FORUMS: list search recent posts

Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Jerry Hofmann
Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 23, 2011 at 2:43:43 pm

It wasn't. It's just that we as consumers have been told we have to have the latest or our self worth is diminished and we become "undesirables". And many seem to be swallowing that big fat lie.

No NLE ever made a better edit decision than the next, and that is all that matters. Any NLE that makes my edit decisions get done faster is good. Plain and simple. Any tool that makes my workflow better is the tool I'd choose. Any tool that's needed to make my living I buy, and any tool that isn't needed I don't buy. Making the best business decision for you is that simple, isn't it?

And what exactly is the problem of FCP X taking cues from iMovie? People seem to complain, but sure give no compelling reasons why this is an issue that should be seriously considered as a flaw. Where's the beef guys? Who the heck REALLY cares? Seems to me that the people that it does matter to, don't matter. If you think for a minute that everyone and his brother will now become editors biting into your business because the interface has cues from iMovie, you've not been watching the market. That situation has been the way it's been for at least a decade already. Anybody with 3k in his pocket could buy a pro NLE starting in about 1999. FCP X at $299 isn't going to make that situation any worse at all. All that matters is your resume, not your toolset.

If the current software makes you a living, what genuine and compelling reason is there to upgrade or crossgrade? I know of an Avid that is at least 2 or 3 versions behind that makes a tidy living for it's operator. My clients didn't give a hang when I switched from Avid to FCP. If I'd had clients who needed me to be running Avid, I'd have kept it. There will be clients who need me to be running FCP 7 for a while yet I'll bet, and I'll also wager that FCP X will run side by side with any other NLE, including FCP 7.

The learning curve for FCP X is likely to be about the same as it would be for a jump to Avid or Adobe. If you think differently, you're fooling yourself. The two monitor display setup we've all been familiar with may well be available in FCP X BTW... just because they didn't show it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. They did say there were dual monitor arrangement setups if you'll recall. Canvas/Viewer may well be there, they didn't show it because they were enamored with the newer way of thinking about the interface, and they had very little time to show many of the new features that are undoubtedly there. And the iMac they were running really sang with the software IMHO. It's not possible to show dual monitor interfaces on a single projector as far as I know.

That Apple is secretive isn't any thing new, and it's served the company very, very well though the years. If I were Apple, I'd be just as secretive. If you think about it, it's actually American corporate law that demands they BE secretive if it makes them another dime... There's little doubt that being silent DOES make Apple another dime or two... Theres a reason Apple is the the most valuable company in tech and it's their innovation AND silence about the future of their products' road maps that has contributed to this situation. It contributes to the buzz as well. Apple gets more free advertising than any company I can think of BECAUSE of this.

It's as if people have been brainwashed to think: "well, if FCP X isn't my cup of tea, I have to DUMP FCP 7 from my computer's applications folder" or something. It seems to me to be really silly, and extremely immature. You'll be needing FCP 7 for a while folks because I seriously doubt FCP X will do everything that 7 does, and I seriously doubt it will end up costing most of us a dime in future business because FCP 7 resides on our machines. Most clients just don't give a hang about anything but results. They don't care which NLE you're using, they care about the success of the project, and your attitude and service.

I mean, have you ever hired a one carpenter over another because his hammer was newer? I doubt that happens very often.

I'll be the first in line to buy FCP X. At less than a fancy meal for 4, it's a no brainer. The features we already know about make it a no brainer. If it won't work for me for every project I run into in version 1, so what? FCP 7 will still be on my computer to carry on with and use when it makes more sense to work in it. Not a single client will leave me because of the software I use. If they were to leave me for somebody with the latest software, I seriously doubt I really want to work with them either. It's about edit decisions guys, not the tools.

Jerry

Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski. My Blog: http://blogs.creativecow.net/Jerry-Hofmann

Current DVD:
http://store.creativecow.net/p/81/jerry_hofmanns_final_cut_system_setup

8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17" MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX - Cinema Displays I have a 22" that I paid 4k for still working. G4 with Kona SD card, and SCSI card.


Return to posts index

Richard Herd
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 23, 2011 at 5:01:22 pm

Well said, Mr Hofman, well said!


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 23, 2011 at 5:26:54 pm

Jerry your sane. Why did they allow you to post in the asylum?
I've been trying to say variations on what you've posted . . . but the sky is falling.

[Jerry Hofmann] "If it won't work for me for every project I run into in version 1, so what? FCP 7 will still be on my computer to carry on with and use when it makes more sense to work in it."

And with Apple's new App Store distribution model they won't need to wait to accumulate features to burn new discs, design and manufacture boxes, warehouse, ship on an 24 months schedule. They'll be able to roll out improvements quickly and for a lot less money. If FCPX is missing something it likely won't be the wait it was from version 1 to 2 (NAB 1999 to around NAB 2001 I believe). What's missing in June might be there in December.

[Jerry Hofmann] "If you think for a minute that everyone and his brother will now become editors biting into your business because the interface has cues from iMovie, you've not been watching the market. That situation has been the way it's been for at least a decade already. Anybody with 3k in his pocket could buy a pro NLE starting in about 1999."

And there were people who were upset that what they did in a $2 Million online room could be done by someone who had a $150,000 Avid Symphony.

[Jerry Hofmann] "just because they didn't show it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist."

If one has worked with people who study early childhood development, there's a stage in a child's understanding of the world that if it's not visible it doesn't exist. This is, in part, the basis for the amazement in games like "peak-a-boo." Judging from some of the posts on this list it seems a large number of editors never moved beyond that stage of development.

Sorry to be so "cheeky" in this and other responses but your voice of reason seems scarce in this forum.



Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 23, 2011 at 6:17:48 pm

just to keep us all open minded - holding an opinion different to one's own does not actually make the other party insane..

and also: calling editors with misgivings mentally challenged infants might be taking things a *little* too far?

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


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 23, 2011 at 6:45:55 pm

There are some that show concerns but there are others that are making what, to me, are wild flights of fear . . . like Apple not supporting input/output cards or abandoning the "pro" market. I do think some of the responses are off the deep end and while a newbie might not have the past history to make reasonable estimations, I do not expect this of people who have worked in or managed facilities for a number of years.



