Description image

Apple Adds Multicam Support (And a Way to Open Final Cut 7 Projects) to Final Cut Pro X

01.31.12 @ 3:59PM Tags : , , , ,

Apple today released an update to the controversial Final Cut Pro X, adding multicam support, advanced chroma keying, media relinking upgrades, and enhanced XML support. There’s also a third party app that — get this — actually allows you to import Final Cut Pro 7 projects. FCPX is now at 10.0.3, and while I’m not sure this will make anyone give up their copy of 7, it’s a step in the right direction (and a significant upgrade for current X users). Here are the details:

Here’s Apple with the new version capabilities:

“In the seven months since launch, the third party ecosystem around Final Cut Pro X has expanded dramatically,” the company said in a statement. “XML-compatible software like DaVinci Resolve and CatDV provide tight integration for tasks such as color correction and media management. The new 7toX app from Intelligent Assistance uses XML to import Final Cut Pro 7 projects into Final Cut Pro X. In addition, some of the industry’s largest visual effects developers, including GenArts and Red Giant, have developed motion graphics plug-ins that take advantage of the speed and real-time preview capabilities of Final Cut Pro X.”

It’s interesting that Apple is relying on a third party application (7toX) instead of building it into their own “Pro” application, but something is better than nothing. Are there any X editors out there getting a hands-on with this new version, or are any 7 editors swayed by these new features?

Link: Apple Final Cut Pro X Software Update 10.0.3 – Apple

[via AppleInsider]


We’re all here for the same reason: to better ourselves as writers, directors, cinematographers, producers, photographers... whatever our creative pursuit. Criticism is valuable as long as it is constructive, but personal attacks are grounds for deletion; you don't have to agree with us to learn something. We’re all here to help each other, so thank you for adding to the conversation!

Description image 84 COMMENTS

  • Looks like some great new features to me. For you pro editors out there, what’s still missing?

  • What’s missing? OMF export. Dual or tri-monitor workflows. Working in multiple sequences. Not having the thing crash. Not having the urge to go on a homicidal rampage.

    I’m honestly checked out of the entire FCPX conversation until it’s at least 10.1, and most likely 10.2. I don’t know a single pro editor who thinks FCPX is anything but a colossal mess– and I know an awful lot of editors.

    • I will second that sentiment on behalf of my editorial department here too. FCPX is still playing catch-up and not worth the time or effort, they should have released it when it was ready.

      • ProRes is the only thing keeping a lot people from jumping ship right now.

        • For people who haven’t jumped ship because of their dependency on Pro-Res, this shouldn’t be an issue. There are Pro-Res workflows for Adobe Premiere CS5 onwards – as long as you have the ProRes codec installed on your machine. It won’t appear as a preset when you start Premiere but you just set up a custom profile. A complete workflow is shown here: …And for those who don’t have FCP7 or FCPX installed to give them those, the cheapest way to get it is to buy Motion 5 from the App Store for £34.99. Then Premiere CS5 (and probably other editing software) will allow you to edit and export in all flavours of Pro-Res. Your ship awaits… :)

    • FCPX has dual-monitor workflows. I’ve used them.

    • David,

      Sadly I agree, there’s no way I would edit anything serious on FCP X but the kicker is that the color correction/slow mo is the best for someone like me that doesn’t have twixtor or Da Vinci. (can’t get xml into Vinci from premiere)

      My current workflow is edit it in Premiere cs5.5 and then grade the project in fcp x… yes I do have to cut every single clip again but it’s worth it.

      Really excited about the fcp 7-fcp x app because then I can do all my organizing/editing in fcp 7 and throw it onto fcp x without having to cut every single clip again.

      Just posted a quick slow mo tutorial, check it out if you’re curious-

    • My crew and I have continued to edit in FCP 7 for most of our editing needs. I think the whole botch up by the FCP re-boot has sent a lot of workflows heading to the Adobe CS5.5 world.

      I will say that when all this gets sorted out, I’m sure FCP X will be a powerful system… It’s just a matter of how long that will take.

