If FCP7 doesn't run past mavericks, looks like I'll finally have the impetus I need to learn Adobe suite. Not trying to re-ignite the debate of X vs 7, but I'd rather just sidestep FCPX and head over to Adobe. I know plenty of professional filmmakers that use Premiere and vouch for its quality, so I don't know why all this talk of "dead horse." If you're basing your choice in NLE based on how many people in Hollywood use it, you're looking for the wrong things.
Final Cut Studio 3 & Yosemite
- Thread starter pwhitehead
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
JustinePaula
macrumors 65816
I am running FCP 7 successfully on my 13 inch late November 2013 macbook pro, no problems, rendering is fast, the only issue was installing FCP 7, it wiped the FCP X, no problems with re-installing, and surprise surprise, the app store updater picked up I had FCP 7 and installed the FCP 7 updates, sweet!!
As long as you have Rosetta from Snow Leopard, you should be fine going forward, I doubt that Yosemite is a totally new operating system, if Rosetta works in Mavericks, I am sure it will work on Yosemite!!
As long as you have Rosetta from Snow Leopard, you should be fine going forward, I doubt that Yosemite is a totally new operating system, if Rosetta works in Mavericks, I am sure it will work on Yosemite!!
The bits I'm waiting for are stronger internal color correction (tracking and roto) and stronger audio editing tools. Addition of the other stuff Shake had would be nice as well. Motion's interface is still clunky for compositing compared to stronger tools such as Shake, Nuke, Etc... even blender is becoming usable for more complexity that the current final cut solutions choke out on (Which the dead in the water Shake makes look like child's play). Sound track pro has a much more polished interface for higher end audio work.
Until I'm able to manipulate image and sound in this way, I'm sticking with my $1300 investment in FCS and Shake. That said, I have several systems and am about to dive in and see if I can break this one with yosemite. I have older systems that can't go past Snow Leopard that will continue to allow me to cut in FCP7, Color, STP, and Shake.
I've Duped my yosemite installer to the desktop to make a USB Key out of and am off to hit go... wish me luck
Until I'm able to manipulate image and sound in this way, I'm sticking with my $1300 investment in FCS and Shake. That said, I have several systems and am about to dive in and see if I can break this one with yosemite. I have older systems that can't go past Snow Leopard that will continue to allow me to cut in FCP7, Color, STP, and Shake.
I've Duped my yosemite installer to the desktop to make a USB Key out of and am off to hit go... wish me luck
Pow!
macrumors regular
Colour
DaVinci Resolve is free for what you need (doesn't sound like you're doing anything larger than 1080p) and FCPX does have colour and shape masks which can be keyframed.
Audio
Nothing is stopping you from using Soundtrack to edit your audio for FCPX, but you'll have a smoother workflow with Logic, since it supports FCPXML import, respecting roles and subroles. Pro Tools, Digital Performer, Sound Forge, and Adobe Audition don't do this without a workaround or 3rd-party tool.
AE vs Motion
I find that I'm doing the same stuff I did in After Effects at lightspeed in Motion. Things that would take a guaranteed half-hour with AE are done in ten minutes with Motion. Loving it for video too, Motion's Optical Flow slo-mo is better-looking than anything else on the market including Twixtor. Great motion tracking too, which has been just as good as Mocha in my experience. The behaviours are such a huge time-saver - have you looked into the equivalent for AE? Expressions? What a mess for those of us just trying to get our ideas from our head onto the screen.
Software $$$
I would stay as far away from Adobe CC as possible. Renting software is not good for users, only good for Adobe. Don't look at your FCS as a $1300 investment which you still need to recoup - I'm sure you've made that money back by now, right? The people vouching for Premiere are really doing themselves and others a disservice - look for ulterior motives there. Once you're paying the rental fee, you're stuck. If you want to access or open your old projects, or if a client comes back for an update, then you need to keep paying the rental fee.
FCPX: Avid and Adobe will be playing catch-up for the next ten years
If you have any Final Cut Pro X questions or are stuck, I'd be happy to help out if needed. It really is the future, for almost all pro video applications. The TED talks and conference have switched to it as well, due to its metadata power.