Return to posts index

Andy Mees
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 2:49:22 am

[Craig Seeman] "This is, in part, the basis for the amazement in games like "peak-a-boo." "

Peek a Boo ... I used to love that game ... but Peek a Boo X Solitaire Edition, man that was rubbish.


Return to posts index


Brian Mulligan
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 23, 2011 at 10:49:05 pm

Actually I think it was Apple that said you had o upgrade to the latest and greatest. IPhone, iphone3g, iphone3gs, iPhone4', iPad, iPad 2', iPod, iPod shuffle, iPod nano,

Need I say more?



Return to posts index

walter biscardi
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 24, 2011 at 6:34:58 pm

Absolutely no law written that we have to upgrade, particularly since it's essentially a 1.0 release. If Apple wants to re-boot the franchise, that's fine.

So you say we should expect to run FCP X and FCP 7 simultaneously on the same machine? How inefficient is that? Two software packages to the do same job?

The problem with FCP 7, at least for us, is the lack of support for all the other codecs out there. Converting H.264 to ProRes takes a ton of time that would be better spent editing. For instance I have over 20 hours of GoPro camera footage we need for a documentary. Gonna take a 12 core Mac 3 days to convert all of that to ProRes when I could just simply start editing with it natively in Premiere or Avid today.

Oh wait, you say FCP X will edit that natively now? So I can go ahead and edit that in FCP X, but if I need something from FCP 7, I can just use that? Well, with Apple's notorious lack of backwards compatibility, we won't be able to edit in FCP X and then switch over to FCP 7. Wouldn't matter anyway because if we're editing in H.264 in FCP X.... well we all know how ugly that will be if you try to step back to FCP 7. Spinning beach ball and unexpected quit anyone?

So in my case, I'm looking for all the current features in FCP 7, but with the efficiency of being able to work with more codecs natively which is what I expected from a new FCP 8. Not something that takes away features that I need for the sake of re-booting the franchise and then expecting us all to celebrate like it's 1999.

So no, we don't have to upgrade, nor do we have to celebrate Apple taking a product for which many of us earn our living and instead of giving us a solid, robust platform, building on 10 years of development and telling us to "remember when FCP 1.0 came out, this is sort of like that again." Actually it's not like that at all. More on that shortly.

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media

Blog Twitter Facebook


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 24, 2011 at 7:22:48 pm

[walter biscardi] "So in my case, I'm looking for all the current features in FCP 7, but with the efficiency of being able to work with more codecs natively which is what I expected from a new FCP 8."

"All the current features" is the wrong mindset, and not at all how Apple thinks in general. "Better overall for the things people are doing in the real world" is the right mindset, and almost certainly what Apple is aiming for.

[walter biscardi] "So no, we don't have to upgrade, nor do we have to celebrate Apple taking a product for which many of us earn our living and instead of giving us a solid, robust platform, building on 10 years of development and telling us to "remember when FCP 1.0 came out, this is sort of like that again." Actually it's not like that at all. More on that shortly."

A year ago the fact that Final Cut Pro was an aging, 32-bit Carbon app was evidence that Apple didn't care about pro users. Today, somehow, that aging 32-bit Carbon app is a "solid, robust platform", and its shiny new 64-bit, OpenCL and GCD-enabled, 4K-supporting, float-processing, Cocoa-based replacement is taken as evidence that Apple doesn't care about pro users.

Go figure.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read Does FCP X make project files obsolete? on our blog.


Return to posts index


walter biscardi
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 24, 2011 at 8:50:36 pm

[Chris Kenny] ""All the current features" is the wrong mindset, and not at all how Apple thinks in general. "Better overall for the things people are doing in the real world" is the right mindset, and almost certainly what Apple is aiming for."

The real world? You mean like cutting four feature documentaries over, delivering hundreds of HD and SD broadcast masters to five networks, cutting multiple weekly episodic series? Is that not a definition of the "real world?"

The "real world" is anyone who is currently using Final Cut Pro to earn a living. What they are able to accomplish today is exactly what they should be able to accomplish with the new software with much greater efficiency.


[Chris Kenny] "A year ago the fact that Final Cut Pro was an aging, 32-bit Carbon app was evidence that Apple didn't care about pro users. Today, somehow, that aging 32-bit Carbon app is a "solid, robust platform", and its shiny new 64-bit, OpenCL and GCD-enabled, 4K-supporting, float-processing, Cocoa-based replacement is taken as evidence that Apple doesn't care about pro users.

Go figure."


Does the shiny replacement allow the user to assign tracks? See that's a huge part of our workflow for the documentaries when we have 26 tracks of raw audio.

We use tracks 1 - 4 for primary narration.

Tracks 5 - 8 for soundbites.

Tracks 9 - 14 for primary natural sound.

Tracks 15 - 20 for secondary natural sounds

Tracks 21 - 26 for rough music and SFX

When we send the mix to the ProTools designer, we send along a document outlining what's what so he knows exactly what he has when we send the mix.

I honestly have no idea if we can assign tracks. The "sneak peek" didn't tell us, they just extolled the virtues of trackless editing. Just throw the video and audio in there, who cares, the app will just make a place for it. Apple's certainly not talking.

So if that one item is not available when Final Cut Pro X ships in June, then that tells me Apple did not consult enough Pro Users. What I just described is a very standard workflow in broadcast and film editing.

I believe that's a very simple question that won't break any big "secrets" from Apple that will have Adobe and Avid scurrying to match that feature.

So it's about time Apple updated the software, but did they retain the features that made it so great for pro editors or did they just create something they wanted to be slick and then figure out what they need to add back after the fact? That will be the determination on whether we just purchase the one copy or install copies on every workstation and throw it into production.

Who cares how many formats it can handle, how much realtime it can have, it has to retain very basic professional functions that took it from being a laughingstock in 1999 to the standard by which everything else is judged in 2011.

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media

Blog Twitter Facebook


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 24, 2011 at 8:59:11 pm

[walter biscardi] "The "real world" is anyone who is currently using Final Cut Pro to earn a living. What they are able to accomplish today is exactly what they should be able to accomplish with the new software with much greater efficiency."

Yes. But I suspect Apple wasn't interested in making sure they could accomplish it in exactly the same way. People need to quit interpreting every implementation difference as evidence of reduced capability.

[walter biscardi] "Does the shiny replacement allow the user to assign tracks?"

