Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

NEW Final Cut to be Announced at NAB?

Mike P. said:
What about a physical/disc copy?
Click to expand...

You can back-up app store packages onto physical media. But I think that's as far as it goes - from what Apple said at the demo, I don't think they're distributing it outside the App Store.

Unless you use volume licensing - I expect that they might have physical media for that (or some other distribution method because I'm not sure if the app store is setup for that yet).
 
So, no more Color I'm guessing? Hmm.
 
Apple has been mum on Color, DVD Studio Pro, and some of the other pro apps thus far. There's been a lot of conjecture about this on the LA Final Cut Pro User Group. My guess is that Apple is committed to the pro market, but I hope they'll continue with the entire Final Cut Pro Suite.
 
Paul Lee said:
So, no more Color I'm guessing? Hmm.
Click to expand...

I heard (can't find the link) that color is now just part of Final Cut X as it's own plug-in, filter, or however the new system works. This is how it should have always been. Sounds awesome if it works like how I'm picturing it in my head. Colorists are probably going to bitch an moan that this in not "professional", but it will be great for the rest of us innovators that don't like to waste money on a job that should just be part of the editing process anyways. Color was awesome program, but a pain in the ass to deal with XML files, and ruined by Quick-time's gamma issues. Good riddance.

Edit: NICE! Here are some pics of the new color system in Final Cut X... http://www.macrumors.com/2011/06/12/more-final-cut-pro-x-screenshots-leak-ahead-of-release/
 
As a Colorist, I'm gonna have to take a minor exception to that. Not gonna pull out the "Not professional" card, but...

I'm of mixed minds about the idea of rolling Color into a plugin. On one hand, the built in color correction tools in FCP have been pretty horrible for years. So any improvements to them would be welcome.

On the other hand, there are reasons that high-end correction and grading are done in separate programs. UI, workflow, etc. I could go on and on about it, but suffice it to say that if you roll the featureset of Color into FCP it will become less powerful and usable from the perspective of a working Colorist.
 
If it is rolled into FCP, PLEASE give us our control panels (MC Color, Wave, etc.) with at least as good of interface as Color. If they give us all of the software functionality but drop the panel support, that would be seriously bad news.
 
Ben Brainerd said:
As a Colorist, I'm gonna have to take a minor exception to that. Not gonna pull out the "Not professional" card, but...

I'm of mixed minds about the idea of rolling Color into a plugin. On one hand, the built in color correction tools in FCP have been pretty horrible for years. So any improvements to them would be welcome.

On the other hand, there are reasons that high-end correction and grading are done in separate programs. UI, workflow, etc. I could go on and on about it, but suffice it to say that if you roll the featureset of Color into FCP it will become less powerful and usable from the perspective of a working Colorist.
Click to expand...

Hi Ben,

I'm curious about why you think a plugin approach would be problematic for users of FCP. Presumably editors could still export XML for a traditional finish at a grading facility, so nothing would be changed from the current workflow. As another option, however, if secondaries, filters, interface connections, and other existing features of Color are rolled into a plugin and operate on a timeline within Final Cut, this would be an enormous benefit to low budget projects. It would obviate the somewhat cumbersome "Send To" and timeline modification process that the current version requires. You get to keep the higher end projects that flow to a Post House with dedicated programs for CC. But I get to finish lower end projects in a workflow that his far more efficient. This is all hypothetical, of course, but such a scenario seems win-win to me. Am I missing something?

Tim Eaton
 
I always thought color and sound track pro and dvd studio should be rooms inside final cut pro without ever having to send to anything. Edit Room , Sound Room , Color Room , Effects Room all working with the same timeline and a final output room
 
Bing Bailey said:
I always thought color and sound track pro and dvd studio should be rooms inside final cut pro without ever having to send to anything. Edit Room , Sound Room , Color Room , Effects Room all working with the same timeline and a final output room
Click to expand...

In total agreement with you.
 
Paul Lee said:
So, no more Color I'm guessing? Hmm.
Click to expand...

Like I said or I think thats what might be happening. Over to Resolve then.....

What made Color for us was the CP100 Tangent panel we out on it, fast and it worked well. Some room for significant improvement but is generally fine. What makes Protools is a dedicated control surface with Icon. Its Fast and works well. There are some things that a mouse and keyboard arn't so good at.

Some while ago I was taught that the reason why computors operationaly speaking look like they do is that some of the design came from the type writer department at IBM. If youd never seen either device before and saw both on a desk next to one another the likeness would be striking. For our work we do need good and proper HUI's so Id put money on who ever integrates affordable and well engineered control surfaces may get good support from its customers.
 
Ben Brainerd said:
As a Colorist, I'm gonna have to take a minor exception to that. Not gonna pull out the "Not professional" card, but...

I'm of mixed minds about the idea of rolling Color into a plugin. On one hand, the built in color correction tools in FCP have been pretty horrible for years. So any improvements to them would be welcome.

On the other hand, there are reasons that high-end correction and grading are done in separate programs. UI, workflow, etc. I could go on and on about it, but suffice it to say that if you roll the featureset of Color into FCP it will become less powerful and usable from the perspective of a working Colorist.
Click to expand...

