Video of Final Cut Pro X Introduction Now Available

[aiqw9182]

... but after seeing these video presentations, serve me a plate of crow and I can't wait until June. This is very, very impressive. Still lots of questions, ie Color, Motion, hell lets throw in Shake while we are at it. I'm assuming there will be other apps in the family to show up but this is quite impressive to say in the least.

"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.”"

http://www.larryjordan.biz/app_bin/wordpress/archives/1452

 

[BrianMojo]

No one but me seems to be worried that the viewer is essentially dead. I'll be very interested to see how actual editing works on this thing -- none of this addresses the process of selecting a clip, setting ins and outs, and getting it onto the timeline. All of this is about stuff that's already on the timeline, and that's where Apple seems to be suggesting you do the majority of your editing.

That doesn't seem very... precise. I love Final Cut, but 'precision editing' (aka Trim Mode in Avid) doesn't replace knowing what you're picking before you place it into your cut. Not to mention editing to music is going to be a pain when everything is slipping around all over the place...

I remain very optimistic. Looks like it's going to be a great piece of software. But it will be very interesting to see how these editing basics work within it.

 

[darthraige]

I love how people are rude enough to carry on conversations during a presentation like this.

 

[jeznav]

Here's another part of the demo that was missing in the beginning of part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gv7ckQYiKI0

 

[Gugulino]

Why Apple does not post the details on its Website???

 

[Hunabku]

Randy rocks!

As an editor i am very very happy with what i see here. Especially native avchd editing. No more Toast for transcoding and more importantly it will save 4-5x in hard drive space - Yes!

Keywording and the timeline editing looks awesome and speaks for itself. I would like to see more how keyframing works including hopefully more after effects like capacity with more ease in complex animating with masks, etc.

Whenever possible i don't want to go to another app for effects. I use After Effects a lot but i feel it is quite old school and could easily be blasted out of the water by something more apple like in the direction of final cut X.

So apple are you gonna make Motion not suck anymore with a completely new ui? Are you going to make it also more seamlessly integrate with final cut? Please rock it like you did final cut x - and i could let get out of the Adobe dungeon.

Then the naysayers have a turn of heart and say - Oh what i would give to be crucified (by apple). They must think the sun shines out (apple's) ******

 

[baryon]

No one but me seems to be worried that the viewer is essentially dead. I'll be very interested to see how actual editing works on this thing -- none of this addresses the process of selecting a clip, setting ins and outs, and getting it onto the timeline. All of this is about stuff that's already on the timeline, and that's where Apple seems to be suggesting you do the majority of your editing.

There is only one "viewer" now, which swaps between showing the timeline or editing clips. In the left side panel, you can choose clips, and they appear in the single viewer. Then when you drag them into the timeline, the viewer switches to timeline playback.

I think that this makes a lot of sense, as you would not use the viewer and the timeline playback at the same time anyway, so why not let it switch automatically between then two, saving space.

 

[BrianMojo]

There is only one "viewer" now, which swaps between showing the timeline or editing clips. In the left side panel, you can choose clips, and they appear in the single viewer. Then when you drag them into the timeline, the viewer switches to timeline playback.

I think that this makes a lot of sense, as you would not use the viewer and the timeline playback at the same time anyway, so why not let it switch automatically between then two, saving space.

I get that, but I need to compare frames side-by-side at times to ensure they're going to flow together. I love space-saving UI but I'm not sure that this one is going to pan out for me. I see a keystroke to quickly switch between the two in my future...

 

[ivladster]

I just love how consistent Apple is with all of their software. It brings the ease of editing from Logic and iMovie. This is gonna be such a deal breaker!

Super excited!

 

[Ramsos]

Watching the video has made me much more open to the new version. I make a living using Final Cut so yesterdays coverage had me worried. But there are some true genius features built into the new version. Not having a viewer is different but the trade off is cool. One thing I am worried about is support for existing FXPlugs.
There are still many more questions to be answered about DVD Studio Pro, Motion and Compressor. I use soundtrack pro a bit and Cinema Tools for slow motion as well.

 

[TimeArrow]

The world's best movie editors never do their job on Mac platform, on which there is little resource/tools compared with other OS, dont they?
A software on mac could be even called a great news. so as steam.

The same thing just needs more hardware resources on Mac.
e.g., for starcraft 2, one needs 1gb on win but 2 on mac...

Video card perfermance is another restraint, may be due to bad driver development.