Oh, and good luck with the install!
Last edited:
Pow!
macrumors regular
Like what? What exactly are you missing in FCPX?
For me it's the other way around, Premiere and Media Composer's multicams are ok but pretty crap compared to Final Cut, no other NLE can do the stuff with metadata that I'm using FC for I'm not sure what these supposed "pro"s are talking about.
@Pow!
I haven't made my money back from the investment yet... Other than having been able to use the software for the intervening decade (or whatever it's been). Indie filmmaker, no money yet, high risk investment
Resolve I've got, but color still works and is currently an easier workflow with FCP7's "send..." The coloring tools don't have built in trackers in FCPX, nor roto splines for arbitrary shapes.
I have to dig into logic more to see what it can do as a multitrack waveform based editor, I still have the historical view of it as mostly a midi editor, and I'm probably wrong there.
I personally find the nodal based workflow for compositing so much more streamlined than timeline based for compositing. Neither motion nor AE have it. Blender does, it's FOSS, the interface is still a little clunky, not nearly as bad as it was pre 2.5... But still not quite as elegant as Shake (or other dedicated software) for combining multiple sources into a single asset. Motion performs like a pig on my workstation on precisely the same tasks that shake sails along happily with. I use motion to generate particle generators for using in shake... Which link and change with updates to the motion file seamlessly. Given a particle system in shake, I would never touch motion, it brings my 2x2.5ghz intel power mac with 16 gb of ram to its knees. I sit and wait on the interface to catch up to every click and drag. Not realtime, nowhere near realtime. 10 minutes with shake or an hour with motion for precisely the same tasks. Mostly waiting on the software to keep up. The tool gets in the way.
I love the interface changes in FCPx, but feel the sting of the larger team workflow that's been removed for the change. It'll come back and it's perfect for a one man band quick turnaround workflow, but that's not the type of projects I/my team are working with. We need the power. The optical flow is strip mined from shake and seems to be one of the sole reasons they purchased it from nothing real.
I haven't made my money back from the investment yet... Other than having been able to use the software for the intervening decade (or whatever it's been). Indie filmmaker, no money yet, high risk investment
Resolve I've got, but color still works and is currently an easier workflow with FCP7's "send..." The coloring tools don't have built in trackers in FCPX, nor roto splines for arbitrary shapes.
I have to dig into logic more to see what it can do as a multitrack waveform based editor, I still have the historical view of it as mostly a midi editor, and I'm probably wrong there.
I personally find the nodal based workflow for compositing so much more streamlined than timeline based for compositing. Neither motion nor AE have it. Blender does, it's FOSS, the interface is still a little clunky, not nearly as bad as it was pre 2.5... But still not quite as elegant as Shake (or other dedicated software) for combining multiple sources into a single asset. Motion performs like a pig on my workstation on precisely the same tasks that shake sails along happily with. I use motion to generate particle generators for using in shake... Which link and change with updates to the motion file seamlessly. Given a particle system in shake, I would never touch motion, it brings my 2x2.5ghz intel power mac with 16 gb of ram to its knees. I sit and wait on the interface to catch up to every click and drag. Not realtime, nowhere near realtime. 10 minutes with shake or an hour with motion for precisely the same tasks. Mostly waiting on the software to keep up. The tool gets in the way.
I love the interface changes in FCPx, but feel the sting of the larger team workflow that's been removed for the change. It'll come back and it's perfect for a one man band quick turnaround workflow, but that's not the type of projects I/my team are working with. We need the power. The optical flow is strip mined from shake and seems to be one of the sole reasons they purchased it from nothing real.
JustinePaula
macrumors 65816
Wait long enough someone will post a way to make everything work on every device...
The march of time forces us to leave behind old stale outdated ideas and methods, and occasionally this comes at a cost, yeah I am sad that my investment in Final Cut Studio 2 lasted only a handful of years, I was bitter and hated the upgrade, now I look back and laugh as I create with ease something I would have bitched about in 7..