    • Sorry folks … but working on Avid or Premiere Pro is still far away from the new era that Apple walked in with FCPX. Apple did had the courage to change everything. And Apple is not focusing at the old school editors …they look ahead. It’s the man or woman behind a tool, not the tool itself that counts. I admit, it was a shock, working with FCPX but now it’s far more comfortable to work with and damn, so easy and logical that you forget Avid or Premiere Pro. FCPX is still young software … give it some time… FCP 1 wasn’t what the latest FCP8 became. It took years. Here, with FCP X it only will take a year to get all the wanted features. Another example: Motion 5. So cheap in price … but so strong in possibilities. I followed a course in After Effects … but Motion is far more creative and amusing to make motion graphics. Straight, simple but yet intelligent. I still believe in Apple and its software. Because Apple is a creative company and a little rebel … fortunately … because in a couple of years, Avid and Premiere Pro will look very old school and slow. Nowadays the weight of expensive production companies will change … professional creative people will make the same things on a standalone application. Why ? Due of economic reasons. And computers will be faster to render impressive results. And yes .. the price of FCPX and Motion 5 .. heavenly low priced … Avid and Premiere too costly. Again … economic reasons will force every company to change. At the end, you make the same nice edits with FCPX and Motion 5 but a lower production cost. But, still have fun with Avid and other software besides Apple.. because there are more concerns in the world than talking about the good and the bad of software, I thing. Greetings from Belgium, Europe.

  • I’ve been editing some client interviews for my company with FCPX and what took an hour or two last week I just recreated in about 20 seconds. The new multicam is pretty awesome. I haven’t had a chance to test out the other features yet though.

    • That’s funny, because I had the exact opposite experience : what would have taken me less than a second in FCP7 took me about 30 seconds to try and figure out in FCPX, sometimes without success.

      • Thats because you know how to do it already in FCP 7… allot of the things people are complaining about in this thread are very possible in FCPX… you just dont know how yet. Once you can confidently say you know the program as well as you know FCP7 and it still is unable to do what you need then complain. I teach both programs at American University and honestly allot of the changes were simply lost in communication, not lost altogether as allot of people tend to think.

  • Are chapter markers available yet in FCP X? I need them for my customers DVD’s.

  • Ditto what David said. There’s no way I would ever attempt to use it on a professional job until it proves to be more than just a flashy version of iMovie with an over-overhauled interface. Still, I’m curious enough to try it.

    • FCP X is not, and has never been, “a flashy version of iMovie”. It’s always had features that only professionally care about, and they keep adding more. It’s unhelpful when people feel the need to maintain their initial rage, repeating things like “no dual monitor workflows” when that was solved in 10.0.1, months ago.

      If you want to find reasons not to use a piece of software, go ahead. Apple can’t please all the people all the time. But with the features added back today, there are fewer reasons than ever to stay away. Herd opinion isn’t always right.

      • How about they release a new Mac Pro? Update their HCL for other graphics cards? Make a public attempt at winning back the professional crowd? People are jumping ship because FCP 7 is crippled due to advancing technology/lack of updates, and FCP X simply was not ready for a pro market. When you can get a Window’s machine with a CUDA-enabled card, DaVinci Lite, CS 5.5 (half price when switching from FCP), and the ability to boot into OSX in a pinch (albeit with some foresight in building) at half the price of a competing product, there is no reason to refresh your workstations with a Mac workflow to accommodate FCPX. Done and done.

        • The “Apple doesn’t care about the Mac Pro” line is getting really tired. Intel haven’t released an update to the workstation-class chip that the Mac Pro uses. Competitors (like Dell) haven’t released new workstations either. Apple can’t update unless it shifts down to consumer platforms. It’s not that Apple doesn’t care about the Pro users, it’s that Intel hasn’t prioritised them.

          If there was an “xMac” (lower end more configurable Mac) we’d have had a faster one already. And despite the wallet appeal of a Hackintosh, they’re not and will never be 100% compatible. Not interested. Most users didn’t need to update their Macs to support FCP X anyway (only a few older cards aren’t supported) and those are in older Mac Pros that can upgrade easily enough.

