Do some people still think Apple will drop FCP?

[Mr-Stabby]

A colleague of mine was speaking to a video editor friend of hers and he apparently said to her that there is no point going with FCP any more because Apple have shown with their new version that they can't be bothered any more and that they are going for the iMovie crowd, and they will eventually drop support for professionals and eventually FCP itself. He said it would be much better to go with Premiere.

Now not even mentioning the Premiere option, does anyone else really believe after seeing the new FCP that Apple have given up on the professional market and they will eventually drop FCP, really!? I think if anything, the new version has reassured editors that there is definitely interest in FCP and the professional market from Apple.

What do we think?

 

[simsaladimbamba]

I don't think Apple will drop FCP, as they invested a lot into the new version, which is a radical change though. We'll see. It is still professional, it just looks like iMovie. I don't know how multi-cam will work though, without a real preview monitor.

 

[MovieCutter]

Not a chance. FCP X drives professional Mac sales.

 

[itoboi]

I do not see Apple dumping FCP any time soon but that's just my opinion. And the editor who made that comment probably has no idea if Apple is moving towards the iMove crowd or not. All the talk you hear about FCP becoming the new iMove is based on a preview from NAB. There hasn't been an official release yet , only an official release date. For all we know the final interface will be the color of rainbows and have only one window, the timeline and two buttons to generate lens-flares and that 3D text from "Panic Room."

 

[handsome pete]

I don't think Apple will drop FCP, as they invested a lot into the new version, which is a radical change though. We'll see. It is still professional, it just looks like iMovie. I don't know how multi-cam will work though, without a real preview monitor.

From what I've heard the preview monitor is still an option. Remember, we've only seen a small sneak peak at what FCPX is.

 

[Consultant]

FCP is not going to be dropped.

Most video professional believe new version is an improvement.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Not a chance. FCP X drives professional Mac sales.

Which begs the question, in this 'Jobsian' post-pc world how important are the professional Macs?

Going only based on the very short demo showing an old build at NAB I get the feeling that Apple is reach down and not up. Which from a business perspective makes sense because there are a lot more amateurs and serious hobbyists than their are people working on TV shows. I've heard speculation that there is no multi-cam, FCP 1-7 projects will not open in FCP X and that it should be regarded as a version 1 product (that last piece came from an Apple rep at the preview event at NAB). Considering the large undertaking it's been to make FCP X I wouldn't be surprised if it was a bit feature-bare compared to FCP. Hopefully Apple will support both FCP 7 and FCP X until FCP X matures a bit more. And hopefully Apple will move to a one year release cycle or, at least, kick out a very big (and free) .5 update to FCP X in 2012 (kinda like they did w/FCP 4.5 years ago). Two years is a very long product cycle a user base that is already restless and competition that is only getting more fierce.

W/that being said, until full versions get out into the wild all of this is just pure conjecture based on a very finite amount of info.


Lethal

 

[beg_ne]

A colleague of mine was speaking to a video editor friend of hers and he apparently said to her that there is no point going with FCP any more because Apple have shown with their new version that they can't be bothered any more and that they are going for the iMovie crowd, and they will eventually drop support for professionals and eventually FCP itself. He said it would be much better to go with Premiere.

Now not even mentioning the Premiere option, does anyone else really believe after seeing the new FCP that Apple have given up on the professional market and they will eventually drop FCP, really!? I think if anything, the new version has reassured editors that there is definitely interest in FCP and the professional market from Apple.

What do we think?

Sounds like the video editor friend is too lazy to actually want to learn something new that will probably vastly improve his professional life.

The computing world is the wrong place to get stuck in the past.

I would suggest your colleague summarily ignore his uninformed opinion and check out FCPX for herself when it's available.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Sounds like the video editor friend is too lazy to actually want to learn something new that will probably vastly improve his professional life.

The computing world is the wrong place to get stuck in the past.

I would suggest your colleague summarily ignore his uninformed opinion and check out FCPX for herself when it's available.

