Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

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?

Alexander Ibrahim said:
In the same vein, don't use Apple if you don't like their gear/software, but why so venomous?
Click to expand...

I own and use many Apple products. I like their gear/software very much. I wasn't venemous, I was honest. I happen to think they're quite brilliant, quite unique, quite original, and very innovative.

I also happen to think they're very arrogant about it.
 
Just out of curiosity, what all functions and features are you Mac folks really hoping for with this new FCP?
 
64bit / full Ram / CPU / GPU use

no gamma shift

super large (bigger than 5k) canvas/resolution

native, native, native (no wrap)


Those are the biggies for me.


Media management can come in a later update, get the above right... and I will be very happy camper.
 
!. Kill quicktime and develop an open architecture of formats like every other edit system.
2. Better media management
3. True integrated suite, everything in one interface.
4. Better audio tools
5. 64 bit
6. Node based compositing
7. Don't make it like imovie
 
native R3D support like Premier is what most are clamoring for.

I just wan them to fix the fucking Quicktime gamma shift and take that product PRO again and stop dumbing it down for consumers.

Quicktime has always been Apple's achilles heel imho. Too arrogant to let it go and develop something superior.
 
Tom Lowe said:
Just out of curiosity, what all functions and features are you Mac folks really hoping for with this new FCP?
Click to expand...

Better media management.
Better meta-data support / search / timeline tools.
Native R3D support.
Stereoscopic editing.
LUT support.
64 bit.
No Gamma Hell.
Better audio sync and editing support.
 
Mostly already listed but worth repeating.

◆ Unified interface. One app to rule them all. FCP is the project interface with other apps in the suite a subset accessible as a function within FCP.
◆ Native R3D with REDRay as an export option in Compressor.
◆ Roll Shake into Motion within FCP.
◆ All FCS apps be compatible with RED project resolutions ( i.e. Color now limited to 4K)
◆ 64 bit to end those ridiculous "out of memory" messages.
◆ Better use of GPU/CPU
◆ NO MORE Gamma shift!


◆ Dreaming now, but if you have a Logic Pro license the ability to functionally incorporate it into the Suite.
 
we'll see ... It will be good or it will be something else they are going to tell us... a 4K iCamera with iOS on it ;-) with iMovie and ....
 
M Most said:
I own and use many Apple products. I like their gear/software very much. I wasn't venemous, I was honest. I happen to think they're quite brilliant, quite unique, quite original, and very innovative.

I also happen to think they're very arrogant about it.
Click to expand...

You are not the only one.
http://www.studiodaily.com/blog/?p=6064
 
I find it interesting that most features being requested for the new FCP have been available on the Adobe suite for a while now.... ;)
 
I want above all else

64 bit
RAM use the RAM all of it!
and R3D support, with rocket acceleration of course.


Other than that, i don't have a problem with quicktime, I quite like it as a format. Fix the gamma issue that others have and its fine, however it to needs to have its underpinnings overhauled. But otherwise, I would be satisfied with the above.

and one far of make believe land wish:

Phenomenon- i want my shake back.
 
Well since its turned into a what I want thread ...

Before I go on, one thing I DO NOT want is a unified interface for all post tasks. That sounds like an interface designer's nightmare.

I do want to be able to access more of the special purpose apps features through Final Cut. For example, about half the time I fire up Color its because I am unhappy with FCP's processing of a perfectly good correction I made on its 3 way color corrector.

So, what I want is for FCP to get rid of its color correction effects, and process that with Color's engine instead through a modest interface. Doing this would probably look very much the same as the current 3-way color correction in FCP, but deliver better results- because we are actually using Color.

If I need more control, then there should be a more specific interface in a dedicated application-one that jumps off from where Color is now. I should have to use that application less than I do today.

That's an example- it continues. If I am working in Color, and I need to do some editing- I shouldn't be using Color, but rather be editing with Final Cut Pro presenting its interface in Color. If I have to track ... again it shouldn't be Color doing the tracking, but Motion.

It should be said, that a very thorough modal interface can achieve all these things in a unified monolithic application- but that makes for a single huge hard to debug application.

Architecturally I think I'd much prefer lots of applications that provide certain features as a service to each other.

I do want true 64 bit support

MOST IMPORTANTLY I want a very high level of parallelization. Video is generally what computer scientists call "embarrassingly parallel." So, its really embarrassing that NONE of the NLE systems out there can make effective use of use of these monster multicore systems. I mean there are two extremely obvious levels to parallelize on- pixel and frame level.

As an adjunct to this, I want to more easily spread rendering out among all available computers.

I want to see true background processing. NewTek offered that on SpeedEdit like a zillion years ago. If there is anything that needs rendering on the timeline, the software should always be rendering. Its pretty obvious now that the interfaces only need a single processor with hyperthreading, or two processors without it. Pay close attention, this is really just another form of parallelization.

