Apple's Professional Video Apps Final Cut Pro, Motion, and Compressor Updated

[namethisfile]

I don't think it's bad VRAM, it is more likely OS X (Rather, the new versions) not being efficiently coded to include.... "old equipment" I never had a problem under snow leopard, but under Mavericks, I had plenty of restarts. I tested that theory by running various programs under 10.6.8 and didn't have a single crash, but when I slapped my 10.9 ssd in, boom, random restarts. So, I came across this fix, it's worked a treat, I don't have any problems or performance issues. So I've not really come up with a detailed analysis. FCP 7 and FCP X were fine under 10.6.8, under 10.9, they would occasionally restart. But after the fix... I have a rock solid machine with no random restarts.

ok. thanks.

one more question, though. fcp x for 10.6.8? isn't 10.8 or 10.9 the minimum for fcp x?

i went to os x 10.7 for a few weeks and it was stabler. i didn't have problems working in fcp express 4 either using transitions, titles and the whole plethora of tools available w/o it KPing like fcp x. i would have gladly stayed there except, i couldn't use most of my apps including fcp x and pixelmator.

i hope apple fixes it if it is just OS-related. i am sort of secretly wishing it is since it is the cheapest solution for me.

 

[mjmatsen]

ok. thanks.

one more question, though. fcp x for 10.6.8? isn't 10.8 or 10.9 the minimum for fcp x?

i went to os x 10.7 for a few weeks and it was stabler. i didn't have problems working in fcp express 4 either using transitions, titles and the whole plethora of tools available w/o it KPing like fcp x. i would have gladly stayed there except, i couldn't use most of my apps including fcp x and pixelmator.

i hope apple fixes it if it is just OS-related. i am sort of secretly wishing it is since it is the cheapest solution for me.

No, I had FCP X running under 10.6.8 on a few machines, I think their new updates might not make it backwards compatible any more. But I would say, just try that fix out and see if that sorts your problem out.

 

[namethisfile]

No, I had FCP X running under 10.6.8 on a few machines, I think their new updates might not make it backwards compatible any more. But I would say, just try that fix out and see if that sorts your problem out.

oh, gotcha. i might try it. i have nothing to lose.

thanks.

 

[Aiwaz418]

LOL...this statement is so false.

Tons use FCX in TV and Film and those that don't moved to Premiere, not Avid.

LOL Herp derp!

You've no idea what you're talking about, kid.

----------

Bwhahahahhahahah Thanks Kid. Editing user share, is Avid 35% Fcp7 30% Premiere CC 18% and FCP x at17% Now So BWHAHAHAH

Final cut 7-x make up more of the market then any other, and FCP7 is losing users to FCPx so lol Avid has not gained much market share lol and premiere has not gained much more market share either so..

Hey, if you want to count amateurs cutting wedding videos, go ahead - I'm speaking about editors cutting television and feature films.

----------

Hahahaha....Really?????

http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/


This kills me every time I read it.

I've used it for mainstream music videos, and currently edit a kids TV show with it.

Good for you.

I work for network television and studio feature films - X is simply not used.

 

[Ded robot]

Bwhahahahhahahah Thanks Kid. Editing user share, is Avid 35% Fcp7 30% Premiere CC 18% and FCP x at17% Now So BWHAHAHAH

Final cut 7-x make up more of the market then any other, and FCP7 is losing users to FCPx so lol Avid has not gained much market share lol

and premiere has not gained much more market share either so..

Ok, your figures are so not accurate. Many of the Final Cut users represented here in your percentages are not actually real professionals. Just because someone owns the software and sits and cuts little personal pieces in their bedroom or living room does not mean they are professional. If you think either the final cuts make up the majority of the professional work out there, you are sadly mistaken. Final Cut Pro 7 is dead software. It's not even worth talking about anymore. I personally only know one professional operation that uses Final Cut Pro X in New York City. There are probably others, but most work is still done on Avid. I know more professional operations using Premier in Final Cut Pro X but Avid is still the go to application for most places.

 

[rei101]

But Apple move on Aperture is just scary, remember during FCP7 days when people are wondering if Apple will drop development or continue?

