Final Cut Pro X Released

[hans de vries]

Has anynone found out what happened with the gamma issue?

 

[shashbugu]

Is FCPX really a ground up rebuild or a full featured version of imovie. ImovieX has been around since 2008/2009. I have not tried it so I cant speak for or against it. I'm all for change, but change without a dedicated source edit monitor is like driving highspeed on the freeway without a steering wheel. Lets face it, its a Dud, DOA for $300.

 

[Robert Rif]

Lightworks is being prepared to go Open Source and there's full 64bit support and a Mac version on the Road map for later this year.

So keep an eye on Lightworks, since it certainly one of the fastest and most flexible NLEs out there.

SMPse
A Lightworks Alpha Tester, so you know where I come from.
Lightworks Beta

 

[Liam Hall]

We work very very hard on making sure the mac is a great editing platform. We are 100% feature parity (we finally got the mac version of universal counting leader in 5.5 which was the last windows only feature, did anyone notice?). About half the team develops on the mac as the main platform (me included been working on adobe mac video software for over 12 years now) and the other half work first on windows. Every member of the team has a mac and windows machine. Give us a try there is a free 30 day demo that is fully functional and a lot of online resources. Join me in the Adobe Workflow section of this forum if you have questions.

Cheers

Dave

I thought the vultures would be circling...

Can't say I blame you. Indeed, it would be nice to get someone from Apple on here to answer some of the glaringly obvious questions we all have.

 

[Stephen Gentle]

@Tim Morten lol you're a Red beta tester! Double standard much? Day 1 and everyone's jumping ship. If you had the same attitude about Red the company would have gone under before the first Red One shipped. Red is still a platform for early adopters.

Yeah, I don't remember hearing "Only 24fps and no audio? RED ONE is not a pro camera. It's like Handycam+"

 

[Paul Duvilla]

I thought the vultures would be circling...

At least their giving us the time of day. And good for them that their taking advantage of this because fcp7 wont last forever, and most professionals aren't gonna wait for 5 versions of fcpx to be released to get a usable NLE.

 

[Steve Johnson]

Steve,

Great post and I would have to agree with you. Is FCPX perfect, No. Will features be added, Yes. It will be interesting to see where the product is in 3-6 months. If things don't move then they would have defiantly missed the boat. At the end of the day, if you use FCP7 and it does what you need it to do e.g. make money, then there is no loss here. Learn FCPX until it reaches a state where its good for you. For facility owners, they always have different solutions whether it be FCP, Avid, Premier, to suit their clients. Some like Avid, some like FCP. For the independent guys, if what you have at the moment works, then keep using it. Jumping ship is premature at this moment. Everyone thought Apple missed the boat when they released the original iPhone with no 3G and no MMS Picture Messages - and to a point they did, BUT they did add it in. There are obviously some good reasons where there is a long list of pro functions missing, let alone R3D support.

For me, yes, disappointment. But on reflection, my current set up works and makes money so no need to jump ship. I added to my studio by purchasing the AVID crossgrade for FCP users and was a steal - just more options for future projects. Different solutions for different projects. I would love to see some great third party intergrations with Davinci, Blackmagic, etc

The price for FCPX is another steal, so buy it, learn it, see where it goes. I wouldn't use it for paid jobs quite yet, but as I said, what worked on Monday before the release will work Wednesday, the day after release - don't jump ship to early, just keep doing what you where doing.

Steve - great post - totally agree.

Steve

I want to preface this by saying, I have zero insider information on what's coming in future updates to FCP. Everything is speculation. But I want to throw some ideas out there and see where people are at.

iMovie haters:Do I enjoy editing in iMovie? Can't say I've done much in that app. Wasn't the biggest fan the couple of times I've tried it. Possible reason, it's just different from what I'm used when it comes to an editor. For those dissing the iMovie import. Let me ask you a question. If you had a client that likes to do an initial rough draft edit in iMovie and then wants to get a project over to you and your professional editing system, would it hurt to have a way to do it? If that client is paying you a good rate, wouldn't you want to be able to accommodate them. Not saying this is going to be the norm, but does it hurt having it as an option? As for the interface looking like iMovie, I don't necessarily care if it looks the same or similar, but I do care that it's capable of doing everything I need it to when it comes to meeting the needs of my clients and making me money. That is still to be determined.