I want strong OpenCL integration across the suite. Really offloading tasks to the GPU is another form of parallelization, but one that requires profiling the tasks to be offloaded.

These are CORE technologies, and in some ways they seem similar to what we have in Premiere CS5, but they are actually fundamentally different. OpenCL support for example means that I can get a speed boost from any new GPU- no matter who makes it provided only that it runs on OS X.

In Final Cut, I have long held that only the video output from Final Cut or color truly represents your image. These outputs are remarkably consistent. The gamma shift issue others describe is a workflow issue.

Basically, most people screw up their QT gamma, because Apple makes it possible to do so. We don't really need a fundamental change in how QT works, but rather an improved interface, one that is more consistent in its presentation of options like gamma, and better defaults that "just work" in more cases.

OK, compositing....

I really want node based compositing to come back, and I really want a "Shake Successor" application. I've basically decided that product is Foundry's Nuke- where a lot of former Shake people work.

Motion however needs an update- and a big brother. In other words sort of the model followed by Soundtrack Pro and Logic. I'd like to see pretty much everything Motion does today inlcuded in Final Cut Pro's interface, but when you call out to another application what you should get is the same engine with a nodal interface.

To be clear, you still have Motion's timeline interface- but you use that in the natural timeline application: Final Cut. When you have to do some heavy duty compositing, you get nodes.

The most important updates to the core Motion engine would be greatly improved matte creation, most notably improvements to tracking and shape creation. Tracking is a huge one. Planar tracking like we see in Resolve and Mocha basically obsoletes point trackers for most uses.

Another feature of concern is noise reduction. Color needs better noise reduction built in, and that has to be available to other applications.

OK, here is the "stand out" new feature we should be looking for: 3D.

Support for 3D post should be built right in to FCP at a basic level.

Overall, this is not a feature set competitive with the Adobe Suite or Media Composer. Its really aimed more at Smoke, Resolve and Nuke.

Some of what I want for the suite is really OS level- for example if we are going to make the GPU(s) a huge part of our post workflow- we need to be able to monitor the GPU resources, which means extending tools like Activity Monitor to provide info on the processing and memory utilization of the GPU. Also, file system improvements, like metadata, should be used more by Final Cut Studio. And better integration with Time Machine. Why have an Autosave vault when you have Time Machine- which does the same thing better?
 
Tom Lowe said:
Just out of curiosity, what all functions and features are you Mac folks really hoping for with this new FCP?
Click to expand...

1) Have a feature that displays "on screen" the FILE NAME or any other meta data that I want for every clip on my timeline, and must be able to render this into a file or output to tape. You have no idea how many times we use this for screening TV shows!!!! (+1 for AVID having it)
2) No matter what framerate I edit in, I want to be able to view the 29.97 drop-frame timecode equivalent!!! We edit in 23.98 ... but we deliver on 59.94i HDCAMSR (or... something else if the stock truly runs out)... I'm tired of doing non-drop to drop-frame conversions in my head... (+1 for AVID having it)
3) Better Media Management
4) Better offline/online setups where (for example) changing the resolution doesn't break the basic-motion properties of a clip
5) OMF/AAF import and export functionality
6) Alpha Channel support on all the prores flavors
7) Script and Storyboard import options
8) Good playback/effects performance on non-standard framerates and resolutions (+1 to Adobe for having this)
9) Use all cores on "send to compressor" or even FCP exports, which should happen in the background (+1 for Adobe once again)
 
Ian Laurie said:
Phenomenon- i want my shake back.
Click to expand...

It's called Nuke. The same people who made Shake have been developing Nuke for quite a while now.
 
Brian Langeman said:
It's called Nuke. The same people who made Shake have been developing Nuke for quite a while now.
Click to expand...

Might be the same developers, but the programs feel worlds apart. I still prefer Shake, and go to it when needed.

As far as FCP is concern, and after listening to a few conversations and arguments about the NEW FCP from industry Pros, I feel like the new upgrade will be far more "forward looking" than most people will be ready for. In other words, PROFOUND changes in the scope of the application. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what is in store.

Most of us know this is not new territory for Apple. They are not afraid to start from scratch if they have to, or simply get rid of some ports and connectors here and there as they become obsolete. Some people are still upset at apple for dropping the floppy drive from the iMac, they were just not ready for that jump yet. I feel some of us will not be ready for this new FCP. So let the woow and waaas and WOWs start and be out of the way so we can get back to working with a brand new editing application. Apple, bring it on!

Jose
 
Fair chance Apple will do what they did with Aperture, and sell the new Final Cut through the App Store, lowering the price in the process. They may also break up the suite and sell individual apps, as they did with iWork and iLife when migrating them to the App Store.

Of course the haters will treat a lower price as evidence it's not a pro app. Sigh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top