NAB Final Cut Supermeet Coverage

[res1233]

If I buy Aperture 3, 4, and 5 on the app store I'll have spent $240.

Didn't it used to be $300 for 1 version? What did the upgrades cost? I feel like I'll be way past 5 before I break even.



Yeah, our editing machines aren't even allowed to be on the internet.

Hopefully there's a way around this.

If you could get permission to access the internet to register your mac app store with your account, it's possible that just transferring the app from another computer will be all you'll have to do to get it to work, and can be done with future purchased apps. Just a thought.

 

[reel2reel]

Some definite improvements but I wouldn't go as far as to call it a "jaw-dropper". I was really hoping to see more about how it integrates with the rest of the suite.

Thank Larry Jordan for that "jaw-dropper" remark.

 

[iSamurai]

hmm... I've just edited a video for a uni project in After Effects... and having done another video in FCP before I thought these two programmes had similar interfaces though AE was much better though I do like FCP's automatic snapping when dragging video clips around.

As for this preview for the new FCPX, quite a few features I thought were great (especially audio clean up), but not so sure on the layout (similarity to iMovie) and compared to AE all the buttons and knobs are clearly allocated... But yeah I'm keen to give it a try.

 

[Barnzee]

only 300? sold

 

[reel2reel]

Well, looks like I was right on the mouche.

You're not taking into account that the price is for FCP X alone, not the whole suite of app's

 

[puckhead193]

Would like to see a demo as well as new Mac pros to go with it

 

[ShiftClick]

Not true. If you buy a Mac-app or iOS app all the updates for that version are free. A new version is a whole new program that must be bought again on both platforms.

What confuses you is that most iOS developers have decided to just keep updating their first version forever and not come out with a whole new version because they've decided that makes more sense on a smart phone than it does on a desktop machine.

But that's a business decision, not a technical one. A developer could do it either way on either platform.

MLB AtBat comes to mind, its been a purchase each year.

 

[LaDirection]

Wow, looks like the rumours WERE true after all! Apple killed the Pro of Final Cut Pro. That guy who turned the much admired iMovie into garbage has done it again. All they had to do was rewrite the engine with 64 bit support, had proper file handling, rendering titling tools amongst other necessary pro features and keep the same F*&$#@*&& interface as pro users of ANY pro software don't want to re-learn an interface for no reason! It takes YEARS before you really know a software under the hood.

We'll now see FCPx turn into a hit with amateurs and will be completely abandoned by pro users who will all return to avid.

 

[jettredmont]

This all started just because I said I hope Final Cut doesn't turn into iMovie. Somehow that turned into iMovie is pro and Final Cut is the Model T of editing.

No, no one said iMovie was Pro. You said you didn't want FCP to take the same "backward step" iMovie did. The hue and cry here is that, where we stand now, iMovie is a far more capable editor than iMovie HD ever was, and has room to grow where iMovieHD did not. It was NOT a step backwards.

Your rebuttal has been that iMovie is not pro, but that's obvious. iMovie HD was not pro (and was significantly less capable than iMovie today is in terms of precision editing, audio work, etc).

For my hobby work (NOT pro), I went from a die-hard Final Cut Pro user (I worked for Apple and got a hell of a discount on FCStudio) to an iMovie user with the past two revs of iMovie. I tried and simply could not use iMovie HD for what I wanted to do. I hit some barriers with iMovie today, but nothing like the crap that iMovie HD and before gave me.

 

[ipedro]

You're not taking into account that the price is for FCP X alone, not the whole suite of app's

In fact I was. I said Final Cut Pro should sell for around $300, not Final Cut Studio.

- iMovie for the general public.
- Final Cut Pro for those who want more control ranging from the semi-pro to the big movie studio.

I'm guessing that the other apps will be announced as part of Final Cut Studio before FCP comes out of beta or you'll be able to buy those apps as standalone in the app store.

 

[vincenz]

That price tag doesn't seem so ridiculous.

 

[bagelche]

Wow, looks like the rumours WERE true after all! Apple killed the Pro of Final Cut Pro. That guy who turned the much admired iMovie into garbage has done it again. All they had to do was rewrite the engine with 64 bit support, had proper file handling, rendering titling tools amongst other necessary pro features and keep the same F*&$#@*&& interface as pro users of ANY pro software don't want to re-learn an interface for no reason! It takes YEARS before you really know a software under the hood.

We'll now see FCPx turn into a hit with amateurs and will be completely abandoned by pro users who will all return to avid.

Yawn...'cause if it ain't kludgy, it ain't pro.

 

[res1233]

Yawn...'cause if it ain't kludgy, it ain't pro.

Some people seem to think that difficult to use = pro. Those are the people use windows because they enjoy fixing problems. Anything to save time is good for anyone, pro or not, and this interface feels like one that wont take much time to get used to. It looks well designed.

 

[rumz]

That price tag doesn't seem so ridiculous.

When was the last time final cut pro was available as a stand-alone app? Seems like last time I considered getting it, it was only available as part of the $1k suite. So $299 easily seems like a more reasonable entry fee than buying Final Cut Studio.

 

[Small White Car]

as pro users of ANY pro software don't want to re-learn an interface for no reason!

