FORUMS: list search recent posts

Point Me In the Direction of A...........

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Rich Kaelin
Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 6:02:58 pm

Okay, so this forum has become unwieldy, a collection of thousands of raves vs. rants, making the cultivation of any real knowledge almost impossible without days of sifting.

ALL I WANT TO KNOW is can someone point me to an article that compares FCP 7 Studio and FCPX? Or can someone with both products please write a pro and con synopsis of this issue?

That being said, here are a few of the things I have "questions" about:
1. I have heard that FCPX will not open projects from older versions, that would be a HUGE con.
2. Can you have 7 & X loaded on same machine at same time with no issues?
3. I hear that FCPX is missing a lot of features real editors would be loathe to give up.
4. In direct relation to 3, I hear FCPX is a "work in progress" and will have many upgrades soon to come, in other words, it was released too early and incomplete.
5. What exactly comes with FCPX package? ie-motion, compressor, color? you see, I am having a hard time with the app store, and can't even find it on there...my searches return lots of final cut stuff, just not FCPX.

Honestly, I think Final Cut is just a Mac lover thing. I have been using it for 2 years now, and from the beginning I was unimpressed. I mainly got it because lots of potential jobs required it, and once I did, I really did not understand the love for this product. Yes, it works, but it is hardly superior. Avid beats it, and the combo of Premiere with After effects is superior in many aspects. Am I missing something? Don't get me wrong, I have grown to like a lot about it, but the hype certainly was a bit overdone.

In addition, Apple seems to be abandoning the pros for a more lucrative consumer market. FCPX seems it may be a downgrade as opposed to an upgrade...iMovie on steroids. Pros kept Apple going before the iPod, and we deserve some loyalty, too.

I have been editing for over 25 years, have seen systems from Montage to Media 100, used 10 incarnations of Avid, became very fond of Premiere and AE for affordability vs. power, etc. I like Final Cut, but it has been 32 bit far too long, and a 64 bit version is overdue. But this release seems to be coming up short.

I have found lots of articles on the web, including some by citing Larry Jordan, but few real answers. Jordan says keep FCP7, and get FCPX as well. No more DVD Studio, big error, My clients want DVDs! It is just all very confusing, especially since I have Adobe Master Collection and various Avid Products as well. FCP just seems to have worked it's way into my work flow, though.

Please, no personal attacks for these observations, just give me some feedback I can use. Thanks.

Rich Kaelin
Kaelin Motion Production Services
http://kaelinmotion.com
New York


Return to posts index


Rich Rubasch
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 6:38:35 pm

Also, I believe FCP X won't load unless you are runnning Lion. the App store runs in Snow Leopard, but FCP X doesn't show up until you instlal Lion.

So, I partitioned a 2 terabyte drive into Leopard with all my current installs, Snow Leopard with CS 5.5 and FCS 3 and then Lion with FCP X. This way I have three options at boot up to work in whatever environment I need. All running off a single drive. I'm simply a boot up away from tinkering with FCP X or I can reboot and work in Leopard with FCS 3 with Compressor, DVDSP etc.

I think it's the way to roll at this point.

Rich Rubasch
Tilt Media Inc.
Video Production, Post, Studio Sound Stage
Founder/President/Editor/Designer/Animator
http://www.tiltmedia.com


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 6:54:37 pm

[Rich Rubasch] "Also, I believe FCP X won't load unless you are runnning Lion. the App store runs in Snow Leopard, but FCP X doesn't show up until you instlal Lion."

??? I'm running FCPX on Snow Leopard. Installs and runs just fine (given the bugs in FCPX under either OS).

Apple does recommend running FCPX and FCS 2009 on separate partitions but I'm using both on one with the only hassle is moving things in and out of folders so they don't bump into each other.



Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 7:09:29 pm

[Rich Rubasch] "Also, I believe FCP X won't load unless you are runnning Lion. the App store runs in Snow Leopard, but FCP X doesn't show up until you instlal Lion."

Sorry Mate, this is incorrect. At least here in the USA.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 6:52:11 pm

[Rich Kaelin] "I have been using it for 2 years now, and from the beginning I was unimpressed. I mainly got it because lots of potential jobs required it, and once I did, I really did not understand the love for this product. Yes, it works, but it is hardly superior. Avid beats it, and the combo of Premiere with After effects is superior in many aspects. Am I missing something? Don't get me wrong, I have grown to like a lot about it, but the hype certainly was a bit overdone. "

As someone who worked on Avid for over 10 years as an editor and later a facility engineer and Final Cut Pro for another 10 years, FCP was better than Avid in many respects . . . and Avid remained ahead for FCP in many other respects. It really depends on your workflow needs. I liked Avid's trimming and Media Management and hated it's "step into" for certain FX work and "modes" in order to move around elements of a sequence. I loved the hardware and diversity of plugin support for FCP. I hated that Avid had indicated they'd leave the Mac market even though that was a huge portion, if not the majority of their base at the time. That's last is of no consequence if you prefer to use it on Windows . . . but I hated the problems in dismounting "shuttles" on Windows compared to Mac and so did every editor in the facility I was engineer at.

I was not happy about Premiere leaving the Mac market and their later entry back in. In the last few years Premiere Pro has improved and in may ways better than FCP especially handling native formats. I preferred Final Cut Studio as a suite though.

Apple has a long history of being innovative and forward thinking. Unfortunately that has often resulted in shorter term pain and consternation. Generally though the end results are widely popular. Whether what FCPX grows into get meet the needs of many "pros" is certainly a question,

I don't doubt it will have a fairly wide market base and therefore significant "professional" third party support whether plugins, video i/o, management utilities. I don't know if/when it'll meet all the higher end professional needs but I like what I see so far . . . and I hate what's missing. I think, given its early stage the latter will be fixed/improved. Even if for the time being it's market share is cut in half or more, it already seems widely spread that third parties are coming along with it and/or announced they are waiting for Apple to complete and distribute the APIs.

Philip Hodgetts has dug deep into the metadata underpinnings. Alex Gollner (Alex4d) had dug into the resources. What they've found convinces me that Apple has a very sophisticated NLE in the works . . . and it's very much "in the works."



Return to posts index


Rich Kaelin
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 8:43:54 pm

I agree, it is all about work flow. I usually use FCP now, but just last week, I found editing in Premiere with linked AE comps a much better, and faster, flow for a specific project (I have never cared for motion compared to AE). I guess the lesson is, get as much as you can, learn as much as yo can, use it all whenever you can, pray you have what you need to get the job done, because you want the job :)

Rich Kaelin
Kaelin Motion Production Services
http://kaelinmotion.com
New York


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 9:32:49 pm

Actually unlike the days when an NLE might set you back $60k or more, it's quite possible to have Avid, Premiere, Final Cut and just use the best tool for the job at hand. The added expense, in large part, is hardware compatibility. Avid has a limited selection of compatible hardware at least regarding i/o.



Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 7:27:48 pm

[Rich Kaelin] "1. I have heard that FCPX will not open projects from older versions, that would be a HUGE con."

It will not open any other FCP version project. It will open legacy iMovie projects.

[Rich Kaelin] "2. Can you have 7 & X loaded on same machine at same time with no issues?"

There are issues with folders being moved/renamed, and on other forums I have read reports of FCS being more unstable after installing X. If you want to try it out, use a partition or a separate drive.

[Rich Kaelin] "3. I hear that FCPX is missing a lot of features real editors would be loathe to give up."

You heard right. No tape I/O, no XML, no OMF, no multi-cam, no ability to open legacy projects, no way to share a project with another editor due to file structure, no way to assign tracks. Theres more, but that should give you an idea.

[Rich Kaelin] "4. In direct relation to 3, I hear FCPX is a "work in progress" and will have many upgrades soon to come, in other words, it was released too early and incomplete."

IMO, this is just spin used to placate those that are angry. I think Apple released what they intended to release, and had to play CYA. Why would they have told the VAR guys to send back unsold copies of FCS3 a week before the release of X, if they knew it had missing features, and would be leaving some in a lurch? I believe they had no intention of adding the 'missing features' because they have a new sales demographic that didn't need them. Now there has been a big uproar, they are in scramble mode to try and incorporate these things to shut everyone up. How successful this will be remains to be seen. I'm not waiting around.

[Rich Kaelin] "5. What exactly comes with FCPX package? ie-motion, compressor, color? you see, I am having a hard time with the app store, and can't even find it on there...my searches return lots of final cut stuff, just not FCPX."

You get Final Cut X. Thats it. Motion costs 50 dollars, and Compressor costs 50 dollars. New Motion has a few new cool features, but can only open one project at a time and can't use two monitors, which is a deal breaker. New Compressor, is really just the same old 32 bit Compresser with a couple of extra prosumer presets, and a bit of chrome on the UI.
DVDSP-gone, STP-gone, Color-gone, Cinema Tools-gone.

[Rich Kaelin] "Honestly, I think Final Cut is just a Mac lover thing. I have been using it for 2 years now, and from the beginning I was unimpressed. I mainly got it because lots of potential jobs required it, and once I did, I really did not understand the love for this product. Yes, it works, but it is hardly superior. Avid beats it, and the combo of Premiere with After effects is superior in many aspects. Am I missing something? Don't get me wrong, I have grown to like a lot about it, but the hype certainly was a bit overdone."

Like you I have been editing since the 80's. CMX, Sony, Paltex, early Avid, Media 100. When I looked for a personal NLE, I was agnostic, and had never owned a Mac and been a PC guy since the days of DOS and the XT. I had never seen FCS, and went to a VAR that had two systems set up side by side. One Avid, and one FCS. After a day of using them, they were pretty close, with each having a few things the other did better. In the end I chose FCP because for what I wanted to do, it gave the best bang for the buck. I think the Avid or PP is better argument is workflow specific, and the 'better' is subjective. And I have to say that the Mac Pro I use to edit on is the best machine I have ever owned. But the FCP X debacle, and the way Apple dumped Shake has soured me on doing business with Apple on any level.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 7:42:12 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "You heard right. No tape I/O, no XML, no OMF, no multi-cam, no ability to open legacy projects, no way to share a project with another editor due to file structure, no way to assign tracks. Theres more, but that should give you an idea."

Please read. While one may not know whether or not these features were abandoned or yet to be implemented, these are things found within FCPX resources currently.

http://alex4d.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/secret-fcpx-xml-multi-user-editing/

and

http://alex4d.wordpress.com/2011/07/13/secret-fcpx-1/



Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 8:09:28 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "[Rich Kaelin] "3. I hear that FCPX is missing a lot of features real editors would be loathe to give up."

You heard right. No tape I/O, no XML, no OMF, no multi-cam, no ability to open legacy projects, no way to share a project with another editor due to file structure, no way to assign tracks."


See, this is part of the mis-information that the OP is talking about. Your statement is accurate to some point, but also inaccurate. It's hard for people to know what to believe when blanket claims are thrown around.

FCP X does not offer tape I/O EXCEPT with firewire devices. The import from camera feature allows for "Capture Now" capability for cameras connected via firewire. I have a DVCPro deck connected with FW and I can capture fine from tape. However, you cannot Log and Capture tape, nor can you go back to tape in any manner. This will likely be fixed as Apple and 3rd party capture card manufacturers address it, but that's where it stands now.

The "no way to share a project" is also misleading. Projects and events can be duplicated and moved for use on another machine very easily. In fact, it's simpler than FCP 7. In addition, media can be stored in a shared storage environment that more than one editor can see, and then the project (sequence) can be duplicated and moved to another edit bay for use with another editor. No, there isn't true project sharing such as Avid has, but FCP has never had that.

[Scott Sheriff] "[Rich Kaelin] "4. In direct relation to 3, I hear FCPX is a "work in progress" and will have many upgrades soon to come, in other words, it was released too early and incomplete."

IMO, this is just spin used to placate those that are angry."


HAHAHAHA! Well, THAT sure worked.

[Scott Sheriff] "I believe they had no intention of adding the 'missing features' because they have a new sales demographic that didn't need them."