You are so right, Apple has shown that is a unreliable company and not serious regarding professional software, at any time they can unplug the plug.

Regarding FCX, no TV station is using it, everybody is moving to Premiere or back to Avid. And that is what I say to people using FCX... that software is not used by the industry.

FCP7 became an standard just because when Apple switched to OSX Premiere didn't and it was the only editing software for Mac besides Avid (very expensive). That is why Final Cut became popular, because of that "historic moment" lets say, but the circumstances are not there any more.

Besides, just cancelling FCP7 like that with no reason... I mean, you lost trust.

In my company we are using FCP7, we tried to used FCX and nothing, kids toy. Once we finish this project we are going to switch to Premiere.

 

[laurim]

LOL Herp derp!

You've no idea what you're talking about, kid.

----------


Hey, if you want to count amateurs cutting wedding videos, go ahead - I'm speaking about editors cutting television and feature films.

----------


Good for you.

I work for network television and studio feature films - X is simply not used.

http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/

http://fcpx.tv/Pages/professionals.html

http://noamkroll.com/why-i-am-editing-my-feature-film-in-fcp-x/

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/new...-movie-being-cut-on-final-cut-pro-x-and-imacs

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/new...-cup-commercial-was-edited-in-final-cut-pro-x

http://www.pbs.org/pov/filmmakers/2013-documentary-equipment-survey.php#.U67kvxboZeU

Yeah, production houses with a big investment in old technology and people who aren't interesting in learning new techniques aren't using FCPX. Plenty of other people and houses are.

This guy discusses how people's prejudices block their ability to see better technologies. He talks about FCPX at 13:43:

http://vimeo.com/73797466#

 

[4God]

....Regarding FCX, no TV station is using it, everybody is moving to Premiere or back to Avid. And that is what I say to people using FCX... that software is not used by the industry...

...In my company we are using FCP7, we tried to used FCX and nothing, kids toy.

http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/scripps/

http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/azteca/

http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/electric/

http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/phoenix/

 

[4God]

What kids show?

https://www.facebook.com/DanceTimeBoys


http://finance.yahoo.com/news/babyfirst-bops-beat-summer-live-221600604.html

 

[laurim]

You are so right, Apple has shown that is a unreliable company and not serious regarding professional software, at any time they can unplug the plug.

Regarding FCX, no TV station is using it, everybody is moving to Premiere or back to Avid. And that is what I say to people using FCX... that software is not used by the industry.

FCP7 became an standard just because when Apple switched to OSX Premiere didn't and it was the only editing software for Mac besides Avid (very expensive). That is why Final Cut became popular, because of that "historic moment" lets say, but the circumstances are not there any more.

Besides, just cancelling FCP7 like that with no reason... I mean, you lost trust.

In my company we are using FCP7, we tried to used FCX and nothing, kids toy. Once we finish this project we are going to switch to Premiere.

Hmmm, been in the USA 3 years and you already know what nle EVERY TV station and movie house uses. Impressive!

 

[rei101]

Hmmm, been in the USA 3 years and you already know what nle EVERY TV station and movie house uses. Impressive!

I have been in the US coming and going for around 30 years. I have been in other countries too and that is why I have experience and base in what I say. Last month Univision replaced every Final Cut Suite for Premiere. And I have worked in other networks too. Besides I was very present when Apple came up with OSX and Adobe didn't have Premiere ready, probably you were not even in high school.

But what ever, the facts are the facts. Apple is totally unreliable regarding their software development. Better to use Adobe or any other. In no time they will end up developing Logic, mark my words, that software does not make money for Apple.

 

[laurim]

I have been in the US coming and going for around 30 years. I have been in other countries too and that is why I have experience and base in what I say. Last month Univision replaced every Final Cut Suite for Premiere. And I have worked in other networks too. Besides I was very present when Apple came up with OSX and Adobe didn't have Premiere ready, probably you were not even in high school.

But what ever, the facts are the facts. Apple is totally unreliable regarding their software development. Better to use Adobe or any other. In no time they will end up developing Logic, mark my words, that software does not make money for Apple.

