Apple Showcases Final Cut Pro X Usage in Production of Hollywood Film 'Focus'

[apolloa]

Now that's how you do it Apple.

Hey, psst, you know that new hit film 'Focus' with Will Smith that's just hit the cinemas? Yes, cool, here's the film being edited on OUR new software!!

I say that as I don't think people sometimes realise just how involved Apple's products are in video production of all shapes and sizes as well as music.

 

[boraxatude]

It's just a tool

I learned to edit way way back with a super 8 splicing block and viewer... Then an upright moviola and finally a flatbed. I learned how to edit video on the job using a CMX system (among others).

The shift from film to video was like entering another galaxy. Each proprietary system took a different approach to the cutting process and then when AVID introduced its non-linear editing system, all of a sudden I had to learn what a codec was and re-think my workflow. It was amazing what could be done but it was also prohibitively expensive to purchase and maintain your own rig.

Then FCP entered and we all laughed at the mickey mouse approach. Amateurs! We cried out! A few years later, I ditched AVID for an ultra affordable FCP system. It was a continual learning process, but by the time FCP7 came around, I felt completely comfortable with the workflow... But by then, I no longer made most of my crust as an editor.

Fast forward a few years and I am back editing, albeit on the side, to supplement my other production and writing work. For the heck of it, I installed FCPX and lo and behold, it appeared that everything was different!

I've got the workflow down again, but still there are elements that don't make a whole lot of sense. The interface as a whole though appears to be quite intuitive and built for the newest generation of media makers. I no longer think about frames and bins, its more about throwing clay on the potter's wheel and shaping, carving until the sculpted piece is complete. It's a different way of thinking about editing, but at the same time, I believe it is perhaps geared towards simplicity, which after all is what editing film with a razor and tape affords you.

At the end of the day, it's just a tool. If it works for you, use it. If it doesn't, find something else. You've got bigger problems: content.

 

[flat five]

I'm glad to see there is still some dedication to professional software. After the destruction of iWork and the discontinuation of Aperture I was losing hope.

what's the matter with iwork?
the new numbers is better than the old one.
how do you mean it's destroyed?

 

[ThisIsNotMe]

But but but all of the 'professionals' on MacRumores told me Final Cut Pro X and the MacPro were utter trash. How can a major hollywood studio produce a major hollywood movie using these tools????

 

[The Samurai]

What?! No iPad used ???? Lol

 

[Traverse]

what's the matter with iwork?
the new numbers is better than the old one.
how do you mean it's destroyed?

If you search these forums or Apple Discussion board you'll find numerous complaints about the new iWork suite. They were "rewritten" to basically be iOS ports so there would be iOS-OS X compatibility. In the process they took out many, MANY features and crippled the suite.

It uses a new file format that isn't fully compatible with iWork '09's so formats may get messed up and once you save a document in iWork '13 you cannot open it in iWork '09. I only use Pages so I can only comment on that but:

- No side-by-side pages
- No format bar or inspector, just a clunky sidebar
- No way to have multiple inspector windows, limited to just one "context aware" sidebar
- No.rtfd file support
- No linked text boxes
- Inability to move, add, or delete pages from thumbnail view
- Loss of several templates
- No ability to import styles
- No styles drawer, only a limited drop down menu in the clunky sidebar
- No vertical ruler

This review by The Verge titled Apple’s stripped-down iWork suite is free, but there's a cost sums it up pretty good.

 

[BlueParadox]

nobody uses FCP X professionally, with the exception of this movie and one tv show. zero commercial houses. period. professional commercial/film/tv video editor here, freelancing in LA for the past 14 years. avid was the reigning beast for years, and slowly FCP crept in. as an early adopter, but user of both, I applauded as they encroached a 50% market share in post facilities. it was easy to use, and made timeline editing a snap. it just couldn't ever keep up with avid for projects that you had to share across servers with multiple editors simultaneously thanks to the bin structure. but for everything short form (commercials mainly) it was the best of the best. then X came out. and we limped along with 7, waiting for the day apple would wise up and bring along a 64bit version. that day, we are coming to accept, is never coming. all post houses are starting to finally dump 7 thanks to the lack of support and inability to keep up with modern cameras. it is still used, but backslid dramatically. the 50-60% of fcp houses reverted back to avid, and maybe 15% still use 7, while 25% now use premiere. i hated premiere, but in the stark void FCP left behind and Avid can't touch thanks to it's limited editing abilities and archaic design and functionality, premiere has leaped and bounded with significant improvements version after version. i have cried myself to sleep many a night over the inevitable death of fcp 7 thanks to X and i can finally stop, because there is finally a new future ready version of final cut out, and it is premiere CC2014. i have never seen anyone professional use X and i never will. congratulations apple, on killing the product that made me and many like me switch to using apple computers in the first place. enjoy your prosumers, because no professional editor will ever use you again.