I don't understand that argument at all. One of the largest complaints against FCP X is that Apple is clearly going after the consumer/prosumer market. After all, Apple already HAD that market with iMovie and FCP. It's not like Avid or Adobe had the lion share of that market before 6-21. If you were a consumer and you owned a mac, and wanted to get into editing, you used either iMovie or FCP. Yes, despite the fact that FCP 7 is in use at high-level production facilities and used to cut feature films, its intuitive nature and attractive price point made it an easy decision for budding videographers, student filmmakers and others. For those who thought it was too much, they have iMovie, installed on their computer when they bought it. For those in this market with PCs, what do you expect FCP X has that FCP and iMovie combined couldn't do to tempt them into buying a Mac?

Also, today's consumer/prosumer might be tomorrow's pro. You think they'll be happy with FCP X's currently limited features? There are people right now shooting wedding videos with multiple DSLRs who are going to want multicam, and to see what the video will look like on an external monitor.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

MIke Guidotti
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 1:41:56 pm

I find it truly amazing how many Apple apologists there are on this forum.

I think it is OK for people to knock or praise a product that they have used and know. On the other hand I think it is bad for people to spread rumors either for or against something when they have no actual knowledge of it. When people speak for Apple (as if they worked for them) saying that Apple will or will not be adding features in the future it really does not help anyone since this is pure speculation on their part. Apple needs to be telling the consumers what their plans for the future are, and they should be the only people doing this.

Never in my life have I seen so many people step up to the plate and pretend to be mouthpieces for a company or product. It is very cult-like behavior and I do applaud Apple for creating possibly the most brand loyal consumers in history.

i am going to repost this as a new thread.


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 1:51:06 pm

[MIke Guidotti] "When people speak for Apple (as if they worked for them) saying that Apple will or will not be adding features in the future it really does not help anyone since this is pure speculation on their part."

Apple spoke
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/
http://alex4d.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/notes-from-apples-london-pro-briefin...



Return to posts index

Rich Kaelin
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 3:43:43 pm

Thank you Mike! That was part of my original thoughts. You said it much better! I think I said something like "it is a Mac thing" I will say, my MacPro is the best computer I have ever owned, and I have owned almost every workstation sized system, even a Silicon Graphics back in the day, the Apple hardware is top notch. I just hope they keep producing it. They seem to be leaving it behind. Also, the app store is a big error for pro users. If I can go to say, BH in New York, and they can sell me Avid, or demo Adobe for me and make a buck, they wll be a sales force for those products. The app store is part of Apple's vision for a medialess future that is not completely here yet. First off, I like back up install disks, every now and then I do a full system clean and need them. It is the mentality that did away with DVDSP. Admittedly, I can make blu-rays and my clients don't really want them, blu-ray is sort of DOA, they hype it and all, but it is still not so popular. And HD media players are more accessable today. I give clients a lot of HD downloads they can play right on their TVs or via ps3 or WD, etc. But many many clients still want a DVD, everyone has a Player and can watch it. Apple should usher in the future, but you can't force it on people. If they had introduced the iPod with no way to get the music off of your CDs and on to iPod, nobody would even know what an iPod is...or was.

Rich Kaelin
Kaelin Motion Production Services
http://kaelinmotion.com
New York


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 4:11:02 pm

[Rich Kaelin] "my MacPro is the best computer I have ever owned, and I have owned almost every workstation sized system, even a Silicon Graphics back in the day, the Apple hardware is top notch. I just hope they keep producing it. They seem to be leaving it behind."

I don't see anything that indicates they're leaving the MacPro behind. Like most things Apple, there may be a major redesign soon. I suspect Thunderbolt may result in the decline in the number of PCIe slots but as to when that will happen is anybody's guess.

[Rich Kaelin] " Also, the app store is a big error for pro users."

It certainly is a problem on many levels. When I bought FCPX I was able to download it of course but it didn't acknowledge the purchase. Therefore any attempt to install on another system attempted to force me to purchase again. That's when I also found the App Store has no phone support when I wanted to fix the purchase issue. I ended up having to call another department with a vigorous complaint so they would transfer my call. In then took them a couple of days to fix the issue. This is absolutely unforgivable for a "pro" application.

I'm not sure how VARs are handling things buy I know locally Tekserve, which offers VAR like support, as well as other VARs, seem to be moving forward with strategies. I have to check out how B&H is handling things.

For a variety of reasons, while I like the App Store as an option, it's a hinderance as the only means of purchase for a "pro" application.

[Rich Kaelin] "But many many clients still want a DVD, everyone has a Player and can watch it."

But I think the demand of authored disks is on the decline. Of course people will cite exceptions. We're at the point were one can play back at 720p HD from tablets and smartphones hooked to an HDTV that will be higher quality than standard def 16x9 from a DVD.



Return to posts index


Robert Brown
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 4:28:07 pm

Companies like Adobe, Avid, Autodesk, and Genarts all figured out a great way. Deliver installer files that come with free trial periods, and have license utilities for moving a license from computer to computer. If you have an issue with the license, you can use it in trial mode until you get it sorted out. I hadn't really thought about using the implications of the app store. Just one more reason not to bother.

Robert Brown
Editor/VFX/Colorist - FCP, Smoke, Quantel Pablo, After Effects, 3DS MAX, Premiere Pro

http://vimeo.com/user3987510/videos


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 4:30:42 pm

I find it truly amazing how many Apple apologists there are on this forum.

See, that's ironic because I find it amazing how many Apple complainers have been whining about Apple apologists. The people slamming Apple outnumber "apologists" 2-1 on this forum and yet anyone who maintains an optimistic point of view strains the credulity of the "haters."

You say that both sides need to stop pretending that they speak for Apple when it comes to speculation on what features will or won't be added, but you only slam the "cult-like" fanboys. Where's your derision for the people saying that Apple isn't planning on adding multicam back in, or any true "professional" features because they are only interested in making gadgets and toys? You know, the vast majority of posters. There is as much truth to any of that as there is to those saying that FCPX will have all the pro features back by the end of the year.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 8:15:47 pm

[Scott Sheriff] " I think Apple released what they intended to release, and had to play CYA. Why would they have told the VAR guys to send back unsold copies of FCS3 a week before the release of X, if they knew it had missing features, and would be leaving some in a lurch?"

You have no evidence or line of reasoning to support that.
While I don't claim to know the reason either, I do know that the reason Macromedia couldn't release Final Cut Pro was due to certain licensing issues around Quicktime

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Cut_Pro

Macromedia could not release the product without causing its partner Truevision some issues with Microsoft, as KeyGrip was, in part, based on technology from Microsoft licensed to Truevision and then in turn to Macromedia. The terms of the IP licensing deal stated that it was not to be used in conjunction with QuickTime. Thus, Macromedia was forced to keep the product off the market until a solution could be found. At the same time, the company decided to focus more on applications that would support the web, so they sought to find a buyer for their non-web applications, including KeyGrip; which, by 1998, was renamed Final Cut.

It's only speculative on my part but it may have been that such licenses were due to be renewed and Apple either chose not to or couldn't.

Adding to that although I can't find the original blog by Peter Wiggins of idustrial revolution
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?t=127811

Although industry professional Sam Johnson (via alex4d) originally claimed that Apple would definitely resume licenses "in the next few weeks," company representatives quickly contacted him to set the record straight, saying it is only "looking into" the possibility at this stage. Blogger Peter Wiggins has noted that Apple's issue is a legal one.

So at least I provide evidence both past and current for my assumption

[Scott Sheriff] "I believe they had no intention of adding the 'missing features' because they have a new sales demographic that didn't need them. Now there has been a big uproar, they are in scramble mode to try and incorporate these things to shut everyone up. How successful this will be remains to be seen. I'm not waiting around."

This makes no sense what so ever. Apple is a business. They spent a few years in R&D to come out with FCPX and regardless of what you think the market is, there most certainly will be new features developed unless you believe Apple released with the immediate intent to EOL it. In fact "shutting people up" makes no rational sense as a business motive. Apple will add features to increase sales, not only of FCPX but likely to sell more Macs since that's what a hardware company does.

It's comments like the previous which are the type that don't forward discussion. It's filled with statements that don't at all relate to what a business might do positive or negative for specific markets. Apple has not EOLd FCPX so it is likely there will be new features. Features are added to increase profits. Maybe you won't like the features but neither you nor I know what they are beyond what Apple has already announced (and they have announced some things).

If someone has a line of reasoning please provide history, facts, analysis to substantiate one's arguments.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 8:57:09 pm

Almost everything either you or anyone else, on either side of the argument, have said about Apple's motivations or future intents in this forum is totally speculative for the simple reason that Apple ain't talking. Or to quote Lao Tzu

"He who knows, does not speak; he who speaks, does not know."


There are no facts that incontrovertibly prove anything in this mess; everything is up for interpretation. What seems logical and unassailable to you seems asinine to me, and I'm sure it's quite vice versa. Apple's appearance at the Super Meet, the Macromedia quicktime licensing issues, the alex4d code findings are all open to multiple interpretations that collectively prove nothing. (If you so desire I'll give you the alternative interpretations for each.)

As of today there are no facts and no evidence beyond the existence of FCPX as it is currently distributed, and the one page FAQ that Apple published; so railing about other peoples speculations while you are speculating away like crazy does not cede you the high ground.

As you might have learned from your HP postings.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 9:14:29 pm

Specluation based on facts.
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/
and concrete findings
http://alex4d.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/secret-fcpx-xml-multi-user-editing/
at least provide a sound basis.

If someone comes in to the house wet and I open the window and see and feel the rain, it might indicate why the person is wet. It might not (they walked out of the shower down the hall with their close on) but at least I can point to facts to speculate about conclusions.

There is substantiate and the lack of and I always find the former much more compelling.

If someone wants to refute my evidence please let them provide evidence that shows the contrary beyond an unsubstantiated statement.

There are certainly arguments to the contrary based on concrete information but one should include them if one is to be persuasive. For example, there's the argument that Apple has never had wide industry success with an in house developed app. That might speak to success or failure but it still doesn't show that FCPX target market doesn't include pros.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 9:44:30 pm

As I see it here's the best refutation of all your beliefs -

Apple remains silent.

Only they can end all this speculation, and they can end it immediately. They choose not to.

If Apple was interested in not alienating the "complex workflow" professionals they could do it in one day. They choose not to.

So as someone who does, sometimes, know when it's time to come in out of the rain, I interpret that to mean they don't care if they are alienating that group - how's that for substantiatin'?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 10:34:59 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Apple remains silent."

They posted an FAQ. There's the "London" meeting that Alex4d and Peter Wiggins posted about. That's not silent. Maybe it's not enough for some but it's not silent.

Then I also see Stu Maschwitz of RedGiant posting that they are talking to Apple about issues they're running into as a plugin developer. Maybe it's a one sided conversation but I assume Apple is talking to them and Stu was able to state that much.

We certainly don't know the conclusion to any of the above but Apple has been talking, albeit very softly and sometimes through others who have talked to them directly.

[Herb Sevush] "If Apple was interested in not alienating the "complex workflow" professionals they could do it in one day. They choose not to. "

Like the FAQ? They could do an update. These features aren't going to happen in one day. Nor would a press release make any sense. Maybe a big marketing event . . . which might lead to accusations of Jobs (or Ubillos?) reality distortion field. The FAQ is the closest we have for an upcoming feature list/development direction.

[Herb Sevush] " I interpret that to mean they don't care if they are alienating that group - how's that for substantiatin'?"

Nothing wrong with that claim. Fact is they certainly have upset that market. Yes that can easily be substantiated. The question is what strategy do they have that can do that and still gain them market share. I can only speculate on that and have little to substantiate that speculation. The only substantial thing I can say is Apple does things in order to make money. They invested R&D in FCPX with intent, even if that intent may fail.

What I can say substantially is that beyond the SuperMeet, there hasn't been much obvious marketing in any direction at all. No Special Event. No Apple Home Page Splash Page. I can (and have) speculated about that but the fact is, the marketing isn't typical of a product targeting "mass" use. There's a lot of iCloud and Lion marketing though.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 11:07:36 pm

Apple is losing thousands of editing licenses to Avid and Premiere.

