Early Final Cut Pro X Response Mixed, Updates Coming

[ARobinson]

I'm using Final Cut Express which suits my needs.
I'm wondering if FCX is a better upgrade currently & if not can FCE users take advantage of integration between the new Motion 5, Compressor, & FCE.

FCPX is more comparable to iMovie than FCPE. I don't say that out of hatred and frustration. I am an apple fanboy. However, I wish apple decided to build FCP in this fashion back when I was younger, before I went to film school. Its a more welcome transition from current iMovie users.

 

[dagamer34]

FCPX is very much like iPhoneOS in 2007; lots of obvious stuff missing in version 1.0, but with version 5.0, you've got a VERY polished product which few can match.

I imagine it's going to take a few iterations to make FCP X really sing, but it was obvious that the FCP7 base needed to be ditched now in order to bring the app into compliance with modern Mac OS X technologies (Cocoa, Grand Central Dispatch, OpenCL, etc...).

 

[Matthew Yohe]

It's basically "iMove Pro" except Apple has deceptively tried to pass it off as the next version of Final Cut Pro. It is _not_ a real 'pro' app and shouldn't have a price tag of more than about $50 -- and that's me being kind.

I've already read reviews from pros stating that this is not the case.

So, since you have already evaluated it, why not tell us specifics instead of the same garbage we can read everywhere else.

 

[MacFan782040]

I don't know how many people remember OS X 10.0 or 10.1, but it was initially a major step down from OS 9 in a lot of ways. It wasn't until 10.2 that it really started to feel like a complete OS.

This is as radical a change to Final Cut. It's a clean break, and there's going to be some pain for awhile - but it is the future.

Agree to a point. However when Apple released 10.0 they were pretty much coming back from a near death experience. They had nowhere to go but up. Final Cut Pro, on the other hand, is an industry standard app. While I am sure updates will make it better, (like iMovie did), I hope they can add some missing features before others make a switch to other systems.

 

[portishead]

I think anybody who was expecting this to be ready to slot into a professional production workflow from day 1 has either not been following the relevant blog posts leading up to this release, or they're being somewhat naive. Apple aren't exactly famous for their airtight x.0 releases, and I for one wasn't expecting this to be any different.

I think now is a good time for FCP vets to start learning the new paradigms in preparation for when it reaches an acceptable level of maturity, and now is also obviously good for newcomers to the FCP fold to start learning their chops, but anybody who is either denouncing this as a write-off or claiming it to be the best thing ever when it's just 24 hrs old is probably jumping the gun somewhat.

this.

 

[powers74]

Love it or hate it eh?

 

[ARobinson]

No, it means you stop acting like a victim or like Apple owes you something and realize you can make choices.

For editors like myself who use Final Cut Pro EVERY SINGLE DAY to make our living, especially a young one like myself who has invested over $10K in my workstation, its difficult to make that choice. To turn away from something you know and TRUELY love. I will and am continuing to use FCP7; however, the future is uncertain right now. I don't want to use anything else, but.... :/

 

[Anaemik]

My guess is that the Marketing department won the battle over the release date. I can only imagine there are several angry/embarrassed Apple FCP engineers on campus today. I suspect that had this been released in December or early next year... the necessary professional features to actually get the project out the door would have been included. Pretty bummed I dropped $299 for a program that's going to collect dust until they add the features sometime in the nebulous future.

I think your guess is almost certainly spot on. I kinda feel for the dev team here, as they probably knew they were set to get flamed on day of release due to missing features, and it must be kinda soulcrushing for them to experience that.

I don't think marketing is being 100% mindless though (although their decision to release now can definitely be questioned) - I just think they see value in a) allowing people to get used to the new workflows, and b) testing the waters to see exactly which of the missing features is causing the most uproar, so that they can prioritise their inclusion in the most immediate software patches.

 

[Sirmausalot]

Unacceptable

Final Cut 7 is so out of date, it's not a decent solution. It doesn't support DSLR footage natively (and many of us are shooting on them), it's not 64 bit, nor multicore aware. Forget memory usage in excess of 4GB.

Final Cut X should address those shortcomings. And it does. 64 bit, multi-core. But it takes away FUNDAMENTAL TOOLS we need such as the ability to export an OMF for Pro Tools. And all of the other serious missing features we rely on

It is unacceptable not to have a decent upgrade for Final Cut Pro 7.

So no to the apologists. Apple has screwed up both Final Cut Pro 7 and this new abomination.

 

[goMac]

FCPX is a lot like OS X. OS X started with the same complaints, the same feature shortfalls compared to Mac OS 9. Same complaints. OS X was the end of the world, Apple didn't know what they were doing, the release was botched, so on so forth. And to a degree, OS 10.0 wasn't Apple's finest operating system.

However, with a few updates Mac OS X had 95% of Mac OS 9's features, and a much better foundation.

If you're a serious pro, wait a few versions of FCP X. FCP7 still works, keep using it. Such a drastic change like OS X was will require some work.

And honestly, I wouldn't want to import FCP7 projects into FCPX anyway. It's an entirely different rendering engine. Whatever gets read by FCPX is likely to not display exactly the same, which is why an external import tool makes sense. Let people do it, but don't give them the idea it's going to be %100 perfect process.