What absolute rubbish! Please stop taking your own experience and generalising it across the field. Yes, the demise of FCP and the introduction of FCPX have resulted in many people reconsidering their professional video editing set-up, but despite your rant, it is being used professionally. Admittedly, no where near the numbers of FCP several years ago, but its growing. I USE IT and I cut commercials, music videos, and have recently started work cutting a small feature here in Australia. I love it, my colleagues love it, and I'll continue using it for as long as I can.

 

[bpeeps]

Currently using FCP7 at work, but I'm looking to upgrade to either X or Premiere before 7 gets phased out by Apple. Suggestions?

 

[ipedro]

Anybody who thinks Apple is abandoning the pro market doesn't know Apple very well. Photography is a bigger pillar than video and audio put together. I'm excited to see what Apple has in store for the development of Photos into a professional work flow.

 

[NY Guitarist]

I'm still not seeing many job listings where FCPX experience is requisite, unless it's a typical low budget thing where the potential hire must bring their own system as part of the deal. Same goes with Premiere but a little less so.

In LA AVID is still firmly established, and probably more deeply embedded after the FCPX introduction as Apple walked away from pro editor houses and editors in favor of the mass market youtube and one-man-band types.

It's not that the bigger places didn't want to transition to FCPX it's that they couldn't because so much was missing. IIRC the day after FCPX was formally introduced AVID offered a cheap cross grade for FCP7 owners and also lowered the price on Media Composer.

Anyway I'm out of the loop on where FCPX stands now and may take another look at it.

 

[macjdfun]

I also work in the post-production industry. When I first saw FCPX, I was thoroughly impressed with its well-rethought interface and AMAZING power under-the-hood. It's ability to edit H.264 video WHILE also re-encoding into ProRes 422 on a Core 2 Duo processor blew my mind. Amazing performance. I loved that Apple was trying to rethink HOW we work on a edit with the use of tags and metadata, rather than just constantly clipping things.

But once I delved past the interface, I realized how problematic it would be to use it at our boutique production company. We have lots of shared fibre-channel RAID space where we store media (and access as read-only the vast majority of the time), but then pass around small project files as we're making selects. But the way FCPX handles this data is bad for collaborative environments like ours. Everything is stored in one folder. In that folder there's a separate file for the meta-data you've labelled on clips. A different file that actually contains your sequence. And then also all of the transcoded clips are kept there, too. Meaning if you want to pass selects and a sequence around, you're either passing around multi-gigabyte folders all the time, or carefully replacing sequence and meta-data files behind FCPX's back, constantly. In addition, because it uses iMovie's "events" structure, you are constantly staring at unrelated items in your bin unless you move those files out of the working folder. It's a lot of unnecessary file shuffling.

Couple this with the fact that it uses iMove lingo like "events" and "projects" instead of "projects" and "sequences," and one could see why my company is not using FCPX.

Which is a shame, because under-the-hood, it is absolutely amazing. I will probably use it at home for future personal projects (where I don't need to worry about shuffling project files and selects), but it is not appropriate for collaboration.

Also: The people who rejected FCPX before even trying it because it merely looked like iMovie are jerks. And there are a lot of them.

Adobe Premiere has MANY MANY MANY severe stability problems (especially when coupled with our AJA video-preview equipment). The only reason we (and most post houses are using it) is that it keeps the same project file paradigm that FCP7 used.

Side Note: On "Pro" vs. Consumer— I am also of the mind that you are a "professional" if you're getting paid to do something. Crayons are a professional tool if you use them to make something you get paid for. So pick the right tool and shut up.

Good points. Regarding the "Pro" vs. Consumer augment, I think what gets lost is that there are MANY levels of what constitutes a professional editor. If the only criteria is "getting paid to edit" then you're putting a guy working from home on a local TV commercial (maybe killing it on FCPX) vs. a post house working for major networks or studios that has numerous delivery specs, a multi-user workflow, and big money tied to deadlines. It's comparing apples to oranges for the local TV guy to be like "hey I'm a professional and it works just FINE for me!" which is the argument I heard a lot when it first came out and in the ensuing years.

