Apple Updates Final Cut Pro X with Multicam Support, Advanced Chroma Keying, and XML Support

[jacg]

Any chance Apple will ever add the useful iMovie feature whereby clips in the event browser are automatically marked as used in the currently open project? Not pro enough?

It does not appear to be in version 10.0.3. Any merit in submitting the feedback again?

 

[NY Guitarist]

Another data point to consider. Autodesk released Smoke for the Mac last year as did Assimilate with Scratch a year before that. I know post houses in LA that are looking hard at what Apple does with the Mac Pro line. It may be back to PC or Linux machines for them.

Both Smoke and Scratch are $15,000+ PER license. These places have multiple workstations. But I don't think Apple really cares about them, and that's the feeling all around LA.

If Apple does cares about the high end user, then they have a big PR problem.

 

[jmille44]

hurt feelings

Sorry to all who have been hurt with FCPX, could be an ego blow, board room discussion about what others think on blogs and so forth. Bottom line, I am a more professional editor than anyone here, it pays my bills and those of over 89 families.

We use FCPX for everything and if you don't start using it, guess what? I will take your clients. I show Premier running on a piece of ship PC attached to a iomega drive, then I show your client FCP on a 13" Air with thunderbolt Raid to show your client how old and outdated you are.

We all have a big laugh and they call you during our meeting and fire you.

Thanks for all the business your sending my way 😀

 

[d4rkc4sm]

Most of us have already moved on to Avid or Premiere. We can't afford the uncertainty.

nice to know. don't you have editing to do now?

 

[charlituna]

Ok, my friend just won a duPont for shooting and editing.

Yippee for him. Doesn't excuse you from acting like a jerk. You don't like FCPX, fine don't like it. Go use where you do like. Let others do the same.

 

[NY Guitarist]

Sorry to all who have been hurt with FCPX, could be an ego blow, board room discussion about what others think on blogs and so forth. Bottom line, I am a more professional editor than anyone here, it pays my bills and those of over 89 families.

We use FCPX for everything and if you don't start using it, guess what? I will take your clients. I show Premier running on a piece of ship PC attached to a iomega drive, then I show your client FCP on a 13" Air with thunderbolt Raid to show your client how old and outdated you are.

We all have a big laugh and they call you during our meeting and fire you.

Thanks for all the business your sending my way 😀

Yeah, sure. Good luck with those Birthday Party videos. Lol

Calling your bluff.

 

[charlituna]

However, I also question the logic of switching to a completely new system while in the midst of working on such deadline-heavy shows, too. I thought the suggested switchover process was continue to work existing projects in FCP7, while training and working on new projects as possible in FCPX as you learn the new system. That sounds like the most professional and un-stupid way to do anything really. But I sold my FCS3 and jumped right in anyway, and couldn't have been happier.

Here in LA, that's the route many editors took.

 

[ray.richland]

Blanke Statement

Most of us have already moved on to Avid or Premiere. We can't afford the uncertainty.

That's a broad generalization. "Most of you" stuck with FCP 7. It's only been about six months since FCPX was released—the industry doesn't change that fast.

 

[zoetmb]

For the hard core, serious editors, FCP X is probably a nightmare. But for the vast majority of people shooting video, which is on iPhones, iPads and small handheld DV cams, FCP X is what the doctor ordered. It's FAST to edit with. If you doubt where Apple and the market is heading, take a look at what was being shown at MacWorld. Shooting and editing video on iPhones and iPads. For Apple, it's all about keeping pace with consumers and prosumers. The real pros have been cast aside.

Sorry, but that's where they get their bazillion dollar quarters. Not from the pro guys hoping for good editing software, and a new Mac Pro Tower refresh.

It's all about da money.

Larry Jordan wrote a blog about this issue, check it out.

But in that case, the complaints about FCP X were correct: it wasn't a professional editing system and therefore Apple was abandoning the market. But Apple claimed it was a pro editor. And that made people angry, especially when FCP 7 had features that FCP X didn't have.

This is definitely a great product for amateurs. In fact, it's absolutely amazing that anyone can deliver such an application for $300. It's probably a bargain at $3000 or even $30,000. But that's not the point. The point is that since Apple never is willing to tell anyone what's coming, no one can plan for the future. And because Apple abandons functions or markets at will, pros cannot rely upon Apple to serve them going forward.