Lack of professional workflow:I truly believe there will be solutions coming, and not just from Apple. Otherwise, why go through this rewrite, and why keep the name of the app, Final Cut Pro? They could have combined iMovie and FCP and called it iMovie Pro, which if intended to hit more consumers would fit right in with their "i" branding. Also, if this were intended more for the consumer base, why not make a bigger splash on Apple's website. Today's release is a bit buried don't you think? That's because the people they are aiming this at make up a small market compared to just about everything else they offer. They knew professionals would find it and pass the word along. They also know that we're all kind of used to beta products and internet updates by now. They felt it was time to get it out there and start getting people used to the new interface while continuing development and helping third parties add support. I will be the first to admit, if we're still lacking some of the necessary professional workflow solutions in a year, then Apple missed the mark by a long shot. I expect to see more features added in the next 3-6 months as the new Mac Pros roll out, and Thunderbolt matures and becomes more integrated. I believe if the architecture has been done well, then the solutions we will see from 3rd parties might in fact be much better than Apple could have done on their own. If Black Magic is able to tap into Final Cut and create a seamless way to get a sequence from FCP to Davinci, will we complain about that? Probably not. If a third party comes along and writes a robust XML/EDL plug-in that is far better than anything Apple has ever done, would we complain? Probably not. It might take some time, but if that's the route they go and 3rd parties are able to put in great tools inside FCP, I think the workflow fears may go away. I could be completely wrong on this.

Native R3D supportCan anyone confirm or deny this is not coming? The backbone appears to be there to allow it. Yes, it is not there right now, but not sure we can blame Apple just yet. There may be reasons why. Until we get official word on this, probably have to wait it out. Having said that, I would love to have the option (and it's just an option because sometimes I would still prefer NOT to use native format) of cutting with R3Ds using RR to decode playback and rendering. But quite honestly, i have also seen some limitations to this in the past, namely getting a signal back out to an HD-SDI monitor. So, there's still work to be done in this area across the board.

What does this change right now?A lot of people seem to be indicating they will jump ship. I'm curious what work are you not able to do right now? And if there is something that FCP 7 is doing that limits your ability to get work done, does Adobe or Avid solve those problems in the interim? To me, FCPx is a product that has potential 3-6 months from now, if for no other reason than that's usually about the amount of time I feel comfortable using something for paid work, unless it's a one of a kind product that works right out of the box and is easy to get implemented. But if FCP 7 suits your needs right now and is making you money, then you have the luxury of playing with FCPx until it reaches the potential you need it to. And if it doesn't, then it's probably time to explore other avenues. But how many people honestly feel there is a gun being held to their head right now to upgrade or cross-grade their editing platform? That's not to say I don't have a laundry list of things that challenge my workflow at times (gamma issues, etc). Perhaps it's not knowing what is coming down the road that is the problem. Which leads me to:

Apple's CommunicationApple's policies when it comes to NDAs are strict, okay perhaps a better way to put it, they are insanely secretive and go to great lengths to keep product announcements, R&D, etc out of the public eye until they are ready. In some ways, it's part of the Apple mystique. In other ways, it drives professionals like ourselves mad because we can't always plan our purchases, or in the case of FCP what direction we'll go in when it comes to upgrading our facilities. Apple works on their schedule, not ours. So, when they release a product like FCPx and it has a lot of things missing, or it's not quite what people expected, their model falls apart in some ways. I'm sure there are people in their pro apps division who would love to come out and say "Look, we've got all of this covered. In August you will see support for this, and in November you will see support for that". But I don't think that's how it works at Apple. When you see Dave from Adobe come on here and say we're working on a solution for that problem, it leaves you with a sense of direction. With Apple, you are left wondering if there will be a solution and you'll probably never know until it's ready. Different philosophy. Will Apple change? I don't know. I think they should to a certain extent. I think they need a couple of really good reps who can interface with the pro market and communicate with them. Perhaps they can't reveal everything they are working on, but they could reassure people that they are listening. Then again, Apple is worth a hell of a lot more money than I am, so I guess they can do it anyway they want. Communication, especially in a social media type of world, is something that companies can't underestimate.