If they want that to stop they could hold moderated question and answer sessions with hand picked industry insiders who would, politely, be asking the questions we hysterically speculate about on this forum daily. If the answers matched your expectations the hysteria would stop - while they might still loose seats in the near term, they would hold on to a much larger part of their base. There are a myriad ways of accomplishing the same goal - not doing it is costing them this part of the user base. To me it looks like they don't care about this loss, and since I agree with you that they are only in it for the money, my interpretation is that the answers would not help them hold onto this market. Whispering into Peter Wiggins ear will not quite do it.

"They invested R&D in FCPX with intent, even if that intent may fail."

No agreement there - it's just that I see the intent as catering to a different slice of the "pro" pie - applying a high-end filter, cutting out all the "noise" above a certain level of complexity so that their app will play better with a larger audience.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 11:09:37 pm

"No agreement there."

That was supposed to read "no argument there" - what's that about a Freudian slip?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 11:39:24 pm

[Herb Sevush] "If they want that to stop they could hold moderated question and answer sessions with hand picked industry insiders who would, politely, be asking the questions we hysterically speculate about on this forum daily."

http://blogs.creativecow.net/blog/5407/fcp-x-updates-high-level-july-6th-me...

http://www.fcp.co/forum/4-final-cut-pro-x-fcpx/346-my-take-on-the-apple-fcp...

http://alex4d.wordpress.com/2011/07/06/notes-from-apples-london-pro-briefin...

They might consider doing another one but if they're within a few weeks of their promised summer update it may be little more than a reiteration of the above. Perhaps after that they should consider talking about the next round.

[Herb Sevush] "while they might still loose seats in the near term, they would hold on to a much larger part of their base. There are a myriad ways of accomplishing the same goal - not doing it is costing them this part of the user base."

Keep in mindI don't think Apple doesn't lose "seats" unless people don't upgrade their Macs and buy Windows PCs instead. A former FCP7 user who buys Premiere Pro or Avid for their MacPro hasn't cost them much beyond an FCPX sale and it's quite possible that aforementioned may have bought it anyway. Basically what they need to do is persuade those to use FCPX and eventually upgrade their MacPros to take better advantage of it. We'll have to see how they'll do that.

Yes the clock is ticking but right now the loses are more strategic than financial. They can become financial if people leave the Mac platform though which is quite possible. I have no numbers but I suspect most switchers are changing software at the moment.

[Herb Sevush] "To me it looks like they don't care about this loss, and since I agree with you that they are only in it for the money, my interpretation is that the answers would not help them hold onto this market."

Apple may even agree with you about "answers." The best answer is an updated product . . . followed by some more roadmap but even the roadmap isn't much if people don't want to wait. Then next update or two will reveal more of the roadmap.

Keep in mind if you've already purchased FCPX, and if the update is free and you take it, they haven't lost yet. If it drives some more purchases that may also be telling. Apple wants you to buy Macs and FCPX is the bait. They have some time to prove how tasty the bait is.

[Herb Sevush] " it's just that I see the intent as catering to a different slice of the "pro" pie"

Again the FAQ already reveals some of the roadmap. The third party hardware and software developers reveal more. I'm not going to post that again but Tagged Audio Export, multicam, AJA support and on an on are already in the works and have publicly addressed by both Apple and the respective developers. Now we wait to see if it's delivered. The promises have been made and these features are ones that some of the broadcast market is complaining about.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 12:31:57 am

From the link you sent me - From July 7.

"• FCP XML in/out is coming via 3rd party soon
• FCPX EDL import/export coming soon
• FCPX AJA plugins coming soon for tape capture and layback; capture straight into FCPX [events].
• XSAN support for FCPX coming in the next few weeks
• FCPX Broadcast video output via Blackmagic & AJAVideo coming soon
• Additional codec support for FCPX via 3rd Parties coming soon
• Customizable sequence TC in FCPX for master exports coming soon
• Some FCPX updates will be free

It was also revealed that Apple is working on allowing existing enterprise deployments under FCS3 to purchase additional licenses."


9 items. 1 never happened (enterprise additional licenses), 1 I believe is late (XSAN support), 7 are still stretching the definition of soon, none delivered.

No questions and no answers about the weird and sudden demise of FCP7 and how that was supposed to work with a transition for a product that is, by their own admission, under-developed.

This is not the kind of Public Q&A I was suggesting. And by all means, do it in Europe.

"Keep in mind I don't think Apple doesn't lose "seats" unless people don't upgrade their Macs and buy Windows PCs instead. A former FCP7 user who buys Premiere Pro or Avid for their MacPro hasn't cost them much beyond an FCPX sale and it's quite possible that aforementioned may have bought it anyway"

So you agree that Apple has no reason to care about the "complex workflow" market - they can let Avid and Adobe deal with the high end while they concentrate on making a product for the "file based corporate market". Apple makes their money either way. See, you've finally come around to my way of thinking.

"Basically what they need to do is persuade those to use FCPX and eventually upgrade their MacPros to take better advantage of it. We'll have to see how they'll do that."

Many on the forum, myself included, have often said something along the lines of "and we'll come back to FCPX in the future if it turns out to be a great product." But will we really? There is a lot invested in working with a NLE and, as has been demonstrated by the vituperative nature of this forum, changing workflows is not something most people take to with the ease of switching from a Toyota to a Honda. I think most of the editors who switch away from Final Cut will be hard to bring back - unless Avid and Adobe prove as stupid as Apple, which would not come as a great shock either.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 1:26:50 am

[Herb Sevush] "1 never happened (enterprise additional licenses),"

It did according to at least one facility own I talked to. He said he got 7 more licenses that he need. He had 50 I believe.

[Herb Sevush] "weird and sudden demise of FCP7 and how that was supposed to work with a transition for a product that is, by their own admission, under-developed."

I truly think this is the weirdest part of all. Apple always has long transitions and long EOL. OS9 to OSX is one example. You can still get iDVD and iWeb in the Apple store as part of iLife. Even Shake was around for some time after EOL was announced. That's why I think "something" happened regarding some license issue but I only have the two bits of info which really is circumstantial at best.

[Herb Sevush] "So you agree that Apple has no reason to care about the "complex workflow" market - they can let Avid and Adobe deal with the high end while they concentrate on making a product for the "file based corporate market". Apple makes their money either way. See, you've finally come around to my way of thinking."

I think Apple will get back to a more professional (broadcast/film) work flow. Alex4d's research points to some of the pieces but nothing points to a timeline and if Apple isn't talking I don't think that's going to be in just an update.

When Randy Ubillos said "the next 10 years" I think it means they have a fairly long road to go to build it up. We may not even know after the first couple of updates. I do think FCPX will be a server based seat at some point but not in the first major update. I think it'll be a year or so before it can compete again and by compete doesn't mean it'll fill every need even then.

I do think they'll get there. I do think the development will be faster than FCP legacy. I do not think faster means in just an update or so though. My own guess is we'll see a bug fix update in September and the update after that will really tell us how many features and improvements they can add and how quickly.

[Herb Sevush] "Many on the forum, myself included, have often said something along the lines of "and we'll come back to FCPX in the future if it turns out to be a great product." But will we really?"

Yes if it's cost effective. It has to do things the competition can't (or not as well). BTW this why I'm thinking server based control because that would be one thing Apple might be able to at lower price point than Avid.

Another way to look at it as that Avid really doesn't make most of their money on the NLE and neither does Adobe for that matter. A viable business model has to include more. Since Apple "thinks different" It has to be something that will result in a lot of computer purchases and some of those have to be high margin. If Apple simply moves Avid Mac and Adobe Mac users to FCPX Mac users they really don't gain all that much. It'll have to drive an expensive hardware purchase...my guess.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 2:18:35 am

In my last post before i call it quits for the night I would like to discus this -

"Alex4d's research points to some of the pieces"


I've seen all the hidden gems that have been discovered in the source code. By themselves they are truly meaningless. They could point to features yet to be built in, they could point to a wish list of features that were discarded after Apple re-targeted the project. You can read everything or nothing into their existence. Until someone can prove when they were written and explain why they weren't utilized, I choose to accept them on face value - meaningless code that someone was too busy to bother erasing.

As for this

"It did according to at least one facility own I talked to. He said he got 7 more licenses that he need. He had 50 I believe."

I had heard otherwise, but I take you at your word, so I stand corrected.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 2:37:56 am

[Herb Sevush] "They could point to features yet to be built in, they could point to a wish list of features that were discarded after Apple re-targeted the project."

We'll know some of this after the first major (not bug fix) update.

Some parts look like they were abandoned such as "Classic" import. It sounds like Apple tried and failed which is why they've given an emphatic "no" to that. Some other things look like they weren't implemented yet though. We know some of the XML related things will happen or at least Apple has said they will happen so I suspect they were part way along with that but not yet ready for release.



Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 3:02:12 am

[Craig Seeman]Some parts look like they were abandoned such as "Classic" import. It sounds like Apple tried and failed which is why they've given an emphatic "no" to that.

It is entirely your opinion that this is the case.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 3:35:53 am

[Gary Huff] "It is entirely your opinion that this is the case."

It's fact that it exists there in resources. It's fact that it wasn't implemented.

It's only opinion that it's why Apple gave an emphatic "no" as there may well be other unknown reasons.



Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 4:17:51 am

[Craig Seeman]It's fact that it exists there in resources. It's fact that it wasn't implemented.

The only fact is that there is a string reference to it in the binary. No more, no less. It may have been nothing more than placeholder from a coder who thought it was a surefire thing to be implemented, only to never actually have tried at all.

To read any more into that is, in my opinion, extremely wishful thinking.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 6:41:00 am

[Gary Huff] "The only fact is that there is a string reference to it in the binary. No more, no less. It may have been nothing more than placeholder from a coder who thought it was a surefire thing to be implemented, only to never actually have tried at all.

To read any more into that is, in my opinion, extremely wishful thinking."


I seriously doubt that coders at Apple can include code based on wishful thinking and not from instructions higher up. To say the coders have free reign doesn't jive with anything I've heard described about Apple's campus.



Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 2:33:47 pm

Craig, you don't seem to understand what I'm saying. I said "placeholder" not actual code in and of itself.

Do you know what a string reference in a binary is? They didn't reverse-engineer the executable, they simply did a dump and saw a string value with that info. That's all. Doesn't mean there's any actual code (or attempt at a code) whatsoever.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 2:57:22 pm

Placeholder can indicate a possibility. It means someone was thinking about that whether aborted or for future implementation.



Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 3:22:40 pm

Which was my point, but you are constantly trying to stretch it into that it was a fact that there was an attempt, when this says nothing at all.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 11:48:05 pm

[Herb Sevush] "it's just that I see the intent as catering to a different slice of the "pro" pie - applying a high-end filter, cutting out all the "noise" above a certain level of complexity so that their app will play better with a larger audience."

BTW I should add that right I now I'd say it's file based corporate market. I can see it for lower end cable spots. There's are generally short form self contained projects with file based delivery. I do think that's a pretty big market though.



Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 2:54:35 am

[Craig Seeman] "You have no evidence or line of reasoning to support that."

I guess you are not familiar with the rather common internet abbreviation IMO.
That means In My Opinion.
Actually I'm pretty sure you are, but you and the glee club just need an excuse to jump on every thread that is not a slobbering love affair with movie hero.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 3:24:37 am

[Scott Sheriff] " guess you are not familiar with the rather common internet abbreviation IMO.
That means In My Opinion.
Actually I'm pretty sure you are,"


So substantiate your opinion based on some evidence in history or fact.

[Scott Sheriff] "Actually I'm pretty sure you are, but you and the glee club just need an excuse to jump on every thread that is not a slobbering love affair with movie hero."

This is the garbage infecting otherwise intelligent debate.



Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 9:14:56 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "You heard right. No tape I/O, no XML, no OMF, no multi-cam, no ability to open legacy projects, no way to share a project with another editor due to file structure, no way to assign tracks. Theres more, but that should give you an idea."

Yes, and FCP7 is 32-bit, has no background render, no skimming, no keyword tagging with smart collections, doesn't playback different codecs as smoothly, needs renders on even the simplest composites, no magnetic timeline, no "conform" within the timeline, terrible 3-way colorcorrector, overcomplicated editing-tool-selections...I could go on for a while. How anyone call it a professional tool in August of 2011 is beyond me. Oh yes, because their workflow is dictated by the investments of 2004. That must be it.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 12:36:05 pm

Alban -

Scott listed a series of industry standard features shared by every other professional NLE in existence. Other than 64 bit and background rendering, which are desirable features for any NLE, you counter with a bunch of FCPX specific attributes that many editors would be happy to live without.

no skimming - don't care
no keyword tagging with smart collections - bins with automation that I don't want.
no magnetic timeline - thank the lord
no "conform" within the timeline - have no idea what it is.
terrible 3-way color corrector - The combination of 3 way CC and Color beats FCPX hands down.
overcomplicated editing-tool-selections - not overcomplicated for me, but then I've been out of school for more than a few months.

"How anyone call it a professional tool in August of 2011 is beyond me."

Not anyone but everyone calls FCP7 a professional tool, it's FCPX that doesn't currently meet all the criteria. But yes, FCP7 is very dated, which is why the huge disappointment in the lack of a suitable upgrade. Because we got X instead of 8 most of the "whiners" here will be migrating to Avid and Adobe during the next year. At which point X still won't be capable of many complex workflows. Skimmer and all.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 4:20:33 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Alban -

Scott listed a series of industry standard features shared by every other professional NLE in existence. Other than 64 bit and background rendering, which are desirable features for any NLE, you counter with a bunch of FCPX specific attributes that many editors would be happy to live without.

no skimming - don't care
no keyword tagging with smart collections - bins with automation that I don't want.
no magnetic timeline - thank the lord
no "conform" within the timeline - have no idea what it is.
terrible 3-way color corrector - The combination of 3 way CC and Color beats FCPX hands down.
overcomplicated editing-tool-selections - not overcomplicated for me, but then I've been out of school for more than a few months.

"


Herb, Scott listed a bunch of features that are indeed missing and needed by SOME editors on SOME projects, including myself on SOME of my projects. But I get around it, because I still have FCP7 and guess what....it still has all the tools it had on June 20th.

I am wondering about your reply to my list, because if you don´t realize how good the skimming feature is then I don´t know what to say. It is saving HOURS of time no matter what you do and how you do it. The 3-way color corrector in FCP is pracitcally unusable professionally now, because it simply doesn´t have a good quality. In FCP7 you need Color, true....and in FCPX we will need another 3rd party tool (or Color again) once the XML works. But the NLE FCPX itself has a much superior colortool. MUCH!

FCP7 is full of workarounds. The editing was by far the worst I experienced on any NLE in its time. In fact FCP7 is FCP6 (what did they bring so valuable since 2007 to call it 7 anyway? Alpha transitions and reflections in Motion?) The software stalled years ago. And it behaves like it. It is clumsy, it crahses when you throw a few thousand waveforms and thumbnails at it. It uses 400% of my 1600% and it uses 4GB when I have 16GB of RAM.
It is made for a workflow from the 90ies and it shows.

..well, Herb, I am out of school a while and edit for 20 years on all different NLEs from SpeedRazor to Edit* to Liquid, Edius, FCP, Premiere.....I used everything but AVID and Media100. Just because I understand what FCPX does better, doesn´t mean I am 17 and it doesn´t mean I don´t produce broadcast programmes. It only means I make them faster even with the extra loop I need to take to bring the project to FCP7 to output it for the network.

I wish XML, OMF, HD-SDI output and all those features were here already, but they aren´t. But that is no reason to bash the rest of the software. It is a delight to use it if you really school yourself in it.


P.S: FCP7 is overcomplicated and you say you know how to use it. Well I do, but other NLEs (not just FCPX) understand what I tend to do just by reading my mouseposition. No more "R" "RR" "S" "SS" etc to start slode, roll etc, the NLE has to understand that just by seeing I am in the clip or on the end of it. FCP7 doesn´t. That´s what I meant and I am happy to hear your argument why less keyboard-shortcuts are such a professional way of doing things.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 4:45:21 pm

"Scott listed a bunch of features that are indeed missing and needed by SOME editors on SOME projects"

No Scott listed some features that are industry standard on every pro NLE available now. Whether you use all, some or none of those features doesn't change their essential place in "high end" post.

"..well, Herb, I am out of school a while and edit for 20 years on all different NLEs from SpeedRazor to Edit* to Liquid, Edius, FCP, Premiere.....I used everything but AVID and Media100. Just because I understand what FCPX does better, doesn´t mean I am 17 and it doesn´t mean I don´t produce broadcast programmes. It only means I make them faster even with the extra loop I need to take to bring the project to FCP7 to output it for the network."

Well it's nice to know we share some of the same pedigree. Of course FCPX would be the only program that required you to use a totally different NLE to output for Broadcast, but I'm sure you see that as a feature, not a bug. Myself I see it as a ridiculous proof as to just how inept X is, at this moment.

"I am wondering about your reply to my list, because if you don´t realize how good the skimming feature is then I don´t know what to say. It is saving HOURS of time no matter what you do and how you do it. "

I've been told by experienced editors that is a toy and a waste of time. Different strokes. It's what I meant by a list of program specific features. An external monitor is required by everyone, skimming is liked by some. There is a difference.

"The 3-way color corrector in FCP is pracitcally unusable professionally now, because it simply doesn´t have a good quality. In FCP7 you need Color, true....and in FCPX we will need another 3rd party tool (or Color again) once the XML works. But the NLE FCPX itself has a much superior colortool. MUCH!"

I'm sure the X color tool is better than FCP7 - but it's not better than round tripping from Color is it? And because X exists in a vacuum it's limited in ways that FCP7 isn't. And how is that possible, how do you spend years developing this sparkly new program, only to have it more limited than the creaky old software you've already EOL'd? It's so screwed up you have to use the old software as part of your kludgy workflow. So I guess FCPX can be thought of as an advanced FCP7 plug-in.

I've never said FCP7 wasn't in need of a total overhall, nor do I doubt that there are many excellent features in X (I love the idea of auditions) I just maintain that with X Apple has announced that they've decided to exit the world of "complex-workflow" video post.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 4:56:13 pm

[Herb Sevush] "I just maintain that with X Apple has announced that they've decided to exit the world of "complex-workflow" video post."

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/
Can Final Cut Pro X export XML?
Not yet, but we know how important XML export is to our developers and our users, and we expect to add this functionality to Final Cut Pro X.

Does Final Cut Pro X allow you to assign audio tracks for export?
Not yet. An update this summer will allow you to use metadata tags to categorize your audio clips by type and export them directly from Final Cut Pro X.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 5:01:26 pm

When I see it, I'll believe it.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 5:09:02 pm

[Herb Sevush] "When I see it, I'll believe it."

There comes a point where people either believe FCPX is EOL and all development has ceased or that inevitably new features will be added. I believe the latter makes more sense than the former.

If every single feature someone on this forum mentions as something that will be added, is refuted, what rational thinking does one come to as are as upcoming features? Does one believe there will be no features added? Maybe that any feature added will have no bearing on professional use? What features are those?
When people say "Apple should say..." and when Apple does say explicitly some of the upcoming features and response is disbelief, one has nearly ended all rational discussion.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 5:16:11 pm

I don't think FCPX is dead, I do think there will be enhancements, I haven't the lightest idea what they will be, I question, but don't refute, Apple's stated intentions.

I do however treat Apple's past and present actions with more weight than I do with those same stated intentions. You take Apple on faith and give scant weight to what has actually happened; I see things in exactly the opposite manner.

I said I would believe it when I see it and that is exactly what I meant, nothing more nor less.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 6:58:02 pm

[Herb Sevush] "I said I would believe it when I see it and that is exactly what I meant, nothing more nor less."

That pretty much shuts down discussion since there's no point to discussing features until you see them. And if you haven't used FCPX your assessment of the current features is second hand... although those of us from "all sides" can confirm what's missing. There's serious disagreement over the value of what's there.



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 6:17:28 pm

I'm seeing a lot of the early FCP7/FCPX arguments rehashed in this thread, but without the context of the original discussion.

FCP7 was a flexible editorial platform with large third-party support and which not only supported interchange (EDL) but also advanced it (FCP XML). It was built on an outdated codebase, but it offered all the functionality necessary for basic editorial and for participation in "complex workflows" (which seems to be the best semantic resolution to the pro vs. non-pro argument that I've seen yet).

FCPX is a new editorial platform with novel interface and editorial paradigm, limited third-party support, and zero interchange ability (for now). It's built on a thoroughly modern codebase, and while it offers very little functionality necessary for complex workflows, it's a great foundation for future development.

This argument has become about when or whether FCPX will add features. Will FCPX 10.1 add features? Certainly -- but so will Avid MC 6 and Premiere Pro CS6, and both of them already offer basic NLE functionality that didn't make it into FCPX. Which one will be the best? Impossible to say -- not only can you not define "the best," but none of these apps are actually shipping yet!

That said, I think this totally glosses over what really shocked everyone about FCPX two months ago.

FCP was an industry leader, but out of the blue, Apple rebooted the FCP franchise. They decided that an application could still carry the Final Cut Pro name, even if it didn't have post fundamentals like video monitoring, tape I/O, editorial interchange, or legacy format support.

With this move, Apple created a huge gap in the market. If you need video monitoring to do your job, Apple does not have an NLE product to sell to you. If you need multicam, Apple does not have an NLE product to sell to you. If you need to share your work with a colorist or audio specialist, Apple does not have an NLE product to sell to you.

Apple in effect told the entire "complex workflow" segment of the business, "Thanks for your support over the last decade, but we are not currently interested in your business." They either didn't understand how important these features were to the "complex workflow" segment of the market, or they didn't care. Either scenario indicates that they are out of touch with these editors.

This conversation is about so much more than 32-bit vs. 64-bit, or open timeline vs. magnetic timeline. In industry terms, it's about stability, goodwill and trust. It's about how quickly a hard-earned reputation can be tarnished. For me personally, it's about understanding whether Apple understands and is interested in meeting my professional needs or not.

All this speculation is what raised everyone's hopes so high for the erstwhile FCP8 release in the first place, and while I think it's very premature to count Apple out of the NLE game, I think we need to be careful about being overly optimistic about what Apple can cram through development for FCPX 10.1.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 6:40:21 pm

Amen. And, I'm down with "complex workflows."


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 6:52:25 pm

[Walter Soyka] "while I think it's very premature to count Apple out of the NLE game, I think we need to be careful about being overly optimistic about what Apple can cram through development for FCPX 10.1."

That's it in a nutshell for me.

It'll take time to add features back. In some cases I suspect Apple will be adding features that either don't exist or at least in a wildly different form than in other NLEs and think that will attract people back. That too will mean development will likely take some time to get to a "high level of attractiveness for pros" and this is just my speculation.

Since Apple is a business (I think we agree on that) and they want to increase profits (I think we can agree on that) I suspect somewhere in there Apple did this radical change because they believe they'll make more money in the long run.

One thought does occur. Profit and market share, certainly as witnessed by Apple's other products, aren't always one to one. It may very well be that even a mature FCPX will have a smaller market share but may well be more profitable for Apple. Actually that's not uncommon in post production. Avid does not make most of their money from Media Composer. Only speculative but perhaps Apple is looking at some direction in which FCPX is only the piece of a more profitable integrated solution.

Again all speculative but again this back to "Apple is a business" and "Apple want to increase profits." Apple may have felt that FCS legacy had little room for profit growth (rightly or wrongly).



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 6:58:47 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Again all speculative but again this back to "Apple is a business" and "Apple want to increase profits." Apple may have felt that FCS legacy had little room for profit growth (rightly or wrongly)."

