FIlm professionals petition seeks to bring back old Final Cut Pro

[Eric Santiago]

...Once they add in all the major stuff that's missing, it's possible that the new program's positives (particularly the speed) will overcome the negatives (like the interface changes).

I learned editing with Media 100 and Premiere back in the mid 90's. Most of the steps in editing is still the same with Avid MC/FCP/PP. As I've stated before, Apple could have just EOL FCP but decided to be bold, which I welcome. I honestly dont think its that much of a jump from FCP to Avid/PP. To me the tricky parts were always the peripherals and they all seem to be working now (mostly).
Only time will tell where Apple is heading with this, I didnt give them the time of day when FCP 1.x came out. Took me till version 5 to notice and start using.
This time around Im going to give this one a chance, its not like Ill hurt myself using it.

 

[Brian Merlen]

If you're more comfortable with FCP7, stick with that. Nobody's forcing you to change right this second. I bet there will still be people using FCP7 two years from now, and as long as they don't change the OS too far, it'll probably still work fine (albeit in 32-bit).

If you feel like changing to Avid or Premiere, I'd say take a basic weekend class, learn all the basics, then sit down with the manual for a couple of weeks and go through every page. After about 100 hours, you'll have enough down that you can do 90% of the standard stuff, even with a client in the room.

As Mr. Most says above: the hard part is the gut instinct about knowing when to cut, and when not to. The interface is not that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. And as Michael Cioni says elsewhere, we haven't seen the final version of FCPX yet. Once they add in all the major stuff that's missing, it's possible that the new program's positives (particularly the speed) will overcome the negatives (like the interface changes).

Yes I completely agree and understand, the only reason I really feel a need to jump ship is that ideally I want to start using all of my cores and ram to their utmost potential. That and I already have the aps anyway and am sick of prores files filling up my raid while still needing to keep the raw files on top of that. I am seriously considering ebaying my FCP7 while it still has some value left in it, but I keep getting gigs that need fast turn arounds and its hard to really commit myself to getting Adobe and Avid dialed while getting yelled at to hurry it up... I know in the end it will be really swell once I get them down though.

As a side note does anyone know if Apple can track if I am still using FCP7 once I sell the discs on ebay (the discs are also registered to me, since I never would of thought I'd be contemplating selling them one day)? Like should I disconnect the router when I use it after the sale, just in case the person I sell it to is using it while I am also using it? I am super paranoid of getting caught out for breaking my license agreement, I don't want Steve Jobs minions after me... I don't really intend to use it once I sell the discs, but perhaps I will open an old project here and there. Stuff like that....

 

[Oliver Peters]

I am super paranoid of getting caught out for breaking my license agreement, I don't want Steve Jobs minions after me... I don't really intend to use it once I sell the discs, but perhaps I will open an old project here and there. Stuff like that....

Err.... Haven't you already created that scenario by publicly posting here ;-)

- Oliver

 

[shashbugu]

One thing I can take away from this thread is that FCPX is still the drive filling, overly transcoding, constantly rendering app its predecessor used to be. It even transcodes quicktime time files to prores. Every action has to be rendered slowing the computer down. Forget about the missing features, the program does not function as advertised.

 

[Subhadip Sen]

One thing I can take away from this thread is that FCPX is still the drive filling, overly transcoding, constantly rendering app its predecessor used to be. It even transcodes quicktime time files to prores. Every action has to be rendered slowing the computer down. Forget about the missing features, the program does not function as advertised.

I don't think this is so much an issue, considering everyone transcodes everything to ProRes anyway. It's been the de-facto standard FCP workflow for years now. The performance is clearly an improvement over FCP 7.

 

[Marc Wielage]

Yes I completely agree and understand, the only reason I really feel a need to jump ship is that ideally I want to start using all of my cores and ram to their utmost potential.

There's been a couple of thousand movies cut on Final Cut Pro, and speed wasn't a big deal then. Be patient. On a fast Mac, FCP7 is still screamingly fast. FCPX will be faster still, and once they can handle R3D files, XML, EDLs, and all that stuff, I think it'll be a workable program. (BTW, there's tons of screaming about this on the LA Final Cut Pro User Group.)

As a side note does anyone know if Apple can track if I am still using FCP7 once I sell the discs on ebay (the discs are also registered to me, since I never would of thought I'd be contemplating selling them one day)?