So while I think the latest update does make this product far more usable for pros and I also think that in the end, Apple will do the right thing, they do not operate in way that properly serves professional markets. So Apple needs to decide if they want to stay in professional markets or not.

As for a new tower, etc., the reputation of a line of products is largely dependent upon the top of the line. By definition, the top of the line sells far fewer units than the mass market items. As just one example, Nikon and Canon have $8000 camera bodies at the top of the line. They don't sell that many--most of the profits come from the middle of the line and most of the sales units come from the bottom of the line. That's the nature of the business. If you abandon the early adopters and power users at the top, you'll lose the customers in the middle and the bottom. Apple needs to understand that. They did in the past, but their great success selling phones, pods and pads have warped their sensibilities. Apple needs to decide whether they simply want to sell the most or whether they still want to sell the best. If they only want to sell mass units, not only will they abandon towers, they'll abandon the entire Mac line because that's not where the units are.

 

[NY Guitarist]

Apple needs to decide whether they simply want to sell the most or whether they still want to sell the best.

^ What he said.

 

[QuiteSure]

Just an observation

I'm a total amateur film dude so certainly everything I have to say should be taken with an enormous grain of salt. Nevertheless, I've been playing around with Final Cut since 2003 and was astounded when Apple released FCP X and the following firestorm of controversy. Just poking along I finally downloaded just 2 weeks ago the free trial and I've been working through the Apple Pro training series book. From my very amateurish assessment it sure looks like this version has everything I remember using in the legacy versions, but in many different places and perhaps with somewhat less precision.

Nevertheless, after all the criticism from the professional postproduction users that I read on this forum and elsewhere I was very surprised to discover an enormous amount of high caliber reference materials for FCP X available from Ken Stone, Ripple training, etc. This was confusing to me: why would these professional resources waste their time offering tutorials on an application that supposedly has no professional use?

I believe ultimately the naysayers will be wrong and proven conclusively so. I believe that within 12-18 months the ecosystem of FCP X, compressor, motion, and third-party plug-ins will be a dominant factor in postproduction. I believe that Apple will release another pro tower.

I remember reading somewhere some time ago that notwithstanding Apple's billions the company is still run like a startup. Engineers are moved from project to project based upon what is hot at the moment. I don't know if this is true or if it is changing. But it makes sense to me that for Apple's long-term corporate strategy white-hot projects like iPhone, iPad, iCloud, and Lion should draw the most attention. Nevertheless, side projects like Final Cut, iLife, airport, and Apple TV will continue to be developed. But let's be patient, after all: Apple is just one company producing many wonderful products.

 

[paulvee]

All these arguments have been stated earlier - when they introduced FCP X and trashed FCP 7.

Nothing has changed. FCP X is a toy compared to the older version, on which I edited 4 feature films and many other small projects.

Argue the merits of one against the other all day for all I care. Apple - and I am the BIGGEST Apple fanboy of all time, but NOT in this instance - they are trying to force people to learn a whole new paradigm and piece of software, a new way of looking at editing. That's fine, if you like, I'm not opposed to change, nor am I inflexible. I do NOT, though want to learn because someone is forcing me to learn. If I choose to learn something from scratch, fine, but I'd rather go with a truly FULL-FEATURED editing app, one that can ingest my previous projects and not just some iMovie projects, one that retains the familiar paradigms of NLE that Apple promoted and nurtured.

All that is bad. The way Apple conducted the changeover is bad. The actually software sucks and, yes, every last true film editor who has done this for years and does it for a living feels the same way. All the amateur idiots defend it to the end.

Good on you. You can now afford a piece of garbage software.

Seeing as how Apple has rendered my years of becoming expert on their software moot, I no longer feel any loyalty to them when it comes to this.

If they end-of-life the Mac Pro, on which I depend for my video and photo livelihood - and I have more than one of them - then I'll really re-assess where I stand.

In the meantime, their customer relations policy has been......garbage.

I'm finishing what I'm working on with FCP 7 and still evaluating. Leaning towards Premiere, but I'm not thrilled with Adobe's model these days, either. That being said, at least it's a real editing application.

 

[MovieCutter]

nice to know. don't you have editing to do now?

Nah, I was rendering, but I'm done with my list of edits for the day, thanks for your concern.