Yes -- but this leads us right back to the early questions from June: is FCPX intended for editorial professionals (now "users with complex workflows")?

We all have our guesses, but only time will tell.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 7:11:07 pm

[Walter Soyka] "Yes -- but this leads us right back to the early questions from June: is FCPX intended for editorial professionals (now "users with complex workflows")?"

Currently the answer is no. The future looks to improve based on Apple's FAQ and reports of their London meeting. How well these are implemented? All we can do is wait and see... and use whatever NLE is most appropriate for our current work.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 7:01:01 pm

I agree with you up to this point.

"Apple may have felt that FCS legacy had little room for profit growth (rightly or wrongly)."

Everyone realizes that FCS legacy needed to be re-written. It would have been much simpler to do that while maintaining their "complex-workflow" market by upgrading FCS legacy to 64 bit. It is the "legacy" of appealing to the high-end of the market that Apple apparently thinks has little room for profit growth.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 7:25:58 pm

[Herb Sevush] "It would have been much simpler to do that while maintaining their "complex-workflow" market by upgrading FCS legacy to 64 bit. It is the "legacy" of appealing to the high-end of the market that Apple apparently thinks has little room for profit growth."

Apple doesn't make much money by selling NLEs or NLE upgrades. They make more money selling hardware. I suspect they took the direction they did because they feel they will sell more hardware. Maybe it will, maybe it wont, but given Apple's profit motive (and not market share motive) they decided to do something different.

In fact, superficially it might make little sense to change the paradigm (connected clips, trackless timeline, etc.) UNLESS there's a change in business model as well that might expand profits. We certainly don't know what's in store but again, I'm looking at this from a business perspective and not as an editor.

Once you start contemplating what might be their business model one starts speculating in some different directions.

IF you take as a given, that Apple doesn't make much money selling NLEs (at least compared to the rest of the company but even Avid can say that to a lesser extent) then one might at least speculate that they think they're going to sell more hardware.

Another way to say it, Apple dropped FCS and developed FCPX and it's driven by motive to increase profits.

The question is (currently not answerable beyond speculation), what direction would they take FCPX in in order to increase profit margins?



Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 7:36:04 pm

[Craig Seeman] "Apple doesn't make much money by selling NLEs or NLE upgrades. They make more money selling hardware. I suspect they took the direction they did because they feel they will sell more hardware. Maybe it will, maybe it wont, but given Apple's profit motive (and not market share motive) they decided to do something different."

From Apple's perspective, they like to make "the best" widget, sell it with a nice margin, and ignore things that other business focus on, like market share or customer preference.

Make the best computer, and the money will follow. Make the best software, and the money will follow. Make the best MP3 player, and the money will follow. Make the best phone, and the money will follow. Make the best tablet, and the money will follow.

Since they had to re-write FCP's outdated core anyway, my guess is that they took the opportunity to make "the best" video editor. So what if that meant throwing out FCP's legacy or the professional post-production industry's needs? The money will follow.

Apple doesn't cater to demand -- they create it.

Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog - What I'm thinking when my workstation's thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 7:36:27 pm

"I'm looking at this from a business perspective and not as an editor."

To me it always seemed fairly simple - Apple sells Final Cut to sell high margin workstations, many of which routinely carry Apple Care, among other things, and there is nothing so profitable as extended warranties. Apple has already learned what happens if you leave it up to Adobe and Avid to push your boxes. I think FCPX points to the fact that Apple is now much less interested in selling work stations and therefore was looking for a product to help sell more Ipads, Imacs, & MB Pros.

Disclaimer:
This is just my interpretation, I have nothing but observation to go on, and I have a generations long family history of ineptitude when it comes to business.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 8:10:27 pm

That's what I see, and I ditto your disclaimer.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 8:59:41 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Apple is now much less interested in selling work stations and therefore was looking for a product to help sell more Ipads, Imacs, & MB Pros.
"


It's certainly possible that FCPX might sell more iMacs and MBPros but that doesn't seem to diminish FCPX amongst professionals. I think the MacPro is going to go through some changes over the next two years. That's why I mentioned in another post that Apple might envision a bunch of satellite stations hooked up to a central device (server/san) which controls the media, events, projects. It certainly seems FCPX would be designed for that, given the metadata handling. I think Thunderbolt ties into this strategy as well.

It does not mean FCPX is a "consumer" app because the masses don't have a great need for many of the features and average folk don't spend $2k+ on MBPs.



Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 9:08:32 pm

[Craig Seeman] " but that doesn't seem to diminish FCPX amongst professionals."


come. on.


http://www.ogallchoir.net
promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 9:16:05 pm

"It does not mean FCPX is a "consumer" app because the masses don't have a great need for many of the features and average folk don't spend $2k+ on MBPs."

I have never said or intimated that FCPX is a consumer ap.

I do believe however that many types of complex work will not be done on Imacs, Ipads or MBPs.

For my work I need multiple monitors, specialized keyboards, access to an ever changing array of video cards, memory chips, external storage, and I/O. I don't believe a single thunderbolt port is up to the task. I still believe that for the next few years hermetically sealed devices will not be as productive as open work stations for complex work flows. And it is exactly this type of work that I believe, without substantiation, that Apple has said good-bye to.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 10:28:34 pm

[Herb Sevush] "For my work I need multiple monitors, specialized keyboards, access to an ever changing array of video cards, memory chips, external storage, and I/O. I don't believe a single thunderbolt port is up to the task."

I think you will see changes in the Mac line that will resolve these things. The high end iMac has two Thunderbolt ports and each port supports daisy chaining without slow down. I can imagine what the MacPro will look like in a couple of years but you'd only call that speculation.

I do thing that FCPX is part of a makeover of the Mac line. Apple thinks about the long term when they make changes and while you may not like my speculation, I do think the makeover will include professional machines. I do think the concept of the "desktop" computer/workstation is changing.

A MacPro may be a desktop/rack mountable box with maybe 2 16 line cards for GPU use and two or three Thunderbolt ports for video i/o and fast external storage. People seem to forger that Thunderbolt allows for daisy chaining without speed degradation (all Thunderbolt or slow device at end of chain). There may be versions with internal drive slots as well. At some point Intel will implement the Fiber Thunderbolt (for longer runs sans power) which may be used in certain network environments.



Return to posts index

Pj Adamo
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Apr 25, 2012 at 3:29:34 pm

Well here we are almost a year later and what has Apple done for us lately with FCP? In a recent call to Apple support I was told to "Use 3rd party products" if I want to do a simple task of rendering to tape and a few other crucial things. What? Also, in Apple forums, I am reading many, many problems with freezes and lock ups which amount from the software not auto saving as specified by the editor. Then, dumping all that work into a land far, far away.... AKA gone in 60 seconds!

I have been editing from the days of A/B/C roll to Avid, FCP (1999 release 1), to FCP 7,(Studio 3). I am in the process of purchasing a new full blown Mac and I am seriously stuck between opting to re-install Studio 3 (yes it's only 32 bit but hey it can do it all),or going back to the "too many keystroke" Avid platform.

There's an old school saying of "If somethings not broke, don't fix it". And, while all Apple had to do was create a new 64 bit FCP 8 version, sit back and make direct deposits to their bank, they decided to shoot right to version 10 and leave out many of the 6 programs that came with the Studio package. Soundtrack pro was great for me, I actually produced a couple of tunes for clients without having to export into another program. Color 1.5 tweaking worked fine, DVD Studio Pro was good for many of my clients needs. Lets not forget the new 10 will not import work from previous versions either.

A sucker for truth, I posted some concerns about FCP 10 at the Apple blog (which they claim they do not respond to), yet my posts were removed by a monitor whos bio reads "sheep dog breeder/videographer" (for real). He claims that FCP 10 is the greatest thing since the invention of the English Muffin. A quick reality check (that's real time brain rendering of the facts), will tell me to stand clear of 10 for now, while the FCP future is still locked in a far distant dream of a 64 bit FCP 8. I can still remember those SiFi moves from back in the 90's where it was date line 2012 and the earth was a complete technological smorgasbord, flying cars and all. Apple has only cued the flying monkeys. There's no place like 7, there's no place like 7....


Return to posts index

Andy Neil
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 5:18:35 pm

"I've been told by experienced editors that is a toy and a waste of time."

Does this mean you don't have or haven't even tried FCPX? If true, don't you think it's a little premature to slam features you haven't even tried? The skimmer is not a waste, it's just different and takes some getting used to. Keyword collections and smart collections are like bins on steroids. They can be as helpful or automated as you want them to be.

And really, FCPX isnt as different an NLE as people are making it out to be. Sure, shortcuts are different and there are some aspects that are radical changes in paradigm (clip connections), but you still load clips in a viewer, mark in and out points, drop in a sequence. I'd be amazed if you couldn't figure out how to edit with it quickly.

There's certainly a lot to be annoyed about, but I'm not going to slam features that are actually improvements to the design.

Andy

http://www.timesavertutorials.com


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 5:57:56 pm

Andy -

All my work is multi-cam, I have no intention of giving Apple any more of my money until there is at least a chance that X (or XI) will be useful to me; at the moment it isn't.

As for the skimmer, all I said in my original post is "I don't care", as in, this is not a feature that would make me either embrace or reject any NLE. When I was told I was missing something essential I merely relayed a differing opinion from someone else who had tried it, to show there was not unanimity on the subject. I have no opinion on it one way or the other.

I'm sure there are many things in FCPX that I would probably like if I tried it. But not all the skimmers and smart bins in the world will make up for the lack of functionality that now exists. And the overall "trackless magnetic timeline" seems totally incongruous with my work flow.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 23, 2011 at 6:33:19 am

Herb-
I agree in most of your points from a businessman standpoint. The way Apple forces us to switch to a new NLE is astounding brutal and illoyal.
I made a small switch already by investing Euro 249&89 for X, Motion and Compressor.

There are some important features missing that force me to use FCP7 on some projects, not all though. And the missing features are mainly involving the output process.

But the rest, the ingest and media-managment and the editing itself are simply great in X.

you are right: Apple has left the highend market. But , and here comes the difference in our view, FinalcutPRO10 has not left the highend, it has just not entered it yet.
Apple built a great NLE that is just that. An editor. As non-linear as can be.
It will be up to the third party vendors to provide us with the tools needed. I won't need tape output ever for example. And many of the features that Scott mentioned and you claim essential in an NLE are not needed by all. So we will have to add what we need. It won't be cheap, but if it is used professionally that won't matter too much.

Color roundtrip? I'd prefer not to. The colourboard in X is imagequalitywise up to par with Color, but it misses a few tools. It's own layout has to accustomed to, but it works very quick and it allows for secondary corrections easily.

My workflow is kludgy, agreed. It is stupid to use two NLE to do tasks one should be able to so. But i want to be ready when X is and not start then. And after all even with the roundtrips to 7 i am working quicker now!



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 1:13:57 pm

[alban egger] "How anyone call it a professional tool in August of 2011 is beyond me."

The allure is more popular after death, than in life.

Fcp7 has some huge, gaping, glaring holes that are all of sudden forgotten. You really have to hold FCP7s hand so it doesn't freak out in large projects, media managing, mixed format support, frame rates, nesting, media reconnection, clumsy text tools, archaic audio controls, database management, "rt extreme", edit to tape, project sharing, field order, alpha channel type and linking to other apps in the "suite". It was time for a big change.

Still pissed about the loss of Color though. That one hurt.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 1:25:39 pm

Jeremy -

Most of us are not pining for FCP7. Its the loss of FCP8 that we mourn.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 1:47:47 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Most of us are not pining for FCP7. Its the loss of FCP8 that we mourn."

I hear you.

I hate to do this as I feel it's "name dropping", but its important. I know someone who used to work in Cupertino on the ProApps team. When new features were requested the constant answer was no, because the code was that old. Basically, it was a road to nowhere developmentally speaking.