Will 7 work on 10.10 Yosemite, it might, if it does, will it be a great painless experience? No..It is a painful experience of dropped frames, error messages, clip collisions, rendering all night for a 10 sec clip, even if you have loads of horses under the hood, in a sum up, drop 7, it is a bag of hurt, upgrade to X, only as it is current, takes advantage of modern 2014 coding systems...
The march of time forces us to leave behind old stale outdated ideas and methods, and occasionally this comes at a cost, yeah I am sad that my investment in Final Cut Studio 2 lasted only a handful of years, I was bitter and hated the upgrade, now I look back and laugh as I create with ease something I would have bitched about in 7..
Will 7 work on 10.10 Yosemite, it might, if it does, will it be a great painless experience? No..It is a painful experience of dropped frames, error messages, clip collisions, rendering all night for a 10 sec clip, even if you have loads of horses under the hood, in a sum up, drop 7, it is a bag of hurt, upgrade to X, only as it is current, takes advantage of modern 2014 coding systems...
Imhotep397
macrumors 6502
MultiCam features in FCP X are nice, but that's it. It's still a pain in the ass to do precision edits in FCP that aren't 3 or more sources which still represents 90%-100% of a lot of workloads for a lot of people. It's still a pain in the ass to traverse the timeline from cut to cut and precisely perform insert edits. It's still a pain in the ass to be forced to work with postage stamp source footage when the mark you need going off screen to determine the out is the size of a cat or a quarter or a dime. It's still a pain in the ass to deal with Apple's automagical saving mechanism that doesn't allow you to know where your files are going without doing an absurd amount of per-arranging and then having to "Archive" your project even if you're not finished, but have to help out on another project. I don't need my hand held in that way.
Pow!
macrumors regular
No. Absurd nonsense. Down and up arrows move between edits. Down, down, down, what is a pain in the ass about that?
Precisely performing insert edits here with no issues!
Adjust your interface to see them larger.
Wow, that's a lot of drama for something that is certainly not "an absurd amount of per[pre?]-arranging. One click, choose where they're stored. Project/media management is working great here, I can choose where those backups are stored on a per-project basis. One click! "Absurd amount!" One! Click!
No idea why you're Archiving your projects to simply work on something else, that's not necessary at all. You can have multiple Libraries open at once, and you can use Snapshots for timeline backups.
If you're paranoid about something happening to your work, close the Library you're working on and open the one you're helping out on.
There's a ton more to like about FCPX than just the multicam, and any video editor who's not making an attempt to learn it is missing out on some great forward-thinking features and a blazingly fast workflow. Good luck, if there are any other issues I can help you with, feel free to post!
----------
Well said.
Imhotep397
macrumors 6502
I went back to Avid, because I needed a professional solution that caters to the editor that primarily is earning his/pay primarily making match edits, working on multiple projects simultaneously and working on group edits.
Last edited:
coldsweat
macrumors 6502
Well done you - thanks for letting us know! :->
puckhead193
macrumors G3
I've never really used Avid before. (fooled around with it) What is the learning curve for Avid if you know FCP7/X. From what I remember, all i know is the "Red Arrow"
haysoos123
macrumors member
Avid is similar conceptually to FCP7 in that you have video and audio in track layers. Recent versions let you edit in the timeline contextually like FCP7/X, but you can still use the modal yellow arrow/red arrow modes if you want. Avid also recently added 4k + support, and the ability to disable clips!
Overall, the UI hasn't changed much over the years, and a lot of it is clunky and complex because they have to add features on top of things rather than be able to "rethink" them. It works great if you get used to it, but there are a lot of areas that are kind of terrible to deal with if you have to do even light compositing or a lot of effects. Where Avid really has no equal yet is in large show environments where you have many assistants/story editors/producers having to wrangle a lot of footage for a lot of episodes (so, reality tv for example). On smaller shows or features/commercials, it's about a wash with the other NLEs in terms of group collaboration.
If you come from FCP7 and especially X, you will probably smash your head in for a while until you learn how to do things, and you will probably wonder why things were done that way at all. I still like Avid because that's what I started on, but as for personal preference, I now use FCPX whenever I can.