 

[lshaner]

Honestly, you're emailing Steve Jobs about this? And, you're emailing him to get your money back? You know Apple made this whole Mac App store that has things like, "help" where you can go to to request things like refunds.

Don't be stupid.

Of course I already requested a refund from the App Store.
Putting this in Steve's face is just a "Don't be stupid, STEVE."

 

[Matthew Yohe]

Of course I already requested a refund from the App Store.
Putting this in Steve's face is just a "Don't be stupid, STEVE."

This is hardly a stupid move on Apple's part. Just like they did with OSX, they are putting Final Cut on a path for the future. The old FCP code was not ready for prime time and would've been a mess to continue piling on.

 

[B. Hunter]

If it were actually Final Cut, I'd agree. This looks like iMovie Pro to me.



That's 100% coincidence!!! Apple never even thought of that....

Yep! You are right iMovie Pro. I can't believe the Green Lantern wannabees running around here defending FCPX. Most people saw this coming. Dumbed down software. How much longer will Apple cater to Pros in name only? Looks like they are moving away from the Pro business.
We are in the mobile device era. Otherwise FCPX would have been out more than a year ago. Anyone remember Jobs saying how the FCS development team was directed to work on IOS projects?

 

[movieator]

Final Cut 7 is so out of date, it's not a decent solution. It doesn't support DSLR footage natively (and many of us are shooting on them), it's not 64 bit, nor multicore aware. Forget memory usage in excess of 4GB.

Final Cut X should address those shortcomings. And it does. 64 bit, multi-core. But it takes away FUNDAMENTAL TOOLS we need such as the ability to export an OMF for Pro Tools. And all of the other serious missing features we rely on

It is unacceptable not to have a decent upgrade for Final Cut Pro 7.

So no to the apologists. Apple has screwed up both Final Cut Pro 7 and this new abomination.

As for DSLR not being compatible with FCP7. I shoot DSLR all the time, and have no issues using Compressor and converting it into ProRes. Yeah, an extra step, sure, but not a huge issue.

 

[Blipp]

The majority of these reviews are bogus as there is absolutely no way it's been properly vetted in less than 24 hours by professionals. It'll never get a 5 start average without backwards compatibility and multicam editing but I fully expect it to even out to a 4 star once people get past the shell shock and it matures past its .0 release.

 

[jrlcopy]

If you're a serious pro, wait a few versions of FCP X. FCP7 still works, keep using it. Such a drastic change like OS X was will require some work.

And honestly, I wouldn't want to import FCP7 projects into FCPX anyway. It's an entirely different rendering engine. Whatever gets read by FCPX is likely to not display exactly the same, which is why an external import tool makes sense. Let people do it, but don't give them the idea it's going to be %100 perfect process.

And while you're waiting, check out some of their competitors that already have real-time editing, no transcoding, handle dslr natively, x64 bit, multicore funtimes. They've had these features for a couple years now. Then when FCPX is ready, feel free to go back, all the competitors have free trials, and they are all running specials to get you switched. Just try it. You know you want to.
http://www.videoguys.com/Specials/Now+In+Stock.aspx

But I disagree with your not wanting the ability to import FCP7 projects, they can program a converter to move projects, if other programs can do it, Apple can also. A converter is supposedly coming.

 

[shiseiryu1]

I think FCP kicks Premiere's butt

I've been using Adobe Premiere CS5 for about a year and I've been disappointed at how clunky it is. I just got FCP and have been messing around with it and it seems like a higher quality product. The UI is nicer, the file system is much more straight-forward, and the playback and edited is much smoother.

BTW: I also got the "Compressor" program...it's UI looks like it hasn't been touched since OS Tiger or earlier.

 

[Anaemik]

The majority of these reviews are bogus as there is absolutely no way it's been properly vetted in less than 24 hours by professionals. It'll never get a 5 start average without backwards compatibility and multicam editing but I fully expect it to even out to a 4 star once people get past the shell shock and it matures past its .0 release.

I wouldn't go as far as to say they are bogus. You could tell within 10 minutes if an audio app lacked sample-accurate editing or SMPTE support for example, or if a bitmap editor was missing a layers facility - those sorts of things don't need a lot of time with the software to figure out, and I believe most of the legitimate gripes that I've read personally would be of this nature. There do in fact seem to be some pretty major holes in the featureset.

That's not to say that I don't still think it was naive to expect everything to be there in x.0 though.

 

[acslater017]

Disclaimer: I am NOT a professional video editor

What is "multicam" and how is it different from "supporting multiple video tracks" ?

If I were to guess, multicam means 2+ cameras recording the same event from different angles and giving a mechanism to quickly sync those streams and switch between the various angles. This is what I think people are saying is missing.

Multiple video tracks = I can stack different clips and cut between them and overlay them. This I am assuming it DOES support, right?

