What does it feel like to be a complete and utter idiot? I just wanna know because I find the mindset of people like you fascinating.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Video of Final Cut Pro X Introduction Now Available
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
What does it feel like to be a complete and utter idiot? I just wanna know because I find the mindset of people like you fascinating.
Saying that you can work faster on a product that hasn't even been released vrs. a product you haven't used at all, is rather pointless.
I actually work in a place that sells and designs high end workstations for people, and there are a lot of people running CS5 on macs. Many editors work with both, and even if they prefer CS5 FCP is still used a lot, and not being able to open a FCP project could cost you a client. It is best to go with a system that can run all major NLE's (FCP, CS5, and Avid). Also the cost of a PC editing workstation is not much cheaper then a Mac workstation.
And don't forget Davinci Resolve, which only works on Macs.
I hope you are right, but it Apple has taken a decidedly Online only approach to Final Cut X rather than the old school model of NLE for EDL creation.
That's great for a lot of people, but you do have to wonder how that new timeline kicks out an EDL, don't you? T
he majority of productions are still tape based for now, but it is shifting rather quickly (especially with the HDSR shortage). I would imagine that Apple is gambling on the inevitable future of tapeless workflows and so I don't think it would be that crazy for them to leave out traditional tools for NLE to Online workflows.
Not really as i have already used Avid and the Final Cut. And because i can see the new interface and features added i already know it will save me ooodles of time. The UI is amazing on Final Cut X (from what i've seen) and it doesn't take much imagination to see how it will super charge my work flow.
Yes, we still have a Media Composer that runs on OS8. Still kicking.
Maybe I misunderstood, but I was looking at just the number of people using FCP versus Avid in television and Film Production as the original poster had insinuated. I do maintain that more film and television editors are cutting using Avid software during their day jobs.
I hope it works out for you, I just think you may be affected by a bit of a reality distortion field and your actual user experience may differ from your imaginary scenario.
And you must be totally void of imagination and creative intelligence. Perhaps that is one of the reasons why you hate apple.
Let me guess your an engineer type - who loves specs and rarely has a unique thought of your own.
Which one of these new features (64 bit support, magnetic timeline, audio sample level precision inside the frame, precision editor, etc) do you think would slow my editing process down vs now and why?
I wouldn't argue that those things would slow down your editing process. My point is, that nobody has used this product. To instantly proclaim that it is "better" or "faster" without having used the product seems premature.
I hope it lives up to all the promises as well, but until I use it in a production environment there is no way to know. None of us have even tried it.
On the show I currently run, we would benefit immensely from the 64 bit and the background rendering, but it's an animated show and our audio and video never comes in linked. It's always synced manually and just judging by the demo it's possible that the new timeline structure could actually slow us down and or create new workflow problems.
So like all new editing packages, we'll wait until Apple ships it to us. We'll install it on one system and evaluate it before we start having people switch over. With any new software there are usually tradeoffs and we will evaluate the final product in a work environment before we would commit to purchasing all the licenses we would need.
Oooh.... dangerous territory. I wouldn't call engineer 'types' uncreative. Very unwise.
But look guys, Calm Down. There is no right solution for the 'professional' editor. Walter Murch, one of the best narrative film editors in the world, cuts on Final Cut Pro. Thelma Schoonmaker, often considered THE best editor in the world (if such hierarchy has any plausibility), cuts on a beta release of Lightworks. Anything that 'does the job' can therefore be considered 'professional grade software'. I find it hard to believe that some people here can't see Final Cut X being used by the most talented and serious professionals.
But look guys, Calm Down. There is no right solution for the 'professional' editor. Walter Murch, one of the best narrative film editors in the world, cuts on Final Cut Pro. Thelma Schoonmaker, often considered THE best editor in the world (if such hierarchy has any plausibility), cuts on a beta release of Lightworks. Anything that 'does the job' can therefore be considered 'professional grade software'. I find it hard to believe that some people here can't see Final Cut X being used by the most talented and serious professionals.
I hate to say it, but this looks like a nightmare for any high volume production house, ie. news studios. Changing the entire workflow for these kinds of teams and departments across the board is a NIGHTMARE.
You're asking the studios that have been transported into Final Cut work flows (bbc/ctv for example), to learn an entirely new interface. The adoption rate for this enormous switch to basically what looks like iMovie 2011 is going to be pitiful within the first few years.
There will need to be some serious mountain moving for this to be usable for editors that rely on being able to and NEEDING to see multiple video tracks 100% of the time.
