I don't know about FCPX but Premiere is great. We used it to make this film: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wjqPPIqzTec&feature=mfu_in_order&list=UL
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Updates Final Cut Pro X with Multicam Support, Advanced Chroma Keying, and XML Support
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
roadmap
I wonder for how long this discussion about Apple's road map will last. I find it interesting to see how much faith some of us have in Apple's competitors. Do you really expect competitors to be faithful to their costumers when they realize Apple is taking a much larger share in the future?
This is a tour without a final destination. Sure, maybe some of you stick to a more comfortable road for some time, but there is no guarantee it will be for the future. Focus on what's missing and you come to realize FCP X is not for you, or your business. However focus on the new approach and you know you have a peak in the future. Apple's competitors will have the same struggling in the future, when they realize they have to overhaul their software, because their approach is outdated.
For now you can switch to anything you like / need. Just don't feel too comfortable about future roadmaps of other parties. There will be new features in FCP X which will not compare to others, because simply they will not be available on other platforms and the need for some features in FCP X will vanish, simply because they become outdated. Eventually Apple will succeed in their business plan for FCP X, which essentially is focused on more potential users, which equals extra money for development.
In the end it's not about the map they offer, but all about how you read it. Some of us have a certain destination and some of us are a bit more adventurous.
I wonder for how long this discussion about Apple's road map will last. I find it interesting to see how much faith some of us have in Apple's competitors. Do you really expect competitors to be faithful to their costumers when they realize Apple is taking a much larger share in the future?
This is a tour without a final destination. Sure, maybe some of you stick to a more comfortable road for some time, but there is no guarantee it will be for the future. Focus on what's missing and you come to realize FCP X is not for you, or your business. However focus on the new approach and you know you have a peak in the future. Apple's competitors will have the same struggling in the future, when they realize they have to overhaul their software, because their approach is outdated.
For now you can switch to anything you like / need. Just don't feel too comfortable about future roadmaps of other parties. There will be new features in FCP X which will not compare to others, because simply they will not be available on other platforms and the need for some features in FCP X will vanish, simply because they become outdated. Eventually Apple will succeed in their business plan for FCP X, which essentially is focused on more potential users, which equals extra money for development.
In the end it's not about the map they offer, but all about how you read it. Some of us have a certain destination and some of us are a bit more adventurous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kxs
Cloud computing will enable us to edit 4K on anything...
Not really. Check out OnLive if you doubt the power of cloud computing. Once the app is running in the cloud your client requirements go way way down.
I'm not saying this is for everyone but for a shop already set up with a San and ingest clients why can't the edit station hardware sit in a rack and editors interact with their machine through the shops own cloud ? OnLive proves the user experience works for high-intensity gaming, I doubt editing video is going to be worse.
Now streaming full 4k previews might be a stretch for many right now but that's just a question of bandwidth..
Originally Posted by kxs
Cloud computing will enable us to edit 4K on anything...
Not really. Check out OnLive if you doubt the power of cloud computing. Once the app is running in the cloud your client requirements go way way down.
I'm not saying this is for everyone but for a shop already set up with a San and ingest clients why can't the edit station hardware sit in a rack and editors interact with their machine through the shops own cloud ? OnLive proves the user experience works for high-intensity gaming, I doubt editing video is going to be worse.
Now streaming full 4k previews might be a stretch for many right now but that's just a question of bandwidth..
Dude you just said you haven't used the app. You've never seen the .0 release of the app. You haven't seen the .3 release of the app. You haven't seen anything at all but think you know everything. This is the very definition of, you do not know what you're talking about.
There is a demo. What's your excuse?
Good morning
Woke up to this bit of good news.
http://fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/719-fcpx-1003-a-roundup-of-all-the-third-party-product-news
Woke up to this bit of good news.
http://fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/719-fcpx-1003-a-roundup-of-all-the-third-party-product-news
Yeah *nobody* ditching FCP... right...
Noboy is leaving prosumer FCPX, right? Everyone is staying put with Apple since they are SO devoted to their professional video post-production clients?
Just guys like these:
http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/real-world-editing
Noboy is leaving prosumer FCPX, right? Everyone is staying put with Apple since they are SO devoted to their professional video post-production clients?
Just guys like these:
http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/real-world-editing
Another thing people haven't mentioned is support. As a FCP house, we bought the Final Cut Server cool-aid. We had Apple's sales people and engineers draw us up the plans, work with us on installation and provide support. It's an amazing product. Not as good as Avid's networking system but had all the potential. And then poof. We called for support and found out FCPS was no longer an active product and the people involved in supporting our product and all FCPS projects were let go or assigned to other projects at Apple. Final Cut Server was immediately killed off. No warning, no notice. The product functions but when there's an issue Apple is no help. If and when people are looking to upgrade, FCPX doesn't work with FCPS and won't ever. People can argue the workflows of FCP7 and FCPX aren't the same--toss in that FCPX won't work with FCPS and workflow doesn't matter at all.