          • The hard truth is Apple now make consumer gizmos. And it’s why it is such a successful business.
            The “Pro” market has and always will be niche and there’s not enough money to be made.
            As for competitors not releasing new hardware – after almost 20 years I ditched my own personal Mac and went HP Z Series for all the reasons stated by chris.

            FCP7 is still more than competent and will be usable for a while to come, but FCPX is too flaky now and running on hardware that is fine but will only become more and more outdated.

            We’ve gone back 10 years and the only truly bomb proof, progressive pro system is Avid. All the others are fine and I could churn out as good an edit on iMovie, Movie Maker or any other NLE, but if I had to absolutely, positively, on pain of death get something on screen and on time Avid would be the only one I’d trust. Which is why you pay top dollar and not $99.

  • For the Digital Content, FCPX is really a blessing. Don´t worry about Codecs. Don´t worry about Clip Collisions. Just edit as if you would always wanted it. That´s my opinion. Though, I still need to use FCP 7 because of a plug in that don´t exists yet for FCP x … hopefully soon. If it´s out – FCPx: I am Yours! :)

  • simma' down on 01.31.12 @ 6:40PM

    Thank you for knowing a lot of editors. that really validates your point. Though I don’t have an answer for your homocidal rampages, FCPX does indeed have multiple monitor workflows, it has always had multiple sequences (which actually work better than fcp7) and OMF export can be achieved through automatic duck’s free plug-in. Because you still haven’t figured these out, it really makes your point only seem more homocidal than valid. Also, Because you know “Pro” editors doesn’t mean others like myself and many other “Pro” editors whom I also know don’t think FCP X, granted it isn’t fully there yet, is a game changer.

    • Thank you. So tired of the same lame arguments for months now coming from “pros” who’ve never even learned the software. I was a big FCPX hater upon its launch but since 10.02 update and now todays 10.03 I’m actually excited about editing software again. This is a deep NLE with features that are very advanced and very cool – I think the foundation has been laid we’re gonna start seeing a lot high end usage very soon.

  • I got fcx when it first came out and fell in love with it!…… then it started freezing…over and over and over again. Now Id rather rip my eyes out and stick them in my ass than use it. If they can fix the freezing and crashing.. maybe, just maybe, I’ll go back and use it.

  • I am a wedding SDE editor…we make money off it..I think that passes up as professional job..and our workflow have never been easier and faster since we started using Final Cut Pro X. This is an amazingly speedy NLE and I wont trade anything in place of it! Now that we have multicam, and Sapphire edge, and MB Looks…the reasons why I still need other programs have been steadily decreasing. With Apples rich developer community..I think this will become the most highly supported (plug-in wise) NLE by a mile within the year. Go stay with your pPros and Avids..let the rest of us have all the fun and speed in editing with FCPX.:)

    • Well put. I find FCPX to be the fastest and most fun to use NLE ever. I hear of crashes but I haven’t had a single crash now in over 2 months. I’m running LION on an old 2.1 Mac Pro with ATI 5770 – works better than ever.

      Since you mention plug-ins you might want to check out Tonalizer. This is the best color timing plug-in I’ve ever used and has great sharpening and noise reduction features – love it!

  • When employers start requiring that I know it to get a job, then I’ll bother with it. Until then…

  • John Jeffreys on 01.31.12 @ 9:33PM

    Same old grumpy, conservative, old videographers and talentless professionals that hate on X.

    I think its incredible, and every young bright visual artist swears by it. 7 was so complicated. X is initiative, visually appealing, and focuses on your ideas and creativity and not technical bullshit.

    Its the best. It makes film an art again, and thats something the current stagnant community hates

  • Wow, quite a mixture of opinions, which doesn’t surprise me. For those with crashing and freezing problems with FCPX, I’m curious how many of you specifically are running Lion? I have a feeling Lion is the problem not FCPX. I run Leopard and do not have any issues with crashes.

    • I’m running Lion and have never had a single crash with FCPX or Lion. I’m currently cutting Pro RES HQ feature film with no issues, love it.

  • @ John, your right nothing creative was ever done with FCP 7, only old people used it, it took people with an IQ of at least 140 to learn it. You have simply fallen into the ditch an the other side of the road you are bitching about. These are just tools. THere are a lot of workflows that FCP X will not make the cut. But there are people, real professionals that it is the prefect tool. Find what works for you but don’t think for a minute that the old grumpy conservative professional cannot cut on anything that is put in front of them.

