Final Cut Pro X

[alph45]

Based on murmurings and mooings on the pro sites, I reckon Apple will lose some customers to Avid, if they had originally come from Avid some time in the last 10 years. They're talking about going back to Avid, not to Avid.

I also reckon every kid who has used iMovie in the last few years will start using FCP X in about July. This is the next generation of video editors, and they will far outnumber Avid users. They will be making movies for web distribution. They will be flooding the film schools. They will also have the mad skillz (look at me, sounding like a teenager ) to turn things over really quickly, something which is appreciated in today's editing environment.

Apple has built FCP X for people who have never used film and probably never will so the metaphor needed to go. Bye-bye bins, hello "smart folders". And a big hello to the do-deca-core, 8TB, 32GB Mac Pro everyone can now justify purchasing.

i second this as well.

as a side note, most of the editors i know don't think twice about switching back and forth btn fcp and avid based on the project /client requirements regardless of their particular preference.

ultimately the result of apples move will only come to light after the software is released and peeps get their hand on it. everything now is just looking at screenshots.

 

[handsome pete]

However, I can see this being a problem for professional editors. The lack of tracks poses problems, just off the top of my head.

I think it's difficult to come to any type of conclusion without seeing how customizable the workflow is. For all we know, there is still the option to edit "traditionally." I viewed this more as a demo of what new stuff they are bringing to the table. Of course everyone sees automated processes and scream "iMoviePro" without considering that they're merely an optional way to work.

Though I'd be very disappointed if Apple cut out key features of FCP (like multi-cam editing for example) only to sell them as add-ons I for one welcome the idea of them breaking up the studio and allowing customers to purchase only the parts they need or gradually purchase the entire suite over time.

I'd love to see Color (among others) get a facelift to match the new UI but I have a feeling that with all the effort on rewriting FCP we'll have to wait a little longer for the rest of the suite to get their chance.

Things like mutli-cam editing would have to be built into the software architecture from the get go in my opinion. I don't think we'd see things like that as an add-on. Plugin packages and other parts of the suite (Motion, DVDStudio, etc.) are things we'd likely see in the app store. I do like the idea of being able to buy the suite components separately. I like knowing that I have Motion at my disposal, but I do all of my motion graphic work in After Effects so I really don't need it. Same goes with Compressor. I don't have nearly the disdain for it as others seem to have (never had any issues with it), but I use Episode for all of my encoding.

 

[mondesi43]

You do realize the excessive amount in data in Motion, Soundtrack, & Others are from templates (aka, extra files you don't have to install). You could probably install the entire Final Cut Studio Suite in probably 3GBs without all the extra template.

I know that.... I'm just hoping/assuming we will have access to the same things without the file sizes. Or..... Buy Motion with core files, DL templates/effects/yadda yadda yadda as needed for free.

 

[jammiefreerider]

Since FCP will be editing everything natively (and I assume that means all sorts of AVCHD files), ironically that means many of us won't need the super high speed Thunderbolt drives.

AVCHD files top out at 24 Mbps (or thereabouts), and since this is around the bitrate of DV, ye olde FW800 drives should be fine for external storage. Internal storage should be fine - 10 hours of footage will only take 130 GB or so.

From my understanding FCP will still transcode your footy from AVCHD to ProRes (because by miles thats still the best codec to edit + add effects to) but it does it in the background along with all the faces/shot/stabilisation analysis. While a clip is being imported your allowed to work on the AVCHD file but it is automatically seamlessly swapped with the ProRes file when its ready. Which, if im right, is absolutely epic

Adds questions about where files are stored tho...

 

[puckhead193]

Will my current FCP plugins work with FCP X? Or will I have to wait for new releases and update them? Thanks

No one knows yet. My guess is that they will not work w/FCP X, but only time will tell.


Lethal

Do u know about transitions?

 

[ryanvalle]

From my understanding FCP will still transcode your footy from AVCHD to ProRes (because by miles thats still the best codec to edit + add effects to) but it does it in the background along with all the faces/shot/stabilisation analysis. While a clip is being imported your allowed to work on the AVCHD file but it is automatically seamlessly swapped with the ProRes file when its ready. Which, if im right, is absolutely epic

Adds questions about where files are stored tho...

I think it'd be more epic to do an offline in avchd, making an IMG backup of the disk which stored the content. You can make an avchd edit and then when you have a picture lock, go back to the original, transcode automatically the footage you need, do your color correction and effects with the better files and export a pro res file or whatever you need. Though disk space is cheap, that would be a workflow I'd love to have since I'm handed hundreds of gigs of footage for a short video, easily filling up a multi-terabyte computer and externals quite quickly.