Panic?No need to. In 3 months we will probably know a lot more. By then, if you have invested the $299 to learn the interface, see where they are going with it, you wil probably either be on the train, hungry for more features or you will have moved on, or stayed right where you are. No need to panic today. If you are a diehard FCP user, you may have more reason to panic later if what I have been talking about above doesn't happen. If they leave a lot of professionals out in the cold, and decide to ignore the needs of many an editor working with all kinds of formats, all kinds of workflows, then yes, it may be time to panic. Personally, I think they have a plan. It may not live up to everyone's expectations, but I can't see the completely F'ing this up because if they do, they wasted a lot of time and effort and should have just sold it to another company.

 

[nigelsmith]

Has anynone found out what happened with the gamma issue?

Bump.
Does it still have the QT gamma issues?

 

[Brandon J.F.]

Lightworks is being prepared to go Open Source and there's full 64bit support and a Mac version on the Road map for later this year.

So keep an eye on Lightworks, since it certainly one of the fastest and most flexible NLEs out there.

SMPse
A Lightworks Alpha Tester, so you know where I come from.
Lightworks Beta

Do you know the eta on R3D support?

 

[Eric Santiago]

Bump.
Does it still have the QT gamma issues?

Im not sure about that I also tried to get the 2GB file limit issue checked but I cant seem to render to Uncompressed from FCPX. I managed to do a 6GB ProRes (HQ) file over AFP network without a prob.

 

[D Fuller]

Learn FCPX until it reaches a state where its good for you. ... Jumping ship is premature at this moment.

But why should I spend my time learning something which is a non-starter? The interface might be just wonderful, but if I can't work with my colorist and my sound mixer, I can't work. It's a waste of time to learn a new software platform without any clear indication from Apple that any of the interoperability functions are coming. It's a waste of time. And I don't know about you, but my time is the most valuable thing I have.

And for the record, the difference between R1 with 24fps and no audio was that I could work in exactly the same way as I did with film at the outset. Everything added later was a bonus.

 

[Robert Rif]

Do you know the eta on R3D support?

Hi Brandon,

No, sorry I don't, but it shouldn't be too long. In the meantime watch the LW forum for any news about this.

 

[Geoff McLeod]

I'm not buying it. It's gone the way of Shake. I've been an Apple fan since 1988 and I can't help thinking the next FCP version will be bundled free with i-life. So, I think Ill continue with FCP 7 until I figure out which way to go. I don't suppose anyone's tried Motion. At $49 I don't think it going to replace Shake either.

 

[Brandon Kraemer]

The reports suggesting there is no SAN (shared storage) support really makes me scratch my head, what is Apple thinking serving this to a pro market?

 

[Michael Hastings]

Looks like Apple just rushed out a totally unfinished product...the fact it cannot even open a project file from FCP7 is just stupid! What are they thinking?

No XML...crazy crazy crazy!

Does it have potential? Yes, is it ready for pro use? NO

AVID and ADOBE are happy campers today!

Except I would be willing to bet quite a lot of money that 50x to 500x people paid and downloaded FCPX in two days than bought the avid cross grade during the discount period, or premier during that same period.

I would be curious to know how many facilities there are editing r3d material that need all of those missing functions - that don't already have some other system in place anyway (and just want to bash apple)? 50? 100? As successful as Red has been, the number of cams out there is still just in the thousands. The 5d has sold something like 100,000 units in the same time-not to mention the million or more fcp users that are doing paid/professional work with other cams (maybe not high end cinema, but still paid) that really don't need a lot of those functions.

The .r3d users are a really small percentage, so why hold back a complete rewrite/new program -when those features can be added in the next few months - probably in free updates? Should red have held back putting out a phenomenal epic cam because audio, remote control, accessories, batteries, etc, weren't ready yet?

 

[Jay A. Kelley]

Jeff got it..

Jeff got it..

Sucking Monkey Balls... Quick, to the point, accurate.

I wish my wife was a forgiving as some of you. "It's coming" some of you say. "Only version 1 relax" some of you say. Guys it's been over 2 friggen years. How much longer are you going to wait? They made FCPx exatly as they wanted it. They are conning the hell out of the pro market right now.

They presented to all of you at your user group thing (After kicking everyone else off the stage at the last minute) like it was made for you, but then rolled out a product that makes only a vague nod to pro apps. A lot of hours were spent deciding what to roll out first.. It was no accident. They rolled out what they believe will sell the most units upon launch.