It is not Apple's style to patch and rewrite while keeping things looking the same. They start over, and when they do they start small and then build. You can follow their history and watch when it's happened. Tim Wilson wrote about it somewhere around here.

I am not aplogozing for Apple, or really happy about the way they do things sometimes, nor do I agree with their methods, but I am also not surprised.

I will say, I like their products, and I like what they have allowed me to achieve. Call me a fanboy or whatever, I don't really care. I have a career in part to do with Apple and their products (even before FCP). Am I wrong for wanting to give them a chance?

We recently got a Windows server in the office. Man, what a huge difference. Talk about learning a new language.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 3:07:49 pm

Jeremy -

I believe you when you say that Apple had to totally re-write the FCP to move forward, there were so many long standing bugs and quirks that it became obvious the programmers were hamstrung by the existing code.

I was a Discreet edit*or back when their programmers took almost 2 years to totally re-write their code. The results were a better faster more powerful editing ap that was an upgrade in every way (which didn't stop Discreet from Eol'ing it, or might actually have hastened it's demise; but thats another story.)

Why Apple chose not to create an upgrade that would have freed them from the limitations of the older code, but rather to create FCPX in it's place, an ap that is a huge step back in useability for the "high end" of their market (at lest in the short term) is the unanswered question at the heart of every post here. Only a few people at Cupertino know, and they ain't talking - at least not to me.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 6:59:53 pm

[alban egger] "has no background render,"
Don't need or want that.

[alban egger] " no skimming,"
Don't need or want that.

[alban egger] "no keyword tagging with smart collections,"
Don't need or want that.

[alban egger] "doesn't playback different codecs as smoothly"
As smoothly as what? X? There are other platforms that do this and have tools for professionals.

[alban egger] " needs renders on even the simplest composites"
This is pure hyperbole. Simple composites where the source matches the timeline codec play in RT if your system is properly configured.

[alban egger] "no magnetic timeline"
This is the best feature of FCS2/3

[alban egger] "no "conform" within the timeline"
Don't need that to happen in the timeline. Using CT where needed is a better workflow.

[alban egger] " terrible 3-way colorcorrector"
The FCS 3WCC is a decent tool, it does what it is supposed to do, and has a pretty straight forward UI. If you want more features or a bit more finesse use Color. The color tool in X is neither better than the 3WCC, and no where near what Color is.

[alban egger] "overcomplicated editing-tool-selections"
Seemed pretty straight forward to me. UPS showed up with my system around 11am, and by dinner time the same day I was up and running, and had captured some test shots and was able to edit, and CG, color correct and output. The secret is to read the manual.

[alban egger] "How anyone call it a professional tool in August of 2011 is beyond me."
How is this poorly written and punctuated sentence in anyway related to what I said, and what you decided to quote? The answer is, it has nothing to do with what I said. But that seems like that's all you have, so I guess I'll give you a hall pass to hurl insults at others with differing opinions. Whatever floats your boat...

[alban egger] "Oh yes, because their workflow is dictated by the investments of 2004. That must be it."
And your point is what? I hope you know more about editing, than you do business.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?


Return to posts index

Ben Scott
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 12:13:20 pm

compressor isnt 32 bit

front end GUI is 32 bit

render engine 64 bit

get facts correct before whining


Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 4:55:16 pm

[Ben Scott] "compressor isnt 32 bit

front end GUI is 32 bit

render engine 64 bit

get facts correct before whining"


Neither Compressor 4 or Motion 5 list 64 bit operation in the specs on Apple's web site. Only X is advertized as being a 64 bit app. There is zero reference to "64 bit render engine" in Apple's tech specs for Compressors rendering system. There is a reference to shared render engine with Motion and Compressor in the specs for X and Motion, but on the Apple Compressor specs there is no mention of this process, with no indication that any process in Compressor is 64 bit.
And since this 'feature' is reliant on sharing with X, it must not be native to Motion and Compressor, and probably not available if they are installed in a stand alone configuration.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 5:01:13 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "Neither Compressor 4 or Motion 5 list 64 bit operation in the specs on Apple's web site."

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/motion/
64-bit architecture
With its new 64-bit architecture, Motion lets you create deeper, more interesting multilayered effects for use in Final Cut Pro.

http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/motion/all-features/
Like Final Cut Pro, Motion is now a full 64-bit application. This means that Motion can support deeper, more interesting multilayered effects for use in Final Cut Pro.



Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 5:35:47 pm

[Craig Seeman] "http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/motion/
64-bit architecture
With its new 64-bit architecture, Motion lets you create deeper, more interesting multilayered effects for use in Final Cut Pro.
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/motion/all-features/
Like Final Cut Pro, Motion is now a full 64-bit application. This means that Motion can support deeper, more interesting multilayered effects for use in Final Cut Pro."


As I said in the specs page, which is not the page you posted a link to, there is no reference to this.

So here is the FCPX specs, notice that 64 bit is clearly called out, I have added bold text for your convenience:

Minimum
System
Requirements

Mac computer with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor or better
2GB of RAM (4GB of RAM recommended)
OpenCL-capable graphics card or
Intel HD Graphics 3000 or later
256MB of VRAM

Display with 1280-by-768 resolution or higher
Mac OS X v10.6.7 or later
ProKit 7.0 or later
2.4GB of disk space

Application

64-bit architecture to take advantage of more than 4GB of RAM
Background rendering using GPU and CPU
ColorSync-managed color pipeline
High-precision floating-point render in linear-light color space
Uses Grand Central Dispatch to tap into all available processors

Full-screen, real-time preview playback of SD, HD, 2K, and 4K media on main screen or an attached LED Cinema Display
Customizable keyboard
Full Unicode support

Editing and
Timeline

Magnetic Timeline automatically keeps material in sync, prevents clip collisions, and eliminates gaps.
Clip Connections keep secondary material in place while trimming and moving the Primary Storyline. Choose to hide or display Clip Connections in the timeline.
Compound Clips allow complex compositions to be simplified into a single clip.
Auditions combine multiple clips into a single clip to see alternative takes, color grades, or effects in context.
Duplicate a clip inside an Audition for comparison of different effects on the same clip
Edit while importing media in the background.
View material in Filmstrip or List view with a mini-filmstrip and metadata columns.
Skimming functionality enables fast viewing of large amounts of material.
Skimmable projects in Project Library enable viewing before loading.
Mix frame sizes, frame rates, and formats in the same timeline up to 4K in real time.
Edit at 23.976, 24, 25, 29.97, 30, 50, 59.94, or 60 fps.
Create the correct project setting with the first edit.
Insert, Overwrite, Replace, Append, and Connect with keystroke or drag and drop.
Extend edit to Skimmer position.

Split edits with J and L cuts in the timeline.
Top and Tail in a single keystroke for news and documentary editing.
Direct access to iTunes, iMovie, iPhoto, and Aperture through Media Browsers.
Timeline Index for timeline navigation and the selection of items based on text searches and other important metadata.
Position tool for moving and deleting media in the timeline and leaving gap.
Clip Markers that include to-do items that can be checked off when tasks are completed
Snapping to Playhead, Skimmer, Clips, and Markers.
Replace with Gap
Lift from Primary Storyline
Create Storyline to consolidate B-roll into a single unit
Insert Placeholder
Insert Gap
Numeric entry of precise clip durations
Blade tool for adding edits
High-quality, real-time vectorscopes, waveforms, and histograms
Record Audio tool for adding narration
Six Clip Appearance presets for timeline display
Multi-Touch gesture support

Trimming

Inline Precision Editor allows skimming of media around the edit before trimming.
Basic timeline trimming
Trim tool for advanced timeline trimming functions
Ripple and roll

Slip and slide
Lift and ripple delete
Dynamic 2-Up trimming with Show Detailed Trimming Feedback enabled
Keyboard and numeric moving and trimming

Effects

Shared Render Engine with Motion and Compressor
Add multiple effects and transitions within a range selection.
Multistream real-time effects in SD and HD formats
Alpha-channel support in real time
Integration with Motion for advanced motion graphics work
Use “Open in Motion” on any effect, modify in Motion, and save as new in Final Cut Pro.
Numeric and keyframe control for precise animation and effects
Copy and paste motion and effect attributes to multiple clips.
Access music, sound effects, transitions, filters, color looks, and generators through Media Browsers
Over 150 advanced 2D and 3D title templates
Over 90 high-quality transitions
Over 125 sophisticated animation templates with video drop zones created by a top Hollywood effects company
Over 110 filters, keys, blurs, and color looks

28 backgrounds, elements, solids, and textures
Trim, crop, and Ken Burns effect
Distort tool with keyframes and onscreen controls
Transform tool with keyframes and onscreen controls
Stabilization effect in real time after background analysis
Rolling Shutter correction to improve DSLR video
Spatial Conform to make different aspect ratios fit into a project seamlessly
Retime tool for speed changes controlled in the timeline for entire clips or selected ranges
Rewind, Instant Replay, and Speed Ramp in a single click
Three Retime quality settings: normal, frame blending, and optical flow
Preserve audio pitch when changing speed
Find and Replace Title Text
Show Title/Action Safe Zones for positioning titles and effect
s
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And here is the Motion spec, with no mention of 64 bit:
Minimum
System
Requirements

Mac computer with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor or better
2GB of RAM (4GB of RAM recommended)
OpenCL-capable graphics card or Intel HD Graphics 3000 or later
256MB of VRAM

Display with 1280-by-768 resolution or higher
Mac OS X v10.6.7 or later
ProKit 7.0 or later
2GB of disk space

User Interface

Dark look to enhance color perception
Single-window layout for all user interface panes
Onscreen controls for selected filters
Keyframe editor pane with a streamlined timeline view for intuitive time-based control
Center toolbar for tools; color-coded objects and inspector keyframe controls for easy identification
Unlimited tracks of movie clips, graphics, text, and particles
Project sizes up to 16K (8K resolution requires a graphics card with 512MB of VRAM; 1GB or more recommended; 16K resolution requires a graphics card with 1GB of VRAM)
Color bits per channel: 16-bit float for GPU rendering; 32-bit float for background software rendering of Motion projects in Final Cut Pro (float processing requires a graphics card with 256MB of VRAM; 512MB or more recommended)
Customizable nonsquare-pixel support
Semitransparent heads-up display with onscreen controls for layers, behaviors, and filters
Onscreen controls for 3D position, 3D rotation, 3D anchor point, skew, four-corner pin, crop, and text glyph manipulations
Enable/Disable viewing and rendering of Lighting, Shadows, Reflections, and Depth of Field

View color channels and alpha channels independently
Canvas alignment tools including dynamic alignment guides, 3D grid, and rulers
Pen-and-tablet gesture-based interface
3D mouse support
Integrated File Browser for fast access to Finder content
RAM Previews for viewing complex animations at full frame rate
Save favorite settings, customized effects, gradients, text styles, and more in the Library
Over 1900 pieces of Apple-designed, royalty-free vector artwork, high-resolution images, and animated design elements
Instantly display and access all layers in the project using a single keystroke, similar to Exposé in Mac OS X.
Create, save, and remap custom keyboard shortcuts.
Show images outside the visible frame boundary for easily adjusting offscreen objects.
Automatically collect media used in a project for easy backup or moving to other locations.
Use Spotlight in Mac OS X to locate Motion projects by searching on any layer name or text string created in the project.

3D Compositing
Environment

Position, rotate, and intersect multiple layers in 3D space.
Combine multiple layers into 3D groups for hierarchical 3D animations.
Add, animate, and cut between multiple cameras.
Walk-Camera intuitively operates like a first-person video game.
Adjust the camera’s near and far soft clipping planes to avoid object “popping.”
Apply Camera behaviors for easily creating and modifying complex camera moves.
Quad split view for displaying multiple orthographic and perspective views
Inset viewer for quickly checking alternative views while making adjustments
Multiple light sources including ambient, directional, point, and spot

Enable shadows for selected point or spot lights, define objects to receive or cast shadows, and control the shadow colors and softness.
Enable Reflectivity on most objects, movies, paint strokes, and more.
Activate depth of field to enhance realism and control focus.
Enable particles, Replicator elements, and paint strokes to animate in 3D space.
Create 3D text behaviors for character-by-character animations with full 3D position and rotation control.
Create 3D motion paths for layers, cameras, and light sources.
Apply behaviors like throw, orbit, and vortex with 3D attributes.
Isolate any layer to a Front view for easily modifying masks or editing text.