The answer is that we don't know how this works, but it's not especially reasonable to believe that Apple has neglected basic, essential features, as you have repeatedly speculated they may have. What you're doing with respect to FCP X is virtually the definition of FUD.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read Does FCP X make project files obsolete? on our blog.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 24, 2011 at 7:32:12 pm

It may be that in order to make the whole thing more efficient they had to leave old code behind. Not all the new code/features may be ready in June.

I expect by June when they can make OFFICIAL comments it may be clear what is there as well as what is coming (or not). So if you decide you can't upgrade in June you'll have the option to wait until December (or whatever) or move to Premiere which, judging from your description, actually does meet your needs now.

Given the new distribution model, if there are any critical features not there in June, they will follow much more quickly than in the old press disc and ship package days.

Apple has always been forthright when abandoning something so I don't doubt, come June, they'll be able to say things like, "AJA and BM are introducing new tape in/out controllers or "XML output track assignments will be coming soon." Of course if they aren't forthcoming in June, then you'll have to decide to move on to Premiere or Avid.

I don't believe Apple will keep things "secret" once the product has been released. It's just not something a developer does while things are still being worked on an subject to change.



Return to posts index


walter biscardi
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 24, 2011 at 8:34:04 pm

[Craig Seeman] "I don't believe Apple will keep things "secret" once the product has been released. It's just not something a developer does while things are still being worked on an subject to change."

But again, nothing we're asking is secret. These features already exist in the current Final Cut Pro.

What Apple showed us at the FCPUG SuperMeet were some of the secret new features. So some of the "secrets" are already out.

Why you have to keep OMF support, assignable track support, Edit to Tape support secret is beyond me, but then I'm not Apple.

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Editor, Colorist, Director, Writer, Consultant, Author, Chef.
HD Post and Production
Biscardi Creative Media

Blog Twitter Facebook


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 24, 2011 at 9:09:31 pm

[walter biscardi] "Why you have to keep OMF support, assignable track support, Edit to Tape support secret is beyond me, but then I'm not Apple."

Because they may still be working on these features, because they may not be anything close to their final form, because they may not be sure that these will be finished in time for the June release, because unresolved bugs may impact the final form and time of delivery. These are all typical reasons why developers remain silent on certain features.

Alternately Apple prefers to antagonize the professional post community so they move to Avid and Adobe products, because Apple has no business acumen and the success of Final Cut was just a happy accident and they have no clue as to their target market.

Which of the above makes sense to you?
If you think it's the latter then it's time to move to other apps. If you think it's the former then you have a reason even if you're not happy with it.



Return to posts index

David Cherniack
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 1:09:31 am

[Craig Seeman] "Because they may still be working on these features, because they may not be anything close to their final form, because they may not be sure that these will be finished in time for the June release, because unresolved bugs may impact the final form and time of delivery. These are all typical reasons why developers remain silent on certain features."

If they're releasing in June, be assured that right now they're just squashing fairly minor bugs and there's a fixed date for release. The feature set was engraved in stone many months ago. Nothing's being added now and it's highly doubtful that even a single minor feature is being dropped because it doesn't work. Whatever Apple didn't say about what's in FCP X 1.0 was not because they don't know. It was purposeful. I have utterly no doubt that they expected the reaction and are following the discussions going on now. Which is why some execs were present at the reveal, not to show support, but to gauge reaction.

They started their rebuild from scratch and there's no way they're going to match the feature set of 7 with this first release. So the purpose of the preview was to see the reaction and to plan their June announcement accordingly. Expect many promises about what's to come in the near future.

Is all this cynical and manipulative? Hey, it's Apple, the masters of cult marketing.

David
AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index


Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 2:39:49 am

[David Cherniack] "If they're releasing in June, be assured that right now they're just squashing fairly minor bugs and there's a fixed date for release."

They showed an earlier beta then it's current state. In my experience, developers do that because there are current features/bugs still work in progress that they feel uncomfortable showing.

[David Cherniack] "Nothing's being added now and it's highly doubtful that even a single minor feature is being dropped because it doesn't work."

My experience with companies that distribute online instead of by disc and ship is that certain features may be concealed to the end user until they are fixed.

I can't speak to Apple's reasons but the above is based direct experience for me, not speculation.



Return to posts index

David Cherniack
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 3:13:33 am

[Craig Seeman] "They showed an earlier beta then it's current state. In my experience, developers do that because there are current features/bugs still work in progress that they feel uncomfortable showing."

I don't disagree but they also took a last minute decision to show. Prep-ing a demo, discussing it's content with marketing, and management takes time and takes away from other things. They had a demo from February. They likely went with it for that reason.


[Craig Seeman] "My experience with companies that distribute online instead of by disc and ship is that certain features may be concealed to the end user until they are fixed."

Online or shipped has no consideration on what features they decide to talk about. Online distribution saves costs but doesn't reduce the actual development time. The last couple of months are spent dealing with the bugs that still exist and tweaking, not considering which features to include. Those are decided in the design stage, before coding even begins.

[Craig Seeman] "I can't speak to Apple's reasons but the above is based direct experience for me, not speculation."

As is mine which goes back 21 years watching the development of more than a few NLEs.

David
AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 3:47:27 am

[David Cherniack] "The last couple of months are spent dealing with the bugs that still exist and tweaking, not considering which features to include."

If a bug can't be killed and it's deemed severe or a stopper, it can be removed. Actually the code is more likely disabled for the release version rather than removed. As a 1.0 app, it's quite possible some critical bugs may not be resolved in time for the initial release.

[David Cherniack] "They had a demo from February. They likely went with it for that reason."

I understand it wasn't simply the same demo but the same version as February. That's a bit different. I'm not sure how the people making that claim would know and be permitted to say it was the earlier and not the current beta though. If it's true, the only reason I can see for that is either there was a noteworthy stability issue in the later version or there would have been features that they wanted to conceal such that might be visible when calling a menu or display.



Return to posts index


Jerry Hofmann
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 10:32:57 pm

[walter biscardi] "But again, nothing we're asking is secret. These features already exist in the current Final Cut Pro."

Right, the idea isn't secret, but whether or not it's in FCP X is. I really think they wanted to show the newest stuff rather than go through the old at the sneak peek. I probably would too. Doesn't mean the old is there, but sure doesn't mean it's not.