My opinion is that it would kind of be sleazy and immoral to sell a program and then continue using a copy. Having said that, I know of people who have two or three copies of the same FCP and run it without a problem. I think Adobe and Microsoft are actually much more aggressive in terms of keeping track of serial numbers and shutting down unauthorized versions.

Me personally, I wouldn't do it.

 

[Eric Santiago]

One thing I can take away from this thread is that FCPX is still the drive filling, overly transcoding, constantly rendering app its predecessor used to be. It even transcodes quicktime time files to prores. Every action has to be rendered slowing the computer down. Forget about the missing features, the program does not function as advertised.

Ive been editing over 100 clips in one event albeit HD 1080p here in a MacBook Pro 2009 Uni w/4GB RAM. Now exactly how is it your system is being tasked?
Im not experiencing anything drastic here and we' ve cut many projects using Avid MC on this same system, AMA hell to be precise
Sure it doesnt match a MacPro 12core but honestly FCPX processess are slight compared to older stodgier apps.

 

[Jason DeSimone]

Adobe rising.....time to move on people

 

[Gabe Conroy]

Semantics.

If you can not see the paralells on many different levels, I'm not going to sit here and argue abour semantics.

David

I believe the difference people are talking about is that Red's missing features are typically ease of use features that would be more useful to low end users than power users. FCPX is the opposite...its missing features are precisely the things power users need.

 

[David Battistella]

Gabe,

ower users?? What?

Have you seen the power in FCP X?

Look. Inital power users for RED were Jackson then Soderberg.

It's NOW, five years later. that Mainstream hollywood is coming on line and that is only after a MAJOR REVISION in the EPIC.

That is the analogy. ALl the parts are there with FCP X just like they were there for RED. Not eveyone saw or believed in RED, not everyone put their money down (and it's a much bigger investment than FCP- X at 300$)

Take a look at the SHARE command in FCP- X watch the Micheal Cioni demo ( a pretty well respected guy around here).

The biggest paralell is BALLS and VISION and I would say that APPLE has HUGE balls to make this move, even cutting loose a legacy app because it IS NOT GOOD ENOUGH for what is coming.

The same way 1080P DSLR footage is NOT GOOD ENOUGH for what is coming.

There are many similarities in attitude among the haters.

People shat on RED and thought DSLR was good enough.

People will shit on FCPX but guess what. It's way better than any other NLE out there right now.

It's built for the future, like RED One was, Like EPIC is.

David

 

[Terry VerHaar]

David really gets it!

David really gets it!

Go, David, go! Go, David go!! :001_smile:

 

[Meryem Ersoz]

wait a second - a little selective hearing is in play - Michael himself had to spend an hour and a half re-editing a project that FCP X was not up to completing. listen to the whole podcast, not just the parts that fit your opnion.

it's one thing to say that Apple is taking a risk on a future - the reality is, that they have done very little to open that window to the rest of us, mostly what we are going on is the blind faith of fanboyism and projection into an unknown and uncommunicated future.

I hope Apple succeeds with what I THINK they are doing - but none of us have any hard evidence that they have a clear vision for developing this software - and even if we BELIEVE IT WITH ALL OUR MIGHT - not a single one among us can say what exactly it is, beyond speculation.

I want Apple to succeed at creating an NLE because I want better tools, period. So far, that hasn't happened, and I've been forced over to Premiere.

Premiere is a very good program, and now the burden will really be on Apple to switch me back. Make it able to natively edit my EPIC-M footage. Make it able to read my metadata - and then, once that is accomplished, make it do some cool, groovy things which my latest investment, Premiere, cannot - give it back the power of Color, and I'll consider it an upgrade.

Every editing system we buy needs to do more, not less, than its predecessor.

Seems obvious. To everyone except the leadership at Apple. And the few who seem to be clinging to hope and beliefs rather than the facts.

If you want to transcode all of your footage to 1080 and edit in FCP X, be my guest. I'll stay in RAW as far down the pipeline as I possibly can.