So why can't you take two cameras, stack their video and then cut back and forth between them? Just please explain in dummy terms what is missing re: Multicam

Multicam is also a type of camouflage

 

[Bafflefish]

FCPX is a lot like OS X. OS X started with the same complaints, the same feature shortfalls compared to Mac OS 9. Same complaints. OS X was the end of the world, Apple didn't know what they were doing, the release was botched, so on so forth. And to a degree, OS 10.0 wasn't Apple's finest operating system.

Uh... what? I was an OS X beta tester, and while the beta and 10.0 were extremely slow, it was far from "botched" or "the end of the world" upon release. Were people unhappy with it? Yes. Could people still see that it represented a drastic (and much welcomed) change over OS 9? Definitely. Apple also had quickly commented that speed enhancements would be coming in 10.1 and that 10.1 would be released relatively quickly, which it was (relative to most major releases for OS X and other operating systems).

There was also the fact that, knowing how performance was less than expected upon its release, Apple made 10.1 a free upgrade, which was very much welcomed.

 

[goMac]

And while you're waiting, check out some of their competitors that already have real-time editing, no transcoding, handle dslr natively, x64 bit, multicore funtimes. They've had these features for a couple years now. Then when FCPX is ready, feel free to go back, all the competitors have free trials, and they are all running specials to get you switched. Just try it. You know you want to.
http://www.videoguys.com/Specials/Now+In+Stock.aspx

Sure, and it was the same thing with OS X. People threatened to switch to XP, which could do things like burn cds and play DVDs, that OS X couldn't. In the end, OS X was just fine, and I don't think anyone today would say OS X is horrible, despite it's beginnings.

I'm not saying that everyone should be happy with FCPX. Clearly there are features that people want. And they probably shouldn't switch if those features are missing. But this is going to be a piece by piece thing.

The other option is Apple didn't release FCP X today at all, and you would be stuck with FCP7 for the next year or two while they were getting FCP X with every last single feature. Would that have been better?

But I disagree with your not wanting the ability to import FCP7 projects, they can program a converter to move projects, if other programs can do it, Apple can also. A converter is supposedly coming.

I'm going to guess now that the converter won't be perfect. FCP X is not at all related to FCP 7. It's a brand new entirely different program with a render engine not at all related to FCP 7's. It's like doing an import from FCP to Premiere. Sure, it could done. But there are differently going to be differences in the original project and the import.

Uh... what? I was an OS X beta tester, and while the beta and 10.0 were extremely slow, it was far from "botched" or "the end of the world" upon release. Were people unhappy with it? Yes. Could people still see that it represented a drastic (and much welcomed) change over OS 9? Definitely. Apple also had quickly commented that speed enhancements would be coming in 10.1 and that 10.1 would be released relatively quickly, which it was (relative to most major releases for OS X and other operating systems).

There was also the fact that, knowing how performance was less than expected upon its release, Apple made 10.1 a free upgrade, which was very much welcomed.

Really? Cause I was a beta tester too, and there were a lot of missing features/bugs.

• Couldn't burn cds.
• Couldn't play DVDs
• Dialing up with a 56k modem would frequently crash your machine
• It ran dog slow
• No hardware window acceleration
• Etc, etc, etc,

Look, I loved OS X, but plenty of people didn't, and even I had to boot back into OS 9 all the damn time to get things done (like, as mentioned, burn a cd, which couldn't even be done from Classic.)

It was so bad Apple gave 10.1 away for free. In stores.

Final Cut Pro X shares a lot in common with OS X besides the number, which I'm pretty sure was chosen intentionally as it's following the same development path.

 

[JesterJJZ]

I don't know if "botch" is the word to use unless your every day work involves multi-cam productions...

Otherwise, just finish your current projects on FCP 7 and start your next on the new system and enjoy the new features and less micro-managing

No no, FCPX is still pretty limited in comparison to FCP7. I know I won't be switching for a while.

 

[Small White Car]

What a bunch of cry-babies some of those reviewers are.

NO professional software is ready for professional use on day one. Anyone who thought that is either not a pro or maybe just incredibly inexperienced.

I'm really happy that I can have Final Cut today so that I can start learning it. Once it gains more features in a few months I'll know what I'm doing and will be ready to go. The complainers will, I guess, just ignore Final Cut until then and THEN they'll start learning it.

Oh well, some of us will be six months ahead of you. Too bad for you.

 

[Infrared]

And while you're waiting, check out some of their competitors that already have real-time editing, no transcoding, handle dslr natively, x64 bit, multicore funtimes. They've had these features for a couple years now. Then when FCPX is ready, feel free to go back, all the competitors have free trials, and they are all running specials to get you switched. Just try it. You know you want to.
http://www.videoguys.com/Specials/Now+In+Stock.aspx

AMC isn't "x64 bit" [sic].

 

[ppc_michael]

I've gotta say, the people who are defending Final Cut Pro X must be either inexperienced or not working on large productions.

It looks like it's great for cutting together little YouTube videos shot on small-sensor video cameras or whatever. But we work primarily in film still, and cherry-picking some of the broader features from the other applications, cramming them in to FCPX, and doing a way with the original applications is terrible for larger projects like ours. The editor isn't the colorist or the sound guy, and Apple does not seem to understand that.

They have essentially destroyed their future in studio-based motion picture.