Do you really think that the folk at Apple don't know what a pro would need? I think they do. Same guy oversaw Premiere, FCP 1-7, iMovie versions, and now FCP X. I don't think they want to give up the pros with a release that's totally unusable by them. I think the attempt to create a new paradigm in workflow is laudable. Without the professionals backing a piece of "pro" software, it ends up going nowhere, and I'm pretty sure that Randy U and team understand this.

Shoot, no one's really attempted a really new interface coming from a position like Apple's FCP holds in the market, so I'd assume they've thought long and hard about what this next version needs to do for a professional, no matter how large or small the company involved is. After all, the source/record monitor manual bin thing has been around for 23 or more years now. Getting long in the tooth compared to other software innovations. Not that it's bad, it's just OLD.

It's too early to tell what the future holds with this new NLE, but I'll bet it sells tons of users out of the gate. If it doesn't hold up by version 2, Apple will lose some of the market share that they've had for the past few years, and then maybe they'll have to rethink. There's just too little public to make any sort of iron clad decision on whether they've made a mistake or not. Wont' be able to tell that for a while yet.

In any event, it was "jaw dropping" alright. Is it better? From what I saw some of it is better than FCP 7... speed changes were pretty cool, automatically helping you log was pretty cool too. That it addresses as much RAM as you can throw at it bodes very well for long form actually. Sequences soak up tons of RAM... There's much to like, much unknown, and waiting is tough, eh? It will be here before you know it. What? 6 weeks or so? Certainly before June 20 or the end of the fiscal year for Apple I'd guess. Not having to package it will move it up a bit too.

Avid will likely work with Kona cards before long too... It's still a 32 bit app though. In any event change is one thing we can always count on in our industry. FCP X is just another one. Again, Apple didn't have a choice here. They had to start over, so why not leverage code from iMovie 11 and make it so a pro would be happy. Certainly that's what they are attempting.

Jerry

Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski. My Blog: http://blogs.creativecow.net/Jerry-Hofmann

Current DVD:
http://store.creativecow.net/p/81/jerry_hofmanns_final_cut_system_setup

8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17" MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX - Cinema Displays I have a 22" that I paid 4k for still working. G4 with Kona SD card, and SCSI card.


Return to posts index

Jerry Hofmann
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 1:51:25 am

[walter biscardi] "So you say we should expect to run FCP X and FCP 7 simultaneously on the same machine? How inefficient is that? Two software packages to the do same job?

No I said you could go back to FCP 7 when it made sense to do so. I'd only use one at a time most likely.

[walter biscardi] "Gonna take a 12 core Mac 3 days to convert all of that to ProRes when I could just simply start editing with it natively in Premiere or Avid today."

So what's stopping you from buying one or the other? They too would run on the same machine as FCP 7 and/or FCP X. At the prices of Avid, Apple, and Adobe NLE software, there's very little reason not to run them ALL on the same machine, and chose the one for the job at hand to work on. They are just tools after all, why not fill up the toolbox? Expecting Apple's new NLE to have every single feature that 7 had plus some, is going to bring you disappointment. You're sounding like the glass is half empty when I see the situation as the glass half full. It looks to me to be a great start.

Randy U and team have been designing NLE software for a very long time with an impressive history. This is just the latest edition. I would assume they know what the pro world needs to be able to do. After all they've been addressing it for a very long time. I think Randy wrote Premiere, Key Grip, FCP 1, iMovie versions, and now FCP X. I figure he knows what the market needs, and has planned releases down the line to address features not included in the 1.0 release of FCP X. That's how it all works right?

FCP X is a 1.0 release alright. Apple had no other choice. In order to tap into the modern technology presented in the Sneak Peek (Grand Central, Open CL, et all) They had no choice but to start over. FCP 7's code is so out of date, it couldn't address all the new OS technology that exists today. To have all the features of FCP 7 is not a cut and paste affair. FCP 7's computer language isn't the same as FCP X's, and every bit of the code has to be re written from the ground up.

Doesn't matter in any event to my business what Apple does. There are alternative apps including FCP 7 that would work for me in the near term, and FCP X will likely fill the bill in the long term. At $995 buying Avid software seems to be a no brainer. Autodesk software really strikes my personal fancy these days. Offline in the NLE du jour, online in Smoke, looks to be a great workflow.

Never the less, I'll be first in line in June for FCP X's download.

Isn't it great we have all these choices?

Jerry


Return to posts index

Shane Ross
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 3:43:47 am

Walter...if FCP X isn't the tool you need, don't get it. If FCP 7 isn't the tool you need...don't use it. If Avid or Premiere does what you need...use them. If you have a screw that you need to get into a piece of wood, you don't use a hammer, you use a screwdriver. FCP 7 might be fine for a lot of things, and it is for many many people and many many things. But if you then need to edit new formats natively, and FCP 7 doesn't do it, but hey, Premiere does...or Avid does...go get them. They are cheap enough that you can pay them off after one job (a phrase you yourself like to say often) And Premiere uses the same capture cards as FCP... so no new hardware. Avid now works with a cheap ($995) AJA IO Express for capture and output.

Like Craig, I too see this as an new start...a whole new app that Apple had to write from the bottom up. More features will be added, but they had to start fresh and make sure that the basics worked. Just like earlier versions of FCP.

Anyway...with the tools all being inexpensive, there's no reason not to have every one of them in your tool belt. 8 years ago an Avid cost $65,000 for an OFFLINE machine. Now you can own all three NLE's...and hardware...for 1/3rd of that. I myself have two of the tools in my belt, and I am not a large post facility, but rather a freelance editor.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD...don't miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 1:45:46 pm

"if

Yes, well ;that's pretty obvious, isn't it. How about if you like FCP7 but wanted 64 bit, access to all cores and grand central access to video card gfx engines - the stuff we were hoping to get with the last release. Now we're f**d, because the designers of Imovie thought it was necessary to reinvent the wheel for people who simply wanted a faster engine. So it's more like "what if FCP X isn't the tool you need and because of that FCP 7 will never become the tool you wanted - well then I guess you're screwed."

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 2:25:42 pm

I wonder if people also felt that way when the first node based composting apps were released.

I suspect Apple believes the interface will improve work efficiency. Generally Apple has been pretty good on designing user interfaces throughout their product lines.

