof of concept. The goal was always a paradigm shift in pro editing.

I'm not speculating. Apple said so, see the topic of this thread.

$300 didn't used to be a lot of money for consumer software, but it is a lot now. Larger user bases in general and mobile software pricing has created large downward price pressure. Look at OS X upgrades - they're probably $29 forever from now on. $300 is an astronomical price today.
 
New FCPX Workflow!

To do the basic stuff other NLE (including FCP 7) do you need 4 different softwares: FCPX, Compressor, Automatic Duck, Media Express (or its AJA counterpart).

Digitize your material from tape using Media Express, switch over to FCPX, edit, render out your movie, import it in media express, edit to tape, switch to FCPX export audio tracks using Automatic Duck. Revision time: recut your edit in your (single and one-per-project) timeline, render out again, go back to media express, try to do an insert and cross your fingers.

Clunky, imprecise, prone to a myriad of errors, unacceptable in a collaborative, pressure-filled, creative business like TV or film. It is not professional. You know what would be a dreamy? Having a super-software where you could do all of these every day, run of the mill, bread-and-butter chores. Oh wait, there are many super-softwares that do this! Oh joy there's Avid, Premiere Pro, Sony Vegas, Lightworks, FCP7 (now defunct). FCPX? Not even close.

Oh and we don't care if you consider yourself a professional because your auntie Bessie paid you 200 (or 2000) dollars to cut all her old videos together. I also play guitar and sing horribly every other weekend at a friend's bar for tips, that does not make me a professional musician. It makes me an enthusiast. FCPX is a great software for enthusiasts, an apalling one for Pros.
 
franbelda said:
Oh and we don't care if you consider yourself a professional because your auntie Bessie paid you 200 (or 2000) dollars to cut all her old videos together. I also play guitar and sing horribly every other weekend at a friend's bar for tips, that does not make me a professional musician. It makes me an enthusiast. FCPX is a great software for enthusiasts, an apalling one for Pros.
Click to expand...

Yes. What he said.
 
Why did Apple not call this "feature incomplete Alpha" release?

People now are saying "I can't use this." And they will need to switch to some other product. Had they simply done nothing else but change the title to include the world "Alpha" then people rather than saying "I can't use this" might say "This might be really good".

It seems Apple is looking for short term profit, selling a few copies now and loosing the long term as people walk away from Apple's Mac platform
 
APPLE FAQ:
Can I hide Events that I am not working on?
Yes. You can hide Events in Final Cut Pro X by moving them out of the Final Cut Events folder. In the Finder, navigate to the /Users/username/Movies folder and create a new folder. Then move the Events you are not using out of the Final Cut Events folder and into your new folder. The moved Events will no longer appear in Final Cut Pro X. If your Events are located on an external drive, you can move the Events to a new folder on that drive, or you can simply unmount the drive.


Seriously? How retarded is that?
They couldn't think of a better way to hide events that you're not working on than having to leave the application and start re-arranging your working folders in Finder?
 
gstrocco said:
APPLE FAQ:
Can I hide Events that I am not working on?
Yes. You can hide Events in Final Cut Pro X by moving them out of the Final Cut Events folder. In the Finder, navigate to the /Users/username/Movies folder and create a new folder. Then move the Events you are not using out of the Final Cut Events folder and into your new folder. The moved Events will no longer appear in Final Cut Pro X. If your Events are located on an external drive, you can move the Events to a new folder on that drive, or you can simply unmount the drive.


Seriously? How retarded is that?
They couldn't think of a better way to hide events that you're not working on than having to leave the application and start re-arranging your working folders in Finder?
Click to expand...

All of this jury-rigging to get FCPX to work (for now) and perhaps in the future is pretty anti-Apple's philosophy of making things easier/more intuitive/etc. Even the most rabid Apple fan has to concede that.

Reach said:
Lots of pro features guys!
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/pro-features/

And most of the hyperbole claiming FCP X has no pro features is clearly insane anyway. FCP X has more great features than it misses. But I do understand that the missing ones tend to stick out. :p
Click to expand...

That page is great marketing. It's also a bit misleading as are the other pages which don't point on features currently not available. The page was created specifically to speak to all the negativity that has been written/posted thus far. Much like a defense or prosecuting attorney sends over boxes of discovery when the other is really only looking for a single piece of information. I

Information/feature overload will definitely convince those not taking a hard look at the software to conclude that it's a perfect app and can do anything.
 
Last edited:
A lot of this debate over the missing functionality for me is just splitting hairs, the real problem is the way Apple feels the need to dictate a workflow for the user. Apple does not lead me anywhere, my clients do! It's my clients demands that drive my creativity, not Steve Jobs whims, and what FCPX gives me is not what my clients are asking for, and takes away things they are. What apple makes is just a tool to help me make give my clients the best possible product, and the new FC limits my options to do that. Not just with the missing features, which are fundament for my clients (regardless of what Apple thinks tapes support will be needed far into the future), but with the workflow options within the program. It's just too limiting.

Ever since FCS 2 came out a group of us that go to lunch regularly have been thinking on what Apple could do with a future program, and what we all came up with was something more like a baby Avid DS. And editing software that would have the compositor and color corrector fully integrated within the editing interface but each with it's own separate functions. Kinda like how Color had rooms for each workflow, but within FC. Sure there is a CC in FCPX, but it's a simpletons CC compared to the tools Color gave us. I even thought that working node tree as an option in FC like shake had, would be great.

But Apple didn't got that route. They tried to make the options more "simple". Well as someone pointed out on another thread, complexity is freedom. Apple has taken away a lot of freedom for the editor within the program, freedom to customize the interface for specific task for instance (big problem), and freedom to change up workflows to complete a task within the timeline itself as an example.

Creativity is not a top down affair. Artist need more tools, not simpler ones, to expand on their ideas. Sure a good editor could cut a movie in imovie, but if he used that program for his whole career, all his movies would end up looking kinda the same. It just doesn't give you many creative options, and neither does FCPX.
 
By the way - for those insisting that it's not a big deal to keep both FCP 7 and also have FCPX on your system and just switch between based on the project you're doing should read this...

http://support.apple.com/kb/HT4722

Quite simply put - the programs aren't playing nicely together people are finding out and now Apple recommends partitioning your hard drive with fresh OSX installs on both.

Oh yeah - and reboot every time you want to switch which app you're going to use....

Simple! ;)
 
MisterK said:
I really feel for the high end video professionals who wanted to like FCPX. Apple's my favourite company and I actually WANT to use everything they make. So when an application like Motion doesn't take care of my needs and I have to go to After Effects, I actually feel like I'm corrupting my Mac experience somehow... despite how much I actually love Adobe's products. I'm sure FCPX users feel the same way.
Click to expand...

This I think is one of the mayor reasons why long time users are so pissed.

We backed Apple every time when others "outsiders" were bashing Apple for no other reason then bashing.

I also think that the respect for Apple did not only came from the massive success they made with the iPod, iPhone and iPad etc.... their was love before that and that love came from their loyal user base (and lots of professionals are in that category)

FCPX was release to early and the loyal user base were expecting something truly magical but which turned out to be a downer after those long years waiting.
Its not that FCPX is a joke or that FCP7 was nice to work with its about something much closer to our hearts and its called respect.

I'm not gonna say anymore that Apple should do this or should do that because Apple really can handle itself but personally I wouldn't mind if they attract more beta users and listen to what they have to say and don't kill a previous "pro" application that fast when the new one is only part usable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back