Companies today are getting an arrogance that I do not like.. And it's pissing me off. Apple made it very clear who their first and most important customer is: The general consumer. Not the pro market. Apple is a different company now.. Like one person said... It's a phone company. It's a pad company. Yes it still sells Mac Pros... But most of it's money no longer comes from us.

Adobe and Avid have stepped up. And they are doing better. Sure Adobe still lacks some basic features in the timecode area, live output, and things like that.. And Avid still handicapps it's real time features for those who want to spend a lot more money, but they are on here.. They listen, and they are working to keep up with our demands. Can't ask more than that.

Thank God that business still works the way it does: Companies can be arrogant if they like, they can drag their heels if they like, and can even insult us or threaten us if they wish. These are come of Apple's better known traits, but customers DO NOT FORGET. And sooner or later a smart person comes along and creates a business or product that answers the customers need, and those customers happily flip off the business who thought they had them by the balls and move to the new business.

I think you all need to stand up and smell the coffee. The pro market does NOT represent enough income to Apple to remain on the top of its priority list. They have made this VERY CLEAR by releasing a piece of software that you have all been BEGGING FOR and leaving off very obvious and needed elements. Only to say "It's coming"... Again...

This reminds me of the guy who used to sleep with this really hot woman.. She would be late for dinner, rarely call him back, and treat him pretty bad.. He'd say, "But she loves me.. It will get better!". Of course, she's just holding on to him until she finds something better.

In our case, she already did, but many of us are still holding on anyway.

Screw letters of complaint. Wanna give Mr. Holy Jobs some feedback? Dump his ass. Of course, we'll all be keeping his ipad and iphone. Which I guess is what he really wants anyway.

Jay

Now.. I'm going to the Adobe forum to bug David into making the improvements in Premiere I want.

 

[JustinC]

Not sure if this has been said, but...

The media management is crazy. Aside from the fact that you no longer use media, you use events in FCPX. I assume events like your son's soccer match.

I tried to load the stock footage I use for a client from my RAID and basically you have two options. First is to copy the media into the event folder (which by default is within Movies folder in each user, but it can be moved) or the second is to create your own folder within the events folder once it's in the place of your choosing. So to use my media FCPX creates it's FCPX Events folder on my RAID then creates reference movie files of each clip I import which are referenced to the original.

I can't believe that any professional editor thought this was a good idea during the development phase.

It seems you can only have one timeline per project and those projects can't be saved within sub folders, so each and every timeline for all your projects are visible in the projects folder. Again a terrible management idea.

As for the complete lack of video output... speechless.

Color is dead and the colour tools are worse than FCP7s. And to prove how amateur hour it is, there are lots of v cheesy preset looks that don't work at all.

Lastly, the compound clips and auditioning things may work well for anyone editing their own material but sitting in suites with clients while half of the edit is hidden will make talking about edits, already an abstract task, very very hard indeed.

 

[Andrae Palmer]

Except I would be willing to bet quite a lot of money that 50x to 500x people paid and downloaded FCPX in two days than bought the avid cross grade during the discount period, or premier during that same period.

I would be curious to know how many facilities there are editing r3d material that need all of those missing functions - that don't already have some other system in place anyway (and just want to bash apple)? 50? 100? As successful as Red has been, the number of cams out there is still just in the thousands. The 5d has sold something like 100,000 units in the same time-not to mention the million or more fcp users that are doing paid/professional work with other cams (maybe not high end cinema, but still paid) that really don't need a lot of those functions.

The .r3d users are a really small percentage, so why hold back a complete rewrite/new program -when those features can be added in the next few months - probably in free updates? Should red have held back putting out a phenomenal epic cam because audio, remote control, accessories, batteries, etc, weren't ready yet?

The prosumer market doesn't need an AJA or BM card, doesn't need a color calibrated monitor via SDI... doesn't need support for native R3D, don't really care about customizable window layout on dual displays or XML/EDL support. You are right... they catered to the prosumer crowd on the initial roll out... no one is debating you there. The question is... when or if will they care about people with professional workflows?

In any case the app is getting bad reviews from the people that purchased it. they spent their money on it and are now complaining like crazy.

 

[Brian Boyer]

I completely agree with everything you said but at the same time don't you think that same person would be capable of doing the same, if not better project utilizing more specific tools available in older versions (FCP7/Color/XML to Resolve, ETC)? I agree that the quality of the product is 99.99% up to the user behind the gear, but at the end of the day, why should we have to adapt to something when we had something great, but just needed it updated to streamline with faster systems and add a few new features?