They've also dealt with new interface aversion with the jump from iMovie 6 to iMovie 08 so I wonder if there was a longer term response they may have been looking at when they decided to make the same jump in FCP.



Return to posts index

Duane Martin
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 5:25:52 pm

Truth is there are many kinds of environments in which editing is done and FCP X will satisfy some and possibly not others. That isn't really the point, at least not for me. Though Hoffman and Ross are comfortable with one-person shops keeping all the tools in their belt (AVID, Adobe, Apple) many editors, like myself, have to function in larger, collaborative environments, and Biscardi is our "voice of sanity". With multiple edit stations and editors, assistants, and clients, facilities seek a streamlined workflow that will address as many needs as possible and will remain stable into the future. In the world of Apple post production FCP 7 is not as capable as current competing products and FCP X remains an unknown.

Apple has put businesses in the predicament where their current FCP solution has fallen behind, their future FCP roadmap is unknown and, rightly or wrongly, in doubt; as a consultant it would be irresponsible to make a business argument in favour of FCP in the current environment, and I personally resent Apple's practices that have created this situation. Some facilities have taken my advice and planned their next upgrade cycle around the release of a 64-bit, modern FCP, and now they are asking what happened to that plan? I don't have an answer; who would have predicted this mess of uncertainty? Being "secretive" has served Apple well in the consumer market, but look at Apple's record in the business sector; there is a pattern here.

If I ever go back to making my living working from my basement I will rejoice in the choices available. In the meanwhile I am expecting to see the reverse of the trend seen over the last 5 years locally and witness a facility migration away from FCP. It may be that FCP X 1.0 when released will surpass current expectations, but then it might not matter; that's just business.

Duane Martin
Calgary FCPUG


Return to posts index

Jerry Hofmann
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 5:34:41 pm

So apparently, making a decision about the future will have to wait until June... You'd need to buy a license for each station (normal for any new software), and any given project would have to start and end in FCP X or other NLE. I don't see where there is a difference in what I've been saying for a facility with many workstations. If it won't work for you, don't use it. Use what does... I've seen more than one facility with more than one NLE installed BTW. I don't see how this changes anything. Maybe you can explain?

Jerry

Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski. My Blog: http://blogs.creativecow.net/Jerry-Hofmann

Current DVD:
http://store.creativecow.net/p/81/jerry_hofmanns_final_cut_system_setup

8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17" MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX - Cinema Displays I have a 22" that I paid 4k for still working. G4 with Kona SD card, and SCSI card.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 5:58:13 pm

[Duane Martin] "as a consultant it would be irresponsible to make a business argument in favour of FCP in the current environment"

Which may last all of eight weeks. As a consultant one can say hold off. Thing of the bigger iron purchases such as MacPro. One might say hold off as well given you will not retroactively be able to install Thunderbolt ports. On the other hand if you must make a decision today you have your answer whether computer or NLE.

[Duane Martin] "I don't have an answer; who would have predicted this mess of uncertainty?"

In eight weeks they will either be happy or they will be moving to Avid or Premiere. Given what happens with any change this is not unusual. Maybe you should talk to people who were using Discreet Edit or maybe Combustion. This predicament is not uncommon.

In this case FCP is being replaced by an entirely new app called FCPX. That much is clear and in June people will know if it has the same functionality.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 6:06:32 pm

Being an old discreet *edit'or myself, you raise the point that hasn't been made clear before. What we are seeing is an EOL for FCP. The fact that the same company is coming out with a new product, FCPX, that might or might not be an acceptable replacement for a given shop is not the point - the EOL for FCP is. And I fear it will be just as painful and costly as moving from any other dead NLE. For myself, after dismissing as "silly" all the rumors of Apple wanting to sell FCP, I'm now wishing they had.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 6:21:20 pm

[Herb Sevush] "FCPX, that might or might not be an acceptable replacement for a given shop is not the point - the EOL for FCP is."

Why isn't it the point? People can chose FCPX, Avid, PremierePro. Of course maybe the learning curve may be at issue as in all three cases there will be some if you're not familiar with the intricacies. If FCPX at $299 turns out to be the best option it won't be costly. If people already have CS5 suite it won't be costly.
Avid is biggest cost given the crossgrade and possible incompatible hardware that may need to be replaced.

At one point many facilities moved from Avid to FCP and that was a major cost savings given the Avid upgrade pricing at the time. FCPX may still be the least expensive option . . . if key features are still there . . . and we won't know that until June.

So it does come down to whether FCPX is an acceptable replacement, at least regarding cost although not regarding learning curve. Yes, it's an entirely new beast keeping a previous product name.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 6:53:38 pm

The reason it's not the point is that I think most users were expecting an upgrade, not an EOL. Having been thru two of them already (EMC2 and discreet *edit) I wasn't looking for another.

I always had the ability to chose Avid, PremierePro, Vegas or anything else. But I also used to have the ability to choose an ever improving FCP. That is now a dead issue. Will I choose FCPX ?? Well, not in year one, that's for sure.

I am thankful that I now have the knowledge to plan for the future -- no hardware upgrades this year, since FCP7 can't even utilize the hardware I have now. 2012 seems to be the crossroads year.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 7:09:54 pm

[Herb Sevush] "The reason it's not the point is that I think most users were expecting an upgrade, not an EOL. Having been thru two of them already (EMC2 and discreet *edit) I wasn't looking for another. "

Alas, this happens so it's nothing new as your post points out. Not fun but just a reality in this business. At least the moves are less costly than they used to be.

[Herb Sevush] "Will I choose FCPX ?? Well, not in year one, that's for sure. "

It may all depend what's there and what's needed but it is possible key things may be missing. My own speculation, but my guess is that since they're no longer tied to replicating and shipping discs, if there are features missing, they will happen much faster than 1.0 versions in the past. Of course that's no guarantee that it will happen.

[Herb Sevush] "I am thankful that I now have the knowledge to plan for the future -- no hardware upgrades this year, since FCP7 can't even utilize the hardware I have now. 2012 seems to be the crossroads year."

One of my own questions is Thunderbolt and anything in FCPX and Lion that may take specific advantage of this beyond what other NLEs can. That may not be known until WWDC. One example might be something akin to Final Cut Server use of Thunderbolt bandwidth as almost "fiber" like. Apple loves motivating hardware purchases. All speculative on my part but at least keep an eye out for a "hook" into hardware purchases that may make FCPX 1.0 more appealing.



Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 7:35:54 pm

Craig -

Every case is different, but my work (broadcast) runs in seasons and we're about to start a new season in June. I would have no problem upgrading FCP 7 in mid-season but I definitely would never switch to a totally new NLE in mid-season. Plus, having learned my lesson, I never buy version 1 software, not even 1.1. I need to see at least one 2 in there to make me a believer. It's not the missing features I'm worried about so much as the esoteric bugs it takes months to find, especially on an initial release. So, for me, I'll look at FCPX, and if I like it I'll give it a try in 2012, but not sooner. What this means is that basically I'm stuck without an upgrade for another year. And so it goes ...

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 8:27:35 pm

[Herb Sevush] " I would have no problem upgrading FCP 7 in mid-season but I definitely would never switch to a totally new NLE in mid-season."

I agree having been in this situation with broadcast work many moons ago. For updates would do just one NLE and use it for the less demanding work and see if it blows up. For a major upgrade we'd put it on a "non broadcast" workstation and let it get beat to death. This was at an Avid facility when FCP had first come out in fact.

[Herb Sevush] "I never buy version 1 software, not even 1.1. I need to see at least one 2 in there to make me a believer."

1.0 is worth playing with on a non critical system to see if there's even potential for 2.0. My own speculative hunch is that things will progress faster given the file based distribution. My guess would be June through December to be a period of fixes and feature additions. Which of course may make it good to go in 2012.

I'm under no illusion that the June release will be good to go in many post environments but I don't buy into the doom and gloom some others have in this forum. Apple has been a company to manage difficult transitions. They did it with OS9 to OSX and PPC to Intel so they have the management to pull this off. It's not all or nothing though and not Instant fail either if it's not all there in June. I have a hunch this will be a killer system come 2012.



Return to posts index

David Cherniack
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 1:58:26 pm

[Craig Seeman] " my guess is that since they're no longer tied to replicating and shipping discs, if there are features missing, they will happen much faster than 1.0 versions in the past. Of course that's no guarantee that it will happen."

Hey Craig,

You keep saying that but I can't see that online distribution will affect the development cycle in a substantial way. Dot releases are done online already by everyone. Full point upgrades take their time and readying the shipping package is normally started in parallel with the end of the cycle so we're talking about a few weeks at most added at the end of an 18-24 month development period (which is pretty standard these days). Of course Apple can throw a huge amount of resources and try and try to speed up the cycle but I can't see that online distribution will make any difference except to their bottom line.

So please explain your reasoning.

David
AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 2:21:22 pm

[David Cherniack] "Full point upgrades take their time and readying the shipping package is normally started in parallel with the end of the cycle so we're talking about a few weeks at most added at the end of an 18-24 month development period (which is pretty standard these days)"

With the disc replication and printing one is more likely to gather several features to put out a release. With online they can get a key feature out the door while others are still a work in progress. Yes, I'm talking about major updates, not just point upgrades, and yes I don't think it will be 18-24 months to see that with online distribution. If there are major features missing in the June release (and there may be) I'd expect them to be rolled out in a much shorter time frame.



Return to posts index

David Cherniack
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 2:45:44 pm

[Craig Seeman] "With the disc replication and printing one is more likely to gather several features to put out a release. With online they can get a key feature out the door while others are still a work in progress. Yes, I'm talking about major updates, not just point upgrades, and yes I don't think it will be 18-24 months to see that with online distribution. If there are major features missing in the June release (and there may be) I'd expect them to be rolled out in a much shorter time frame."

Maybe so. But the way all aspects of NLE software interconnect makes the coding, testing and QA processes more cost and time efficient to do with bunches of new features. Rolling out each new feature as a one-off means doing the QA for petty much the whole package each time. So a more likely scenario will be groups of features rolled out together. Which is the same things as point updates. Independent modules, like a new version of Color, for example, are a different story.

David
AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 2:59:58 pm

[David Cherniack] "But the way all aspects of NLE software interconnect makes the coding, testing and QA processes more cost and time efficient to do with bunches of new features. Rolling out each new feature as a one-off means doing the QA for petty much the whole package each time. "

I think Apple is in an unusual position with FCPX. It's a 1.0 app and it may have to play feature catch up. Of course it depends on the feature, it's interrelationship to other parts of the program, the demand. If there's a major demand over a feature, I suspect it would get developed and pushed out as quickly as possible. I just don't think they'd wait 18 months for a "package" if it were critical.

It seems the doom and gloomers here are absolutely convinced FCPX will be unsuitable for anything other than home movies. I, on the other hand, am convinced Apple has Post Facilities in mind (Thunderbolt for example) although I wouldn't be surprised if a major feature or three may still be under development come June release and Apple is not going to be waiting 18 months to get those out the door.

It would be expensive to do major disc and ship every 6 months but major upgrades are much easier in the Mac App Store.

Obviously all speculative but I just can't see Apple waiting 18 months if there's something major missing.



Return to posts index

cam khoury
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 6:15:44 pm

I might be wrong but Apple took over two years to get FCP Studio 2 out and it's been almost two years since FCP Studio 3 came out. In between those releases no major features were introduced. Bugs were squashed and some file format additions were added between major releases but that's pretty much the extent of their updating history.

Cam Khoury
One Eyed Dog, LTD
oededit.com
248-613-8966


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 6:28:24 pm

That's all going to change IMHO. FCP1 wasn't trying to catch up with itself. It wasn't trying to be an instant Avid killer.

FCP1-7 was till locked into the "roll everything into a replicated disc and ship" model. It's WAY TOO EXPENSIVE (IMHO) to do that every 6 months or so. FCS3 wasn't the biggest upgrade because they were likely already looking at FCPX. No sense in investing limited development resources into something you're about to leave behind.

There's no way you can compare old distribution model to Mac App Store. You also can't compare old timelines to a situation where a 1.0 app has to replace the features set and code that began nearly 14 years ago at Macromedia for a product now the market share leader and heavily integrated into professional workflows.