 

[KeithPratt]

You can make an avchd edit and then when you have a picture lock, go back to the original, transcode automatically the footage you need, do your color correction and effects with the better files and export a pro res file or whatever you need.

The only benefit to transcoding prior to effects/grading would be to aid system performance. It will not result in better image quality.

 

[ryanvalle]

The only benefit to transcoding prior to effects/grading would be to aid system performance. It will not result in better image quality.

But doesn't AVCHD work in a way where some frames are estimated similarly to how HDV gets estimated frames? So if we were to apply effects to it, such as Color Correction, what we see may not be what we get when we export - thus by converting it to Pro Res before applying any sort of effects, you would result in more accurate effects rendering when it comes outputting a file out. However, if AVCHD doesn't work the way I thought it works (by using frame estimation), then I guess it saves a step in the process...

 

[martinX]

The only benefit to transcoding prior to effects/grading would be to aid system performance. It will not result in better image quality.

Yes and no, as I understand it. A smart guy said "sure when you transcode an 8bit 4:2:0 file to ProRes you won't be getting any more bits in the bucket, but you get a bigger bucket to swirl them all around in." (I paraphrase)

Every time you hit "render", your file gets rendered in whatever you have asked FCP to use. If it's an 8-bit 4:2:0 format (even DV) then the calculations applied to those colours may shift them away from the rest of the footage (or to use that metaphor, swirling the bits in that small bucket will result in losing some). Render a clip over and over again (say, text overlays) and the shifts may become noticeable. You may also get compression artefacts sneaking in.

ProRes is high bitrate, 4:2:2 10bit colour so more subtle variations of colour can be rendered in, rather than the crude 8bit steppings you sometimes see in things like DV.

Flipside, I reckon editing AVCHD directly is fine if you are usually a "cut this, butt that, overlay this, trim that" kind of guy. And I am.

 

[KeithPratt]

But doesn't AVCHD work in a way where some frames are estimated similarly to how HDV gets estimated frames?

Every time you hit "render", your file gets rendered in whatever you have asked FCP to use.

This is what happens when you do colour correction in FCP:

• FCP decompresses video (so whether it's AVCHD or ProRes, it effectively becomes uncompressed)
  
• FCP calculates colour changes in 32-bit float
  
• FCP renders to codec you designate

As ProRes is lossy compression, you're actually suffering one more generation loss by transcoding to it first. But in the real world you're not losing anything worth keeping. Just make sure you set your render codec to ProRes.

 

[mBox]

I think it's difficult to come to any type of conclusion without seeing how customizable the workflow is. For all we know, there is still the option to edit "traditionally." I viewed this more as a demo of what new stuff they are bringing to the table. Of course everyone sees automated processes and scream "iMoviePro" without considering that they're merely an optional way to work...

I love how you can isolate your tracks with Compound Clips When Randy was showing this off, he would switch back and forth from multi-tracks down to the collapsed version.
Now more nesting sequences
Now Im hoping everyone adopts this (Adobe and Avid).
Gone are the days of the multi layer/track cluttered timelines

 

[Richardthe4th]

A cut will still be a cut; and a fool with a nice tool is still a fool...

The art of cutting/assembling shots to a nice story will not change, the language of film/movies is still the same. A good book is still a good book, wether it is written with a pen, typewriter or top of the line computer with a fancy text processor

We will have to wait to see what FCP X will turn out to be, but Apple said they are fully dedicated to pro's, so I expect FCP X to still be a pro app, with all the pro functionality.

My impressions are that all these new functionality will help editors to quickly edit shorts etc. Wham bang the shots together. But longer movies will still take all the traditional craft. For example: the video and audio packed together, but I expect something like a J or L-cut will still be possible in an easy way. But how? Let's wait...

Grtz, Richard

 

[mBox]

Based on murmurings and mooings on the pro sites, I reckon Apple will lose some customers to Avid, if they had originally come from Avid some time in the last 10 years. They're talking about going back to Avid, not to Avid...

Funny how Avid announced the $995 upgrade to MC from FCP just days before FCPX was demoed
I used both professionally and cant wait to see how Avid reacts with version 6

I also reckon every kid who has used iMovie in the last few years will start using FCP X in about July. This is the next generation of video editors, and they will far outnumber Avid users. They will be making movies for web distribution. They will be flooding the film schools. They will also have the mad skillz (look at me, sounding like a teenager ) to turn things over really quickly, something which is appreciated in today's editing environment.