    • John Jeffreys on 02.1.12 @ 9:11PM

      im just noticing a trend among the types of people that complain about, and resist change.

  • thats awesome that multicam got added, I think fcpx may have a future for professionals down the line, but I’m currently not going to use it because its a web editor program. Though I do edit for the web, I like most of us am trying to eventually edit for tv and film and learning final cut x can’t really help me get there.

    Plus no native support for R3Ds, thats a 2012 no no.

    • Nonsense. It’s not a “web editor program”. Sure, you can output to web, but you can send a digital file anywhere, even back to tape with the tools that came from the HW card supplier. Built-in 4K support, Roles, broadcast monitoring, and decent multicam are not consumer features.

      Learn to edit, don’t just learn an NLE.

      • dude, be real. No one is going to transcode R3ds to baked 4k prores to work in final cut x. Why would you when premiere and avid work with it natively and you can adjust and load RMD data.

        And I never said anything about it being a consumer editing software. You can edit professionally for the web guy. But if you need to export xml, edl, or omf, (MOVIES) files or you need to set up a network (TV) then final cut x doesn’t work YET.

        • RED support is missed, and will likely come soon, but RED isn’t the only option for generating 4K video. Alexa shoots to ProRes, natively supported in FCP X. I don’t deal with RED files often, but I would happily transcode for a small, occasional job.

          Also, FCP X does have export options. The new 10.0.3 specifically improved the XML export, and now there’s a 7toX tool, an Xto7 tool, and another tool (XtoPro) for AAF export coming soon. (REF: Even before this release, the Automatic Duck tools allowed pro audio export.

          Finally, the new file-level media relinking tools do allow a more traditional online/offline workflow. It’s not all locked down.

  • This is long overdue but great site you guys! I’ve been following since 2010 (not long for you NFS fans) and have loved this site’s appeal towards the inner filmmaker in all of us. I’m experimenting with Premiere, Final Cut Version 7 and now Final Cut Pro X. I’m actually really new to all of this so all of the recent updates are great tidbits of information for me and any other rookie filmmaker. I really like the latest version of Final Cut (V. 7) but at the same time I don’t mind working with Final Cut Pro X since I’ve barely had any experiences on either format. Premiere rocks as well. I’m constantly flipping back and forth between the programs to see what works well for me and to be honest…they all do. I know your guys are professionals and are actually really inspiring but from an amateur’s POV without years of editing Final Cut Pro X works pretty well too. It may look like an advanced version of iMovie but as long as we make movies from it then it shouldn’t be too bad. Sure it may not be for you guys but it’s a great tool for the little guys like me. Of course I’m still messing around without programs, can’t be caught up with only one right? Anyway keep up the great comments and awesome website! This is the reason why I keep coming back.

    By the way NFS, could you go back to the days of DIY articles. I miss the DIY rigs, cages, etc…those articles really got people inspired to go out and film. Budget is an issue and any help on creating cool contraptions from home will always lure new filmmakers here!

  • The way Apple works with all of their products is to not release a feature until its ready, like with the iPhone and cut/copy/paste. They prefer to come up with the most elegant and intuitive way of doing this without having a stopgap. This is fine for consumer phones, people can be distracted by the missing functionality by the shiny interface and other bells & whistles. Unfortunately, this doesn’t work so well where people have to use the tool for work… I’m sure Apple will get there eventually with FCPX, but they’ve burnt many bridges along the way…

  • There is also Xto7 which theoretically can move FCX projects to software like Davinchi.

    By the way. FCX is awesome. It’s so much faster in use than FC7. Sync work well even with bad quality sound. Yes, it’s not perfect but I’m sure many editors don’t even try to work in FCX just because of iMovie style looking. It has all professional functions and (which is very important) great aura. You just feel creating not working.

    I’ve already done three big projects in FCX and like it so much. Don’t want to move back on FC7.

    P. S. I didn’t know about Xto7 so for grading in Color and Davinchi i used to export ready movie to FC7, make cuts and than export xml.