Well, you aren't the first person to claim to be able to predict the gloomy future of Apple and I'm sure you won't be the last. Yet my stock always tells me a different story, lol. I remember in the '90s when I worked at a printing service bureau,QuarkXPress was the AVID of print production and AFAIK hardly anyone uses it now. With all the great add-ons continuously being developed for FCP, I hardly think it'll be going anywhere soon. And as far as it not being the most-used "feature film" or "network tv" tool, doesn't really matter if it ever happens because those industries are niche compared to all those millions of content producers you look down your noses as not being important.

 

[tmroper]

Capture One Pro is supposed to be good, and is used very widely by professionals (esp. in the studio). But it's from a Medium Format camera company, which doesn't exactly instill great confidence about it's longevity.

 

[coldsweat]

Well, you aren't the first person to claim to be able to predict the gloomy future of Apple and I'm sure you won't be the last. Yet my stock always tells me a different story, lol. I remember in the '90s when I worked at a printing service bureau,QuarkXPress was the AVID of print production and AFAIK hardly anyone uses it now. With all the great add-ons continuously being developed for FCP, I hardly think it'll be going anywhere soon. And as far as it not being the most-used "feature film" or "network tv" tool, doesn't really matter if it ever happens because those industries are niche compared to all those millions of content producers you look down your noses as not being important.

Here here!

 

[Ryth]

LOL Herp derp!

You've no idea what you're talking about, kid.

----------

Yah I guess working for National Geographic, Discovery and Smithsonian channels that broadcast on television I have no clue what I'm talking about.

You on the other hand working at your local college network for free doesn't really qualify.

----------

http://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/

http://fcpx.tv/Pages/professionals.html

http://noamkroll.com/why-i-am-editing-my-feature-film-in-fcp-x/

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/new...-movie-being-cut-on-final-cut-pro-x-and-imacs

http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/new...-cup-commercial-was-edited-in-final-cut-pro-x

http://www.pbs.org/pov/filmmakers/2013-documentary-equipment-survey.php#.U67kvxboZeU

Yeah, production houses with a big investment in old technology and people who aren't interesting in learning new techniques aren't using FCPX. Plenty of other people and houses are.

Yep, that was my post house until we had a long discussion about adapting or moving on to what everyone is buying and getting with their new Macs.

This guy discusses how people's prejudices block their ability to see better technologies. He talks about FCPX at 13:43:

http://vimeo.com/73797466#

He's clueless dude. He doesn't get that more and more producers and channels are buying macs and doing their shows on FCX.

----------

I have been in the US coming and going for around 30 years. I have been in other countries too and that is why I have experience and base in what I say. Last month Univision replaced every Final Cut Suite for Premiere. And I have worked in other networks too. Besides I was very present when Apple came up with OSX and Adobe didn't have Premiere ready, probably you were not even in high school.

But what ever, the facts are the facts. Apple is totally unreliable regarding their software development. Better to use Adobe or any other. In no time they will end up developing Logic, mark my words, that software does not make money for Apple.

Premiere is the one that more will decide to go with because of the reliability of Adobe will continue to support it and knowing they arent going anywhere but there are tons that are using FCX also.

 

[news4jones]

Final Cut X Audio

As a sound professional, my clients need to buy X2Pro to export a AAF file if they are using FCPX. To me, it's remarkable that a major update doesn't include the ability to export audio in a format that ProTools can open.

As far as I'm concerned, it's not Pro yet.

I used Final Cut 7 and Adobe until Apple fixed Final Cut X.
I switched to Final Cut X a year ago....and have been able to export audio only for the entire time under the export settings. For the X naysayers...I've been in broadcasting 45 years and just won my 7th Emmy (31st nomination) That most recent Emmy was accomplished using only Final Cut X.

 

[LethalWolfe]

People can throw out tit for tat links all day but I think the best litmus test for whether or not software has 'made it' is the answer to the following question, "Is it newsworthy/noteworthy when someone chooses to use Software A over Software B?" If the answer is 'yes', then Software A hasn't made it yet.

