Final Cut Pro X: A Look From Past to Present to Future

[Justen Nguyen]

Yes I know what you're thinking. Not another thread on FCPX. But I'm not trying to excite another argument filled thread.

Really just here to share this video from tekservepro. "Final Cut Pro X: A Look From Past to Present to Future"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwF9J1_aYzI

It's a pretty detailed and neutral look and overview of FCPX. And definitely opened my eyes to some of the better things about it.
While it isn't prefect, I admit that I did not have the patience and time to try and fully learn/understand the program and left it alone.
I think the video reaffirms and outlines in detail a lot of what Michael Cioni had said about FCPX.

I have spent a lot of time not only evaluating FCPX, but also evaluating technological advancements in general since the late 1990's. Pointing out that FCPX is missing critical components to professional users is warranted and (more importantly) a large percentage of the reasoning behind limited implementation of this application in the workforce. But to suggest that FCPX is a step backwards is a gross misunderstanding of what is happening in this program, programs like it and Apple in general.

While it's easy to establish "WHAT" is wrong with FCPX, I encourage people to explore the "WHY." And when you can figure out the "WHY" you can always determine the "HOW."
For example, there are components inside the new architecture that are simply so advanced that there is no way to easily or efficiently upgrade existing project files from a previous iteration. But even more significant than that is the philosophical approach Apple is taking on editing in general and I personally am 100% behind Apple's stand on the matter, even though it means I cannot use the program for much of my work at this time.

What's happening with FCPX right now is no different than what Apple did when they switched from OS9 to OSX. The problems, limitations, dual-booting, limited functionality, restricted horsepower - all of this was part of a massive improvement that starts with massive causalities. And while there were few online message boards at the time of the OSX turnover, I am willing to bet the opinions of those feeling "marooned" due to their contentment was similar to the feelings now. -They just didn't have as easy a time of expressing it. But forward-thinking leaders like Apple (and there are many others) are able to identify when it's appropriate to sacrifice the few to save the many. So is the case of the current situation of FCPX.

Now a real risk: POLITICS;-)
One thing that always bothers me with political discussion is that people tend to assume they know as much as world leaders in terms of evaluation of decisions. In other words, people criticize presidents or senators, military officers or even mayors from making what seem "rash" decisions when there is no way all of the information that went into those decision are clear to the general public. That is to say we often do not have the largest perspective on the matter, yet we do have the largest (collective) voice in the matter. This is why I cannot partake in this petition because it assumes I know more than Apple does about what's good for the software and hardware they build for me...which I don't.
Some of you may remember a radical change in Apple's platform when in 1999 they removed the floppy drive from their computers. "How will we ever get content in and out of the CPU!?!?!" criticized many. But Apple knew of AT&T and Comcast who had been laying massive lines of cable (many cities with early fiber forms) that was going to offer high speed internet within 18 months. Steve said "You'll just send 3.5MB files through the internet without any physical media." But did everyone take this "organ transplant" well? Of course not, but the masses benefited hugely because Apple took a stand on a level of progressions that was necessary for it's own protection and advancement of the tools we use. When a company with as much reach, influence and general inside information as Apple has knows something about the future, they tend to position their product in line with that trend. This is the very reason that when Apple releases (what I believe will be their last) tower, it will be without optical drives. Like the floppy drive, optical media is a limiting format and a bottleneck that's lifespan is on a steady decline. While this will upset the tools of many, it will no doubt improve the tools for many more.

FCPX in a word: HORSEPOWER.
This system is by far the most advanced image and sound manipulation device that I've ever seen. Running incredibly complex tasks on my laptop in 2K resolution with this program is unmatched by any other software I've seen for the price of the tool and the hardware it runs on. For me, the road that FCPX is headed down is absolutely the right one, but it's a road under construction. And while I'm fully aware driving on that road now is going to be full of unfinished pavement, narrow lanes and those annoying K-rails really close to the side of my car, I know the direction the road is going is exactly where need to be.