    • Hal Robertson on 02.1.12 @ 8:27AM

      Ooooh… it has “Aura”. That’s what I always wanted in my NLE.

      I guess what’s interesting to me is that Apple – the our-way-or-the-highway people – have stepped out of their closed ecosystem for this one, relying on third parties to patch their software. Weird. In addition, they popped the “Pro” label on a half-baked piece of software and it’s taken them 7 months to get it to this point.

      It really just looks like a bungled idea and they’re spending a lot of time and money repairing the damage… if that’s possible.

      Everyone I know (including the Apple fanboys) just hung their heads and switched to Premiere. Which is fine with me. I never had to switch.

      • Very funny. I’ve edit all my movies in Premiere for 3 years and in FC Pro for 2. I also was working in Avid for couple months. And yes’ the “aura” is important if you are not just a boring editor and taking right clips in right places based on director’s task. Best choice is what helps your creativity.

  • There are still some essentials missing (as far as I know). It sounds like a lot of you don’t work in broadcast. Tape deliverables? Nope. No EDL’s eiher. There goes our biggest color house (not all programs take xml ya know) No viewer, how am I supposed to do matchbacks? I do this pretty regularly as an assistant editor. If it works for you, great, I don’t care, but it’s still not fully functional for some of us.

    • Agreed … can’t even think of using it without match frame. Why not have a UI option that includes a Viewer and match frame? It might just be an optional window arrangement.

      • There is match frame. Select clip in Timeline, Shift-F, the original clip is selected in your Event with its In and Out marked. There are also keyboard shortcuts for Replace (Shift-R) and Replace from Start (Option-R) if you want those. There is, however, only one viewer.

  • I use FCPX day in day out doing corporate videos. I have had some crashing issues and have had some minor things I wish where there, multi cam was the biggest and now with that addressed I don’t see what everyone is complaining about. Yes there is some key broadcast features missing… but they will come. No real professional abandons a program for a .0.0 release anyways. I made the switch and work a lot fast now thanks to it and no longer have to worry about mixing content from vendors via handy cam footage and dslr and dvcpro, it all just works not. I still use 7 when a job calls for a task I can’t do in X, yet, or I just feel more comfortable doing so in 7.

    I agree it wasn’t at 100% when they launched it but most people accept .0.0 releases to be somewhat beta anyways, so take it all in stride, give them a year and it will be the most powerful smooth running NLE out there, and if not 7 will still work and Adobe and Avid will have new versions too.

  • For me it is simple. FCP 7 works for my professional needs. Why would I by an inferior version of the product? It would be different if version X enhanced to the tool, but it didn’t. I think they should have called this product something else and made it clear that it’s not for professionals (at least not broadcast professionals anyway).

    • That’s great that 7 is working for you but in no way is this inferior software. The deeper you dig into FCPX you see the incredible foundation here for future growth unlike any current NLE. It does take some time (weeks) to get used to, but I haven’t met anyone who’s given it a truly fair shake wanting to go back to old-style NLE’s. Just take a look at some of the multi-cam tutorials over at the Cow – this is not some toy, there are future forward features that are fantastic not to mention fun.

      7 to X White Paper from Apple:

  • We’ve been using FCPX at our local PBS station since the day it came out. While our TV production staff still relies on Avid for all the compex broadcast stuff, the beauty of FCPX for us is now all the non-production staff are producing 3-camera interviews, short docs, and pledge breaks for TV broadcast because FCPX is approachable. While we’ve had FCP7 and Premeire, the apparent learning curve prevented folks from feeling like they could learn. But now we output 5x as much local production, the whole staff is very excited to do more, and best of all, the approachability of FCPX has secretly been teaching us the basics of editing in other NLEs. So all in all, it’s got more people involved in the art of video production, where before it seemed reserved for only professional editors. And in the end it means more production than we’ve ever thought possible. Who could argue with that?

    • This. FCP X is much, much easier to learn. If you’re used to patch panels and juggling tracks, it’s maybe not such a big deal for you, but FCP X is opening many doors to non-editors.

