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

[MovieCutter]

I work in an insanely high paced broadcast environment. We made the leap to FCPX the week it came out and have been flying high ever since.

I seriously doubt the veracity of people here who claim to be "pro" editors. We adapted our workflow to FCPX and made huge bounds in efficiency and productivity in the fist month alone. Now with multi-cam, I'm almost afraid at how cool things are going to get.

Good for you. I'm glad it works for some people. But for my clients who have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in equipment that works with FCP7 and not with FCPX, it's not as simple. When a production coordinator comes to me and says "So I'm hearing a lot of bad press on the new Final Cut, what's the deal, can't we just upgrade? Isn't it that simple? Oh and I have next year's budget, we need to spend $200k on upgrades, what should we get?" I have to be honest with them and say that FCPX isn't ready for prime time for their particular needs, and it's unclear the direction it's heading. If it works for you, great.

 

[danimal99]

It took them 7 months to deliver multi-cam, a feature I cut hundreds of shows with over the years. Couldn't do it with FCP X, so I had to stay with FCP 7 and find another program that had a future that would serve my purposes.

As you said, it took them [only] 7 months to deliver multi-cam.. I inserted the only. My other, actually main, profession is a software engineer (went back to school to get the broadcast degree on the side), and I can lean on my own expertise and say that this is no basic task. And to complete it in only 7 months and make it fit this entirely new way of working video is just insane.

I could have used this feature last month when editing two different 3-camera shoot projects, but oh well. I made do with just synchronized clips, cutting breaks, then turning off the unused angles. It was certainly doable, not much extra work, and the results look exactly like the last time I did a 3-camera interview in FCP7. I'm surprised you couldn't figure out a way yourself, with all your decades of experience in international film and broadcast.

 

[MovieCutter]

Watching this back and forth, I have to say I have to question YOUR vision of the future when you jump platforms so quickly when Apple made it clear that if you were patient for a few months your concerns would be addressed. Instead, it seems like you looked at something, gave it almost no legitimate critical thought, and then ran off, thereby blindly wasting all the investment you had made in prior versions. Follow that up by asserting, starkly, that you think that you are somehow better and farther along in your industry, and you really come across as pretty rude. Get over yourself, seriously. Your little sphere constitutes about 0.000000001% of the professionals out there, and until I hear your name attached to the Pulitzer, you are not above anyone else.

Ok, my friend just won a duPont for shooting and editing. He cut the show in Final Cut Pro 7, and is in the process of moving to Premiere. And my sphere isn't that little. You'll see by other posts in this thread that I'm not alone in my thinking or my experience with other editors. I'm sorry if you're overly sensitive to that fact. Also, if you'd read my posts, you'll notice that we have not yet jumped ship, but have already initiated a process to move to Premiere or MC. Nobody is that stupid to change horses overnight like that. It's a months long process.

 

[LaDirection]

Yeah, I don't think so. "Most of us." Most of yourself, perhaps.

No, most of "US" as in people who's regular income is and has been video post production for years. Apple fanboy denial cannot alter the truth.

Apple did something deemed impossible, they took the market from AVID's hands and imposed a new format standard, PRORES. Then, with NO REASON, they sabotaged it willingly and replaced their flagship product with iMovie, simply updated with new formats and features. Absolutely mind-boggling.

Even with multicam this toy is useless for professional application. High end facilities such as TV stations have already gone back to AVID MC, low-end editors and freelancers will go back to Premiere.

This is EXACTLY as it was when Apple shook the world with Firewire and FCP. My prediction is this: AVID and Autodesk will gradually upgrade their offerings to higher professional standards and raise the price accordingly. ADOBE will go back to stopping all creative upgrades of Premiere and keep the cost low, so that in 10 years from now MC or Smoke will cost around 10 to 15k, and Premiere will be about the same price with just about the same features as today.

 

[AcesHigh87]

Looks like it’s getting closer to something I’ll pay for. 300 bucks might be nothing for the pros but for people with 0 dollar budgets trying to get into the industry it’s too steep. Hopefully once the summer rolls around and I have some extra cash they’ll get out a few more updates and it’ll really be worth getting. For now I stick with the student discounted FCP 7.

 

[MovieCutter]

I could have used this feature last month when editing two different 3-camera shoot projects, but oh well. I made do with just synchronized clips, cutting breaks, then turning off the unused angles. It was certainly doable, not much extra work, and the results look exactly like the last time I did a 3-camera interview in FCP7. I'm surprised you couldn't figure out a way yourself, with all your decades of experience in international film and broadcast.