 

[Subhadip Sen]

Meryem, I don't think anyone is saying FCP X is a good solution today - merely the expectation that it will be in the future. The lack of R3D support alone means it's no good for most of us. The discussion now is merely speculation for the future. Let's hope for the best, competition is always good.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

wait a second - a little selective hearing is in play - Michael himself had to spend an hour and a half re-editing a project that FCP X was not up to completing. listen to the whole podcast, not just the parts that fit your opnion.

it's one thing to say that Apple is taking a risk on a future - the reality is, that they have done very little to open that window to the rest of us, mostly what we are going on is the blind faith of fanboyism and projection into an unknown and uncommunicated future.

I hope Apple succeeds with what I THINK they are doing - but none of us have any hard evidence that they have a clear vision for developing this software - and even if we BELIEVE IT WITH ALL OUR MIGHT - not a single one among us can say what exactly it is, beyond speculation.

I want Apple to succeed at creating an NLE because I want better tools, period. So far, that hasn't happened, and I've been forced over to Premiere.

Premiere is a very good program, and now the burden will really be on Apple to switch me back. Make it able to natively edit my EPIC-M footage. Make it able to read my metadata - and then, once that is accomplished, make it do some cool, groovy things which my latest investment, Premiere, cannot - give it back the power of Color, and I'll consider it an upgrade.

Every editing system we buy needs to do more, not less, than its predecessor.

Seems obvious. To everyone except the leadership at Apple. And the few who seem to be clinging to hope and beliefs rather than the facts.

If you want to transcode all of your footage to 1080 and edit in FCP X, be my guest. I'll stay in RAW as far down the pipeline as I possibly can.

A) I, for one, did listen to all of the podcast - just for clarification. And, no, I don't agree with your "interpretation." But we all have our own POV. Are you suggesting Michael doesn't actually like FCP-X?

B) Not sure why you say Apple did not open the window to the rest of us; what better thing could they have done than to let us have the program early in its development? Damned if you do, damned if you don't. People complain that it was released too early. Now we have complaints that we are left in the dark, even when you can get started evaluating it now rather than later. And claims that Apple hasn't communicated ignore the fact that they have said they don't intend to abandon the pro market. People argue with that but it doesn't mean they haven't said it. Do they communicate like RED? No, we all wish they did, but they say what they are willing to say. That's the way most companies work.

C) Why would you have to transcode your footage to 1080p? FCPX will deal with 4K.

D Why do people call for "hard evidence" on one side of the coin when they are perfectly willing to make assumptions on the other? The future is unknowable on both sides. The popular claim is "they are abandoning the pro market" and all manners of "selective hearing" are employed to cite evidence to prove it. But Apple themselves say differently; you can disagree, of course, but why is your skepticim, based on your selected "facts" more accurate than my optimism based on my observations and a willingness to take Apple's comments at face value? Is it "there" yet? No. But, the near future looks promising to me. A simple opinion and, I believe, a well reasoned one.

E) And, I am going to register my obligatory complaint for the drumbeat of the term "fanboy." Why oh why do people retreat to the name calling approach when disagreeing with another POV? Is it not at least possible that people who choose any particualr product might have legitimate reason to do so? Reasons that are well thought out, well reasoned and thoughtfully analyzed? Are you inside their heads to know that they are just "going along" with the "cult" of Apple? Is there no possibility of a good reason to own and use any Apple products? Are all PC users "PC Geek Boys," all Premiere users "Adobe Brown-Nosers," all Alexa shooters "Arri Ass-Kissers", all Sony users "Sony Boneheads" etc? Come on, how about a new approach to disagreeing with another's choice of equipment - drop the name calling.

F) Premiere is a very good program, built on a very firm and well established paradigm; a paradigm that Apple helped develop and perfect; a paradigm that is many years old and just might be getting a little tired. Adobe couldn't afford the risk to change the paradigm, nor could Avid. Apple could, and did. I, for one, think it is going to work. :coolgleamA:

 

[Bruce Allen]

People complain that it was released too early. Now we have complaints that we are left in the dark, even when you can get started evaluating it now rather than later.

People complain that it was released feature-incomplete - eg "too early" in terms of development. Not "too early" in terms of time. A FCP update was long overdue. There is a difference.

FCP X was late, feature-incomplete and kept secret.
Let's pretend you're sending over an edit to a client of their showreel.
Client wants to see your edit. You say "you can't see it but I promise it is awesome!".
Client says "But it's been years! I just want you to update the old reel a bit! Send it over!"
And a few months later you send over something that is totally incomplete. And say "Well don't knock it - it's only version 1! This is just for you to evaluate!"
Client gets very angry.

