Professional Video Editors Weigh In on Final Cut Pro X

[grooveattack]

hey, i have used final cut x this week and personally i like it but have obviously seen all the negative comments all over the internets about it.
i came across this and thought it would be useful to answer some really important points on the newly released software.

http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2011...?ref=personaltechemail&nl=technology&emc=cta1

i hope this is helpful to some of you out there.

 

[linuxcooldude]

I knew a lot of problems would be solved if they took the time to actually learn the program.

I just don't see how FCP X can open FCP 7 files. Too much has changed to even make it work. Even if they tried to put backward comparability would it be a good thing? It would bog down a already fast program with old code. Most likely the results would be less then satisfactory.

They could keep FCP7 for older projects if it comes a time they have to edit them again. Over time you would be less likely to need or use FCP7 as the new version are used for new projects.

 

[deej999]

Useful link. David Pogue is good.

Found this interview with one of the designers behind FCP 1.0 on the shortcomings and future of FCP X. Good read!
http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/inte...iginal-designers-speaks-about-final-cut-pro-x

This site has good links too;
http://fcpx.tv/fcp/index.html

 

[handsome pete]

David Pogue is good.

He's still wildly misinformed regarding that article.

Some of his points are valid. The majority of them aren't, not to mention he's only addressing a small sample of the issues.

 

[LethalWolfe]

Richard Harrington does a great job of responding to David's list. I'm not sure how David Pogue got into the position of speaking on Apple's behalf and defending an app he admitted doesn't know much about against the people that use NLEs day in and day out to make a living. Things would be much less volatile if Apple would just lift the veil of secrecy a bit.

I knew a lot of problems would be solved if they took the time to actually learn the program.

I just don't see how FCP X can open FCP 7 files. Too much has changed to even make it work. Even if they tried to put backward comparability would it be a good thing? It would bog down a already fast program with old code. Most likely the results would be less then satisfactory.

While there are certainly problems that stem from getting used to a new program the show stopping problems for many are things that are flat out missing from FCP X right now. I also don't see how adding XML support, which is pretty much a requirement (and rumored to be one of the first things to get added back), would slow the app down at all. Have you read of anyone using the FCP X plugin from Automatic Duck having any decreased performance issues?


Lethal

 

[acearchie]

Things would be much less volatile if Apple would just lift the veil of secrecy a bit.

Lethal

Exactly something I was thinking. Surely it would be in Apple's best interest to come out and say whether this is going to stay a competitive "PRO" app or go for a more consumer/prosumer market.

I realise that the Apple way is pretty much black and white secrecy but what about announcing the iPhone 6 months before shipping and announcing Final Cut a few months before. Surely they can release a press release just giving some sort of answers.

I mentioned it in another thread but I was wondering if this was the intended FCP X version from release because a few of the editors who have been working on it said that there was a lot more to come from what we saw back in April but this application looks the same and I can't see any mind boggling new features that weren't mentioned?

 

[Chwisch87]

Well I saw a twitter post that was posted on daring fireball, saying "Final Cut Pro X review: Apple will happily piss off 5,000 professionals to please 5,000,000 amateurs."

Just looking at FCPx you can tell that someone coming from iMovie will have a much lower learning curve. It also has functions like exporters to youtube and facebook... really pro stuff there. Once you consider it only has a digital delivery, the lack of support for final cut server kind of thing, you get the idea that this product was not made for a editing house.

Apple has basically decided that the market for non-linear editors is stale and they want some growth.. With the explosion of amateur made content all over the internet, apple delivered a product for them. The question remains, what is or isn't apple going to do about FCP7 users.

I think FCP7 I suppose to have continued existence in the short term with more "pro" features being rolled out into FCPx over the next year or two. I mean did everyone just expect that they were going to switch over on day one? Of course not. FCPx I think could be described as a pro-sumer product that is in a transitional phase for pro users. Think OS9 to 10 here.

Of course it would really help if apple actually came out and said what was going on. lol.

 

[illegalprelude]

I mentioned it in another thread but I was wondering if this was the intended FCP X version from release because a few of the editors who have been working on it said that there was a lot more to come from what we saw back in April but this application looks the same and I can't see any mind boggling new features that weren't mentioned?

Maybe Motion and Compressor were it?

 

[acearchie]

Maybe Motion and Compressor were it?

Haven’t really checked out Motion as I have a copy of After Effects but there is basically no change to compressor as far as I can see. If there are changes they are not game changers like we were promised!

 

[xStep]

Haven’t really checked out Motion as I have a copy of After Effects but there is basically no change to compressor as far as I can see. If there are changes they are not game changers like we were promised!

Who promised you that?

 

[CaptainChunk]

Haven’t really checked out Motion as I have a copy of After Effects but there is basically no change to compressor as far as I can see. If there are changes they are not game changers like we were promised!