My friends Steve Beres and Suny Behar have a podcast show called "Tech Media Planet." The show is fantastic not only because the content is good, but unlike many podcasts, Steve and Suny are hysterical. Making people laugh while talking about gear is about as rare as it gets, but that's why people love the show. Tech Media Planet recently did a show on FCPX and had me as a guest. If you want to hear and see (we did a clip component to the podcast) what I highlight as the right moves for FCPX, take a free listen at the link below. It just scratches the surface on what FCPX's positive affect will be on the next evolutionary trend of creative hardware and software potential.

http://techmediaplanet.com/2011/07/episode-26-final-cut-pro-x/

Apple clearly made mistakes in this release. And I'm as disappointed in the positioning of the application as anyone. But I have been a user and supporter of AVID, FCP and Premiere for over a decade and I like to think I know a good idea when I see one.

;-)

m

I met Michael at the open house for RED, great guy. I don't think I need to try and vouch for him.
Anyone involved with RED should already know his credentials and what he's doing with post.

I'm glad that the dust is settling about FCPX.
It's crazy, exciting, and nerve wrecking to see the industry change so quickly in such a short period of time.
Hopefully the video helps someone. I definitely liked the ending.

 

[Liam Hall]

Yes I know what you're thinking. Not another thread on FCPX. But I'm not trying to excite another argument filled thread.

No, I was thinking, I saw this video nearly a month ago - before Lion was released. Which made me think how half-assed of Apple to release FCPX before the OS it is designed to work on...

 

[Jarek Zabczynski]

While that was a great video to watch, and yes I watched the whole thing, and it's given me a slightly better understanding of how FCPX works, I stiff consider it completely unusable for the kind of editing that I do. I can't for the life of me see how I could possibly edit a music video like that. I need my tracks and I need to be able to layout 20 of them in my initial cuts to throw clips around. Sorry if I'm "old hat" but editing isn't broken yet. Just because the software was getting slow doesn't mean the entire workflow needed to be re-written. All they needed to do was speed up the software.

FCP7+64bit+multicore+some of the organization and analytical features of X=perfection

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

I stiff consider it completely unusable for the kind of editing that I do. I can't for the life of me see how I could possibly edit a music video like that. I need my tracks and I need to be able to layout 20 of them in my initial cuts to throw clips around.

Well that's interesting.

The Avid/1 was introduced in 1989. Before that the LucasFilm EditDroid system existed, but just at LucasFilm starting in about 1981.

I'm not sure when those systems introduced the capability to handle 20 tracks of video ... but at first they barely handled two tracks.

Here is what mystifies me ... I distinctly remember motion pictures from before either of those dates ... including music videos.

How is that possible? Does anyone know???

Maybe all those music videos and feature films from before 1989 or so were actually edited in the future and transmitted back in time!!

If so, at least we know they couldn't possibly have used FCP X.

They must have used iMovie instead.

 

[DCC Erickson]

I'm sorry ... EditRoid? Is that where you jog the shuttle with your ASS?

 

[Alexander Ibrahim]

I'm sorry ... EditRoid? Is that where you jog the shuttle with your ASS?

???

 

[Häakon]

I can't for the life of me see how I could possibly edit a music video like that. I need my tracks and I need to be able to layout 20 of them in my initial cuts to throw clips around.

I don't completely disagree with you, but this point of view goes directly to his "buttprint in the couch" analogy. What I got out of the video (from his point of view, at any rate) is that change is inevitable and you can adopt the change or find an alternative. I honestly don't think any amount of whining about change is going to redirect Apple's path at this point... they have their directives and sorta just do what they want whether anyone likes it or not.

 

[Joe D'Arcy]

I like Michael Cionis comparison to the OS9 to OSX changeover. I remember at the time being very annoyed that there was no path between the two systems and everything had to be repurchased. However, if FCPX proves to be as significant an upgrade as OSX proved to be, then FCPX should develop into a great program.
The downside to this optimistic outlook is that the future is still a concept.