It might be rather easy to include powerful coloring and compositing tools into FCP ... like Smoke does. Apple has said they've done this to at least some extent - the technology for color correction is there under the hood. The question then becomes almost entirely one of user interface, not software technology.

I think that we are underestimating the potential of modal software interfaces. Actually to use user interface jargon, "intelligent task focused modal user interfaces"

Well, the cool thing is that software can readily change its interface at a button click. It costs almost nothing to generate an interface where FCP X looks and acts like color ... but is still a full featured NLE.

You can get a VERY PRIMITIVE taste of this by switching between FCP's audio mixing and editing and other window layouts using the Window|Arrange menu.

You can get a slightly more advanced version of it by loading up Magic Bullet or the Baselight plugin.

Well ... there is no reason why you couldn't put FCP X into "color correction mode" and have it look like Color ... then you may be able to customize that and have it look like Resolve instead ... or whatever the user prefers.

The only reason that may not happen is because Apple has traditionally liked telling us how to arrange/design our working environments. I think that's pretty smart for iPhoto , iTunes ... or even something like Pages.

It breaks into stupidity when you look at FCP ... and FCP and Apple's other professional applications have typically been the most flexible from an interface perspective.

I think we are going to be all right.

So ... let's all just assume the WORST CASE: Apple has integrated Color's technology into FCP X, and the interface for color correcting anything non-trivial is abhorrent.

The solution is called "Resolve 8." A full license will run ~$1000 and you'll be able to interchange with FCP 7 and X readily over XML (as Apple demonstrated with FCP X) The cost is not unbearable ... and you'll have real world class grading with no compromises. BMD seems to be VERY user friendly when it comes to upgrades.
 
Timothy Eaton said:
Hi Ben,

I'm curious about why you think a plugin approach would be problematic for users of FCP. Presumably editors could still export XML for a traditional finish at a grading facility, so nothing would be changed from the current workflow. As another option, however, if secondaries, filters, interface connections, and other existing features of Color are rolled into a plugin and operate on a timeline within Final Cut, this would be an enormous benefit to low budget projects. It would obviate the somewhat cumbersome "Send To" and timeline modification process that the current version requires. You get to keep the higher end projects that flow to a Post House with dedicated programs for CC. But I get to finish lower end projects in a workflow that his far more efficient. This is all hypothetical, of course, but such a scenario seems win-win to me. Am I missing something?

Tim Eaton
Click to expand...

I guess it depends on how you break down "Users of FCP". For your average editor/freelancer/whatever having the basic functionality of Color in a plugin form inside FCP (Like Colorista or whatnot) would be fantastic. I just think that people are being a bit ambitious when they say "All the functionality built in" in regards to correction, and more particularly grading.

Alexander makes a pretty decent point about Modal Interfaces, and if Apple managed to pull that off I'd be thrilled. Less workflow steps (Send To -> Grade -> Render -> Send Back) would be fantastic. I'm just a bit dubious, personally. Apple's all about "Pretty" in their UI design, and if you're not careful you can destroy a color correction program by making the UI "Pretty". There's a reason Color, DaVinci, etc all present on a bland grey background, and it's not because they're too lazy to do UI design.
 
So Best Buy has a sale going through the rest of this week where all iTunes gift cards are 15% off, and with the new Final Cut Pro X being available through the Mac App Store you can use iTunes gift cards. So technically if you get 3 $100 gift cards you're only spending $255 for them. Just throwing it out there for anyone interested.
 
Jerrod Cordell said:
So Best Buy has a sale going through the rest of this week where all iTunes gift cards are 15% off, and with the new Final Cut Pro X being available through the Mac App Store you can use iTunes gift cards. So technically if you get 3 $100 gift cards you're only spending $255 for them. Just throwing it out there for anyone interested.
Click to expand...

My first reaction is 'Wow, good idea. Thanks!'

My second reaction is what the hell is the world coming to when I'm considering buying my editing program at Best Buy with i tunes gift cards?
 
Ben Brainerd said:
I guess it depends on how you break down "Users of FCP". For your average editor/freelancer/whatever having the basic functionality of Color in a plugin form inside FCP (Like Colorista or whatnot) would be fantastic. I just think that people are being a bit ambitious when they say "All the functionality built in" in regards to correction, and more particularly grading.

Alexander makes a pretty decent point about Modal Interfaces, and if Apple managed to pull that off I'd be thrilled. Less workflow steps (Send To -> Grade -> Render -> Send Back) would be fantastic. I'm just a bit dubious, personally. Apple's all about "Pretty" in their UI design, and if you're not careful you can destroy a color correction program by making the UI "Pretty". There's a reason Color, DaVinci, etc all present on a bland grey background, and it's not because they're too lazy to do UI design.
Click to expand...

I'm not a software engineer, but eliminating those workflow steps would be gold. It's not just the round trip steps either. It's what you have to do to prep an FCP sequence for Color, because Color doesn't like certain effects, is finicky about speed changes and some transitions. I end up rebuilding the sequence after I've roundtripped it to Color. Would be brilliant to simply work on the existing timeline within a modal interface (call it a room or tab), within FCP. Fingers crossed.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top