  • Back in the old days when Final Cut first appeared on the scene and started shaking things up a little, a lot of editors took it on board and helped it grow.
    Some preferred it to Avid or Media 100 and decided to make it their primary tool, but all the while they could flit between different systems as and when required.
    I added it to my repertoire and it meant that I could take on more jobs.
    I’ve even worked with FCPX, just so if a job arises I can walk right in and get on with it (no jobs on X have surfaced though).

    What I don’t understand is why there is a need to stick with Apple’s NLE even though the latest version is, quite frankly, not up to the job.

    First and foremost I use Avid MC (mainly because the workflow trounces any other NLE), but if Avid released a dog of the proportions of FCPX I would jump ship straight away and vote with the money in my pocket.

    Why are you all waiting for Apple to get it right? Why are you giving them the time of day?

    I seriously cannot believe that a whole generation is so in love with a brand that they will allow themselves to be kicked around until the brand comes up with the goods.

    Do the sensible thing. Run into the arms of Avid – or Premiere – or anything, but for gods sake don’t let them take you for a ride.

    • Well, I certainly don’t feel like I’m being “kicked around”, nor is FCP X a “dog”, nor am I “in love with a brand”. Even if I did want to switch, Avid or Premiere still costs $1000s. Not everyone uses After Effects and gets Premiere for free.

  • Oh wow. Aren’t Apple just the innovators…

  • Last I checked, many “professional” post houses are closing their doors. Fcpx or not, things are changing and the shift is do to technology, economy and demand. Therefore, worry about keeping your job and not about some silly NLE. Alright whiners, get back to work.

  • Joe Ray bSkrha on 02.3.12 @ 2:10AM

    I love FCP X for shooting songwriters in studios and in-concert. I use a 5DMKII, Dual Eyes, and a SD 744T. It does everything to put together a 90min set from download, edit, transitions, color and mix audio in about 12 hours. When I watch a concert, I hate cut aways every 5 seconds. I use long lens, and long shots. I can now use 2 or 3 camera’s. I sure hope FCP X will adapt to 4K as easy to 1920 x 1080P. Granted, I am not a pro editor but before FCP X, I was limited by time as I am a trial attorney by day. Now with FCP X I can edit and preserve performances that would have been lost 5 years ago. Thanks Apple.

  • Joe Ray Skrha on 02.3.12 @ 2:12AM

    I love FCP X for shooting songwriters in studios and in-concert. I use a 5DMKII, Dual Eyes, and a SD 744T. It does everything to put together a 90min set from download, edit, transitions, color and mix audio in about 12 hours. When I watch a concert, I hate cut aways every 5 seconds. I use long lens, and long shots. I can now use 2 or 3 camera’s. I sure hope FCP X will adapt to 4K as easy to 1920 x 1080P. Granted, I am not a pro editor but before FCP X, I was limited by time as I am a trial attorney by day. Now with FCP X I can edit and preserve performances that would have been lost 5 years ago. Thanks Apple.

  • Errrr… didn’t we have cameras and NLE’s 5 years ago?
    And wasn’t this possible without the aid of Apple?
    I smell fanboyism.

  • LinuxDanish on 02.3.12 @ 9:57AM

    I understand I don’t technically belong commenting on this thread seeing as how I use PPro on windows (though I have used FCP7 a little before). but I was wondering if you FCPX users could anwser a question for me. what makes FCPX so great? because from what I hear it tends to be, native codec support, background rendering, real-time playback, and 64 bit I have been doing on PPro CS5 for a while. Is there seriously something new? or is this just new for mac?
    -Thanks, LinuxDanish

    • Before I used FCPX I used PPro and FCP7, 6 was before that and good ol’ windows movie maker before that. Now, before the wonderful world of NLEs came along, we used to edit movies with two VCRs, and a playstation for the soundtrack, this method, believe it or not, was a refined workflow for kids making movies at ages 10 and 11. Of course, that was a vast improvement over rewinding and re-recording over each scene every time something didn’t go as planned, but I digress.

      My point is, we all have different experiences as editors, and we all utilize the platforms that best serve our needs. Personally, for editing narrative film, especially if I were to endeavor to make a feature film, I may use PPro in conjunction with AE and try to set up a workflow similar to the one Koo demonstrated a few months ago for The Social Network, it seems like a brilliant, seamless way to do it.