Try shooting an hour long show on Thursday night with 3 cameras and have it ready for broadcast QC friday afternoon and air friday night to 300 million households. Once you're in that situation, you can lecture me on not being able to "figure out a way" myself. I don't put deadline-heavy shows in the hands of tools that have been downgraded to cut the features I use for that very instance. That's unprofessional and stupid.

 

[brock2621]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I own my own ad firm and edit independent movies on the side (low budget $1-3million) and have neither moved to Avid or FCP-X. I still use 7. I just picked up X a month ago and am going to mess with it a little on some commercials to see how it does. Also, my 2 best friends just piked up FCP-X and use it daily for their work as well.

I really don't want to move to Avid and premiere wasn't stable last time I had a project run in it. Im hoping the FCP plugin Eco-system gets a boost over the next year cuz I plan on a new Mac pro editing off thunderbolt late this year.

I'll do what the job requires in the end but I'm rooting for FCP-X as its ingrained into my blood and mind.

 

[Lone Deranger]

It's simply business and investment. It's nothing personal.

You seem to take it mighty personal yourself whenever anybody here argues another opinion. You got what you want (your Adobe suite) and then some (this new FCPX update) maybe time to lighten up a little?

 

[RhymeAnimal]

Try shooting an hour long show on Thursday night with 3 cameras and have it ready for broadcast QC friday afternoon and air friday night to 300 million households....

You're part of the old guard man. Bloated post facilities with too many employees & too much overhead, charging clients way too much. The future is all about solitary editors working with programs like FCPX, pumping out super pro quality material.

Time to move on.

 

[MovieCutter]

You seem to take it mighty personal yourself whenever anybody here argues another opinion. You got what you want (your Adobe suite) and then some (this new FCPX update) maybe time to lighten up a little?

Nah, this is too much fun.

----------

You're part of the old guard man. Bloated post facilities with too many employees & too much overhead, charging clients way too much. The future is all about solitary editors working with programs like FCPX, pumping out super pro quality material.

Time to move on.

I'm a freelancer. I AM a solitary editor. And I'm anything but old. But I have to work within the realm of my clients. And until THEY decide that FCPX is the way to go, I have to stick with FCP7, MC, and Premiere.

 

[handsome pete]

Apple made it clear that if you were patient for a few months your concerns would be addressed.

Yet here we are 7 months later, still missing many "features" and no solid outlook on if/when they will be addressed.

ran off, thereby blindly wasting all the investment you had made in prior versions.

I know this was directed towards someone else, but I don't even know what that means. Apple made everyone's investment in previous FCP versions completely moot with FCPX. So your comment doesn't even make sense.


Look, I have nothing against FCPX. It's a perfectly fine product for a lot of people. I simply don't know anyone professionally who has moved to the FCPX workflow. They've either stayed with FCP or shifted to Avid or Adobe. But even with this latest update, it still doesn't seam yet that FCPX is their future.

 

[kayloh20]

Thank God! Now maybe the video editors I work with will stop crying about how Apple screwed over the video industry.

Unless Apple activated a kill switch and stopped Final Cut 7, they didn't screw over the industry. If editors were basing their next project on the release of Final Cut Pro X, then they screwed themselves over (this is different than planning future update cycles and choosing to update to Avid instead of Final Cut).

I work in post and *no one* has moved to MC or Premier. No business person would make such a knee-jerk reaction such as that! FCP 7 didn't somehow stop working when FCPX came out... smh.

Indeed. I don't think any professional editor switched to Avid or Premiere as soon as they saw Final Cut Pro X wasn't a real upgrade. I think it's more they planned on updating regardless (after all, Final Cut Pro 7 wasn't full Cocoa and wasn't 64-bit) and held off to see what Apple was going to bring. Once they were disappointed, they decided to go with the alternative.

 

[danimal99]

Try shooting an hour long show on Thursday night with 3 cameras and have it ready for broadcast QC friday afternoon and air friday night to 300 million households. Once you're in that situation, you can lecture me on not being able to "figure out a way" myself. I don't put deadline-heavy shows in the hands of tools that have been downgraded to cut the features I use for that very instance. That's unprofessional and stupid.

I already said your weiner-sling was bigger. What more do you want?

 

[MovieCutter]

I already said your weiner-sling was bigger. What more do you want?

That's good enough

 

[coleridge78]

Try shooting an hour long show on Thursday night with 3 cameras and have it ready for broadcast QC friday afternoon and air friday night to 300 million households. Once you're in that situation, you can lecture me on not being able to "figure out a way" myself. I don't put deadline-heavy shows in the hands of tools that have been downgraded to cut the features I use for that very instance. That's unprofessional and stupid.

300 million households? Global simulcast?

 

[RhymeAnimal]

You seem to take it mighty personal yourself whenever anybody here argues another opinion. You got what you want (your Adobe suite) and then some (this new FCPX update) maybe time to lighten up a little?