They said the same thing about Graphic Design, 3D (Gaming and SFX) and Web-Authoring. Once these options were easily available to the kids in high-school, a lot of us thought that the market would be saturated.
Ive had the task of interviewing and working with the younger gens for the past 10 years. I also get to teach them at local college.
Old or new, they all have to apply for a job.
From my experiences the older gen has been networking longer and gets first dibs on most projects

Apple has built FCP X for people who have never used film and probably never will so the metaphor needed to go. Bye-bye bins, hello "smart folders". And a big hello to the do-deca-core, 8TB, 32GB Mac Pro everyone can now justify purchasing.

Great! Now I can use the 32GB of RAM Ive loaded in all our 12core MP's

 

[mBox]

We will have to wait to see what FCP X will turn out to be, but Apple said they are fully dedicated to pro's, so I expect FCP X to still be a pro app, with all the pro functionality...

I dont get why others are still balking at FCPX as iMovie like?
Ive said this in other posts before, "If you treat it like iMovie, then its iMovie!".

 

[martinX]

As ProRes is lossy compression, you're actually suffering one more generation loss by transcoding to it first. But in the real world you're not losing anything worth keeping. Just make sure you set your render codec to ProRes.

That's the key, like editing 'native' hdv with pro res as the render codec. I'd be happy enough editing avchd like that just to avoid the multiple jigabyte files on ingestion.

 

[martinX]

They said the same thing about Graphic Design, 3D (Gaming and SFX) and Web-Authoring. Once these options were easily available to the kids in high-school, a lot of us thought that the market would be saturated.
Ive had the task of interviewing and working with the younger gens for the past 10 years. I also get to teach them at local college.
Old or new, they all have to apply for a job

My point was that people who have never used 'the old ways' will find it easier to pick up the newer metaphors.

 

[martinX]

For example: the video and audio packed together, but I expect something like a J or L-cut will still be possible in an easy way. But how? Let's wait...

You haven't seen the video of the super meet? You have to see it. IMO the whole timeline is getting set for a touch interface. Just imagine fcp x on your screen in front of you and the timeline on your iPad.

 

[martinX]

Great! Now I can use the 32GB of RAM Ive loaded in all our 12core MP's

Can I come and work with you

 

[Synthion]

Am I the only one here who actually LIKES Premiere?

 

[alph45]

liked it when i used it last (1999). Would use over, say, imovie if i was stuck on an island.

i'm sure it's fine, haven't looked at a recent version.

this seems to be a fcp x discussion. a fluffy one because we don't actually know what the product will be on delivery, but non-the-less amusing.

 

[jwheeler]

Am I the only one here who actually LIKES Premiere?

Ive liked all NLEs that i've used. They do what they say on the tin. Its just a tool to get an end product.

Premiere has been awesome for not transcoding

I am looking forward to seeing FCPX for real. But premiere IS awesome.

 

[martinX]

this seems to be a fcp x discussion. a fluffy one because we don't actually know what the product will be on delivery, but non-the-less amusing.

This is MacRumors. We don't know anything about anything

 

[THX1139]

I am looking forward to seeing FCPX for real. But premiere IS awesome.

Unless you are concerned about audio. The last project I did in premiere, the audio got jumbled up with drop-outs on export and I had to reedit in FinalCut because I couldn't figure out why is was doing that. But, I do like Premiere interface and edit tools better than FinalCuts ancient ones. Really looking forward to FCX, but still considering switching to AVID full-time for the known reliability factor.

 

[objectivecause]

Im actually very excited about this release. I hear a mixture of negative and positive responses about the new FCPX. I think it will take a bigger step then we believe atm

 

[mBox]

..but still considering switching to AVID full-time for the known reliability factor...

Not to scare you but reliability and Avid MC in certain aspects dont go together. Ive been on Avid MC since 2001 and can tell you that some days its a roll of a dice
One tip, dont upgrade till youve read all the gripes on the Avid forum site. Which is sometimes months after initial update is deployed.
Oh and yearly support means you have someone to call and bitch but dont expect your problem to be fixed quickly (sometimes never ).
Now since Im the end user and dont have to pay a dime, im good.
But I ran my own shop and had to deal with support costs and yearly justifications (my dollar of course), then I welcome anything anyone has to offer at $299 USD (or $285 Canadian)