Timeline Editing
and Layering

Layer list view makes it easy to change the stacking order of any layer, group, filter, or animation behavior.
Grouping for applying compound transformations and filters
Common “bring to front” and “send to back” functions
Opacity and blend mode display for quick access on every layer and group
Create drop zones for easy drag-and-drop image replacement.
Clone layers for linking instances of images that inherit properties automatically.
Solo tracks for easier viewing and refinements
Isolate selection for temporary framing and solo of an object to facilitate editing of an object in a 3D composition.

Composite with premultiplied or non-premultiplied Alpha channels.
Mini-timeline built into the Canvas that displays a single track for the currently selected layer, group, filter, or behavior
Trim, slip, slide, and retime audio and video clips via the mini-timeline.
Retime clips using frame blending, motion blur blending, or optical flow.
Cache optical flow retiming analysis to change speed at any time without reanalyzing.
Full timeline with drag-and-drop editing to choose between compositing and assembling multiple clips.
Insert and overwrite editing directly into the timeline
Markers that can be placed in the timeline or on a specific clip with notes

Animation

Unique behavior animations for creating natural phenomena like wind, gravity, and vortex
Sophisticated simulations like attract, repel, and orbit, which create multilayered 3D animations
Text sequencing for automating complex title animations in 3D space
Auto-animated Parameter controls like oscillate, wriggle, and more
Parameter linking for driving secondary animations
Retiming behaviors automate ramping in and out of speed changes.
Audio behavior for syncing animations with audio tracks
MIDI behavior for triggering parameter changes via any MIDI device
Shape behaviors allow for tracking points on a shape or creating random wriggling animated shapes.
Complete keyframe-based animation tools
Keyframe editor with Bezier, Linear, Constant, and Ease In/Ease Out curve interpolations

Keyframe edit tool, keyframe sketch tool, and a keyframe box manipulation tool
Copy and paste keyframes from different tracks and parameters
Keyframe settings for ping pong, repeat, and progressive
Record Animation feature with keyframe thinning for recording animations in real time
Draw keyframes in the Keyframe editor using a freehand pen tool.
Squish, stretch, and move groups of keyframes using a transform box.
Save curve sets for quick access to common parameters.
View animated curves for easier navigation.
View keyframes in the timeline for quick positioning.
Enable/Disable keyframe and behavior-based animations to easily compare different results.

Particle Engine

Sprite-based particle engine with accelerated performance
Over 200 particle presets for easy access to sparkles, fire, smoke, and more
Animate particles in 3D space with Face-Camera control.
Apply multiple objects or video clips as emitters.
Apply additive blend mode for intense glowing results.
Animate emitters and cells independently.

Save newly created particles in the Library for reuse in other projects.
Choose between point, line, rectangle, circle, box, sphere, and more for emitter shapes.
Control birth rate, life, speed, angle, spin, scale, and gradient colors for particle cells.
Scale particles over their life or add behaviors like orbit and vortex for amazing 3D results with little effort.

Paint Effects

Paint with pressure-sensitive vector-based brushstrokes.
Select from over 140 customizable brush styles from traditional to abstract.
Modify brush width, color, opacity, and jitter over the stroke path.
Automatically draw on and draw off with full customization.
Edit brushstrokes as Bezier or advanced B-spline paths.

Rotate the stroke in 3D space with Face-Camera control for volumetric 3D strokes.
Assign pressure and speed to brush properties when using a pen and tablet.
Enable dynamics on paint dabs for particle paint type effects.
Apply Replicator-like sequencing animations that can cause the paint stroke to ripple through 3D space.

Replicator Tool

Automatic replication of any graphic, text object, or movie file along defined patterns
Over 200 Replicator presets that can be completely customized and resaved
Animate replicated patterns in 3D space with Face-Camera control.
Save newly created Replicators in the Library for reuse in other projects.
Choose between line, rectangle, circle, burst, spiral, wave, box, sphere, and more for Replicator patterns.
Define the number of rows, columns, and 3D ranks that fill or outline the pattern.
Control pattern size, cell size, angle, scale, and gradient colors for Replicator cells.

Change the offset for rows and columns, causing them to shift position across the defined pattern.
Control origin of animation from various points of the pattern.
Add random scale and angle setting for more natural replications.
Apply additive blend mode for intense glowing results.
Set color of replicated objects from a single tint to a user-defined range.
Add Replicator Sequence behavior for wavelike animations over various patterns.

Title Design

Vector-based text engine for creating clean type at any size
Import capability supporting Text and RTF files to create Motion text objects
Format text using size, rotation, slant, tracking, kerning, and more.
Animate individual text characters in 3D space using customizable text behaviors.
Transform single characters with the Adjust Glyph tool.
Select from a common set of blend modes, including normal, multiply, screen, and add.
Customize text styles with control over the face, outline, glow, and drop shadow.
Type-on and text-on-a-path layout/animation options
Scroll and Crawl layouts and animation options that support large amounts of text

Text field parameter in Inspector makes it easy to edit text even if text is obscured in the Canvas.
Fill text with solid or multipoint gradients.
Apply static images or video clips as textures to text faces.
Control textures using hold frame, offset, wrap modes, and opacity.
Support for Asian, Cyrillic, and other Unicode system fonts
Right-to-left and vertical text support for non-Roman languages like Japanese, Chinese, and Arabic
Search-and-replace function to find and modify specific text throughout a project
Shrink-to-fit option that automatically resizes text to fit into a given area

Tracking and
Stabilization

Match move using single-point tracking or four-corner pinning
Create tracking data that can be referenced by multiple objects.
Track a filter’s onscreen position controls.
Offset tracking for creating a single track from multiple offsets
Tracking behavior highlights best potential tracking points, eliminating guesswork.
Advanced tracking algorithm maintains accurate analysis when patterns rotate or skew.
Smart retry feature resets the search region automatically for less user intervention.

Provide directional hints for fast-moving regions by using the look-ahead feature.
Stabilize using traditional point stabilizer or optical flow analysis.
Automated optical flow stabilizer bypasses selecting points and time-consuming setup.
SmoothCam optical flow analysis removes jitter and rocking from handheld shots while retaining overall camera moves.
Adjust amount of smoothing applied to transforms, rotation, and scaling in real time.

Accelerated
Filters and
Effects

Over 110 accelerated filters for real-time interactivity
More than 10 blur filters, including Gaussian, Channel Blur, Radial Blur, and Defocus
Simple and bevel borders
More than 15 color correction filters, including Color Balance, Gradient Colorize, Color Reduce, and Threshold
More than 25 distortion filters, including Refraction, Insect Eye, Glass Distortion, Ripple, Scrape, and Polar
Stunning glow effects for Light Rays, Bloom, Aura, and more
Keying filter that automatically analyzes the dominant color of the visible frame and presents onscreen controls for refining the sample color and edges of the key
Keying controls for filing holes, adjusting edge distance, spill level, and light wrap

Advanced keying color-wheel control for adjusting the tolerance and softness in the chroma and luma channels of the keyed region
Stylize filters like Vignette, Bad TV, Bad Film, Color Emboss, Halftone, Line Art, and Slit Tunnel
Unique kaleidoscope and tiling filters
Time-based filters for echo and strobe effects
Video filters for deinterlacing and broadcast-safe colors and luminance
Generators that automatically generate patterns, noise, colors, caustics, and concentric shapes and spirals
Text generators that create and animate text elements like numbers, currency, dates, and timecode or can generate text using the contents of a text file

Masking Tools

Bezier or advanced B-spline masking tools
Create ovals, rectangles, and arbitrary freehand shapes.
Control opacity, rounding, and edge feathering.
Combine masks using mathematical operations.

Track entire shapes or control points using tracking behaviors.
Create image masks from alpha, luminance, or RGB values of a second image.

Audio

Support for AIFF, WAV, MP3, VBR MP3, and AAC (MPEG-4 Audio)
Edit audio tracks in the timeline with trim, slip, and move.
Retime audio tracks with pitch change.
Scrub audio tracks for frame-accurate positioning.

Control balance, gain, mute, and solo individually.
Use master audio controls for global audio adjustments.
Trigger parameter changes based on audio frequencies or transient hits.

Final Cut Pro
Integration
and Third-Party
Support

Create and save Smart Templates in Motion for titles, effects, transitions, and generators to make them available in Final Cut Pro for drag-and-drop application without rendering.
Rigs allow multiple parameters to be controlled with simplified sliders, pop-up menus, or checkboxes.
Predefined aspect-ratio snapshots make templates automatically fit the Final Cut Pro project frame size.
Define fixed durations for intro and outro sections in templates; Final Cut Pro adjusts the title body to fit the timing in the middle.

Rigs and parameters can be published in a template for simplified control in Final Cut Pro.
Import vector PDF graphics, Photoshop layered documents, BMP, GIF, JPEG, PICT, PNG, TIFF, TGA, or Open EXR files.
FxPlug 2 for GPU-accelerated third-party filters and effects, including support for shapes, paths, cameras, and lights
Support for Image Unit plug-ins

Export

Share feature to export and deliver content automatically to devices like iPod and Apple TV or to services like Facebook, Vimeo, and YouTube in a few clicks.
Export to ProRes, H.264, MPEG-4, and other QuickTime-supported codecs.
Export as movies or image sequences.
Export as OpenEXR format.
Support for progressive and field-based rendering

Accelerated motion blur with customizable shutter
Save custom export settings for easier selection.
Settings created in Compressor can be accessed directly from the Share feature in Motion 5 and Final Cut Pro X.
Send a whole project to Compressor for advanced encoding requirements.
Export Selection can render out selected objects.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And here is the Compressor spec, with no mention of 64 bit:

Minimum
System
Requirements

Mac computer with an Intel Core 2 Duo processor or better
2GB of RAM (4GB of RAM recommended)
OpenCL-capable graphics card or
Intel HD Graphics 3000 or later
256MB of VRAM

Display with 1280-by-768 resolution or higher
Mac OS X v10.6.7 or later
ProKit 7.0 or later
685MB of disk space

High-
Performance
Encoding

H.264 multipass encoding for Blu-ray discs and files
Support for red laser burning of AVCHD discs for playback in compatible Blu‑ray players
H.264 encoding for Apple devices, web, and mobile devices
Support for image sequence sources: TIFF, Targa, DPX, JPEG, and OpenEXR
Support for encoding HTTP live streaming
Support for encoding to TIFF, Targa, DPX, JPEG, and OpenEXR image sequences
Full QuickTime support
MPEG-2 encoding
MPEG-1 encoding
MPEG-4 encoding
Two-pass VBR encoding for MPEG-2
Dolby-certified encoding to Dolby Digital Professional AC-3 format
Accepts QuickTime (single-channel or multichannel), AIFF, Sound Designer, and WAV files
Advanced chaptering for Apple TV and podcasting
Closed-caption support for Apple devices, QuickTime, and MPEG-2
Automatic setting creation via drag and drop of a QuickTime file
Scaling and down-converting
Standards conversions
Retiming
Preview with split-screen comparison
High-quality image processing

Batch templates with job actions for automating workflows from encoding to delivery, including:
Add to iTunes Library
Create DVD
Create Blu-ray Disc*
Create Web Reference Movie
Open with Application
Prepare for HTTP Live Streaming
Run Automator Workflow
Publish to YouTube
Publish to Facebook
Publish to Vimeo
Publish to CNN iReport
Send Email
Podcast Producer Workflow
More than 100 presets included
Automated encoding with droplets
Automatic and custom cropping
Automatic and custom padding
Automatic copying of source media for reference media to encoding nodes
Automatic FTP
Reverse telecine
Deinterlacing
Enhanced droplets for easy desktop encoding