Return to posts index

cam khoury
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 6:54:14 pm

Fair enough Craig but I think we have to consider the true nature of what Final Cut is really doing for us as professional editors. In and of itself, FC is just a basic editor and when compared side-by-side with Avid it's feature set was weak. For instance, Avid provided (and continues to provide) animatte, excellent keying, tracking, exceptional motion effects, cloning, painting and so on all in a unified interface. FC offered none of these. The best FC could offer was a cheaper cost point especially when installed with third-party hardware such as Aja and BM. By introducing FC as a bundle in FC Studio Pro they could now go head to head with a mature product such as Avid. To tout FC as a a great edit system by itself is subjective and depends on the individual (for the record, I happen to like Final Cut) but it really doesn't have the tool set to give it traction on complex editorial jobs. The days are gone when clients will accept a rough cut without those complex details already worked out - details that require a robust tool set. So you have to look at the development cycle for the entire FCP Studio as a basis for discussion because the editor by itself just won't do. Based on that history, Apple has an abysmal record of updating their product. A notable item in this discussion is Quicktime which is the foundation of FC. Quicktime is perhaps the worst format for moving media around if you care about color management. They introduced Quicktime X which took away so much functionality while ignoring core issues that we rely on in a professional workflow. Do you know any professional editors who are using Quicktime X? If past is prologue, does the FC update history or QT improvement tell us anything about Apple's future offerings?

Cam Khoury
One Eyed Dog, LTD
oededit.com
248-613-8966


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 7:43:01 pm

You've just given a very good post why Apple scrapped the whole thing and started over again. FCPX isn't even based in Quicktime (at least as we have known it).

I was an Avid user from 1989 until around 2002 with some overlap with early FCP. I have major complaints about FCP that were never resolved to my satisfaction (and to many others as well). I have a hunch from what I saw and what I know, that Apple is doing the smartest thing possible by throwing it all out and doing it with a different code base instead of dealing with a patch quilt that began at Macromedia around 1997.



Return to posts index

Jerry Hofmann
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 7:55:41 pm

FCP X isn't based in QuickTime. I think I heard it's based in A/V Foundation. But that's a good thing I think.

Jerry

Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski. My Blog: http://blogs.creativecow.net/Jerry-Hofmann

Current DVD:
http://store.creativecow.net/p/81/jerry_hofmanns_final_cut_system_setup

8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17" MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX - Cinema Displays I have a 22" that I paid 4k for still working. G4 with Kona SD card, and SCSI card.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 8:14:26 pm

[Jerry Hofmann] "FCP X isn't based in QuickTime. I think I heard it's based in A/V Foundation. But that's a good thing I think."

Yes, True as I also understand it.



Return to posts index

Neil Hurwitz
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 9:30:54 pm

"by cam khoury on Apr 26, 2011 at 11:54:14 am

Fair enough Craig but I think we have to consider the true nature of what Final Cut is really doing for us as professional editors. In and of itself, FC is just a basic editor and when compared side-by-side with Avid it's feature set was weak. For instance, Avid provided (and continues to provide) animatte, excellent keying, tracking, exceptional motion effects, cloning, painting and so on all in a unified interface. FC offered none of these. The best FC could offer was a cheaper cost point especially when installed with third-party hardware such as Aja and BM."


Ah Here is the real NUB of IT
I get a kick out of all the Pissing and Moaning about what will
or will not be. I don't know anyone or any edit house that bought into FCP because it was better or even close to Avid 9 or 10 years ago, But it was way way CHEAPER. End of story
How many here are in their own shops now because of the entry point
in terms of dollars that FCP offered? Who cares what is or is not going to be in the new FCPX? Avid and Adobe have now adjusted their
pricing to be more in line. So the solution is now PICK WHAT
YOU WANT, there is not going to be a huge cost difference.
What most are worried about is What is it going to cost if I decide to switch? What have you all done, subjugated your free will
to APPLE. Throw the hammer back at APPLE.
I quaranty they are more worried about how many Ipads and
Iphones they sell in MAY than the amount of FCPX they sell in the next 10 years.


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 9:58:32 pm

Lets look at the numbers, not speculation.
Now understanding that the purpose of FCPX is to sell Macs and that Thunderbolt on those Macs is geared to Pros for high speed storage, video I/O, possible high speed networking.

MacPros certainly aren't a big portion of Mac sales but Thunderbolt is on MacBook Pros and will likely be on iMacs as well. FCPX completes the picture for the low cost video workstation that isn't PCIe card dependent.

Don't discredit the portion of Apple's revenue dependent on Macs though. Certainly iPhone leads but Macs overall are still ahead of iPads and FCPX is designed to boost those Mac sales.







Return to posts index

David Cherniack
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 6:21:35 pm

[Craig Seeman] "It seems the doom and gloomers here are absolutely convinced FCPX will be unsuitable for anything other than home movies."

I think this rather exaggerates their concerns...which are, for the most part, reasonable, given Apple's choice of not addressing the obvious questions of their pro users. It's natural to worry and human to speculate. I for one, believe that was exactly one of their reasons for holding back...it increases the buzz...which is considerable, looking around here. And like you I do believe they have more up their sleeve for June....as that's their style. But I doubt it will be much more...the rest will take a year or three.

David
AllinOneFilms.com


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 6:37:47 pm

[David Cherniack] "I think this rather exaggerates their concerns"

I think some people here have done the exaggerating. People proclaiming features dropped when they just don't know. People saying they're moving to Avid/Premiere when they're really waiting. There's a difference between speculation and the declarative statements some are posting. All this based on a sneak peek of a beta which was already a few months old, not an official product announcement.

[David Cherniack] "And like you I do believe they have more up their sleeve for June....as that's their style. But I doubt it will be much more...the rest will take a year or three."

Yes, will have a complete current picture in June. I do think they'll move faster than a year though for the first significant additions (depending on what they might be). I suspect they may be working on some major things that may not be ready in June but aren't going to take a year to finish. It might be a year for a paid new version (no paid upgrades in the App Store as of current policy) but we will see some new features added at no cost (I'm not talking about additional suite apps if they go that route).



Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 8:58:25 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Being an old discreet *edit'or myself, you raise the point that hasn't been made clear before. What we are seeing is an EOL for FCP. The fact that the same company is coming out with a new product, FCPX, that might or might not be an acceptable replacement for a given shop is not the point - the EOL for FCP is. And I fear it will be just as painful and costly as moving from any other dead NLE. For myself, after dismissing as "silly" all the rumors of Apple wanting to sell FCP, I'm now wishing they had."