      However, for the work that I do that actually pays the bills, FCPX is the best thing that could have ever happened to my virtual world. The efficiency it offers saves my up to twenty hours per project, and it’s a very conducive set up to trying things out, rearranging and re-cutting in seconds, (which I realize an experienced editor can do on any platform, so hold onto that Molotov!)

      The tragedy here is that people get so caught up with the “I’m a pro, you’re an amateur” or, “I’m a creative, next generation genius, you’re a dinosaur” arguments, or any other mentality displayed in some (definitely not all, but it’s a common trend running through every FCPX thread ever posted since it came into existence) comments.

      So Linux, all I can tell you is that for me, FCPX offers a workflow that is intuitive, efficient, and after using it for awhile now, it’s very hard for me to go back to the traditional way of doing things. So if my answer seems vague and completely lacking a compelling reason to you, it’s because it’s not a single feature that makes me like editing with it, it’s just different, and for me, it’s different in a really good way.

      But, then again, I’d probably be happy to go back to editing with some ancient VHS equipment and my trusty old PS1, because making movies makes me happy…and that’s what it’s all about people!

    • Re: what makes FCPX so great? Don’t bother asking this question, because all you will get is an emotional response rather than factual reasons, or a feature vs feature against PPro or Avid.

      “I love FCP” – Joe Ray Skrha
      “it’s just different” – George Simon

      This new update only confirms Apple was dead wrong and professional editors were justified in moving away from FCPX to PPro / Avid. Even with this new update, the problem is that pro editors still won’t trust Apple to risk any further investment. Apple’s interests are vested in the larger market share of simple-minded consumers, not the smaller market share of intelligent professionals.

  • It is a step in the right direction, I mean it has to be from what I have been hearing. I have used many versions of FCP and PPro. Maybe someone can clear up a major issue I have been having before I think about making the switch to FCPX. I know this isn’t a support forum but maybe someone here has had the same problems as me to say the least its very frustrating. I am having terrible issues with PPro CS5.5. When I go back to an older iMac Snow Leopard with CS5, it runs so much more smoothly. With CS5.5 I am running the latest Lion on a brand new iMac and it constantly quits or forecloses. I am editing no more than 1080p DSLR footage. Anyone else having the same problems?

    • Its Lion that’s your problem.

    • Re: Anyone else having the same problems? No. CS5.5 runs great on Win 7 64 and even Vista 64. Mac is no longer a platform for serious editing; hobby editing… yes, professional editing… no.

  • With all this faffing about going on with FCPX, this should be the time that Sony kick some butt with Vegas Pro. Never quite understood why it doesn’t get more recognition in the professional world. Yes, plugin’s from 3rd parties are lacking, but for everyday and complex work I find it much faster and cleaner that Premiere Pro and FCPX put together. Add to that, far better audio editing tools, I would urge you to give it a go.
    All SOny need now is to sort out whatever the issue is with not having a MAC version and we’d be sorted.

  • Can someone please confirm this question. If I’m understanding this correctly, will this new update offer the equivalent of what the pluraleyes plug-in did for syncing video with their audio tracks?

    • Yes, this pretty much does what PluralEyes did (syncing cameras that stop and start using audio), except it allows multiple frame rates and multiple frame sizes in a multiclip. PluralEyes does work on FCP X, though I haven’t compared the two since the update to 10.0.3.

      Apple’s version has a much simpler workflow, but PluralEyes may be better for a big job, like syncing up an entire shoot’s worth of clips. Right now their workflow is messy (export, process, import, etc. vs “just do it”.)

      I suspect Singular Software will be updating PluralEyes to directly support the new multicam ASAP, if they can.

      • Thank you Iain for the response.

        I can’t help but suspect that with the pricing of FCP X, the release of an affordable, (FS100 price level) large sensor camera, recording internally to Prores is just around the corner.

        We’ve really come a long way in digital video in the last five years.

        Here’s hoping to NAB!

  • Oh!!! now iMovie X can open projects from FCP 7??? and work with Multicams??? Amaziiiiiing!!!! ;)