This pro user will re-learn the interface for the very good reason that I will get lots of new features and tools.

It's a shame you're going to go out of your way to apparently not learn anything during the process. Seems counter-productive to me, but it's your life.

 

[MacinDoc]

Wow, looks like the rumours WERE true after all! Apple killed the Pro of Final Cut Pro. That guy who turned the much admired iMovie into garbage has done it again. All they had to do was rewrite the engine with 64 bit support, had proper file handling, rendering titling tools amongst other necessary pro features and keep the same F*&$#@*&& interface as pro users of ANY pro software don't want to re-learn an interface for no reason! It takes YEARS before you really know a software under the hood.

We'll now see FCPx turn into a hit with amateurs and will be completely abandoned by pro users who will all return to avid.

Oh, they'll all switch to Avid to avoid learning a new interface, but of course, they won't have to learn a new interface to use Avid instead of FCP . Not everyone who is a video editor has been around since the time of the dinosaurs. You're complaining that an automobile isn't a horse, so it must be inferior to the horse. If we always continue to do things in exactly the same way, we will never make any progress.

 

[thedarkhorse]

There's an immensely good reason to learn the new interface, Speed.

 

[benjs]

Wow, looks like the rumours WERE true after all! Apple killed the Pro of Final Cut Pro. That guy who turned the much admired iMovie into garbage has done it again. All they had to do was rewrite the engine with 64 bit support, had proper file handling, rendering titling tools amongst other necessary pro features and keep the same F*&$#@*&& interface as pro users of ANY pro software don't want to re-learn an interface for no reason! It takes YEARS before you really know a software under the hood.

We'll now see FCPx turn into a hit with amateurs and will be completely abandoned by pro users who will all return to avid.

You've been using the beta for months, right? Or are you a developer for Apple? Because if neither of these are true, you have seen either some poor quality cell phone video of a short demo of this program, or several poor quality still pictures of this product, along with hearing short introductions to key features. If the latter is true, I'm sorry, but I really don't believe you are justified in saying what you have. The companies who embrace change rather than fearing it remain relevant, and Apple is notoriously good at providing a quick learning curve on their products due to strong UI focus.

 

[benjs]

Oh, they'll all switch to Avid to avoid learning a new interface, but of course, they won't have to learn a new interface to use Avid instead of FCP . Not everyone who is a video editor has been around since the time of the dinosaurs. You're complaining that an automobile isn't a horse, so it must be inferior to the horse. If we always continue to do things in exactly the same way, we will never make any progress.

"If I'd asked customers what they wanted, they would have said 'a faster horse'." -Henry Ford

 

[LethalWolfe]

You mean made easier to use?

No, I'll take easier to use in a heartbeat unless the way they made it easier to use was to dumb it down. Making something better and making something easier to use aren't necessarily the same thing. An automatic transmission is easier to use than a manual transmission but there are a host of reasons why manual transmission are the better choice.

Lots of the changes to FCP X look very promising. The 'enhanced' labeling/tagging feature for clips sounds great. As does their new stab at having an 'open timeline' (hopefully it works out much better than their current attempt at it). The easy color matching between shots could save me a ton of tedious work that I hate doing assuming it works properly.

I'm not against change itself I'm just against change for the worse or change for the sake of change.


Lethal

 

[chirpie]

This pro user will re-learn the interface for the very good reason that I will get lots of new features and tools.

It's a shame you're going to go out of your way to apparently not learn anything during the process. Seems counter-productive to me, but it's your life.

Agreed. Even a large overhaul of an interface like this one should take a day or two to get used too. I'm more likely to get tripped up over a remapped keyboard shortcut than anything else.

 

[Mr-Stabby]

Some people seem to think that difficult to use = pro. Those are the people use windows because they enjoy fixing problems. Anything to save time is good for anyone, pro or not, and this interface feels like one that wont take much time to get used to. It looks well designed.

You've hit the nail on the head there. It goes back to the old problem that some pros enjoy having something thats hard to use, because they feel clever/superior using it, knowing that others can't. Releases like this one that make a Pro program accessible to not so skilled people p*sses off these Pro users, because they want to be seen to be the clever ones, the mystical being who can work this very complicated program that no one else can. It's these type of people who come out with the 'Oh well it's not a pro program anymore, hello iMovie Pro" type comments.

I for one am a professional video editor, and i am extremely excited by this. It's going to be so fun learning this new program! Something new to investigate is always fun. From what i've seen, it doesn't look dumbed down at all.

 

[flashcutter]

Pro Support

Because Apple says "Tape is Dead" doesn't make it true...just like Blu-Ray isn't gone. So that begs the question--is there tape output support (machine interfacing, et al) for FCX?

 

[Small White Car]

Because Apple says "Tape is Dead" doesn't make it true...just like Blu-Ray isn't gone. So that begs the question--is there tape output support (machine interfacing, et al) for FCX?

They started out the presentation bragging about how FCP use is growing faster than the NLE market overall.

That's clearly important to them or they wouldn't have started out with it.

So re-ask your question keeping that fact in mind and I think you'll find your answer. Actually, you can answer a LOT of un-answered FCP questions using this technique.

 

[puckhead193]

So now the question is do I still need to transcode to pro res my avchd footage