At this point in time the assumption that FCP X will improve one's professional life is equally as uniformed as the assumption that it will be detrimental to one's professional life. And to be fair to the "editor friend" mentioned in the first post, that person did recommend moving to Premiere Pro which implies a willingness to learn something new in an attempt to improve their professional life. Just sayin'.


Lethal

 

[chrono1081]

A colleague of mine was speaking to a video editor friend of hers and he apparently said to her that there is no point going with FCP any more because Apple have shown with their new version that they can't be bothered any more and that they are going for the iMovie crowd

This shows that the video editor friend has no clue what they are talking about. People who consider workflow improvement features "un pro like" are not pro's since its obvious they can't adapt to software changes.

It would be like having a game engine for me that automatically simulates cloth and me saying that the game engine is "moving towards the casual market since it makes something easy for me".

FCP is not going away and I have a few friends who work for big name studios doing editing and they were very excited about the new Final Cut Pro. I don't claim to know much about video editing but I know my friends know their stuff inside and out and if they are excited about it I know its good.

For some reason people have this idea that if a convenient feature is added it must be for home users. Its a stupid mentality since a real pro cares about getting things done faster and more efficiently.

 

[mBox]

Sounds like the video editor friend is too lazy to actually want to learn something new that will probably vastly improve his professional life...

same old song and dance. I've been around enough jaded users to stop feeding their flame of hate.
I go about my business and enjoy all the possibilities thats available now and in the future

 

[sillybilly]

a real pro cares about getting things done faster and more efficiently.

I am a pro editor and this quote is right on the money. I use FCP and AVID they are both as good and bad as each other and it's a case of using the right tool for the right job.

The improvments they make in FCP always seem to be concentrating on the fancy stuff. I want to see improvements in media shareing and UI. So far FCP X has added some features that look very consumer focused. But as was mentioned earlier the amount of people who edit as a pastime is increasing and if you can get them to part with $300 instead of downloading a cracked version why not. FCP is a good product and it would be a shame to see them imovie it. Having said that i don't want it to be a command line system.

 

[Babybandit]

Whilst I work mainly as a Director and Cinematographer in my student films. I often edit some footage together just as a temp and to see if certain things will work out to be what I want.

For me, the key is Can I do what I want to do. Quickly. Admittedly, I have never tried Avid - but I have Final Cut Pro and Premiere Pro. Whilst I understand I could do a more with Premiere Pro, I stuck with Final Cut Pro because it was something I knew better. I wasn't doing anything super render heavy - so for me. Final Cut worked. It was what I wanted. (Though the Render has tempted me to go to Premiere). With FCX, what I'm seeing is what some called a dumbed down interface, an iMovie Pro. Personally, I agree that the interface has changed, but I disagree with it being dumbed down. It'll take a bit of time getting used to - but I have a feeling it will help increase efficiency. This is like the reluctance I had moving from iMovie HD to iMove 06, but at the end... I realized I could get a lot more done. Quicker.

Is Apple abandoning the Pro Market? Final Cut Studios? No.
I find it hard to believe that a company who has sunken down so much money to redesign a software is one who is ready to just abandon it. If they desired to, they could have easily left it to die with incremental updates like the previous one. I think Final Cut is here to stay, and it will only get better as people start giving a go at it.

The only issue I have with it? What's the situation with Plug-ins.

 

[mondesi43]

The sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!! Very few have played with FCP X so very few can actually comment on it legitimately.

1) "Redesign looks like imovie" - A lot of the young people starting out in the field have probably played around with imovie as a kid. So why not have a comfortable look for the new breed? That rolls out into companies switching instead of training new employees on other software.

2) "It's too cheap to be good" - It's one portion of the suite. App store makes it a little harder to pirate. It'll be easier to justify $300 for someone who only looks to edit the footage and doesn't need Color, DVD Studio, Motion. Oh and the lower price point + app store legitimacy (most likely) = more profit for Apple.

3) The only thing I'm wondering/concerned about is motion. Hopefully it will also be a $150-200 app with an upgraded interface and new features.