I think it has been pretty widely understood for some years now that the old Final Cut Pro codebase was going to have to go. Adobe did the same with Premiere a few years back (moving to Premiere Pro).

There seem to be a bunch of people (not necessarily you) who last year were using the fact that Apple hand't yet rewritten FCP as a 64-bit Cocoa app to argue Apple want neglecting the product, and who, now that Apple has done precisely that, are spooked about it.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read Does FCP X make project files obsolete? on our blog.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 9:15:19 pm

I think it has been pretty widely understood for some years now that the old Final Cut Pro codebase was going to have to go. Adobe did the same with Premiere a few years back (moving to Premiere Pro).

Re-writing the codebase is one thing, coming up with an entirely new NLE is another. Premiere did it because they were trying to go from hobbiest software to a professional product. FCP already had a large and fairly happy following who, for the most part, were looking for speed increases in rendering time and increased ability to handle various codecs natively and on the same time-line, along with better media management. There was no hue and cry for them to re-invent the wheel. While it sounds like they have addressed the various speed issues, only time will tell if they have indeed come up with an improved NLE, or merely a different one.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Chris Kenny
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 25, 2011 at 9:24:05 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Re-writing the codebase is one thing, coming up with an entirely new NLE is another. "

The product is the codebase.

I mean, I suppose they could have set out to deliberately replicate the existing application, feature for feature and UI element for UI element, with entirely new code. But they'd have been passing up a really, really big opportunity, I think. UI has come a long way since the original FCP as well.

--
Digital Workflow/Colorist, Nice Dissolve.

You should follow me on Twitter here. Or read Does FCP X make project files obsolete? on our blog.


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 6:40:48 pm

they could have set out to deliberately replicate the existing application, feature for feature and UI element for UI element, with entirely new code

I was with discreet *edit when they took 2 years to re-write their code. When they were done the new software had many great new features, new ways of handling rendering, clip management, multi-clips -- all major improvements. But it was basically the same UI, the same software. The users were very happy - up until auto-desk EOL'd it, but that's a different story.

So yes, I was hoping this was what Apple was going to do. Why not? NLE's have been around for over 15 years, it is not a new field. They are not coming up with the I-phone here. Why try to re-invent the wheel - it was not as if editors around the world were clamoring for a new way to do this work - they just wanted the old way to be faster and less error prone.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions


Return to posts index

Craig Seeman
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 6:58:28 pm

[Herb Sevush] "Why try to re-invent the wheel - it was not as if editors around the world were clamoring for a new way to do this work - they just wanted the old way to be faster and less error prone."

Back to the Henry Ford Faster Horse quote which I assume you've heard. Randy Ubillos and team probably did a lot of UI research. There's good reason why iOS isn't a netbook. Apple's history for the beginning of its OS and computer design has been about new UI. Apple wants a GUI they believe will be much faster and efficient. I think iMovie was their testing ground . . . and that bothers some people. I don't think they made changes just for the sake of changes.



Return to posts index

James Drake
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 26, 2011 at 10:10:25 pm

Absolutely agree Jerry. I've run Premiere next to Final Cut for a long time and haven't run into a single issue because of it. Same mentality with 7 and the upcoming X.


Return to posts index

joshua schwarz
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 29, 2011 at 8:34:40 pm

you don't have to upgrade. i have a ten year old avid that runs circles around fcp. if i was content to keep editing standard def, i would never have bothered getting an fcp rig. i can stay with fcp 7 for at least a couple of years and see what happens with fcpx. my clients couldn't care less what tools i use but if apple proves to be going off in some weird pro-sumer direction, adios baby!



Return to posts index

joshua schwarz
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Apr 29, 2011 at 9:26:14 pm

ok i should have watched the full demo before i posted. precision editing is way better than what's in imovie. the learning curve is going to be brutal but it may be worth the trouble. i don't quite get how it can completely replace asynchronous trimming but maybe i need to rethink the whole thing. clearly, it is better than pro-sumer.



Return to posts index

Jerry Hofmann
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on May 31, 2011 at 6:46:45 pm

Apple certainly represents it in that demo it to be a pro NLE... and the next generation Final Cut Pro.

Jerry

Apple Certified Trainer, Producer, Writer, Director Editor, Gun for Hire and other things. I ski. My Blog: http://blogs.creativecow.net/Jerry-Hofmann

Current DVD:
http://store.creativecow.net/p/81/jerry_hofmanns_final_cut_system_setup

8-Core 3.0 Intel Mac Pro, Dual 2 gig G5, AJA Kona SD, AJA Kona 2, Huge Systems Array UL3D, AJA Io HD, 17" MBP, Matrox MXO2 with MAX - Cinema Displays I have a 22" that I paid 4k for still working. G4 with Kona SD card, and SCSI card.


Return to posts index

Jerry Hofmann
Re: Since when was the law written you had to upgrade to the latest?
on Jun 30, 2011 at 5:15:31 pm

Well, turns out I'll have to wait on a source/record monitor. And in some cases I miss it. I'm quickly getting used to the single monitor though. But I was using Motion a lot, and other apps which only have a single player... so it's not that foreign to me. Still, there are times a simple look at source/record makes an edit decision quick. There are those "audition clips"

Hey, FCP X has promise I think. Is it ready for all? Nope, but I expected this - noting it in the OP of this thread. Did Apple KILL these features? NOPE they just haven't written the code yet for them. They can't use any code much from FCP 7. Different computer language for starters... So they've "dumped" nothing. Other than the ability to open legacy project files. That they say, they couldn't do.

They are just starting over here folks. LIke it or buy something else... don't belly ache about how they've "screwed" you. They didn't, and now that FCP 7 will definitely run in Lion, there's no compelling need to dump FCP 7 today don't think, I'll bet that the next gen Mac Pro's work with it too. Sure runs on my i7 MBP.

I think the best thing to do is sit tight, buy the 1.0 version of FCP X just to see some of the future, use it where you can, or learn Avid, Adobe or whatever. This product that is attempting to change the way we work for the better. Gotta say, it's easier to learn than FCP 7. It's cues from iMovie are OK by me. (after all same fellow oversaw iMovie 11 as well as Premiere, and FCP 1.) are useful IMHO. But in no way is this iMovie Pro, and it's not written on that code base. It's all new.

Jerry


Return to posts index

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