Final Cut Studio Update Due in Late April?

[Durendal]

This is mostly nonsense, final cut is better / performing better and sells better than adobe production, also you can render out h264 ready for burning onto blu-ray (which can be done in toast or on a pc) and is a higher quality than what production suite can do. Also i dunno how apple keeps it so cheap, with the inclusion of color the price of studio is unbeatable.

Not my words, but I trust my brother on this one. He used Final Cut for years and learned advanced editing, effects, etc. He bought the whole suite, training materials, and did tons of work on it. Now that he's in film school he's turned a 180. He'll still admit that FCS is better in some ways, but he's sold on the newest Adobe suite. I trust his judgement in that arena, but I suppose mileage will vary depending on what you're doing.

But my point on Compressor still stands as I've used it plenty and gave up on it. If Apple would allow greater control over your formatting and speed the damn thing up a bit, that would be something. Ever tried formatting a video for iPod on it? What an utter joke. And while you can export to H.264 for BluRay, you still can't author or properly burn BluRay from FCS2. It needs real support, not rudimentary roundabouts.

 

[swatchpost]

And how often do you do this?

See, this is what I think is the inherent problem with FCP's media management. In order to keep everything organized, and especially when I'm working with multiple projects at the same time, I make a new folder on my hard drive PER PROJECT where I keep all my music, sfx, gfx, etc. and make a folder called FCP PROJECT. This is where I keep the Scratch Disk, Autosave Vault—everything from the System Settings.

It's easier organization, and it's much easier to find the things that pertain ONLY to your project than having to go into FCP Documents on your system hard drive and try to find exactly what you're looking for when you're working on eight projects at the same time.

Granted, this is how we do it because I'm a full service post house that runs Avids, FCP systems for offline and online editing—so the level of organization must be greater when handling that volume.

Obviously, for a prosumer user it shouldn't have to be the same. It's just something that my Avid has that makes things much more streamlined and easier to organize for high volume. But it's a good practice to get in the habit of doing, especially when working with FCP.

 

[numbersyx]

Probably in the cards too…

Now you've raised my hopes again.....

 

[darthraige]

Awesome!

Disc Studio Pro better make its debut. Tired of using Encore as a work around.

 

[TMay]

See, this is what I think is the inherent problem with FCP's media management. In order to keep everything organized, and especially when I'm working with multiple projects at the same time, I make a new folder on my hard drive PER PROJECT where I keep all my music, sfx, gfx, etc. and make a folder called FCP PROJECT. This is where I keep the Scratch Disk, Autosave Vault—everything from the System Settings.

It's easier organization, and it's much easier to find the things that pertain ONLY to your project than having to go into FCP Documents on your system hard drive and try to find exactly what you're looking for when you're working on eight projects at the same time.

Granted, this is how we do it because I'm a full service post house that runs Avids, FCP systems for offline and online editing—so the level of organization must be greater when handling that volume.

Obviously, for a prosumer user it shouldn't have to be the same. It's just something that my Avid has that makes things much more streamlined and easier to organize for high volume. But it's a good practice to get in the habit of doing, especially when working with FCP.

Final Cut Server is the add on solution:

http://www.apple.com/finalcutserver/

 

[slimpunk]

This is great news!

And forget Premiere, it's time to start taking on Avid now!

 

[the vj]

1. If Apple comes out with a new version of FCP you will have to wait for the next update because usually a mayor revision comes witha bunch of bugs, you you will have to wait for January 2010 (to give an example) to get the bugs free update.

2. Adobe have been superior always. I have their suit installed, I never use it because the interface is sort of strange and I do not actually need much of the editing lately and FCP would do. But Adobe has a maturity i their software Apple does not.

 

[JGowan]

So Sweet!!

When the new Macs came out, I almost placed a very big order but have held off to hear about all of the annoucements and to see benchmarks on the machines. The order will include Final Cut Studio so I am so glad that I waited. I'm sure there will be lots of people who already placed their order and got the "old" version of the studio... feel bad for them.

Happy for me!

 

[Small White Car]

1. If Apple comes out with a new version of FCP you will have to wait for the next update because usually a mayor revision comes witha bunch of bugs, you you will have to wait for January 2010 (to give an example) to get the bugs free update.

If by "example" you mean "silly guess" then, yeah, sure.

But in the real world, Final Cut Studio updates tend to come along every 3 or so months in general, and slightly faster after a major release.

2. Adobe have been superior always. I have their suit installed, I never use it because the interface is sort of strange and I do not actually need much of the editing lately and FCP would do. But Adobe has a maturity i their software Apple does not.