I would be very interested to see a benchmark comparison between Compressor 3.5 and 4 and if any substantial performance gains actually exist.

According to Apple, Compressor 4 requires OpenCL hardware to function, so does that mean that it's harnessing GPU power to assist in encoding? I've also been told that running QMaster for virtual clustering on multi-core machines is no longer necessary, yet from all that I've gathered from its manual, QMaster is still alive and kicking (and I suppose it has to be in distributed computing environments).

I for one HATE QMaster for virtual clustering. It's fussy and requires a lot of trial and error to fine tune for optimal performance on your configuration.

And if Apple went through the trouble of making FCP X and Motion 5 64-bit native apps, why couldn't they show the same courtesy to Compressor?

 

[acearchie]

Who promised you that?

Larry Jordan, below are some exerts from one of his blog posts that sort of agree with what I have said most important one’s in bold, bare in mind that this is a blog post made after the preview of FCP X back in April so that is the presentation he is talking about:

After the presentation, I spoke with Richard Townhill, Director of Pro Video Product Marketing for Apple (who served as the host for Apple’s presentation) who told me that “the purpose of today is to focus exclusively on Final Cut Pro, highlight some of the new features, and give people a chance to see and comment on the new interface. We will have much more to say about both Final Cut and our other applications in the future.”

After the presentation, I went down front to talk with the folks from Apple about what I saw. And I asked Richard directly: “Explain to me why this isn’t a big version of iMovie?”

Richard replied: “We designed this to have professional features for the professional user. The reason we chose to present it here at the Supermeet was that we wanted the professional user to see it and understand what we are doing.”

Somehow, I managed to sit in the Apple executive section of the hall. In front of me was Phil Schiller, Senior VP for Worldwide Marketing. The head of PR was sitting to his right. The two lead engineering directors, or VPs, were sitting on either side of me. I was surrounded by top-level executives from engineering, PR, marketing, product management — literally a dozen extremely senior executives were sitting in the front two rows.

Apple would not send this level of executive talent simply to watch the roll-out of a product that they did not care about.

While the slide show was identical to the February meeting, the demo was not. Randy Ubillos, who did the demo, added more features and additional explanations on effects (see the screen shot above). However, I was told later that the build that was demoed was the same build that was shown in February – and that the application has moved significantly forward since that time.

In other words, what we saw tonight was nowhere near the final form of the application.

I met Randy Ubillos, Chief Architect for Video Applications at Apple, after he presented the demo of the software. I told him that parts of what I saw I liked a lot and parts had me quite concerned. And I asked if Apple was interested in our feedback. He immediately said that Apple is VERY interested in our feedback, that they are listening and want to make this application something that all of us can be proud of using.

 

[Chaos123x]

FCP X does everything I wanted!!!

I wrote a letter to Stever Jobs when Final Cut Studio 3 came out and bitched a fit on how the new version wasn't 64-bit, didn't use the graphics cards and opencl, didn't use all the processors in my Mac Pro. I wen't on and on about all the new Snow Leopard stuff that was not implemented. Also asked about auto syncing by comparing the waveforms.

All the features I asked for are now in X!!!

LOL

I guess I should of said to keep everthing else the same.

 

[TheStrudel]

I for one HATE QMaster for virtual clustering. It's fussy and requires a lot of trial and error to fine tune for optimal performance on your configuration.

And if Apple went through the trouble of making FCP X and Motion 5 64-bit native apps, why couldn't they show the same courtesy to Compressor?

This, this! A thousand times this!

As an aside, I was hoping for blu-ray functionality to be included, and it was. Haven't checked it out yet, but it is a pleasant surprise.

FCP X is a little half-baked, but I expected that going into it.

It does actually seem like it's got a lot of the things people have heard me ask for on these forums before. Some omissions are downright irritating, but I expect they'll be fixed in the meantime.

Speaking of the meantime, FCP X doesn't superside your FCP 7 installation...so we actually get to have our cake and eat it too.

This may turn out to work better than we expected. It's stupid to upgrade software mid-project.

 

[Infrared]

Apple has basically decided that the market for non-linear editors is stale and they want some growth.. With the explosion of amateur made content all over the internet, apple delivered a product for them. The question remains, what is or isn't apple going to do about FCP7 users.

There is another explanation: Apple run a lean programming operation that
switches focus between iMovie (iOS & Mac) and FCP. Because they were
heavily involved in other projects they didn't have the time to write a
new editor from scratch. So it was a case of making incremental
improvements to FCP 7, or building atop something that already exists and
is more modern. I'm suggesting - I don't know this for a fact - that FCP
X has within its very core the iMovie engine. That is, much of the iMovie
codebase is shared with FCP X.

If that is true, then the similarities between iMovie and FCP arise not
out of an attempt to dumb down FCP, but from their shared DNA.