Would anyone be surprised to hear that Avid was used to edit a big TV show or movie?
Would anyone be surprised to hear that FCP X was used to edit a big TV show or movie?
Would anyone be surprised to hear that PPro was used to edit a big TV show or movie?

If Walter Murch had used Avid instead of FCP to edit "Cold Mountain" there would not have been a book written about the editing of "Cold Mountain". 😉
The old FCP was getting really close to the level of usage and acceptance where people would no longer find it noteworthy that FCP was used on a big project but Apple hit the reset button when they launched X.

FCP7 became an standard just because when Apple switched to OSX Premiere didn't and it was the only editing software for Mac besides Avid (very expensive). That is why Final Cut became popular, because of that "historic moment" lets say, but the circumstances are not there any more.

Adobe didn't initially make PPro for the Mac because there was so little interest in it on the Mac side. Even as far back as 2000/2001 FCP was more popular than Premiere for Mac users (Premiere did have a strong following on the PC though). Around that time almost every post house I was in had a FCP machine sitting in the corner that would get tinkered with and it was quickly becoming the darling of the documentary world (where being cashed strapped is much more common).

I agree though that the situation the old FCP came of age in no longer exists. Back then it was FCP for $999 vs Avid for $50,000 (if not more). Today the price discrepancy between NLEs is significantly reduced and editing hardware has become more NLE-agnostic.

 

[laurim]

People can throw out tit for tat links all day but I think the best litmus test for whether or not software has 'made it' is the answer to the following question, "Is it newsworthy/noteworthy when someone chooses to use Software A over Software B?" If the answer is 'yes', then Software A hasn't made it yet.

Would anyone be surprised to hear that Avid was used to edit a big TV show or movie?
Would anyone be surprised to hear that FCP X was used to edit a big TV show or movie?
Would anyone be surprised to hear that PPro was used to edit a big TV show or movie?

If Walter Murch had used Avid instead of FCP to edit "Cold Mountain" there would not have been a book written about the editing of "Cold Mountain". 😉
The old FCP was getting really close to the level of usage and acceptance where people would no longer find it noteworthy that FCP was used on a big project but Apple hit the reset button when they launched X.




Adobe didn't initially make PPro for the Mac because there was so little interest in it on the Mac side. Even as far back as 2000/2001 FCP was more popular than Premiere for Mac users (Premiere did have a strong following on the PC though). Around that time almost every post house I was in had a FCP machine sitting in the corner that would get tinkered with and it was quickly becoming the darling of the documentary world (where being cashed strapped is much more common).

I agree though that the situation the old FCP came of age in no longer exists. Back then it was FCP for $999 vs Avid for $50,000 (if not more). Today the price discrepancy between NLEs is significantly reduced and editing hardware has become more NLE-agnostic.

We could also argue the pros and cons on whether a company should stick with small, incremental tweaks to their software so that they don't rock the boat, knowing how resistant to change people tend to be, or be the kind of company that occasionally decides to rock the boat for, in their view, the betterment of the industry and hope that their user base gets on board with the expectation that tweaks will need to be made later. Seems like Apple has its origins with boat rocking so it's not surprising that they rocked the boat a little hard with FCPX and have had to make course corrections along the way. I bet the other NLEs are watching what Apple does in anticipation of poaching the new features people end up liking better.

 

[rei101]

We could also argue the pros and cons on whether a company should stick with small, incremental tweaks to their software so that they don't rock the boat, knowing how resistant to change people tend to be, or be the kind of company that occasionally decides to rock the boat for, in their view, the betterment of the industry and hope that their user base gets on board with the expectation that tweaks will need to be made later. Seems like Apple has its origins with boat rocking so it's not surprising that they rocked the boat a little hard with FCPX and have had to make course corrections along the way. I bet the other NLEs are watching what Apple does in anticipation of poaching the new features people end up liking better.

Let me give you an example of why Apple is an unreliable developer for pro applications:

3 years ago I was working in a TV station, they were changing the name of the station and all the promos needed to be reopened and have the logo and voice over changed. We are talking about 600 promos.

Now, all those promos were done in FCP7 and we were able to open them up. Today FCP7 is no longer supported but now they have above 2000 promos made in a format no longer supported. If they were made in Avid or Premiere there was no problem.