Ha ha...so software you don't use is better for reasons you can't explain.

Ok, got it!

 

[bigtriece]

The main problem with Final Cut (the current version) is that the mobile Intel processors are not powerful enough to run this software, you need at least a quad core to run this effectively.

I think Apple really messed up with their strategy of putting mobile processors in all their products and putting server class CPUs in the Mac Pro, and crucially omitting the standard desktop processors.

 

[Shookster]

If Apple would allow greater control over your formatting and speed the damn thing up a bit, that would be something. Ever tried formatting a video for iPod on it?

If you want to speed things up, use Qmaster. And what's wrong with iPod H.264s? They work just fine for me.

Compressor and Qmaster have a lot of reliability issues though.

 

[Lesser Evets]

From what I've heard the new version of Final Cut is going to have a virtual orchestra included, with scoring built into the program, so you will no longer need Logic to score the film project.

If they do this and close down Logic, while keeping the price of FCP about the same, I will be blown away.

 

[wizard]

One does not imply the other.

By that I mean next weeks debut does not imply nothing happening on the 24 th. In fact since next weeks meeting is really targetted at developers I don't see how there would be any relation to product announcements. Maybe nothing will happen on the 24th, I just don't see the relationship here.

As to FCS, which I don't use by the way, two years is not a long time considering the transition Apple is going through right now with it's OS. From the little bit I've heard this is a major rewrite to leverage new tech. The result ought to be a considerably improved application. I do use Apeture and frankly would rather wait on rushed release and instead get a solid and substantial update. Especially if rumors are true about the software targetting Snow Leopard. Even then I would expect some pain when all this new technology hits.

In otherwirds guys let's chill with respect to the whining about updates. Apples pro apps updates will come and hopefully reflect substantial improvements and new technology adoption.



Dave

 

[nontroppo]

The main problem with Final Cut (the current version) is that the mobile Intel processors are not powerful enough to run this software, you need at least a quad core to run this effectively.

FCP works perfectly for DV content editing on a 2 year old macbook with puny GMA950, and a MBP works fine on HD content as long as you don't try so many simultaneous video sources, but that is disk-limited.

What FCS needs is to move to Cocoa, and be 64bit native throughout. Color needs to support >2K (4K and 3K RAW cine cameras are proliferating!!!) and 10bit shouldn't be locked to YUV. And it should natively use OpenCL and Grandcentral when Snowleopard arrives. Apple needs to eat its own food and lead by example.

 

[yoak]

Really looking foreward to this. I got a copy of FC3 cheap and have been waiting to get FCS until they release version 3.
Soon I can use FCS at home as well.
Looking foreward to BD upgrad as well

 

[the vj]

Ha ha...so software you don't use is better for reasons you can't explain.

Ok, got it!

Exactly!

I mean, once you get used to FCP, are you going to learn all the shortcuts again with Adobe? I do not have the need right now but I remember well Premiere when I had my beige G3 back in 1999 and it was way better than todays Final Cut Pro. Imagine what would be now.

But basically I am fine with Quicktime pro

 

[wizard]

What reallybhurts is that the last hardware release makes things worst.

The main problem with Final Cut (the current version) is that the mobile Intel processors are not powerful enough to run this software, you need at least a quad core to run this effectively.

The problem is this performance gap just gets bigger and bigger. It really does make one wonder what Apple really thinks of the iMac. The problem is applicable to many software packages.

I think Apple really messed up with their strategy of putting mobile processors in all their products and putting server class CPUs in the Mac Pro, and crucially omitting the standard desktop processors.

Yeah I have to agree. It is very bothersome that they went to all the trouble of designing new iMac internals and never recognized the need to actually deliver better performance. Yes I mean better CPU performance. It wasn't something they needed to deliver across the board but the medium and top ends needed more that they got. Apple has very much painted themselves into a corner with the exclusive use of mobile processors.

Note too; I appreciate low power energy saving machines, the Mini being an excellent example of, but a user needs choice and the ability to meet cost and performance requirements. So I'm not at all opposed to Apples use of mobile processors as such, I'm just not happy having a performance gap that you could sink the Titanic in. From the standpoint of engineering quad cores in the iMac should have been a snap, a lay up or freebie. Instead the new iMacs are another example of Apple being to focused on concerns outside of the core reasons for purchasing the hardware in the first place. The reality is that people have broad reasons for looking at iMacs but unfortunately Apple made them into a narrow solution.


Dave

 

[MIDI_EVIL]

I'll be happy if it can finally use all my CPU cores to their fullest.