 

[Craig W. Bickerstaff]

Sorry if I'm "old hat" but editing isn't broken yet. Just because the software was getting slow doesn't mean the entire workflow needed to be re-written. All they needed to do was speed up the software.

FCP7+64bit+multicore+some of the organization and analytical features of X=perfection

The workflow may not have needed to be re-written but Final Cut did, from scratch. FCP 7 was written in carbon as it is an OS9 app ported to OS X and carbon doesn't support 64 bit.

 

[Eric Santiago]

Its been a few months and cant believe how much hype has been built up around this release.
In some circles this is a win win situation.
I'm learning and using FCPX now.
Doesn't matter what the future holds, I'm living it in the present

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

Really just here to share this video from tekservepro. "Final Cut Pro X: A Look From Past to Present to Future"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwF9J1_aYzI

It's a pretty detailed and neutral look and overview of FCPX.

Looks more like a puff piece (IMO).

Unless negative PR coming from a company selling same products usually doesn't have any repercussions.

And definitely opened my eyes to some of the better things about it.

That's the purpose of a puff piece.

Interesting skin tones and right channel audio only. Not sure whether that's a part of FCPX revolution as well or...

 

[Ivan G]

Who's Apple to change the wheel? Stick to reinventing smart phones, pods and pads.

 

[Oliver Peters]

Here is what mystifies me ... I distinctly remember motion pictures from before either of those dates ... including music videos

I get your sarcasm. Just so things are clear, prior to electronic NLEs, linear and film editing used track-based concepts. Been that way for nearly 100 years.

Oliver

 

[Peter Moretti]

I hope Apple makes cars so we can all fly to work.

 

[David Battistella]

I actually think the guy is very qualified to speak on the subject. Looks like he runs a post operation that is MUCH larger and sees MANY more issues than most of us see on a daily basis.

His assessment is fair.

I have yet to see a big long video on all the BAD and STUPID things about FCP X.
WHY?
No single person could whine that long.

It's easy to pick on the new kid, that is how some people are socialized. But we aren't in grade school anymore.

It is what it is. Like everything else.


David

 

[Jarek Zabczynski]

My point is it's a step back in workflow. True we couldn't do that stuff back then, though the kinds of music videos made were also far less intricate. Why should I want to go to a trackless timeline when I've been using one that supports 99 for the past 12 years? Would you want to go back to those early systems you mention? No, why should you have to when you have tools much more capable now?

Common, dare I say standard features were flat out removed and now Apple is trying to tell you how you should edit. It's not their job.

 

[christopher witzke]

well..... I'm not a big post house.... but I've jumped in a few weeks ago and have to say I love working in X now more than 7. Once you get the hang of it.... it's faster and more intuitive. But then I'm one who likes a clean desk.... and not lot of cables hanging off my camera.

Just me.... just say'n.

 

[Eric Santiago]

...and now Apple is trying to tell you how you should edit. It's not their job...

Well you see it is their job since their the ones offering it.
If you dont like it, move forward. Most of us have

 

[Hrvoje Simic]

I actually think the guy is very qualified to speak on the subject. Looks like he runs a post operation that is MUCH larger and sees MANY more issues than most of us see on a daily basis.

That's a very nice benefit of doubt given to the damage control rep doing the presentation.
Also, very sweet move and wording with "us" in the context of less perceptive and experienced.

I'm sure he's able to see a lot of issues 8500 editors who signed the petition aren't able to, although their craft relies on visualization ability.
He managed to miss quite a few drawbacks tho, even in things he presents as advantages.

It's easy to pick on the new kid, that is how some people are socialized. But we aren't in grade school anymore.

Yes, and by coming out of the grade school it's time to ditch toys and speeches meant to convince what's best for "us".

 

[David Battistella]

So don't use it.

Forget it.

i'm not going to bite.