 

[Affirmed]

Skeptical

If Apple thought this product was actually a big leap, they wouldn't have to announce it in front of a group of fans. I would have like to see them demo the software at the editors guild or have some editors who have used it.

Im sure it will be a great consumer product, but so far there is nothing to say that it is revolutionary or that it's even a good choice for content creation.

 

[Hunabku]

The world's best movie editors never do their job on Mac platform, on which there is little resource/tools compared with other OS, dont they?
A software on mac could be even called a great news. so as steam.

The same thing just needs more hardware resources on Mac.
e.g., for starcraft 2, one needs 1gb on win but 2 on mac...

Video card perfermance is another restraint, may be due to bad driver development.

You must be new here. Just kidding.

Apple was first to bring realtime effects to a mainstream platform with motion as Motion used the GPU for effects. Eventually other large software houses followed suit. Problem is that Motion sucks in so many other ways it fell by the way side.

Now with Final Cut X Apple is leap frogging again with Grand Central Dispatch, etc. These speed advantages are a huge reason for some of the best editors in the world to stay onboard with final cut and buy more apple boxes - which cost about the same as a pc when you add the extra costs of 3rd party pc software and the like. Besides reliability is essential for editors and Macs have that in spades.

 

[KiraDouji]

The world's best movie editors never do their job on Mac platform, on which there is little resource/tools compared with other OS, dont they?
A software on mac could be even called a great news. so as steam.

The same thing just needs more hardware resources on Mac.
e.g., for starcraft 2, one needs 1gb on win but 2 on mac...

Video card perfermance is another restraint, may be due to bad driver development.

??????????????????

Last I checked Apple quoted about 49% of the professional production market?

Video game restraints are due almost entirely to DirectX vs OpenGL. A combination of coders wanting to stick with what they know and Microsoft working with content creators in that area. For that reason developers can really streamline the code for Windows games... It uses more hardware because it's less efficient. Conversely, when coding for Final Cut they know what to expect in terms of hardware (they make it) and can code more accurately to that than, say, Adobe can code to Premiere. (Obviously Avid would be similar to Apple and thus not a counter example).

 

[xStep]

Someone else who had posted video was strongly asked by Apple to pull it, and he did; https://twitter.com/#!/TejBabra/status/58237572450746368

 

[addicted44]

Why Apple does not post the details on its Website???

Because its a "sneak peek" "preview".

Fact is that FCPX is going to be released in June, but be incomplete. The question is how incomplete. Apple probably doesn't know the answer to that either, which is why they are only giving out details for stuff they are sure about.

 

[Affirmed]

You must be new here. Just kidding.

Apple was first to bring realtime effects to a mainstream platform with motion as Motion used the GPU for effects. Eventually other large software houses followed suit. Problem is that Motion sucks in so many other ways it fell by the way side.

Now with Final Cut X Apple is leap frogging again with Grand Central Dispatch, etc. These speed advantages are a huge reason for some of the best editors in the world to stay onboard with final cut and buy more apple boxes - which cost about the same as a pc when you add the extra costs of 3rd party pc software and the like. Besides reliability is essential for editors and Macs have that in spades.

That's a bit disingenuous. Yes there are editors who use FCP. And yes many Avid editors also have an FCP license on their laptop or home computer as well. Why not, it's cheap and can use third party hardware.

When you compare actual employed editors who work in Film and Television, Avid is still king. Apple skews the numbers by comparing the amount of software sold, but it's better to look at the projects completed and see what tools were used.

The question is whether this new release and their strategy is going to continue to draw working editors away from Avid or just continue to be a great prosumer video editing tool that has gotten easier to use.

You can't evaluate the product based on an Apple pitch if you rely on your editing software for a living. How do you know it kicks out and accurate EDL? How do you know if it still kicks out solid OMF files to your sound designer?

Avid, Final Cut, Premiere, they are all just tools and you have to use the right tool for the job.

 

[Soura2112]

The suite

My main curiosity is whats going to happen with the rest of the bundle and how much each app will cost. I know this is just a sneak peek except I would like to know how much everything will cost not just FCX.

I love the idea of buying only what you actually use though as long as it doesn't cost more then the current FCP.

 

[blackpond]

If Apple thought this product was actually a big leap, they wouldn't have to announce it in front of a group of fans. I would have like to see them demo the software at the editors guild or have some editors who have used it.