An example? OK- here's a clip we pumped out last summer in about 4 days. 3 camera shoot, multi format, & a client breathing down our neck. Graphics created in motion, seamlessly integrated into FCPX sequence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlcVuluInsk&feature=related

BAM.

 

[MovieCutter]

300 million households? Global simulcast?

International news network. Last count 250 mil last year, likely 300 mil now.

----------

An example? OK- here's a clip we pumped out last summer in about 4 days. 3 camera shoot, multi format, & a client breathing down our neck. Graphics created in motion, seamlessly integrated into FCPX sequence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlcVuluInsk&feature=related

BAM.

That took you 4 days? Where do the 3 cameras come in? Clock wipes? iStockPhoto? Not sure if serious...

 

[3282868]

You seem to take it mighty personal yourself whenever anybody here argues another opinion. You got what you want (your Adobe suite) and then some (this new FCPX update) maybe time to lighten up a little?

Actually, I disagree. He has been rather civil, it's others whose comments have been of a personal nature (one person in particular seems to be taking this very immaturely).

Yeah, I don't think so. "Most of us." Most of yourself, perhaps.

I worked in broadcast and produced, directed, and edited live TV. My degree is in broadcast communication. And I still call BS on your "most of us" baloney statement.

Your little sphere constitutes about 0.000000001% of the professionals out there, and until I hear your name attached to the Pulitzer, you are not above anyone else.

Congratulations! I hope Avid also comes with a complimentary weiner-sling which you'll need to carry around all your international broadcast and film credentials, whilst you look down at all the smaller station professionals with the rest of your "most of us" pals.

 

[bagelche]

you must be working in community cable access.

Oh hey, that's me!

We currently use FCP7, Premiere CS5, and FCPX. This update makes it a whole lot easier to stop using 7 and streamline our training. I'll still keep 7 around for legacy projects, but my users take to X much quicker and produce more polished pieces with it.

I understand why X may not fit in many post house environments, but for us it's working quite well. I note that there is a lot of debate within the Access community and most stations have not transitioned to FCPX, though some have. A lot of stations are in the process of deciding whether to consider it or jump to Premiere in the nearish future. I'm curious to see how this will affect that decision.

 

[MovieCutter]

Oh hey, that's me!

We currently use FCP7, Premiere CS5, and FCPX. This update makes it a whole lot easier to stop using 7 and streamline our training. I'll still keep 7 around for legacy projects, but my users take to X much quicker and produce more polished pieces with it.

I understand why X may not fit in many post house environments, but for us it's working quite well. I note that there is a lot of debate within the Access community and most stations have not transitioned to FCPX, though some have. A lot of stations are in the process of deciding whether to consider it or jump to Premiere in the nearish future. I'm curious to see how this will affect that decision.

And that's GREAT! $300 for a program that can do that much is a bargain. It's just sad that a lot of post-houses higher up on the broadcast ladder still require tape and other features that FCP X hasn't delivered.

 

[coleridge78]

An example? OK- here's a clip we pumped out last summer in about 4 days. 3 camera shoot, multi format, & a client breathing down our neck. Graphics created in motion, seamlessly integrated into FCPX sequence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlcVuluInsk&feature=related

BAM.

That looks like the same stuff that has been airing on daytime cable tv since 1988 or so. No offense, but I wouldn't hold that up as an example of some sort of achievement. Speaking as an outsider to the industry who did stuff like that for hobby projects more than a decade ago, it's not impressive.

 

[Simplicated]

Broadcast Monitoring only available for Mac OS X Lion. Oops.

 

[MovieCutter]

That looks like the same stuff that has been airing on daytime cable tv since 1988 or so. No offense, but I wouldn't hold that up as an example of some sort of achievement. Speaking as an outsider to the industry who did stuff like that for hobby projects more than a decade ago, it's not impressive.

I didn't want to be the one to say it.

 

[danimal99]

Try shooting an hour long show on Thursday night with 3 cameras and have it ready for broadcast QC friday afternoon and air friday night to 300 million households. Once you're in that situation, you can lecture me on not being able to "figure out a way" myself. I don't put deadline-heavy shows in the hands of tools that have been downgraded to cut the features I use for that very instance. That's unprofessional and stupid.

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.

 

[Cybbe]

Per person of course. One year totals about 600 bucks and is only useful so long as you pay. I doubt that many career people are going to bite for renting their software like that.

Why wouldn't they? It's a professional product and service, and the price is very reasonable. Professional software comes at a high price, and $600 a year is very manageable for someone who makes their living using Adobe tools. This also reduces uncertainty about the cost of upgrading, integrated cloud services, and continuous access to new Adobe product. For a professional, this is a steal.