Yippee for him. Doesn't excuse you from acting like a jerk. You don't like FCPX, fine don't like it. Go use where you do like. Let others do the same.

Dude said he'd hear my opinion once I won a Pulitzer. I didn't need to win a prestigious award, my friend did and shares the same opinion...so by proxy, mission accomplished. Go forth, use FCPX, I'm sure it's great for 90% of people who want to work with video. But it's naive to assume it will work for the remaining 10% who need the same features of FCP 7.

That's a broad generalization. "Most of you" stuck with FCP 7. It's only been about six months since FCPX was released—the industry doesn't change that fast.

Read the rest of the thread where post after post, people who work at the upper end of the industry have stated that their companies have started to transition to Avid and Adobe and don't forget the part where I mention that we ARE still using FCP 7, but have planned to move on to the competition.

 

[jaduffy108]

The problem here is the arrogance that you show to all non-high-end editors. Why such a amount of elitism?

I don't sense arrogance or elitism. He's simply stating the needs of high budget productions. Needs which most on this forum are clearly unaware of.

I think the update is encouraging nonetheless.

 

[JCEDIT]

There are in fact large companies here in LA that are ditching FCP. An example of the would be Bunim/Murray

Link to article
http://www.postmagazine.com/Press-Center/Daily-News/2012/Bunim-Murray-makes-switch-to-Avid-NLEs.aspx

I have yet to hear anything positive from the companies I work and my other editor colleagues. Not to say the FCPX is bad but it just DOES NOT fit in our shows and companies. Mind you the shows were doing are the American Idol, X-Factor, Victorias Secret Fashion Show, VMA's, Deadliest Catch, Jersey Shore etc etc. and this doesn't that the people cutting commercials, promos, documentaries are any less professional, it's just we all have different needs. And in the end the software doesn't make the end product any better, the software is just a means to an end and we all want what gets us to the final product in the most efficient and stable way.

Let's just all get along.

 

[handsome pete]

Nevertheless, after all the criticism from the professional postproduction users that I read on this forum and elsewhere I was very surprised to discover an enormous amount of high caliber reference materials for FCP X available from Ken Stone, Ripple training, etc. This was confusing to me: why would these professional resources waste their time offering tutorials on an application that supposedly has no professional use?

No one has ever said it has no professional use. The problem lies with the term "professional." Anyone can make a living these days in video production. All you need is the skill (and sadly sometimes not even that). Where in the past the line between professional/prosumer/hobbyist was clearer, it's much more hard to differentiate between the groups now. "Pros" are working on anything from multi-million dollar budgets to local cable broadcast to event videography and so on. No matter the scale, it's all of our livelihoods.

Tools like FCPX have enabled more people to get into the business and creating things. A lot of these people have no concept how the higher end post production facilities work. So they simply see someone else producing high quality work with FCPX and say, "see, it can be done" without consideration for how so many other editors and shops operate differently.

I have no problem with anyone calling themselves a pro, but a little understanding of how the rest of the "pros" work could go a long way.

Also, I would surmise that ripple training, Ken Stone, etc. are providing training for FCPX simply because there's a market for it, especially now that it's in more people's budgets. I don't see how that has anything to do with being "professional."

I believe ultimately the naysayers will be wrong and proven conclusively so. I believe that within 12-18 months the ecosystem of FCP X, compressor, motion, and third-party plug-ins will be a dominant factor in postproduction. I believe that Apple will release another pro tower.

I disagree on your estimate for FCPX, but I at least hope you're right with regards to another MacPro. I have too much invested in Mac software to go back to Windows.

 

[NY Guitarist]

That's a broad generalization. "Most of you" stuck with FCP 7. It's only been about six months since FCPX was released—the industry doesn't change that fast.

I don't know about this, AVID offered a FCP crossgrade to Media Composer fueled by the FCPX fiasco and from what I gather from an informal survey of people I come in contact with many took advantage of it. I think Adobe also offered an NAB crossgrade from FCP to PPro.

I do know that many editors had a renewed interest in PPro, especially that they would be able to migrate FCP7 projects. This is one aspect that I wonder if people don't realize. It is very common to revisit old projects to either modify/update them, or grab part of it for use in another project.

And don't get me started on collaborative workflow.