Of course, more features and functionality would make it easier to complete those projects, provided they needed those things in the first place, which most people won't (I'll get to that in a second). Even if they did need them, human beings tend to do things just to see if they can. In a way, they're inspired by the limitations and the risks. I guess my point was that someone out there is going to do something spectacular in FCPX that dwarfs the "professional" projects of people who begrudge its lack of pro features. There are vastly more people out there now who are single users than people who need to export an XML for use in Resolve in a facility or other collaborative setting. Don't blame Apple for this. Blame technology, computing power, storage capability and miniaturization. Blame the Internet. Blame YouTube, Vimeo and Facebook. Almost anyone with a phone has a video camera and, therefore, a need to edit. But, the current iMovie is more than most folks need. FCPX is way more editor than those folks need. Apple is probably gearing up to take care of the rest of us. Otherwise, they just wasted a whole lot of time and money.

Also, there's been a lot of bantering over the word PRO, and like Brian said, all that really matters is using the right tool to carry out your vision. My problem is a "PRO" app should give me the creative freedom to do whatever I need to carry out that vision. FCPX does not do this, which is upsetting. Additionally, the majority of us editors cut a LOT of material that is simply a product for someone else's vision, and we just have the creative input, technical knowhow, and gear to carry out ANY sort of editorial needs for the client FCPX vastly limits those abilities and options as editors. So for now I'll stay on my own ship and continue cutting just the same as before on FCP7 for as long as I need to until FCPX is usable, or I switch to Avid.

I can't think of a single app that gives you the freedom to do whatever you need to carry out that vision. Ironically, when a company makes software that takes on the role of all things to all people and doesn't integrate well with others, it's dismissed as not being professional enough. Sound familiar? At any rate, everyone's choice is simple. Buy it now or wait and see.

 

[András Puiz]

Sorry guys, I feel I just need to chime in, because there seems to be a general misunderstanding. The blame for this misunderstanding lies with Apple's lack of proper communication.

What Apple neglects to tell us is that this is a 1.0 version. They completely rewrote Final Cut Pro from the ground up, and a slew of features just didn't make it into the first release. They will be added later.

Some analogous examples.

1. OS X itself. When Apple released it in 2001, it was pretty much useless, more like a beta or a demo than a workable operating system. People were wondering if the Mac is doomed; if Mac OS X would ever contain all the features of Mac OS 9 (which had been the result of a 17-year evolutive process). Everyone was still using OS 9 for real work, and early adopters were playing around with OS X, and sending Apple feedback. Well, look at Mac OS X today. The idea of going back to OS 9 would be laughable.

2. iMovie. Apple threw out the old version a few years ago, and released the first iteration of the current one. Users were disappointed, several features were seemingly "cut." Actually, they weren't cut; they were simply not implemented yet. They have been mostly added back since. And with the first release of the new iMovie, the old one was still kept (as a free download) in case users weren't ready to live without some of the missing features.

3. Xcode. Virtually all Mac software development is done with Xcode. Xcode is perhaps the most critically strategic application for the platform. Yet when Xcode 4 was released a few months ago as a completely rewritten version, it lacked many critical elements. Again, some early adopters have already switched, but the understanding is that most developers should use a previous version until 4 becomes mature enough. And since then, it has been updated multiple times with changes and new features based on feedback.

Do you see a pattern there? Apple releases new products early, and adds any and all missing features as soon as it can. Note how the first iPhone didn't have copy/paste. Does anyone remember that now?

In 18 months, nobody will remember that FCP X didn't support RED or multicam, or it didn't have a proper audio mixing interface. Apple could have waited another year before releasing a more complete version, but chose to do so now. I don't think they're stupid. They have a reason, most probably they want to receive early feedback.

I think where they went wrong was failing to communicate successfully the fact that FCP X is a work in progress; a new start; and it will take time for it to catch up to FCP 7 in terms of features.

After all, FCP 7 is still there. You can run both, X doesn't overwrite 7 on your HD. These are growing pains.

I'm sure there will be people who find FCP 7 too old, and can't wait for FCP X to mature into a real workhorse. Apple will probably lose these customers. But look back in 2 years... The picture will be entirely different.

My two cents.