From what I saw of the presentation I was impressed. 64-bit, background rendering, tagging of clips, no transcoding, magnetic timeline.....all are time savers and well worth the $300.

 

[Mr-Stabby]

A comment i made back to her went along the lines of "The version of FCP you're using now and working very well with, has it suddenly become useless?"

Even if FCP does eventually go down the toilet (which i don't think it will) that doesn't suddenly make the version you're using useless. If there does come a time where FCP goes or the new version is too consumer orientated, carry on using FCP 7 until you need a specific feature that isn't on the older FCP but is on the new version of Avid, or something like that. Then think about upgrading.

A lot of people seem to care a lot about what NLE software people are using, when at the end of the day, surely it's the product that comes out of the software that matters? Really the software you're using shouldn't matter at all to any client. Unless of course you're working with other editors who use specific software.

 

[shorafix]

For me, the key is Can I do what I want to do. Quickly. Admittedly, I have never tried Avid - but I have Final Cut Pro and Premiere Pro......Final Cut worked. It was what I wanted. (Though the Render has tempted me to go to Premiere). With FCX, ....I agree that the interface has changed, but I disagree with it being dumbed down. It'll take a bit of time getting used to - but I have a feeling it will help increase efficiency.

It seems we are birds of a feather. I am currently messing around with Premiere CS5 because of it's AVCHD Full HD support and because it features Adobe Encore. There are in fact some nice features but I can't remember, that a project took so long to get to an end as with FCP CS5. What I noticed watching the FCP X presentation looked like a major improvement over other simply timeline based software. I was learning on Premiere in 1995 on a Quadra 900 and switched to Final Cut Pro in 2000. Let's go one step ahead in 2011 with FCP X!

 

[LethalWolfe]

This shows that the video editor friend has no clue what they are talking about. People who consider workflow improvement features "un pro like" are not pro's since its obvious they can't adapt to software changes.

Unless you know the editor friend personally and what their workflow needs are you can't comment on how good/bad FCP X will be for that person (or really for anyone since we've only seen a brief preview of it).

It would be like having a game engine for me that automatically simulates cloth and me saying that the game engine is "moving towards the casual market since it makes something easy for me".

I don't know much about making a game so pardon me if my analogy is off base. What if the game engine did a poor job of simulating cloth and provided no parameters for you to adjust the simulation? Would you still consider it a positive aspect of the software?

More simple is not necessarily an improvement for professional users. Is a point and shoot camera more simple than a DSLR? Yes, does that mean point and shoot cameras are better tools for professional photographers? In most cases the answer is no. Are cars with automatic transmissions inherently better than cars with manual transmissions?

I'm all for more efficient ways to work but not at the expense losing control or functionality.

From what I saw of the presentation I was impressed. 64-bit, background rendering, tagging of clips, no transcoding, magnetic timeline.....all are time savers and well worth the $300.

I'll add 'clip auditioning' and the improved (hopefully) nesting feature which I can't remember the name of to that list. All of those things look good to me except I'm worried about performance using things like H.264 native clips and the magnetic timeline is going to be the first thing I turn off (I hope you can turn it off). Cutting a show to time, audio mixing and basic timeline organization look very difficult, if not impossible, using the magnetic timeline as demoed at NAB.


Lethal

 

[mBox]

From what I saw of the presentation I was impressed. 64-bit, background rendering, tagging of clips, no transcoding, magnetic timeline.....all are time savers and well worth the $300.

For some editors (ENG, Corporate Video) this is all you need. I for one am waiting for the high-end comfort of R3D and MXF. Am I worried, no!
Its not out yet, even if it has everything, the Jaded ones will still gripe

 

[chrono1081]

Unless you know the editor friend personally and what their workflow needs are you can't comment on how good/bad FCP X will be for that person (or really for anyone since we've only seen a brief preview of it).


I don't know much about making a game so pardon me if my analogy is off base. What if the game engine did a poor job of simulating cloth and provided no parameters for you to adjust the simulation? Would you still consider it a positive aspect of the software?