 

[schmidm77]

What I don't understand is why Apple didn't make it more clear they were going to add these features back. I understand their need for secrecy, but sometimes they seriously overdo it.

From what I gather, this supposed "need for secrecy" is Apple's major failing in the professional space. Not that I have any personal experience using this software, but it seems to me that this nonsensical attitude of Apple's that professional users are more than willing to play the guessing game about what will or will not be supported down the road is exactly why people are jumping ship.

This secrecy game that Apple plays of springing things on consumers with no notice does not work for grown-ups who depend on the predictability and assurance of long-term roadmaps.

 

[milo]

From what I gather, this supposed "need for secrecy" is Apple's major failing in the professional space. Not that I have any personal experience using this software, but it seems to me that this nonsensical attitude of Apple's that professional users are more than willing to play the guessing game about what will or will not be supported down the road is exactly why people are jumping ship.

This secrecy game that Apple plays of springing things on consumers with no notice does not work for grown-ups who depend on the predictability and assurance of long-term roadmaps.

Bingo. This exact thing is hurting Apple with Logic users as well, the assumption is that Logic 10 isn't coming any time soon (and I actually have faith they won't strip out features like they did with FCX). I've been on Logic for years but it's finally reached the point where I'm starting to look at alternative apps.

 

[NY Guitarist]

Bingo. This exact thing is hurting Apple with Logic users as well, the assumption is that Logic 10 isn't coming any time soon (and I actually have faith they won't strip out features like they did with FCX). I've been on Logic for years but it's finally reached the point where I'm starting to look at alternative apps.

I use Logic too. I also have been using Digital Performer for a long time.

I wonder if the same thing should happen with LogicX as with FCPX then people will look again at DP8. DP has some features that make it a favorite among TV/Film composers, and with DP8 going 64 bit, negates that VI memory limitation that made Logic a better choice for some.

AVID lost me with Pro Tools a long time ago, and (at the time) had no MIDI features to speak of.

 

[linuxcooldude]

I don't know moviecutter,

You say your a solitary freelance editor, but it seems your speaking for the entire industry. You use words like "We, we're, us, My firm" when describing people who don't like FCP X. But for the time being, your just working by yourself. I get you have friends in the industry, thats fine, I'm sure a lot of people do.

And 300 million does seem a bit far fetched. You then say you doubt that many viewers watch. Potential viewers and actual viewers are much different things.

I think it was a bit of a knee jerk reaction. People don't like change or like to wait.

It will not matter much if people already transitioned to other editors. With each new generation, new editors are born and FCP X is going to look very attractive and its getting lightyears ahead of the competition.

Given in a few years time it will probably back where it was before and even far ahead.

 

[rfrmac]

Why?

Well, the update has started the same emails again. Apple promised to get these features in and they did. The people who complained about not having these features now say they have left for another NLE. No comments at all as to how these features are working in FCP X. No comments on whether Apple got it right. Nothing. Just the same old stuff. If you have all left, why are you here? Why not sprend your time on the Avid or Adobe sites? Apple did this for you and they get no credit. For me, I can think of at least 25 items that I need more than what is in this update. This update was for you "Pros". It is not for the Prosumer Types like myself. I really like FCP X and how it works with Motion. I know that makes me some sort of low life. Since all the "Pros" have left, I hope that Apple spends its' time on things that help people like me do better and faster work. And I hope that when the next update comes out we can spend our time discussing the update and not discuss the same old thing. We might have a chance since all of the "Pros" will have left.

Tired

 

[QuiteSure]

No one has ever said it has no professional use. .

Thank you for your reply to my rambling post, but I am now even more confused. I have heard FCPX referred to as "garbage" within earshot of my post. Truly, the violent polemic against FCPX would render it unusable by professionals, no?

Maybe it's the violence that is so confusing...

 

[pancakedrawer]

I don't get the outrage over the lack of these features in the initial release.
Everyone seems to be claiming they have already moved to other software because of a lack of certain features that Apple promised when it was released.

Does that mean if they just waited until these features were ready they wouldn't have jumped ship? Just because new software is out doesn't mean you have to use it. You can just take a look and get used to it, then migrate when it suits your needs better.

 

[prowlmedia]

Most of us have already moved on to Avid or Premiere. We can't afford the uncertainty.

No we haven't...