Then, you have to talk to the owners of the station and explain them why you need to spend more money changing platforms. THAT takes you about a year in convincing them and during that year they will tell you "you are an incapable that have no clue about technology because 4 years ago you told us to spend certain amount of money in the current platform". Anybody working in a network have been trough that.

Then... your video editors know how to use FCP7 but no necessarily Avid or Premiere. So is a hassle for human resources as well, you may fired them or pay for training a huge load of money.

That, and other reasons is why you can not trust Apple pro applications or any other application because they are not reliable. I can use FCPX AS AN OPTION but is totally irresponsible to relied on that software at serious corporate level.

If you are going to use FCPX do it, but master Avid or Premiere if you want to go pro. Personally I like FCPX but Apple has been so negligent specially with Compressor, that damn software was never able to use the multicore or network render, a complete lie that software is. And lets not talk about FCP Server... it never worked! Huge scam.

And today.... I am trying to make the iPad to talk via midi with my iMac... impossible! I have a virtual instrument on my iPad and iOS is totally incapable of synchronizing via USB with Logic or Live... come on!!!!! is 2014!!!!! The only way to make the iPad work via midi is using an EXTRA EXTERNAL midi cable!!!!! I mean, I have to use a technology developed 35 years ago!!!

Sorry but I do not have machines to show off and only surf the web, I actually use them. And I am not asking for much, just basic reliability.

 

[cdarlington1]

They better. Motion is pretty much my bread and butter software as a motion graphics designer. I use After Effects sometimes but Motion most of the time. And I just bought the mObject add-on that allows me to create textured 3D objects within Motion that react to lights and cameras. So when I read the article about Aperture, I got a little nervous until I read this.

Anything similar to mObjects for after effects?

 

[laurim]

Anything similar to mObjects for after effects?

I've never heard of that one. A Google search makes me think it's an exterior program to After Effects so you would have to leave AE to use it. mObject is an add-on made by MotionFX and is for Motion and FCPX only. You can add 3D objects within Motion and FCPX, including pre-made .obj from sources like Turbosquid or ones you made in Blender or Cinema4D etc. Primitives are included and you can also easily extrude text, .svg files and buy additional packs of shaders and objects or make your own. You can also map quicktime movies onto surfaces. The 3D objects continue to react to cameras and lighting in a 3D space within Motion and FCPX, unlike many 3D plug-ins which only look 3D from a front angle. After Effects can bring in 3D objects from TurboSquid but I found the process clunky and not as flexible and featured as mObject.

http://www.motionvfx.com/mplugs-33.html#1

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xl6lOPJXrrA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqElGBKaruQ

----------

Let me give you an example of why Apple is an unreliable developer for pro applications:

3 years ago I was working in a TV station, they were changing the name of the station and all the promos needed to be reopened and have the logo and voice over changed. We are talking about 600 promos.

Now, all those promos were done in FCP7 and we were able to open them up. Today FCP7 is no longer supported but now they have above 2000 promos made in a format no longer supported. If they were made in Avid or Premiere there was no problem.

Then, you have to talk to the owners of the station and explain them why you need to spend more money changing platforms. THAT takes you about a year in convincing them and during that year they will tell you "you are an incapable that have no clue about technology because 4 years ago you told us to spend certain amount of money in the current platform". Anybody working in a network have been trough that.

Then... your video editors know how to use FCP7 but no necessarily Avid or Premiere. So is a hassle for human resources as well, you may fired them or pay for training a huge load of money.

That, and other reasons is why you can not trust Apple pro applications or any other application because they are not reliable. I can use FCPX AS AN OPTION but is totally irresponsible to relied on that software at serious corporate level.

If you are going to use FCPX do it, but master Avid or Premiere if you want to go pro. Personally I like FCPX but Apple has been so negligent specially with Compressor, that damn software was never able to use the multicore or network render, a complete lie that software is. And lets not talk about FCP Server... it never worked! Huge scam.