How much faith can you have in company that drops support to a customer that spends nearly $100,000 after telling us they wanted to be the leader in high end broadcasting and finishing. Time to move on and work with a company that provides the kind of support needed.
How much faith can you have in company that drops support to a customer that spends nearly $100,000 after telling us they wanted to be the leader in high end broadcasting and finishing. Time to move on and work with a company that provides the kind of support needed.
http://www.studiodaily.com/blog/?p=8433
Nothing against FCPx, but in my experience I haven't seen a single post/production house use it to cut video. I have been seeing a lot more Premiere...
Nothing against FCPx, but in my experience I haven't seen a single post/production house use it to cut video. I have been seeing a lot more Premiere...
<channels Augustus McCrae>
You're right. They shouldn't have done those things.
But they did. They did.
And at this point in time, it's evidently obvious to broadcasting pros that this software is not for them, correct? So why hang around in Apple's front yard with a boombox over your head rather than just move on to something that works for you. That's what I'm protesting. The bitter lingering.
What bothers me the most is the fact that many of you scathing lambasters will probably be back to using FCP X in a year.
The crotchety old blowhards weren't at NAB, they were right here on this thread. Seriously guys, just grab some rulers if you want to know who's is biggest.
No one cares who you edited for, for how long, or who you know. Unless you're in dire straits, FCP7 would work for most of what you needed in the immediate future. So there was plenty of time to see what would happen with FCPX. And it seems that they addressed a lot of the concerns that you guys had to begin with—especially XML.
Those who switched to Avid or Premiere for that were either at the point of having to upgrade machines or were just looking for an excuse to switch anyway. Perhaps those moving to Premiere just wanted to work in a similar product or they wanted better integration with After Effects. Apple didn't give a clear timeframe so that was understandable.
At this point, they're coming through with some of what they promised, and since things like XML aren't used by your average prosumer, I'd say that it's going to get back to where it was relatively soon.
tl;dr
Work with whatever you want. No one cares what system you're running if you're a good editor. I'd be hard pressed to think that any of you work at all anyway, if you have so much time to devote to bickering. As for me, I'm going to get back to it.
No one cares who you edited for, for how long, or who you know. Unless you're in dire straits, FCP7 would work for most of what you needed in the immediate future. So there was plenty of time to see what would happen with FCPX. And it seems that they addressed a lot of the concerns that you guys had to begin with—especially XML.
Those who switched to Avid or Premiere for that were either at the point of having to upgrade machines or were just looking for an excuse to switch anyway. Perhaps those moving to Premiere just wanted to work in a similar product or they wanted better integration with After Effects. Apple didn't give a clear timeframe so that was understandable.
At this point, they're coming through with some of what they promised, and since things like XML aren't used by your average prosumer, I'd say that it's going to get back to where it was relatively soon.
tl;dr
Work with whatever you want. No one cares what system you're running if you're a good editor. I'd be hard pressed to think that any of you work at all anyway, if you have so much time to devote to bickering. As for me, I'm going to get back to it.
I don't think any moaners jumped ship....
Well said, I Have been using this since day one, how did we get around the lack of Multicam? we used 7 for that, no need to jump ship.
Well said, I Have been using this since day one, how did we get around the lack of Multicam? we used 7 for that, no need to jump ship.
Well, its obvious you don't own a Final Cut business and you haven't been investing in that business for the past decade. Many of us have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in Xserve, Xserve RAID, Final Cut Server, 3rd party hardware - all the while getting commitments from Apple reps that they are "here to stay"- only to see Apple kill them.
Then to have Apple say "You know what, we know everyone loves Final Cut, and you've stuck with us, but actually Final Cut sucks - and here's what our programmers think editing should be like." Well, it was a Final FU, is what it was. So F yeah, I'm bitter.
I like FCPX, I used it to edit my mom's 80th birthday party video. It was fun and different to work with.
But on the feature that I'm currently editing - myself, my assistant, and with the facilities I'm working with; 2 Visual FX houses, the color grading facility, and the audio post house I have to send omf files to - well, it was decided to stick with FCP7.
I'll download to new FCPX update and use it to edit my son's birthday video and report back. Interesting discussion.
But on the feature that I'm currently editing - myself, my assistant, and with the facilities I'm working with; 2 Visual FX houses, the color grading facility, and the audio post house I have to send omf files to - well, it was decided to stick with FCP7.
I'll download to new FCPX update and use it to edit my son's birthday video and report back. Interesting discussion.
Im curious as too how much most have invested in FCP? Back in the day it was simply a CPU. DV deck/camera and software (v2 for me) when I had to put together a system for a freelance project.
After that, it was a few upgrades up to the first FCS offering.