I just LOVE waiting 40 minutes for an export when I can see all my procesor cores working at 45%.

Seconded.

Such a waste!

 

[dvkid]

It's about damned time! FCS2 is a good two years old or more by now.

Not quite. FCS 2 was announced at NAB 07 and shipped sometime thereafter. So it won't be two years old until May or June of this year.

 

[Durendal]

If you want to speed things up, use Qmaster. And what's wrong with iPod H.264s? They work just fine for me.

Compressor and Qmaster have a lot of reliability issues though.

The degree of control you get over iPod H.264 encoding is pathetic (Compressor doesn't even support bitrates over 1.5Mbps after Apple officially added that to the iPod!) and the quality is significantly lower than a lot of free encoders. QMaster is fine if you're on a quad+ core or a network, but if you're on a dual core, it's not much help.

And yes, there are reliability issues. I've tried running Frame Controls for deinterlacing on 1 minute videos. I wind up with large blocks of combing still in the video when it's done. I don't even know how Apple could let that kind of crap out the door, much less fail to fix it by now.

 

[Ed A.]

I'm still learning FCS2

I have mixed feelings about it. It's great that they're releasing a new update of FCS, but I just finished studying to take the FCP6 certification test. Guess I'll have to wait for the new test for FCP7.

 

[SPG]

It will be nice to get an update to FCP, but what I'm looking for is some decent support for BluRay. Right now that's a big hole in the program.
As far as the whole Adobe v FCS debate, they have their strengths and weaknesses. FCP beats Premiere hands down no contest and the fact that there is a huge base of users makes it no contest. OTOH, After Effects makes Motion look like a Fisher Price toy.
The fact that we still have two competing suites to keep either company from getting stale is great. Nothing like a little competition to keep the innovations coming.

 

[AidenShaw]

Ummm, the competition already is using "OpenCL"...

Now, what would be REALLY cool is support for OpenCL when Snow Leopard hits. Can you imagine what that could do to rendering/encoding times? Apple would nuke the competition!

You did know that GPU acceleration using CUDA (the Nvidia equivalent of OpenCL) is already available for CS4 on Windows, right?

http://www.nvidia.com/object/builtforadobepros.html

Click the "Premiere Pro CS4" picture to see a graphic of the CUDA-enabled Premiere nuking the competition.

 

[ccuk]

FCP works perfectly for DV content editing on a 2 year old macbook with puny GMA950, and a MBP works fine on HD content as long as you don't try so many simultaneous video sources, but that is disk-limited.

What FCS needs is to move to Cocoa, and be 64bit native throughout. Color needs to support >2K (4K and 3K RAW cine cameras are proliferating!!!) and 10bit shouldn't be locked to YUV. And it should natively use OpenCL and Grandcentral when Snowleopard arrives. Apple needs to eat its own food and lead by example.

+1

It will be nice to get an update to FCP, but what I'm looking for is some decent support for BluRay. Right now that's a big hole in the program.
As far as the whole Adobe v FCS debate, they have their strengths and weaknesses. FCP beats Premiere hands down no contest and the fact that there is a huge base of users makes it no contest. OTOH, After Effects makes Motion look like a Fisher Price toy.
The fact that we still have two competing suites to keep either company from getting stale is great. Nothing like a little competition to keep the innovations coming.

I really hope Phenomenon is still alive and that motion is dumped and replaced with said Phenomenon. Shake is on its last legs, and Motion is quite frankly a joke... A GUI update across the board to make everything coherent, improving stability and interoperability between apps wouldn't go a miss. And whilst I hope/want to see Blu-Ray authoring I am going to go out on a limb and say we won't see it in this next update, but probably in the one after that. Given Apple are still being so stubborn about adding Blu-Ray to their Desktop and Mobile line-up, I really can't see Blu-Ray until well after Snow Leopard has launched.

 

[Durendal]

You did know that GPU acceleration using CUDA (the Nvidia equivalent of OpenCL) is already available for CS4 on Windows, right?

http://www.nvidia.com/object/builtforadobepros.html

Click the "Premiere Pro CS4" picture to see a graphic of the CUDA-enabled Premiere nuking the competition.

I figured that they probably would. I guess we'll see how OpenCL stacks up against CUDA, but OpenCL has the advantage of running on more than just Nvidia cards and, if I'm not mistaken, is compatible with a wider range of Nvidia cards to varying degrees, ie, 7x00 line or earlier. I think Apple will have the upper hand as they're part of the group that standardized OpenCL and control both the OS and the editing suite. It'll be interesting to see some benchmarks between the two. Whatever the case, (as someone said above), more competition is a good thing.