If FCPX works well for you to make a living, then more power to you. But that doesn't invalidate the MANY good reasons it has made minimal inroads on the higher tiers of editing, or why so many places still cling to FCP7, which is now embarrassingly outdated.

 

[flat five]

If you search these forums or Apple Discussion board you'll find numerous complaints about the new iWork suite. They were "rewritten" to basically be iOS ports so there would be iOS-OS X compatibility.

heh, that's the best part.. i use 4-5 spreadsheets throughout a project for things like budget tracking, payroll/hours, material delivery, then a couple of glorified calculators..

doing all that in real time on a phone is way better than keeping receipts/notes/etc throughout a day and doing data entry at night..
email me the receipts and i enter costs as they occur.. and it's automatically on all (well 2) of my computers as well.

way better.

It uses a new file format that isn't fully compatible with iWork '09's so formats may get messed up and once you save a document in iWork '13 you cannot open it in iWork '09. I only use Pages so I can only comment on that but:

- No side-by-side pages
- No format bar or inspector, just a clunky sidebar
- No way to have multiple inspector windows, limited to just one "context aware" sidebar
- No.rtfd file support
- No linked text boxes
- Inability to move, add, or delete pages from thumbnail view
- Loss of several templates
- No ability to import styles
- No styles drawer, only a limited drop down menu in the clunky sidebar
- No vertical ruler

This review by The Verge titled Apple’s stripped-down iWork suite is free, but there's a cost sums it up pretty good.

yeah, idk. and i'm not meaning to defend iwork or try to convince you that you like it even though you don't

that list just seems like a mountain out of a mole hill or- certainly not 'destruction of iwork'.. put that list next to all the things you can do with pages and it starts looking a little less detrimental.

-----
edit

- Inability to move, add, or delete pages from thumbnail view

right.. i don't get that one either.. or, it's one of those things that i automatically try to do when needing to delete a page because it seems like it should work.

 

[StyxMaker]

You aren't a professional because you use FCPX! Obviously. Of course, as a non-professional, you wouldn't understand.

My, isn't the No True Scotsmen fallacy useful.

 

[Traverse]

that list just seems like a mountain out of a mole hill or- certainly not 'destruction of iwork'.. put that list next to all the things you can do with pages and it starts looking a little less detrimental.

Fair enough. iWork will work for some (most?) people and that's what Apple wants. If, however, you depend on a feature that got removed than you're out of luck.

Many, MANY people need linked text boxes. Me? I've spent a lot of time creating my own custom styles. Until I can import styles again I can't/won't use Pages '13. I'll move to Word before that. Word is bloated, but you can bet that feature you want from 10 years ago is there.

 

[Nuvi]

A very heart-felt rant, but not a lot of talk about why FCPX isn't a professional tool. Maybe that's because it actually is a professional tool. Have you checked it out lately, or has bitterness completely consumed you?

Unfortunately if your profession is not weddings and what not then FCP X is not professional tool. I would like to also state the fact that FCP (not FCP X) was already very easy and flexible to use compared to others. Around the time FCP 6 was released Adobe Premier was pathetic joke and Avid Media Compser started falling behind. Then came FCP 7 with only minor upgrades and after that nothing happend. For few years it was OK since FCP a was way better than the rest but eventually lack of HW support caught up to it. After years of waiting for 64bit support Apple came with FCP X which is iMovie Pro that no one wanted. Now few years have passed and almost every post house has ditched FCP and switched back to Avid Media Composer (which has seen total overhaul for better) or in some cases Premier. Some are even cutting with Autodesk Smoke which is kick ass if it suits the project and workflow. FCP had very bright future at some point with rumours of FCP Extreme (high end editing/finishing system) and the purchase of Shake under Apples belt. However, Apple threw that all away in favour of iMovie Pro. Nowadays it seems to be a big deal if feature film is edited with FCP X... In its prime FCP was just the logical choice for many -> http://www.cnet.com/news/final-cut-pro-the-apple-of-oscars-eye/

So now Apple makes a big deal when they have paid (?!?) some one to use FCP X on feature film. I say, bring back the real and updated FCP and there is no reason to mention about single films if it's not winning an Oscar.