And today.... I am trying to make the iPad to talk via midi with my iMac... impossible! I have a virtual instrument on my iPad and iOS is totally incapable of synchronizing via USB with Logic or Live... come on!!!!! is 2014!!!!! The only way to make the iPad work via midi is using an EXTRA EXTERNAL midi cable!!!!! I mean, I have to use a technology developed 35 years ago!!!

Sorry but I do not have machines to show off and only surf the web, I actually use them. And I am not asking for much, just basic reliability.

a) I'm kind of amazed you continue to use old promos. I would think a name and logo change would warrant an overall image change.
b) There are apps to convert 7 to X. I'm sure there are challenges to that but at least it gets you most of the way there if you have to reuse an old project.
c) FCP 7 and X can coexist on the same computer so continue to use 7 if you must reuse those old projects and do new projects in X.
d) Most importantly, WTF do you insist on claiming what you do is considered "Pro" and what the rest of us do to make money (plenty of money, btw) isn't? Maybe you should rephrase that to say, if you want to work for somebody ELSE where you don't get to choose your software and want to increase your employment options, you should learn Avid, too. That would be reasonable. EVERYBODY should know multiple NLEs to increase their opportunities in the "pro" employment world. Own your own business and you can use whatever you want.

 

[nerdo]

I have been "in the business" for as long as you and learned this:

Personal experience is not "facts" if you have facts, please share the source, if you don't have a source other then yourself, then it is just personal opinion no matter how long you have been in the business or how many places you have visited. Start a database, let companies enter what they use etc. then we might know. Everything else is just poserBS, who cares if you have been editing for 100 years if we are talking about who uses what TODAY.

I have been in the US coming and going for around 30 years. I have been in other countries too and that is why I have experience and base in what I say. Last month Univision replaced every Final Cut Suite for Premiere. And I have worked in other networks too. Besides I was very present when Apple came up with OSX and Adobe didn't have Premiere ready, probably you were not even in high school.

But what ever, the facts are the facts. Apple is totally unreliable regarding their software development. Better to use Adobe or any other. In no time they will end up developing Logic, mark my words, that software does not make money for Apple.

 

[linuxcooldude]

Now, all those promos were done in FCP7 and we were able to open them up. Today FCP7 is no longer supported but now they have above 2000 promos made in a format no longer supported. If they were made in Avid or Premiere there was no problem.

Then, you have to talk to the owners of the station and explain them why you need to spend more money changing platforms. THAT takes you about a year in convincing them and during that year they will tell you "you are an incapable that have no clue about technology because 4 years ago you told us to spend certain amount of money in the current platform". Anybody working in a network have been trough that.

What platform change? $300.00 to test the feasibility of importing and testing of the new version of Final Cut. Even if you move to Premiere or Avid both work on Mac.

 

[LethalWolfe]

We could also argue the pros and cons on whether a company should stick with small, incremental tweaks to their software so that they don't rock the boat, knowing how resistant to change people tend to be, or be the kind of company that occasionally decides to rock the boat for, in their view, the betterment of the industry and hope that their user base gets on board with the expectation that tweaks will need to be made later. Seems like Apple has its origins with boat rocking so it's not surprising that they rocked the boat a little hard with FCPX and have had to make course corrections along the way. I bet the other NLEs are watching what Apple does in anticipation of poaching the new features people end up liking better.

Pretty much all of the 'boat rocking' features have been their since day 1 and Apple has spent most of the last three years giving X the 'standard' features that it lacked at launch so it can be more like other NLEs. Feature parity isn't a one way street. If the current version of X had been the launch version the reception would've have been much less volatile.

I don't think Apple didn't rock the boat for the betterment of the industry, I think they rocked it for the betterment of their bottom line. FCP X is an inexpensive NLE with a very low learning curve and the fastest growing segment of video editors are part time video editors. Out of the gate Apple wanted to target a broader audience and not settle for just the war of attrition that had developed between the old FCP and Avid MC.

 

[foodog]

Ugh, no.

I personally dumped it, and none of the people I work with or know in film and television use X - it's hobbled tech, and not suitable for professional productions. Most stick with FCP7 or moved to Avid.

Specifically what is hobbled?