Built-in
Distributed
Encoding

Built-in setup for distributed encoding, including This Computer sharing options as well as the ability to create rendering jobs and administer clusters
Create Rendering Jobs option to run third-party process on available clusters

Full cluster administration tools including maximum number of jobs to be run, email notifications, and security permissions

Dolby Digital
Professional
Encoding

Dolby-certified encoding to Dolby Digital Professional AC-3 format
Accepts QuickTime (single-channel or multichannel), AIFF, Sound Designer, and WAV format sound files for encoding

Support for all channel formats from mono to 5.1 surround
Automatically creates 2.0 or 5.1 based on the number of channels in the source media file
Confidence decoding for preview of AC‑3 files

Video Filters

BlackWhite Restore
Brightness and Contrast
Color Correct Highlights
Color Correct Midtones
Color Correct Shadows
Deinterlacing
Fade In/Out
Gamma Correction

Letterbox
Noise Removal
Sharpen Edge
Text Overlay
Timecode Generator
Watermark (Image, animated with QuickTime or Motion files)

Audio Filters

Dynamic Range
Peak Limiter
Apple: AUGraphicEQ
Fade In/Out

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are full cut and pastes directly from Apples web site.
In the specs for X, they clearly call out the app as being a 64 bit app.
But when it comes to Motion and Compressor, there is no such spec.
In the Motion specs they say this " Color bits per channel: 16-bit float for GPU rendering; 32-bit float for background software rendering of Motion projects in Final Cut Pro (float processing requires a graphics card with 256MB of VRAM; 512MB or more recommended)", and never is the term 64 bit used.
I find it odd that they tout 64 bit on the main page of Motion, but when you get to the actual specs, there is nothing but the sound of crickets.
Compressor doesn't even mention 64 bit anywhere.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 5:39:47 pm

All you have to do is look at Activity Monitor to see what's 64bit.
Motion 5 is 64 bit.



Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 7:30:58 pm

[Craig Seeman] "All you have to do is look at Activity Monitor to see what's 64bit.
Motion 5 is 64 bit."


Point of fact. You can only do that if you have already bought it. If you are strictly making a purchasing decision based on what is on the web sight, there is a lot of ambiguity in between the tech specs page, and the main page.
And this still doesn't clear up the question of the 64 bit operation being dependent on the installation of X.

BTW, in my OP, I never said anything one way or the other about Motion being 32, or 64 bit. I said Compressor was 32 bit. I said Motion 5 can only open one project at a time, and can only use one monitor, and to me that is a deal breaker.
Just another instance of using misquotes as an excuse to thread jump.
I should be use to it by now, and just let it slide.......sigh...........

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 8:45:46 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "Point of fact. You can only do that if you have already bought it. If you are strictly making a purchasing decision based on what is on the web sight, there is a lot of ambiguity in between the tech specs page, and the main page. "

Another example of Apple's poor marketing unfortunately.

[Scott Sheriff] "And this still doesn't clear up the question of the 64 bit operation being dependent on the installation of X."

I haven't tested Motion 5 on a non FCPX machine but the app itself shows as 64 bit. Compressor app itself shows as 32bit but I see two CompressorJobControllers, one is 32 bit and the other is 64bit.

[Scott Sheriff] "I never said anything one way or the other about Motion being 32, or 64 bit."

[Scott Sheriff] "Neither Compressor 4 or Motion 5 list 64 bit operation in the specs on Apple's web site."

But you did reference the website. It doesn't say 64 bits in the specs page but does on their feature pages.



Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 6:18:39 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "Compressor doesn't even mention 64 bit anywhere."

Why should Compressor be 64bit? Most codecs are 32bit, so 64bit compressor doesn't make any sense. Also, if you have a network of computers and they aren't all 64bit, this could cause problems.

There are some very good technical reasons for Compressor remaining 32bit for now.

If you set it up correctly, you can still completely max out your machine, just look here:



Jeremy


Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 7:21:38 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Why should Compressor be 64bit? Most codecs are 32bit, so 64bit compressor doesn't make any sense. Also, if you have a network of computers and they aren't all 64bit, this could cause problems.

There are some very good technical reasons for Compressor remaining 32bit for now.

If you set it up correctly, you can still completely max out your machine, just look here:"


Jeremy,
Did you read the whole thread? In responding to a chunk of one of my posts:
"You get Final Cut X. Thats it. Motion costs 50 dollars, and Compressor costs 50 dollars. New Motion has a few new cool features, but can only open one project at a time and can't use two monitors, which is a deal breaker. New Compressor, is really just the same old 32 bit Compresser with a couple of extra prosumer presets, and a bit of chrome on the UI.
DVDSP-gone, STP-gone, Color-gone, Cinema Tools-gone.
"
A guy named Ben Scott said this:
"compressor isnt 32 bit

front end GUI is 32 bit

render engine 64 bit

get facts correct before whining
"
To which I responded:
"Neither Compressor 4 or Motion 5 list 64 bit operation in the specs on Apple's web site. Only X is advertized as being a 64 bit app. There is zero reference to "64 bit render engine" in Apple's tech specs for Compressors rendering system. There is a reference to shared render engine with Motion and Compressor in the specs for X and Motion, but on the Apple Compressor specs there is no mention of this process, with no indication that any process in Compressor is 64 bit.
And since this 'feature' is reliant on sharing with X, it must not be native to Motion and Compressor, and probably not available if they are installed in a stand alone configuration."


In the ensuing flame war, this has been cherry picked( by leaving out the part about stand alone configurations) in an effort to change the context of what I said. Why are you jumping on this bandwagon when you are agreeing with what I said about it being 32 bit?

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 7:38:56 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "New Compressor, is really just the same old 32 bit Compresser with a couple of extra prosumer presets, and a bit of chrome on the UI."

The simple answer instead to Ben Scott is that it can't be all 64bit, yet. There's a reason that it's not in any of the sources you mention. It has to be the "same old" 32bit Compressor because certain aspects of it can't be a new 64bit Compressor. So, the reason is not because Apple is lazy or not thinking, the reason is technical, you didn't really mention that and downplayed the significance. For those people out there who are wondering for a reason why Compressor might not 64 bit when X and Motion are, there's a pretty good reason. You would agree with at least that much?

It has changed as well, Qmaster is now built it instead of trying to search of two or three different apps and control panels. Setting up a distributed network is less daunting.


Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 8:29:50 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "The simple answer instead to Ben Scott is that it can't be all 64bit, yet. There's a reason that it's not in any of the sources you mention. It has to be the "same old" 32bit Compressor because certain aspects of it can't be a new 64bit Compressor. So, the reason is not because Apple is lazy or not thinking, the reason is technical, you didn't really mention that and downplayed the significance. For those people out there who are wondering for a reason why Compressor might not 64 bit when X and Motion are, there's a pretty good reason. You would agree with at least that much?"

Fair enough. But this is all in response to the OP who simply wanted to know what you get/don't get, when you buy X.
I consider all that minutia of Compressor needing to stay 32 bit TMI in that context. The bottom line is it's the same old compressor and really does nothing more than the current version.

[Jeremy Garchow] "It has changed as well, Qmaster is now built it instead of trying to search of two or three different apps and control panels. Setting up a distributed network is less daunting."

IMO, that is not worth 50 bucks if you already own FCS2/3. I will admit the documentation on how this works is somewhat lacking, but setting up a cluster is a one time thing and really NBFD. I talked a FCS newbie through the process over the phone yesterday in about 5 minutes. It is no more difficult, or time consuming than doing a permissions repair. And the additional presets in the new Compressor are not anything you can't do for yourself in the FCS version.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 8:35:55 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "IMO, that is not worth 50 bucks if you already own FCS2/3. "

Not if you are using FCPx and want to send straight from FCP to your cluster using Compressor settings. you can only do it with COmpressor 4.

I am also not talking about a virtual cluster, I am talking a multi-machine QMaster cluster. It is a pretty BFD.

Virtual Clusters on one machine are easy, yes, and nbfd.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 9:18:09 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "Not if you are using FCPx and want to send straight from FCP to your cluster using Compressor settings. you can only do it with COmpressor 4.

I am also not talking about a virtual cluster, I am talking a multi-machine QMaster cluster. It is a pretty BFD.

Virtual Clusters on one machine are easy, yes, and nbfd."


Yeah, my bad. I'm thinking virtual cluster (single machine) since the OP sounded like a single machine/single seat shop, and was thinking in that context.
In that case it may very well be worth 50 bucks for render farm guys using X. For a single set shop, doing typical work. Maybe not so much.
Although I do wonder how many multi-machine shops would use an app that has no I/O card support, hence no calibrated monitoring? Seems like driving a 16d nail with a sledge hammer. You can do it, but not with much precision.

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 9:23:42 pm

[Scott Sheriff] "Although I do wonder how many multi-machine shops would use an app that has no I/O card support, hence no calibrated monitoring? Seems like driving a 16d nail with a sledge hammer. You can do it, but not with much precision."

That train left the station a long time ago, but I don't know how it done either.

I am imagine every station couldn't be a finishing station.


Return to posts index

alban egger
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 21, 2011 at 9:04:36 pm

[Rich Kaelin] "1. I have heard that FCPX will not open projects from older versions, that would be a HUGE con.
2. Can you have 7 & X loaded on same machine at same time with no issues?
3. I hear that FCPX is missing a lot of features real editors would be loathe to give up.
4. In direct relation to 3, I hear FCPX is a "work in progress" and will have many upgrades soon to come, in other words, it was released too early and incomplete.
5. What exactly comes with FCPX package? ie-motion, compressor, color? you see, I am having a hard time with the app store, and can't even find it on there...my searches return lots of final cut stuff, just not FCPX."


1. It cannot open FCP7 projects.
2. Yes, have it on a Lion and on a snowleopard
3. Depends on your needs. We have produced several broadcasts with FCPX already and while we miss some, I would miss some on every platform. It is not finished with features, but you can work with it on a high level already.
4. Again....i can work with it, although i miss features that are yet to co,e.
5. ? Weird. Fcpx, Motion and Compressor are 3 different apps to be purchaßed within the Appstore. Maybe you need an upgrade of your Osx?



Return to posts index

Tim Wilson
The web's best resource for FCPX articles: The COW
on Aug 21, 2011 at 9:56:00 pm

There are some great articles here at the COW as well.

In order from NAB forward:

The Future of Editing

FCPX: Ready or Not, here it comes

FCPX: Why We Can't Use Final Cut Pro X at Our Companies

FCPX: What Pros Find Missing In Final Cut Pro X

FCPX - First Cut with the new Final Cut Pro X

FCPX: Three Camps - The Pro vs. Non-Pro Debate

RED and FCPX

A Final Cutter Tries Out Premiere Pro

FCPX: Hardware Changes, Part Two

FCPX: OMF The Hard Way

The Magnetic Timeline: Thoughts on Apple's New Paradigm

Here are links to interviews with execs at Avid and Adobe reiterating that, without pros, their companies cease to exist.

I've left out a dozen or so, but you get the idea.

As for FCPX tutorials, we've got bunches. Most recently, a 6-part series by Kevin McAuliffe on switching to Avid Media Composer, starting here.

Hey, maybe you're looking for tutorials for FCPX itself. :-) Yeah, we've got those too. In addition to some of the text-based lessons above, we have bunches of video tutorials as well, covering things like working in the timeline, animating with keyframes, matching EQ, taking projects on the go, and more.

Start here for more details.

So yes, in addition to chatter, we have articles and tutorials. :-)

Yr pal,
Timmy
Creative COW


Return to posts index

Scott Sheriff
Re: Point Me In the Direction of A...........
on Aug 22, 2011 at 9:23:27 pm

[alban egger] "but you can work with it on a high level already."

Care to elaborate on how you are doing broadcast quality, or film output without the ability to CC your work using a calibrated monitor, or EDL, LUT's? Because that is what I would consider "high level".

Scott Sheriff
Director
http://www.sstdigitalmedia.com


"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." ---Red Adair

Where were you on 6/21?


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]