 

[Chwisch87]

There is another explanation: Apple run a lean programming operation that
switches focus between iMovie (iOS & Mac) and FCP. Because they were
heavily involved in other projects they didn't have the time to write a
new editor from scratch. So it was a case of making incremental
improvements to FCP 7, or building atop something that already exists and
is more modern. I'm suggesting - I don't know this for a fact - that FCP
X has within its very core the iMovie engine. That is, much of the iMovie
codebase is shared with FCP X.

If that is true, then the similarities between iMovie and FCP arise not
out of an attempt to dumb down FCP, but from their shared DNA.

Well I def. think apple is trying simplify the product line. iMovie for amateurs and making fcpx a pro app that prosumers actually can use.

 

[xStep]

Larry Jordan, below are some exerts from one of his blog posts that sort of agree with what I have said most important one’s in bold, bare in mind that this is a blog post made after the preview of FCP X back in April so that is the presentation he is talking about:

No where in those quotes was there any mention of promised Compressor changes.

Most importantly of course, Larry does not speak for Apple. Also, anything seen of a preview and reported is open to change upon delivery.

 

[xStep]

I've also been told that running QMaster for virtual clustering on multi-core machines is no longer necessary, yet from all that I've gathered from its manual, QMaster is still alive and kicking (and I suppose it has to be in distributed computing environments).

I for one HATE QMaster for virtual clustering. It's fussy and requires a lot of trial and error to fine tune for optimal performance on your configuration.

From what I've read somewhere, QMaster seems to have a super simple setup and self discovery process. Sorry, I can't remember where I read that, although I think is was on Apples site.

 

[acearchie]

No where in those quotes was there any mention of promised Compressor changes.

Most importantly of course, Larry does not speak for Apple. Also, anything seen of a preview and reported is open to change upon delivery.

When I was talking game changing changes I was refering to Final Cut as what we have today looks no different from the one shown in April which is the same build from february.

Well Larry wouldn't have any interest in lying since it would ruin his credability wouldn't it? He has a few quotes from people at apple.

 

[MIDI_EVIL]

I'm really, REALLY looking forward to what Apple could do with FCPX. It's an impressive application, for sure. They should have called this a 'soft release' though, with view to adding features and being open about it.

I'm considered a 'Pro'. I make a living from Final Cut Pro Studio 3. I don't edit complicated feature films, or documentaries, nor do I use a collaborative workflow. I work on exhibition films, art installations and corporate video.
I'm a one man show. I think this product is aimed perfectly at myself, and also the folks who have outgrown iMovie.

I absolutely resent that they've shut off legacy support. That is my biggest gripe.

I think this is a predictable move by Apple. A general market will always make them more money than a niche specialised one.

I have a HDSLR project itching to be edited with FCPX.

 

[Soura2112]

Good...and bad

FCX is doing what I want, but if I find something it can't I can go back to 7.

When I first opened the program sand tried my first edit I was nt very happy, except I was thrilled it worked with my camera with ease. After some hours went by I got used to the tool bar for example, still prefer the other tool bar, but im just learning new ways to do things.

I understand people's complaints, hopefully updates will help the problems. As many have said we still have use of FC7. Pretty much knew this would happen when you change so much, let's just hope the updates make some of us happier.

 

[MIDI_EVIL]

Haha. Great!

FCP X does everything I wanted!!!

I wrote a letter to Stever Jobs when Final Cut Studio 3 came out and bitched a fit on how the new version wasn't 64-bit, didn't use the graphics cards and opencl, didn't use all the processors in my Mac Pro. I wen't on and on about all the new Snow Leopard stuff that was not implemented. Also asked about auto syncing by comparing the waveforms.

All the features I asked for are now in X!!!

LOL

I guess I should of said to keep everthing else the same.

 

[xStep]

Haven’t really checked out Motion as I have a copy of After Effects but there is basically no change to compressor as far as I can see. If there are changes they are not game changers like we were promised!

When I was talking game changing changes I was refering to Final Cut as what we have today looks no different from the one shown in April which is the same build from february.

Well Larry wouldn't have any interest in lying since it would ruin his credability wouldn't it? He has a few quotes from people at apple.

I read your post as referring to Compressor. Short of a large Apple executive presence, none of your quotes have anything to suggest a promise of a game changer for the Final Cut tools.

Only time will tell if there are any game changers in the new FC products. Our current, and mostly uninformed opinion doesn't currently matter.

No, I wouldn't expect Larry to lie, but as he isn't a representative of Apple, you can not accept what he says as a promise from Apple. Well, short of an accurate quote from Apple brass which your chosen quotes didn't display.

 

[MIDI_EVIL]

I'm actually having a lot of fun cutting with Final Cut Pro X... If like me you have some projects that just need to be 'cut' and are not too technical, then it's perfect.

This project is a profile about a 23 year old woman who works at a coal mine in South Wales. A very male orientated environment, she talks about her challenges and her joys that come with her role.