Late, incomplete and secretive! Not mutually exclusive!

Do they communicate like RED? No, we all wish they did, but they say what they are willing to say. That's the way most companies work.

Name another professional post-production software company that works that way. Adobe, Assimilate, Avid, Autodesk, Quantel, etc do not.

Bruce Allen
www.boacinema.com

 

[Michael Hancock]

Premiere is a very good program, built on a very firm and well established paradigm; a paradigm that Apple helped develop and perfect;

What paradigm is that? Track based editing? Apple didn't develop that, and they certainly didn't perfect it. They had their interpretation of it, but it was around long before FCP.

 

[Scott Crawley]

Clarice Starling: Lambs. The lambs were screaming.
Hannibal Lecter: They were slaughtering the spring lambs?
Clarice Starling: And they were screaming.
Hannibal Lecter: And you ran away?
Clarice Starling: No. First I tried to free them. I... I opened the gate to their pen, but they wouldn't run. They just stood there, confused. They wouldn't run.

Gordon Gekko: Ever wonder why fund managers can't beat the S&P 500? 'Cause they're sheep, and sheep get slaughtered.

Gordon Gekko: I don't throw darts at a board. I bet on sure things. Read Sun-tzu, The Art of War. Every battle is won before it is ever fought.

from Rounders:
Mike McDermott: Listen, here's the thing. If you can't spot the sucker in the first half hour at the table, then YOU are the sucker.

Bleating little suckers running about like headless chickens hemorrhaging money.

 

[Stephen Matthews]

wow it's funny two separate segments of the industry arguing two separate points.

Yes, it is good for some people they will love and embrace it, it will be exactly what they want.

Yes, some people will hate it as it will not fit their current workflow, and even cause them to have to change computer platforms (getting a new computer) earlier than anticipated.

To each their own, but considering this program can't edit the files from the camera whose website you are on now just take a guess at how people are going to react to it here.

respect others opinions and choices, and try and look at it from another perspective than just your own.

I in fact agree with some of the implementation changes of this petition, others may think them ridiculous but to me it is far nicer to your existing and old clients who are not happy with the new version(small updates to fc7). But that is just me, and I have no hopes that apple will ever honor that petition no matter how many people sign it.

 

[Terry VerHaar]

I believe the difference people are talking about is that Red's missing features are typically ease of use features that would be more useful to low end users than power users. FCPX is the opposite...its missing features are precisely the things power users need.

Like playback, and audio recording. :001_smile:

 

[Brian Merlen]

Terry I think people are just a little bummed out that they waited years for a major update and were handed something that is sort of half assed. Yes maybe one day it will be awesome (we have been hearing that for years now though while we complained to make it 64 bit, get native support and fix gamma issues), but the fact that our old licenses don't matter is somewhat strange, and the fact that they do not communicate their future intentions leaves room for worry and doubt. Like saying you can do 4k with it and releasing it without that ability in place is pretty awkward to say the least, CS5 handles red wonderfully for quite some time now in 64 bit goodness. Also I dont think "fanboy" is as derogatory as you seem to think, i love being a fan of apple and they make great products usually. But the fact that this is a "upgrade", yet seems to be missing so many rudimentary features is somewhat shocking... and it feels that way to many users it seems.

we all do hope it gets there deep down, but what kind of time frame do we need to deal with? that and the fact that is seems dumbed down so consumers can use it certainly doesn't make me feel as though us supposed pros matter as much. its a cheap application and so similar to the free one that i wonder if we are going to be needed or if the budget cutting producers will try to avoid paying higher end editors? kids know imovie really well these days... the complexity of the previous final cut is what made us important, they were too dumb to understand the interface and we were pros for being able to control stuff with great detail, power users need extensive control, and there is no way to make that part simple while providing the level of control we need.

i suspect they want to make it an ipad application, but its strange that they make it so watered down. it certainly doesn't ring well with many people it seems. though we do hope it gets there one day, it just sort of freaks us out in the mean time. he said this would be awesome? what is the awesome parts of it exactly? why didn't they suspect that this would happen? i mean multicam is pretty darn important, OMF, etc...like that stuffs basic needs man