I definitely know all of them personally, I have been to their houses and saw their video editing setups. They work in studios professionally which I was obviously not allowed to go to but like most people in various industries they have setups at home as well.

As for the analogy it works but Apple didn't dumb anything down from what I saw, they just changed the way things are done. All I know is my friends were happy from what they saw as well as all the people at that conference. If it was so bad there should have been grumbles instead of cheers.

The things I see people crying about on these forums were things like letting users automatically adjust color of the video upon import. People don't have to use that feature but for some reason according to forum users "that makes apple geared towards the non-pro crowd". Sure there are colorists in the real world but having consistent video before tweaking surely can help some people. I'd love if Aperture did that for pictures. It wouldn't mean I'd have to use that option but its there if I wanted it.

 

[shorafix]

Are cars with automatic transmissions inherently better than cars with manual transmissions?

Yes, at least when you have an AUDI S5 with DSG or similar transmissioin! And that's exactly the point: once Apple is able to provide a more easy way to do the same job in comparable quality, they will stay in business in this market. Let's just wait and see, what the near future will bring us.

 

[mBox]

The things I see people crying about on these forums were things like letting users automatically adjust color of the video upon import...

That and the fact that its cheap. If you ever have to justify purchasing a piece of software in the corporate level then you'd understand that 300 dollars is a lot easier to swallow than 2500 for software, 5000 plus for I/O box and add 2k for yearly support.
Then add headaches to my workflow, tech support at times laughable and updates that put you out of commission for days due to their incompetence...priceless?

You know who you are! Shame!!

 

[LethalWolfe]

I definitely know all of them personally, I have been to their houses and saw their video editing setups. They work in studios professionally which I was obviously not allowed to go to but like most people in various industries they have setups at home as well.

I meant the editor that the OP mentioned whom you bashed repeatedly. Do you know that person?

As for the analogy it works but Apple didn't dumb anything down from what I saw, they just changed the way things are done. All I know is my friends were happy from what they saw as well as all the people at that conference. If it was so bad there should have been grumbles instead of cheers.

How do you know if they dumbed anything down when you've admitted you don't know much about editing software? Everyone I've talked to that was at the NAB demo said the crowd was split about 50/50 between cheers and cautious trepidation. To be honest, I think anyone who is jumping for joy over FCP X doesn't know what they are talking about. Just like I think anyone who is all negative about FCP X doesn't know what they are talking about. It's like declaring a Super Bowl winner the day after the draft.

Sometimes I wonder about people that don't seem to be able to find fault with anything. Maybe it's just my personality type though since I actively seek out potential problems so I can either A) avoid them outright or B) create a contingency plan so if the problem does manifest itself I'll already have a solution waiting in the wings. Hope for the best but plan for the worst.

Yes, at least when you have an AUDI S5 with DSG or similar transmissioin!

I'm not a car person so sorry if this is an ignorant question, but are similar type transmissions being used in things like F1 cars or semi-trucks? Is a transmission like that a better choice over a manual in every situation?


Lethal

 

[KeithPratt]

Is a point and shoot camera more simple than a DSLR?

A DSLR on full auto is as simple as a point and shoot. Surely Apple wouldn't make an error as huge as not including the manual modes as well...

And regarding the price: Final Cut Express has always been under $300, but it's not like every Tom, Tori and Tekeshi has bought it. I'd imagine it's sold fewer copies than FCP.

 

[LethalWolfe]

A DSLR on full auto is as simple as a point and shoot. Surely Apple wouldn't make an error as huge as not including the manual modes as well...

That is the $64,000 question and going just off the info we currently have no one knows the answer to it. Like I said before, being a version 1 product I'm sure FCP will be feature-bare in some places but hopefully those holes are filled w/in 12 months via either a big .5 update or a full version update. I also hope that Apple supports the current apps concurrently until FCP X is more of a complete replacement.


Lethal

 

[martinX]

Yes. Apple is about to drop FCP entirely.

Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to my Flat Earth Society meeting. If only I could get my GPS to work...