Im sure it will be a great consumer product, but so far there is nothing to say that it is revolutionary or that it's even a good choice for content creation.

Exactly. Because no professional would be shooting in 4k. That's for soccer moms and trolls.

 

[LemonsofDeath]

That's a bit disingenuous. Yes there are editors who use FCP. And yes many Avid editors also have an FCP license on their laptop or home computer as well. Why not, it's cheap and can use third party hardware.

When you compare actual employed editors who work in Film and Television, Avid is still king. Apple skews the numbers by comparing the amount of software sold, but it's better to look at the projects completed and see what tools were used.

The question is whether this new release and their strategy is going to continue to draw working editors away from Avid or just continue to be a great prosumer video editing tool that has gotten easier to use.

You can't evaluate the product based on an Apple pitch if you rely on your editing software for a living. How do you know it kicks out and accurate EDL? How do you know if it still kicks out solid OMF files to your sound designer?

Avid, Final Cut, Premiere, they are all just tools and you have to use the right tool for the job.

Avid is for mac as well, in fact it used to be mac only. CS5 is also for mac, the only major editing programs that aren't for mac are Sony Vegas and Grass Valley Edius, which don't have a major market share. So a 49% figure is probobaly accurate if you include the people running Avid and Adobe on Macs.

 

[chrono1081]

Who said this was a dumbed down edit suite and no longer for pros?
This looks AMAZING and solves dozens of the gripes that I deal with on a day to day basis.
Thank god that Apple aren't scared of naysayers and traditionalists like user 'Full of Win'!!!

+384082084290384

I've been "video curious" for a long time. At $299 I think its time to bite.

 

[Hunabku]

That's a bit disingenuous. Yes there are editors who use FCP. And yes many Avid editors also have an FCP license on their laptop or home computer as well. Why not, it's cheap and can use third party hardware.

When you compare actual employed editors who work in Film and Television, Avid is still king. Apple skews the numbers by comparing the amount of software sold, but it's better to look at the projects completed and see what tools were used.

The question is whether this new release and their strategy is going to continue to draw working editors away from Avid or just continue to be a great prosumer video editing tool that has gotten easier to use.

You can't evaluate the product based on an Apple pitch if you rely on your editing software for a living. How do you know it kicks out and accurate EDL? How do you know if it still kicks out solid OMF files to your sound designer?

Avid, Final Cut, Premiere, they are all just tools and you have to use the right tool for the job.

Excuse me how is it a bit disingenuous when i say "some of the best editors in the world" use Final Cut Pro. I never said that Avid is not King of the high end in production houses.

I do feel that for myself as an editor, if i were to take the time to relearn the latest version Avid, I still would not be able to do as much as quickly, and yes as good looking of an end product as i could with Final Cut X.

I also understand that Avid has and may continue to have more necessary advantages for production houses and their workflows. I also know that people who work in those situations are often very tied to the solutions they are versed in and are less likely to try out something new - especially if it seems proprietary to their existing system.

 

[totoum]

How do you know it kicks out and accurate EDL? How do you know if it still kicks out solid OMF files to your sound designer?

The software handles 4K video,not even "prosumers" work in 4K so I doubt they'd bother supporting that and not things like EDL and OMF exports.

 

[TimeArrow]

Avid is for mac as well, in fact it used to be mac only. CS5 is also for mac, the only major editing programs that aren't for mac are Sony Vegas and Grass Valley Edius, which don't have a major market share. So a 49% figure is probobaly accurate if you include the people running Avid and Adobe on Macs.

The share thing is quite tricky isnt it?
Last time there is a report adding the sale of ipads to the apple computers, then apple instantly overreaches at least two major pc competitors in only one quater? i believe most CS5 users run their job on non-mac platform, and adobe may have that data. Just curious whether CS5 shows the same performance on both platforms if identical computer resources are offered. I guess those editors have their preference since they usually possess several workstations for specific jobs and they can try it out.

 

[lukewind]

The world's best movie editors never do their job on Mac platform, on which there is little resource/tools compared with other OS, dont they?
A software on mac could be even called a great news. so as steam.

The same thing just needs more hardware resources on Mac.
e.g., for starcraft 2, one needs 1gb on win but 2 on mac...

Video card perfermance is another restraint, may be due to bad driver development.

Are you serious? Please don't come in here with such moronic comments like that. Think before you speak, you will find that things in life will move along better for you.