That totals to say 6k from my experience.
I think we spent that much on Avid support from 2005 to 2006.
They dropped the price to 2k a year since.
Also with most migrating to Avid/Premiere, isn't the tech transferable to the new software?
So how much did most of you lose?
And please dont tell me you lost clients due to the change from legacy to FCPX.
We all know never to upgrade during busy seasons, never mind a complete rewrite
And I think you have a right to be. But it's been 8 months. At some point you need to move on and stop saturating every FCP X thread with this drivel.
We didn't buy it on release. 10.0.1, assuming the major bugs were ironed out.
These are known issues it seems.
Anyone know if the issue where the project fails to save, or reverts back to previous versions has been fixed?
At the start I didn't experience this problem, then a month later it happened to me ONCE
With .02 and .03, so far so good.
Yes I cringe at times but no different from any other app e.g. Avid MC 5.5.x would not remember my most recent AMA conversions
Try to work with a dozen XDCAM discs just to find AMA decides they didnt exist
That last sentence is the key one. Different needs. Reality TV shows are about making the product for the cheapest possible price so that you make the most profit off the ratings. Anything and every thing that can bring down costs and still produce the product is a win.
I would hazard that most of these shows and the companies that make them were thinking of leaving FCP (if they ever used it) way before X came out simply because Avid and Premiere aren't restricted to just Apple Hardware. Apple Hardware is way more expensive than PC so having the choice of which you use without having to change your software is a plus.
Im curious as too how much most have invested in FCP? Back in the day it was simply a CPU. DV deck/camera and software (v2 for me) when I had to put together a system for a freelance project.
After that, it was a few upgrades up to the first FCS offering.
That totals to say 6k from my experience.
I think we spent that much on Avid support from 2005 to 2006.
They dropped the price to 2k a year since.
Also with most migrating to Avid/Premiere, isn't the tech transferable to the new software?
So how much did most of you lose?
And please dont tell me you lost clients due to the change from legacy to FCPX.
We all know never to upgrade during busy seasons, never mind a complete rewrite
Well, that's not really a post facility. We were working on shows shot in HDCAM, which is a little beefier than DV. We did offline and online in-house. Each one of our 4 Xserve RAIDs cost $13,000, we probably bought 20 Mac Pros over the decade, 10 going at a time, each around $8000 each tricked out with extra RAM, dual fibre channel cards, and Kona cards. Maybe $3000 each to upgrade each machine from the original Final Cut through FCPS3. It adds up, and we weren't even a large facility. When Apple stopped supporting these products, it became very expensive to maintain them, scavenging off E-bay when we could.
Lose clients from upgrading to FCPX? We couldn't HAVE any clients if we upgraded to FCPX. Everything was shot on tape, delivered on tape. We mastered to HDCAM or HDCAM SR for show masters. The networks tell YOU how they want shows delivered. You don't say "How about a Quicktime instead?"
I can tell from your questions that FCPX is perfect for you, best of luck.
That's not totally true. Final Cut Express lacked a major amount of the plug in support that FCP7 had and FCPX has. Because of this Express could never been 'upgraded' to a pro level.
Whereas with FCPX I was able to find add on software for a great deal of what was missing from the initial release within a couple of weeks. A handful of the plugins I used in 7 were available the day after FCPX hit the market AND the companies were offering them at half price as a previous customer of the 7 versions.
Yes that third party software could make the price rather expensive if I had bought all of it but the fact was that I didn't really need half the 'missing' features so I didn't bother replacing them. I'll likely never use them even now that they have been added back in, well for anything more than playing around to see how well they work.
I have Express 4, had Studio 3, and have FCPX. I've used all this software you're talking about. You look like the biggest moron ever for saying a) you've never used FCPX, b) but you know all about it anyway, c) it's really just another Express, and d) having the nerve to call anyone else 'stupid.' You're nothing more than a garden-variety Internet troll. And everybody knows it. You probably can't even play guitar either.
You must be addressing someone else while quoting my post; I haven't been engaging in any pissing contests. My point is that Apple seems to care about those things because their marketing of FCP prominently features well known (i.e. Hollywood) users. The same .01% that a lot of you folks complain about. I think no matter what segment of post you work in, you are interested in the tools you use to your job.
Sure they were disappointed. The rumor was that Apple was just taking 7 and recoding it 64 bit and done. They were already mad that it was taking so long because they had little concept of what even that would mean. Understandable, they are editors not software engineers. But then to find out that Apple had totally rewritten the software and they had to relearn it, well that just wasn't cool. If they were going to have to relearn software they might as well switch to something they could run on their Macs or on cheaper Windows/Linux hardware and increase their profit margin. Heck some of them might have already been using Avid and/or Premiere alongside FCP because sometimes to get a client you have to agree to use their choice in tools. So the dropping of FCP was easy as pie for them.