 

[StyxMaker]

I'm not a film editor, but I have a question for someone who is. Is their a name for the often used cut to the audio of a new scene a couple of seconds before the video cut happens?

 

[puckhead193]

For what i'm doing. FCPX has been a god send. With my mac pro my renders went from 6 hours to a half hour. For me not having multiple timelines gets annoying. I just have a multiple Projects. Every Library is a new project. There are few quirks but then I've just grown to work around them. The pros out way the cons for me. I need speed and FCPX delivers for me. I have to turn around a 2+ worth of a full sports broadcast in under 24 hours and unlike before, I don't sweat my import/render/export times.

 

[superjew1492]

I'm not a film editor, but I have a question for someone who is. Is their a name for the often used cut to the audio of a new scene a couple of seconds before the video cut happens?

that's an L-Cut

 

[D28Z98]

I gave the new Final Cur Pro X an honest chance - over a couple of years. No matter what I did I just couldn't shake the feeling that it just ALL felt template based or something. Like I had to fit my projects into what the Final Cut Pro X wanted to do with them - instead of the software just doing what I wanted.

I finally tried Premiere Pro and honestly haven't looked back. Immediately it was the precision that I had been trying to force Final Cut Pro X to be for those few years. I don't have any intention of ever going back to Final Cut Pro X.

I'm also still one of the guys who just doesn't trust that Apple has a longevity to their pro apps. I was a hardcore Aperture user (even had a bunch of work featured about my specific use of Aperture) and Apple dumped it so I moved to Lr. I was a Final Cut user until Apple completely changed it so I moved to Premiere. This isn't a good track record for pro apps as far as my personal work is concerned.

I don't doubt that there are a ton of pros who can just adjust their work around what Apple is changing or abandoning - but I'm not one of them. I've GOT to be able to trust a longevity to things I'm investing that kind of time and money into.

 

[Luap]

I'm glad to see there is still some dedication to professional software. After the destruction of iWork and the discontinuation of Aperture I was losing hope.

Music production might not be your thing, but Apple has certainly been very attentive to Logic Pro X.
So I wouldn't accuse them of losing interest in Pro orientated software.

 

[RobertMartens]

Just turn sound off when skimming, in the app, not your system

I just can't believe anyone actually likes the scrubbing noise. I turn it off right away.

----------

The pros out way the cons for me.

I need speed and FCPX delivers for me. I have to turn around a 2+ worth of a full sports broadcast in under 24 hours and unlike before, I don't sweat my import/render/export times.

You kill me with your puns.

BTW thanks for uploading the nfl games without the CM, they are great.

 

[definitive]

What's next? A movie shot using only iPhone and edited in Final Cut Pro X?

 

[haysoos123]

I'm not a film editor, but I have a question for someone who is. Is their a name for the often used cut to the audio of a new scene a couple of seconds before the video cut happens?

That's a J-cut.

 

[jayducharme]

What?! No iPad used ???? Lol

If you read the actual article, they did indeed use an iPad (as a monitor, not a camera).

I just couldn't shake the feeling that it just ALL felt template based or something. Like I had to fit my projects into what the Final Cut Pro X wanted to do with them - instead of the software just doing what I wanted.

You're cutting it wrong.

Let's see how the film does at the box office. If it makes money and the profits are higher because of the time (and money) saved using FCPX, I wouldn't be surprised if more productions jump on board.

 

[RobertMartens]

"Many editors called the new FCPX 'iMovie Lite,' when it was released, and not ready for the big leagues, but Ficarra says he likes that FCPX is easier to use, and that it's look and feel is akin to iMovie. 'We have a whole generation of kids learning on iMovie,' he says. 'They'll be familiar with this tool when they get into the real world.'"

This whole passage is unreal. It is just pure marketing copy. It was never called 'iMovie Lite', it was called 'iMovie Pro'. iMovie Lite makes no sense at all.


Next. Kids aren't using iMovie as it is underpowered garbage. The 'iMovie' paradigm only works when it is given the full power that is FCPX. Then it works and is fast and fun. I use FCPX everyday and love it. And I have taught it to 10 year olds.

Granted, the deal breaker for the editing houses is that it is not designed for sharing. I get that. But for every house like that there are 10,000 single users. Apple gets that. All the way to the bank.

Could they have done both? Yes. But Steve liked things simple.