They need to show a demo for serious power users that don't care about millions of thumbnails, scrubbing through clips with a mouse (where the hell is the preview window for gods sake), facial recognition and fun quirks like automatically figuring out the depth of field for a shot.
Lets see what it looks like as a multiple monitor system. How does it integrate with Final Cut Studio? How do multiple projects simultaneously look and work together? These are questions that editors that don't rely on putting projects together on a MacBook are waiting for.
Also, automagic color correction with a touch of a button? Color correction for HD-SMPTE better have had something to do with this.
Audio with multiple sample rates not needing rendering? This I have to see.
Zero render times with multiple codecs? Unicorns. Also Avid's had this beast tackled for years. (no, I'm not an avid fan boy)
This list goes on.
Give us an update for 64bit multicore power and the instant render and we'll be happy. Just don't charge us a slap in the face to bring the software to modern day standards.
You're asking the studios that have been transported into Final Cut work flows (bbc/ctv for example), to learn an entirely new interface. The adoption rate for this enormous switch to basically what looks like iMovie 2011 is going to be pitiful within the first few years.
There will need to be some serious mountain moving for this to be usable for editors that rely on being able to and NEEDING to see multiple video tracks 100% of the time.
They need to show a demo for serious power users that don't care about millions of thumbnails, scrubbing through clips with a mouse (where the hell is the preview window for gods sake), facial recognition and fun quirks like automatically figuring out the depth of field for a shot.
Lets see what it looks like as a multiple monitor system. How does it integrate with Final Cut Studio? How do multiple projects simultaneously look and work together? These are questions that editors that don't rely on putting projects together on a MacBook are waiting for.
Also, automagic color correction with a touch of a button? Color correction for HD-SMPTE better have had something to do with this.
Audio with multiple sample rates not needing rendering? This I have to see.
Zero render times with multiple codecs? Unicorns. Also Avid's had this beast tackled for years. (no, I'm not an avid fan boy)
This list goes on.
Give us an update for 64bit multicore power and the instant render and we'll be happy. Just don't charge us a slap in the face to bring the software to modern day standards.
Agreed. We would gladly pay $300 a license to upgrade each of our current FCP seats to 64bit and not have to interrupt our pipeline.
I don't care what everyone else is saying, that new version seems AWESOMELY AMAZINGLY EPIC and quells all most every grip I have with FCE.
I'm as giddy as Justin Bieber fan for this update
I'm as giddy as Justin Bieber fan for this update
Guaranteed that they wouldn't get rid of something so basic as OMF or EDL exports. Why would they? OMFs and EDLs are used for things other than exports for onlining to tape.
Think about it logically... they have support for 4K. 90% of people shooting 4K are going to do serious color timing with a DI. That's a figure I'm pulling out of my a**, but you get the idea. To do a thorough DI you gotta give them an EDL and all your clips, end of story. As for tapeless finishing, wouldn't you still want to give the sound editors and mixers audio OMFs? Good sound has nothing to do with being tapeless or not. These are just a couple of examples.
OK Affirmed now you make a more sensible argument. So you are upset that Apple changed the paradigm and f---ed your work flow and pocketbook?
Apple is not microsoft or avid and not so much into supporting the status quo - I imagine you know that. So perhaps you should just lick your wounds and file this under "to be expected." Or perhaps Final Cut X will surprise you by fitting better than you thought into your existing pipeline and return to you, in a short time, the amount of money you have to invest to implement it.
Yes FuzzMunky that was unwise of me and i stand appropriately corrected. There are so many creative engineers and in fact one might argue that enginnering itself is a creative act. I will not say that again -
What About Multiclip?
I can't say I saw every second of the two videos but I did see about 95% and I didn't hear about multi cam . I do a lot of multiclip editing and was wondering how that would work without the viewer window? I assume it would still have multicam editing available? I hope.
I can't say I saw every second of the two videos but I did see about 95% and I didn't hear about multi cam . I do a lot of multiclip editing and was wondering how that would work without the viewer window? I assume it would still have multicam editing available? I hope.
a. Never once complained nor mentioned being upset. Simply reiterated that the demo was interesting, but provided little specifics. "Improved media management" - In what way? etc.
b. Yes, I am tasked with purchasing the systems and software for my shows so I do consider cost and work flow when migrating to new software or hardware solutions.
c. hahaha "changed the paradigm"
the collapsing of the clips in the timeline made me think of multi-cam editing.
i am also curious how that is going to look like. Everything i saw put a smile. Look forward to upgrade and hopefully one day make a single penny. Darn it, not sure why i keep messing with it all this years and never capitalize on it.
Last edited: