Description image

Apple Sets Sights on Professionals, FCPX Version 10.0.8 Adds Support for Sony XAVC and Alexa Log C

03.28.13 @ 5:28PM Tags : , , , , , , ,

Apple has been losing its grip on the professional editing market ever since Final Cut Pro X was launched in 2011 to much skepticism. With Avid and Adobe welcoming a lot of FCP7 refugees, Apple is now once again targeting those customers with its latest free update to FCPX. The major features include support for Sony’s new XAVC codec up to 4K resolution, and the option to display ProRes Log C files from the Arri Alexa in Rec. 709. Also included in the free update are various fixes to both Compressor and Motion. Get the full details after the jump.

With Version 10.0.8 of Final Cut Pro X, Apple is reported to be launching a campaign today, to ‘win back’ professionals. In this campaign, Apple will be reporting on stories from professional editors who are making the switch back to FCPX, like Julian Liurette from Toronto’s Globe and Mail newspaper who, after waiting a year after its initial release, says:

It’s better on all fronts. Its interface is 100 times more interesting. And it’s much, much faster.

The campaign will also include a piece on Hong Kong filmmaker Tsui Hark.

No doubt this is in response to Sony’s new F5 and 4k F55 cameras and the popularity of the Alexa amongst industry professionals, and Apple’s campaign is being timed to coincide with this year’s NAB convention in Las Vegas from April 6th-11th.

The full list of features and fixes from Apple:


  • Support for Sony XAVC codec up to 4K resolution
  • Option to display ProRes Log C files from ARRI ALEXA cameras with standard Rec. 709 color and contrast levels
  • Resolves an issue where some third-party effects generated green frames during render
  • Resolves performance issues that could occur with certain titles and effects
  • Time reversed clips render in the background
  • Ability to use key commands to adjust Clip Appearance settings in the timeline
  • Ability to view reel number metadata located in the timecode track of video files
  • Mono audio files in a surround project export with correct volume levels
  • Drop zones no longer reset to the first frame of video after application restart
  • Fixes a performance issue which resulted from selecting multiple ranges on a single clip
  • Fixes an issue where the Play Around function did not work properly on certain clips when viewed through external video devices

Harry Miller, head of the American Cinema Editors’ technology committee, shared with the LA Times:

Personally, I’m still suspicious of Apple, I don’t think they have my interests at heart. And I don’t want to invest money in any of their hardware or software when they might drop features in new versions.

Apple has made a lot of concessions, responses to criticism, and updates since FCPX’s release; but will it make a difference, or is it too late? Have you already moved on from Apple’s NLE suite, or will continued campaigning and functionality improvements convince you to come back? Share your thoughts below.

Links:

Related Posts

  1. Apple Adds Multicam Support (And a Way to Open Final Cut 7 Projects) to Final Cut Pro X
  2. Apple Updates Final Cut Pro X to 10.0.6, Brings Full Native RED Support and Other New Features
  3. Apple Adds XML Interchange* to Final Cut Pro X with First Update

COMMENT POLICY

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 163 COMMENTS

  • Curtis Schmidt on 03.29.13 @ 12:58PM

    I have been a commercial/ music video for 10 years. I have worked in Avid, Premier and FCP 7. Didn’t listen to the haters and tried it myself. I love it. There was a week or two where I had to teach myself how to work differently, and now I am so glad I did. There is no way I could go back to Avid or Premiere. I can finish things far better in a fraction of the time. I have used it in many client sessions, never had any problems and the Multi cam editing is so ridiculously easy, and the color tools for jobs with a quick turnaround is a lifesaver. I am not saying it has a few kinks that need to be worked out, but so do all the other NLEs. To all those out there that put energy into complaining about it, put that into actually taking an an unbiased look at it. I have done a lot of things in my life “the way that I always do.” Doesn’t necessarily mean that it is the best way.

  • From:
    http://community.sony.com/t5/F5-F55/XAVC-APPLE-FCPX-plugin/m-p/107431#U107431

    ” Very happy to report that 4K XAVC on 27″ Imac 3.4ghz/680MX is VERY fast in FCPX. Like 1080p fast.

    MOREOVER, the GPU scales it on the fly to pass to the Blackmagic Mini Monitor to output at 1080p, high quality scaling, no hiccups whatsoever. Like working with 1080p, except there’s 4x the pixels that you don’t see unless you go blowing up clips. “

  • Yay. Basically will be my XAVC transcoder to edit in Premiere! :)

  • With Adobe’s Cloud insanity looming on the horizon, and Avid’s fIirtations with bankruptcy, I think Apple will soon find a whole new following. Especially, in those folks with dodgy Internet connections. Granted, they’ll need to get it downloaded from the app store but, once that’s done, no ‘club’ membership, monthly fees or need to connect. Avid on the brink of collapse? I hope not but, what else is left? You can continue to defend your chosen application based on fanboy-ism but, the times they are-a-changing, and that will be your downfall. The fact that I’ve just acquired a Sony F5 and this latest update from Apple (and there will be many more to come) supporting XAVC, I’m thrilled. FCPX has a bright future, indeed.

  • I still have a problem… FCPX forces you to layer an effect over a color correction. Try it… Color correct something and a Vignette and watch the Vignette alter the color correction. This is because the Vignette changes the color you selected or adjusted… Apple’s tools are useless. I end up making all my adjustments and effects with Red Giant’s software. This kind of think doesn’t just stop at the inspector panel… I feel like little annoyances like this resonate all through out the program.

  • I hate the timeline. GIve us back our FCP 7 timeline and maybe I’ll like it. It is so non-intuitive.

    • Clark Nikolai on 03.29.13 @ 3:35PM

      My observation from teaching others and with myself, is that people who already have experience editing with FCP7 find it to be “non-intuitive”. It behaves differently than what they’re used to. For those who have never edited with any non-linear editor, they find that it is intuitive. In my experience teaching both versions, I find beginners take much more time learning before they can edit with FCP7 than with FCPX.

      Editors who are used to earlier versions of FCP (or even other NLEs) should get some instruction of some type. Videos, books, etc.

      • Good Point.
        I understand what you mean my friend,
        Itos obvious FCPX was NOT aimed to veteran profesional but newcomers
        But…
        is not supposed profesional editors have spend many, many years working to master the tools?
        they (The Pro) have the authority to choose the tools the want to work with
        that´s why the migration to APP o Avid
        A big mistake from Apple?
        You bed it…
        Even Ubillos was mad with FCPX

      • I was pretty resistant to the FCPX when it first came out because, like many people, I had put so much damn energy into learning FCP4-7, but I tend to find anyone who has difficulties with it is actually finding those problems because they are approaching using the program in the wrong way. They are essentially fighting against the application. It’s like all those people who insist on doing even their minor photography touch ups in photoshop instead of a simpler program like aperture because it feels more professional to take 5 steps instead of one for the same result.

        If you actually approach the editing process in the way FCPX intends it, it opens you up to a whole new way of thinking about editing. I find it a lot easier to channel my creativity with the new timeline (again.. once I stopped fighting against it). In many respects, traditional editing programs just give you a means to an end when it comes to showing your creative vision but I find, particularly for shorter works, editing in the new timeline makes my brain work in a completely different way and it gets some pretty great stuff out of me.

        Like I said, I wasn’t won around to begin with, but now after a few updates and actually taking the time to teach myself how to use the program properly, not just trying to apply my existing knowledge of editing to FCPX, I’m definitely on board. Also I have to say, any editor out there who honestly thinks that the learning part of their career is over now is going to dry up pretty quickly.

    • Learn how to use it, and you’ll realize that it’s actually the FCP/Premiere/AVID system that is far less intuitive in a fully digital environment. The original NLE’s were designed so that people coming from tape and/or film could transition without losing the conceptual framework of pre-digital editing.

      It’s time to move past that model, and FCP X is the only software out there at the moment pushing those boundaries. Is it perfect? Far from it. But it’s rapidly advancing and, since launch, is actually listening to its users’ needs.

      • That comment is incoherent nonsense. Pretty sure we experience all media in a linear way – thats what those tools were emulating. I dont hate FCPX but its not more intuitive – its just different. And when you think how linear the output is – odd.

        • I disagree with Mark. Those comments make complete sense. FCP7 and everything before was aimed at people transitioning from tape and film editing. FCPX is a complete re-imagining of editing built from the ground up. People’s resistance says more about how people become more stubborn with age than anything.

          I personally don’t care, but FCPX works for me and I can get it done FAST and the final result is totally professional. That is all that matters to me.

  • Way to win people over. Tell them that they’re dinosaurs and behind the times – LoL!

    • No, he’s correct, learn to use it, and it will open new doors. Has nothing to do with being or not being a dinosaur.
      This world is all about change, and how well you deal with it will make your life easier, there is no stopping change. Is FCPX the perfect editing app, no, what is? Is FCPX the future of editing, in my opinion, without doubt. My prediction, Avid, Sony, Adobe, will soon follow a very similar UI to that of FCPX, it’s just a matter of time.

      • I can’t tell the future. All I know is I learn what works for me, and what the majority of the market is using – it’s not FCPX.

        If it’s eventually adopted, I will learn it, but for now I’ll stick to FCP7, Premiere, and Avid.

      • Ha. You sound like you know what you’re talking about.

  • Same old complaints “old” editors said at the dawn of digital: It’ll never catch on. It’s not serious enough. It’ll never be used by professionals.

    Then, the same thing at the dawn of FCP and Premiere: it’ll never take away market share from AVID. They’re just toys for consumers.

    Long story, short: Editors who illogically cling to antiquated platforms aren’t exactly the best bellweather for future trends. Young editors are jumping into FCP X without any emotional attachment to the ludicrously overpriced AVID era. It’s your call, guys: learn the new technology or be buried by it.

    • Bah, hummerbug!

      This may come as yet another surprise to you, but not everyone is working on a Mac. Learn the new technology and be buried with it when Apple shifts focus to something that’s more important to them..

      • I’m not sure I understand this whole “Apple doesn’t make pro machines” argument. iMacs and the MacBook Pro Retina are both sophisticated and capable machines, used by nearly every creative house I’ve seen. A new Mac Pro has been hinted at, and could very well be released this year. Apple is now making clear overtures with FCP X to cater to professionals – how many home movies are shot on ALEXA or RED?

        Could you save a few hundred dollars by building a PC? Sure. But most professionals I know don’t sweat over a few hundred dollars when the return in reliability, build quality, and depreciation are factored in. The seamless integration of design between Mac hardware and software is still worth the price premium – and I’m not the only one who feels that way.

        • Give me break, you can get way more horsepower on the PC side than anything Apple makes.

          • In the pre-bankruptcy days of GM, you could buy a shitty American car that had plenty more horsepower on paper than a German or Japanese sedan. And yet, at the end of the day – the American made car was still a piece of shit that drove roughly, fell to pieces, had poor resale value, and was horrifically unsafe.

            If horsepower is what makes you happy, then so be it. I care more about the product that gets me where I need to go every single time, with half the effort and frustration. And a little style can’t hurt.

          • Daniel Mimura on 04.5.13 @ 10:45PM

            That’s an awesome analogy.

            All horsepower with crappy suspensions. (Mustangs still have solid axels!)

            All grunt, no finesse.

        • Comparing American cars to PC hardware is a poor analogy. Furthermore, with video and graphic applications, you want as much processor power as you can get for your money.

          • It’s not just about getting X RAM, Y processor, and Z Graphics card. You can build a computer with the exact same parts as a mac but as soon as you run a different OS on it, even if the application is the same, you will get different results. Different OSs and applications use and understand the same hardware in different ways.

        • Marcus Pun on 04.4.13 @ 9:05PM

          Actually you can save up to a thousand dollars or more building your own PC. A loaded up 12 core Mac Pro is more than $3500 while my own rig with FX4800 card cost me less than $2500. It’s a Asus P67 Sabertooth board holding 32GB of high speed RAM with an i2700K Intel processor that is liquid cooled. Add to that a 200GB SSD drive for System and program OS, some 1TB had drives with room for at least 8 more in the box. Without even breathing hard it overclocks at 4.3GHz. Running Adobe Media Encoder it matches the speed of a 12-core Xeon MacPro. What did I do with the extra bucks? Upgraded my Adobe to CS6 and Avid to 6.0 at time of purchase plus some other bells and whistles. The MacPro line is good but as for price performance, not even close.

  • It’s surprising how much comes down to emotion and trust. We pretend to make rational decisions, but its mostly emotion-driven post-rationalisation.

  • Yeah, I’ve edited on all the above ,Premiere, Media composer, Vegas, FC-7 and X. Using both PC and Mac and currently own both types of systems, but after more than a year of research, talking with collogues and professionals in the film industry, my go to NLE is FCPX. Not because it’s necessarily better, but with the roll of the editor, being more involved with the process of story telling and film making than in days past, FCPX works very well in this regard. Will I stop using the other NLE’s, probably not, at least for the near future. With that said, If your NLE helps you tell a better story and get that story in front of your audience, than that is the right NLE for you, regardless of what company made it.
    It’s a great time to be a filmmaker!!!!

  • Dean Cannon on 04.2.13 @ 5:29PM

    I think what a lot of people are forgetting here is that Apple DUMPED it’s pro customers in one almighty hangover beer s**t with FCPX. They basically said ‘screw you guys’ you’re not a big part of our income; here’s the Wal•Mart version of FCP. There’s no way I will trust Apple again. I will buy some of their hardware but, I am moving to Adobe as they don’t have an iPhone company to run.

    • chosentopher on 04.4.13 @ 3:25PM

      It all comes down to Apple not caring about their customers. It took a year for Apple to update FCP X to output an EDL and XML. If you don’t know what these are, you have no business talking about this topic.

  • I’m still on FCP7. I have been since 1998, so it’s safe to say that I’m a dinosaur. I admit that I’m comfortable with the standard (maybe “traditional” is the proper term) interface found in FCP7, Avid and PrPro. I really want to like FCPX, and every time another update comes out, I do give it another look. Yeah, I’m still a little miffed about the way Apple dumped on us with FCPX, but not so much that I won’t continue to consider it.

    I think the major thing that’s still holding me back is file- and project-management. And I know this is petty, but I really wish they’d just go back to using professional terms like “bin” rather than “events” – to me, that’s a big part of what makes it feel like a consumer application. I can’t think of any project where the term “event” actually describes the way my media is organized, but I can think of another application that uses that term. It’s called iPhoto.

    So yeah. I’m a little suspicious of Apple, but I’m still open-minded. And for now, I’m still waiting.

    • “I think the major thing that’s still holding me back is file- and project-management. And I know this is petty, but I really wish they’d just go back to using professional terms like “bin” rather than “events” – to me, that’s a big part of what makes it feel like a consumer application. I can’t think of any project where the term “event” actually describes the way my media is organized, but I can think of another application that uses that term. It’s called iPhoto.”

      I am surprised that more professionals don’t make this point. If you want to work with most experienced pros (I am not one) or directors, you need to understand the language that has been around since nearly the dawn of the movie industry. Bins, timelines, and even Avid specific elements such as the composer window. Unless someone can show me evidence otherwise, I am going to assume that most big budget and and widely released movies from the US are cut in Avid. Does that make it better? Maybe not, but that’s the reality. And based on what I see around the net, other pros that left FCP7 went to Premiere. Premiere of course is staying with the traditional lingo. And by the way, current versions of Avid and Premiere handle almost all tapeless media just fine.

      As for Avid’s financial trouble, it is unlikely that the product would be allowed to die. Somebody will rescue Media Composer and/or Symphony. Blackmagic likes to by pro apps and make ‘em cheaper, maybe they will ride in on a white horse.

      Lastly, this bit about FCP X making one more creative is laughable. If it did that for you then great. On the other hand, Thelma Schoonmaker and her folks cut Hugo on Lightworks which has a modern interface but uses bins and a traditional style timeline. I don’t think any of us are better or more creative than that marvelous 3 time Oscar winner who edits Scorsese’s films.

      Y’all be cool,
      Robert A. Ober

  • I think Apple made a really bold move to re-invent the non-linear editing platform. For that alone, they are worth supporting. FCPX is a much faster and intuitive application than its competitors and has successfully re-invented the editing experience.

    Contrary to the belief by some that Apple were purposely ignoring editors working in advanced areas of film and video post-production, I believe their intention was simply to make it more accessible and affordable to a broad range of editing and simplify the process. The risk that comes with such an innovative overhaul is that you can’t and won’t please everyone. It takes time to fine-tune such a complex tool and the fact that they are obviously listening to their customers by addressing many of the initial criticisms is testament to their commitment.

    For those that find it non-intuitive, it’s simply that you are used to what you already know, but if you take the time to learn it, I guarantee you’ll never look back.

  • apples products are considered top of the line, for me i edit with final cut and Avid, i use all adobe suite except for premiere cause i consider it for wedding and small editing, where as there whole suite is considered the best when i say photoshop, illustrator, after effects and so on, so when i started on Avid media composer and then switched to final cut pro 5 then 6 then 7, it was really very interesting to me and i never worked on avid again, but when final cut X came in, in the beginning i really hated it and i felt it is like imovie and very difficult to edit with and the magnatic timelime was pain in the ass, but when the updates started coming in and especially the 10.0.6 update, here i started to dig in and get to know final cut x really well, and now i can say it is one of the best editing systems and it is going to be the future based system in which avid and other editing systems will try to be more like final cut X

  • whatever the subjective experiences are – fact is: they are now REacting to the market rather than pushing ahead and leading it. once you lose your customer base and piss them off by not doing anything about their complaints you can pack in.

  • I work for a heath media company as a shooter/editor that produces a high volume of patient stories on a weekly basis. Before I took this job, one of job requirement was to be fluent in FCP X. First time I saw FCP-X (not FCP7) as a prerequisite for an editing job. This was 6 months ago.

    As a FCP7 and Premiere user, I reluctantly learned the software and haven’t looked back. Every update improves upon the last one. I submit feedback to Apple all the time as I use the program and I actually feel like Apple is listening to their users. Granted, the video I produce is for the web-but hey, it’s perfect for the web-although I can eventually see the platform developed for broadcast. Give it time.

  • Rob Manning on 04.4.13 @ 7:13PM

    Comments so far are indicative of adherents, those who view editing as circumspect and the undeniably biased haters’ misnomer.

    Where this stands from a business/marketing perspective is yes, iJOBS is hoping to shape an entirely new paradigm with the html5 user base, and might at some point shift the focus of film making, but as the LA Times writer who responded to my critique of his piece last week (basically an iteration of this posted pre NAB fluff piece) pointed out, Film Makers and TV Editors, are not the growth market.

    That leaves a few possibilities.

    I have been reminded in other brand centric forums, that most features are cut on Avid, and few on Premiere, with that also including FCP7/X, Vegas et al.

    Avid’s demise at NAB went hand in hand with Apple, where both companies used to command the first few acres of the South Hall and dueling demos ruled the sea of congregants even on the last few days when the North and C halls became sausage fests for reps and exhibitors.

    In (’08?) they both evaporated. Apple because they had morphed into a hand held device company, and Avid because they clung onto hardware too long, then bought debt laden DigiDesign which had bought M Audio.

    The classic bell curve for marketing, if applied to these two entities, suggest, arguably that growth in a product type/division will only come one of two ways.

    Either create something so compelling, that the energy for embracing it forces the market to shift and others will and must follow (Avid/Adobe did that because of FCP7) or build some cachet into the existing (loyal) user base which has been captured in the run up to where the bell curve peaked.

    A very bad/good example is when Monster Cable finally peaked in the market, and dealers or users were no longer buying the “image”, they shifted to power conditioning by emulating Furman’s older dated designs but with a Monster badge, then, Beats Audio until that partnership dissolved last year.

    Apple, was made on the engineer$, editor$ and graphics artist$ when these folks were the customers, then iJOBS purloined (successfully) the Creative MP player and that along with the continued miniaturization of PCBs and chips, forever changed the landscape.

    The hardware computer that is Apple now, while refreshed, (as pointed out elsewhere in this comment section) is no longer leading in firepower. Case in point, the native ingest which Adobe saw as an opening when they partnered with Nvidia for the Mercury Playback function. Some Apple centric folks back then, said Nvidia would be plowed under, but between Intel, USB 3 being up through putted, and Adobe not backing off, it is arguably safe to conclude a PC even though it can be built from old Pinto parts (snark) can run rings around MAC’s these days.

    When Nvidia brought out a MAC centric aftermarket GPU, that was noted and Cupertino shifted back to Nvidia after the chain of design/supply was exhausted, and who knows but also after Steve passed because publicly he had lost any warm and fuzzy for Adobe long ago and was not an enabler.

    Avid faces a more daunting prospect, the LAT guy pointed out they have not turned a profit since ’05, which is about when Apple was peaking with their purchase of E-Magic, and of course had shifted the editing realm from metal boxes, to a decent MAC array.

    So, both companies need to entice and redefine the process in order to get new business, and to hang onto existing business.

    Adherence to the platform is because of the elegance of Wozniak’s and Job’s design, that cannot be understated, but it has a shelf life.

    Parity, is a result of democratization not just in hardware based editing stations, but the web, touch screens, TV sets, and before Q3-13, four or five brands of wearable devices.

    So who will continue to dominate the small segment of professional editors remains an open question.

    In Apple’s case, Cook has indicated they will be building a new computer here in the states, IF that line produces a 64 bit advanced MAC bursting with power, then the shift to their platform, adherents or not, will be swift.

    If, Avid clones aspects of FCPX and PP which their users demand, they will continue to advance as the main platform for features and high budget projects for some time to come.

    The other leg on Avid’s milk stool, will someone buy them out, perhaps Apple, or Adobe, or someone else.

    Adobe, since they could stand to have a native codec, might do well to take Avid along for the journey, just sayin”.

    The main point of my explanation on background to the Times was he made no mention of the PC in the article and that writing to inform a readership, should not be an advertorial.

    He agreed to my assessment and in the end alluded that the professional film community was not the target for Apple.

    I surmised, he is evaluating the growth potential for folks like we here, who are demanding better results with HD enabled capture devices and accessories in order to advance the craft with products from GoPro, Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic, Leica etc.

    • ” IF that line produces a 64 bit advanced MAC bursting with power, then the shift to their platform, adherents or not, will be swift.”

      You are aware that Macs and OS X have been 64bit for years now? Also, for some reason most folks don’t realize that you can buy an NVIDIA card from folks like macvidcards that will greatly improve the performance of pro apps on a Mac Pro. More RAM in multiples of 6 helps of course. Or one can of course run Avid or Premiere on Windows. If you do go to Windows, grab 7 while you can. Windows 8 is a disaster interface wise.

      Hope you folks are having some fun,
      Robert A. Ober
      PS: New is not always better. Studies have shown for years and experienced editors know this, that keyboard shortcuts are more productive/faster than reaching for the mouse. This of course is even more true in regards to touching/oiling a screen.

      • Rob Manning on 04.5.13 @ 1:15PM

        Thanks, I did not know that MACs have been 64 bit I my information obviously was flawed and incorrect on that, apologies to anyone who turned on the switch and saw a room illuminated by Luddite.

        Yes, W8 is a disaster, my brother and nephew are both IT techs and they said MS has gone a bridge too far as to be useless for anyone to unwind an issue without being tethered to MS.

        Not sure who defined the look of that GUI but it repels my artistic senses. Thanks for straightening me out on the OS, otherwise, yes, all about firepower.

  • 10.8 is big deal. Much faster, more stable and much better handling of audio. This is now a serious app for sure. I like Premere a lot but this rev seals the deal in terms of ease of editing. Now if Apple could get rid of renders… disruptive becomes the watch word for FCPX

  • Blobmaster on 04.5.13 @ 4:17AM

    This is good to improove software, but what about hardware ? What’s the point to be able to edit 4k rez on a mac mini or an Imac ? The machine won’t be able to do the job. The mac pro just desapeared, I think apple have lost the pro market. I’am still using now fcp7 on mac pro, until other new codecs will release and I won’t be able to use it anymore. I also switched to AVID same time, to prepare my future.

  • Well, I’m one of the “dinos” who doesn’t even think of using FCPX. Just read the “new” additions and find that NOW you can see THE REEL info in your footage. WOW… two years later, sure they thought it was not important, when it’s basic in the identification of every frame in your project.
    Excuse me, I’ve been an analog and moviola editor since 1980, then a “digital” editor since 1989, I’ve work with D2, Abekas A64 (100 seconds!!! of non-linear digital recording) and sure all kinds of “digital” tapes with pre-read etc. I’ve learned the operation of CMX, Sony, GVG, and even ACE editors. I can adapt to whatever kind of timeline, GUI or philosophy in any new app. But ¿How could I work a serious pro editing job without the tools to communicate with the rest of the post process. I need EDLs, cut and change lists (there are still people who shoots negative), OMF or AAF. Sure there are improvements in FCPX. But I can read here people who mistakingly use the word “digital” just trying to open a generation breach, in order to defend their point (or maybe it’s simple ignorance). The obvious truth is that Apple is just letting go the “pro” market, and not only in FCP. How about the Mac Pro.

    • I really didn’t care for the ACE…miss the Convergence. – Fellow brontosaurus.

      • Dear fellow survivor from the paleolithic: I tried not to make the long list much more boring by mentioning things like… Quantel Carousel, Harry or Henry, or Media 100, or Edit (hated that), EMC2, Questech, ADO 100, Century switchers et cetera.
        Love to see youngsters under-appreciate experience. They forget how we got it… by learning (and teaching) every new tool that came in the market. Falling sleep at night reading manuals (with your wife snorting in the other side of bed). Subscribing to not-so-cheap magazines (I mean real paper) and get them sent off-shore, Mix, Millimeter, American Cinematographer, Macaddict…
        Most of all they forget we are NOT DEAD.
        I’ve seen things you human wouldn’t believe… Ampex discovering every new planet in the galaxy, and then die from their own success… two-hundred-thousand-dollars Cubicom running on PC-AT with FOUR MB of RAM… rooms full of D1 tapes sleeping in their suitcases just waiting to be swallowed by $75.000 VTR that have hracking Issues… Quantel inventing gestuals, and charging huge amounts for dedicated hardware in an almost slave-market… Flame running in a mainframe the size of a huge freezer with nice big multiprocessor Silicon Graphics boards, that you will find in the trash just five years later… Avid selling SCSI 4 GB hard disks for three thousand dollars, years later trying to convince us that 10 bit HD can pass intact through the firewire connection with Adrenaline…
        All these memories… will be lost in time… like… gears… in the rain.

        • Well, I meant my wife was SNORING in her sleep…
          Sorry, not so good in english. And already divorced. Who wants to be with some geeky reading-manuals-in-bed nerd?

        • Blobmaster on 04.7.13 @ 8:37AM

          But now for 300 bucks you can be a “professionnal” ! Your memory, Roy, won’t desapear like that. I think the next generation, nexus 7 will encounter new problems, and will spent lot of time to read some digitials news to update ourself.

        • Wow, didn’t realize Rutger Howard edited his own film – way cool. Replicant on tape if possible.

  • I learned to edit on 16mm film using a multi-gang synchronizer, long-shaft rewinds, a Moviscop and tape & hot splicers. Having worked-through every iteration of FCP Studio over the years, I was really skeptical of the “new editing paradigm” promised by FCP X. Several months back I downloaded the free trial of FCP X and sat through a couple of free tutorials on the web. I opened the app and created my first “Event” (titled “Test”) and imported recently shot footage for a new project that I’d assumed would actually be edited on FCP 7. Ultimately I finished and exported the project in FCP X and haven’t looked back since. Motion 5 and Compressor 4 are terrific partner apps.

    I’m still discovering FCP X, but so far it’s vastly faster and more nimble than legacy FCP Studio versions I formerly cut on. My typical workflow isn’t collaborative– I shoot and deliver most of my work without handing it off to others, so I can’t comment beyond my uncomplicated requirements for the platform. Like all previous NLE’s, FCP X might not suit the needs of every user, but most of the objections I read seem to come from those who haven’t given it a try.

    • Tony B you are absolutely right, the people who complain the loudest are those that when you read their story, haven’t actually tried FCPX. And then there is all this pro vs non pro BS, like some people feel if they start using FCPX they will be all of a sudden non professional. Avid still has a strong hold on the high end of the industry but I think the main reason for this is ‘the stick with what you know’ mentality understandably adopted by those in high budget workflows where changing anything is a huge risk and the person would sticks their neck out to do so knows full well they are the ones the shit will shower down on if it doesn’t work out. If I were in that situation I would react the same way. The ones who can take that risk (people like me) the sole agent productions are so far the biggest adopters and this is exactly how FCP1-7 became the most popular editing application ever both in the one man band and higher end production industry.
      I’m over the lump in the throaters, so a profit making business with shareholder who expect the highest possible divined made a decision to scrap an history product version that the main competitors has superseded in favour of a revolutionary new product with a broader appeal, get over it, you should be happy, I was over the moon when X was released. Many people had already moved over to Premiere Pro before X was even announced because FCP7 performance was comparatively very sleepy. Such a transition was never going to be a smooth one. Most of the old editors are very ‘stuck in the mud types’ (and I say old meaning older than me 49) I can understand that but this is a rapidly changing landscape, just incase you haven’t noticed, film just died and it happen much quicker than any of us thought, holding on the rail at the back of the last carriage won’t slow down the train.
      I wonder how many of the haters are influenced by the Adobe / HP propaganda site Creative Cow, that does seem to be where the backlash started from.

      • ¿Haters? It’s really amazing how some people use this really “emotional” word just to avoid reasoning. I haven’t tried FCPX because it’s lack of some basic tools THAT WERE PRESENT on FCP7, which I need to do my daily work.
        Let me put it this way. I try to edit material shot with some DSLR. First: every clips began with TC at 0. NICE. Second: the clips don’t have reel name. So, I can not export a viable XML to the grading stage, even the EDL is only working on the two “master” columns. Unless… I hire a person (or even worse do it myself, I’ve done it) to put TC and reel# manually into EVERY clip of the project, I mean thousands. Mmm, friendliness in real life. If your editing software let you do it.
        So if a director or DP come to me and tell me they are going to use this kind of gear, well I know we will be working more in the edit process (in stupid repetitive tasks), and so I will need to charge some more money to do it. And that’s with FCP7.
        Then I know this afore mentioned director does not mind go SUB-STANDARD in order to… put your option here: use his old lenses, use two cameras, save some budget… whatever. Because other people at the end of the film making will cover their backs by working longer hours.
        I can appreciate the improvements in the X version, but my clients can not afford the lack of some of the functions which I need to my everyday working flow.
        Then here comes the “hate”. Decades of devotion to Apple, spending money in overpriced products. May I remember you that in 2002 some of us paid 1200 euro for FCP3… and another 1200 for DVD Studio Pro 1.5. Defending Macs against legions of haters (even some in my family)… and the brand that you put your faith in just ditch you without hesitation, because (sure, that’s a good reason) your line of work has become a narrow niche in their market. So it’s not hate, man, just business.
        Finally, of course I will try FCPX, sure I will find it when freelancing on editing suites in some post facilities in the near future, and I will operate whatever they give me and have fun learning this friendly software. But I will never trust again. In fact, I’m hackintosher now, just forced by the fact that I still need back compatibility with old projects. I doubt I will never buy Apple hardware again (even the good products like macbook or Iphone). I’m also in it for the money, bro.

        • Hey I run two Hacks but they are pain in the arse. Probably more hassle than windows. If a new mapro came out tomorrow I’d order asap.
          I shoot on DSLRs and the C100, never had a need for timecode. I grade in Resolve so do many of the onlining post houses now, do multi cam sync with X (by far the best implementation of multi cam syncing yet) also sync audio for DSLR very reliable and so easy. I loved editing FCP7 but I love working in X a lot more, It feels very natural, and once you get over the difference, very fast.
          If FCPX cant work for your workflow and your workflow is so fixed it can’t be changed to accommodate X, thats a real shame, but there are other options I guess.
          I use hater for want of a better term and I mean no offence by it, but went I think back of the angry mob that first arose on forums throughout the inline post world, it seemed appropriate. Perhaps some of those ppl are softening their view somewhat with the groundswell of support X is gathering. It seems more like 50/50 or even slightly more in favour than against now. I haven’t read anything from people who have really given it a go and hated it after.
          “¿Haters? It’s really amazing how some people use this really “emotional” word just to avoid reasoning. ”
          Is it reasoning to boycott buying apple products because you are offended apple changed FCP?
          Maybe apple don’t have the edge in advancement they once had, maybe thats your reason. Samsung phones for instance. I’m typing this on my macbookpro that’s lasted me rather well and I do believe you get what you pay for. My hacks are no mac, opening the side cover is such proof of that. To build a PC as good would probably cost a comparable amount, duel processor motherboards are pretty expensive last I looked and most PC cases are that quiet or built as well. In a business the difference $s isn’t worth the probably downtime.
          Apple have the advantage over Avid and Adobe in that they can advance FCPX and tweak their OS to accommodate the changes, this works quite well for them. If there was something that adobe wanted to change that was reliant on changes to the OS it would be very hard for them to do so as they don’e make ether platforms their SW runs on and they run on two different OSs. The latest very of X requires you to update to the latest version of OSX. It’s a brave Avid user who would tempt fate updating to the version of either OS without reading forums to ensure it didn’t end in disaster. I’ve never had a problem updating X even on the day of release.

          • Hi, Jon:
            Thank you for reading my moaning. I’m glad you like X. I like people pioneering to new lands, and this “new” approach to editing seems to be quite useful for a big number of editors and projects. Perfect, go for it.
            The thing I don’t like is that they are forcing us to change to an unfinished and unfitted tool for my needs, by surprise, no notice, no turning back.
            I am not offended, and I’m not promoting any boycott. Simply put: Apple had let me down, and lot of people (and their investments and long lasting trust), so I moved on… Not in the direction they try forcing me to adopt. Because their products are expensive (as always, not FCPX, which -casually- you can buy for the same price FCExpress had). But most of all FCPX, when they launched it, was clearly a downgrade without A LOT of the capabilities I need, that where present on the previous version. It’s true they are hearing and incorporating things, but now it’s too late for me.

            You NEVER need timecode neither reel name? Nice, but right now is the only method I know to identify every frame in the project. I know it’s ancient technology, but it had been working for more 30 years now, so if you want to change it, then propose a new standard and convince people to make the change. It’s basic for consistency when you work in collaboration with other people and other platforms. Sure, we grade with Resolve, but after days of trying and sending discs back and forth, we weren’t able to communicate through XML, so we rely in the old method of exporting the master and sending them an EDL to mark the cuts… Works but, any transition beside cuts must be graded using dynamic color corrections between one shot to the next. Mmm sub-standard its my word for this. And that’s with FCP7.
            Some try to sell me FCPX, well I don’t buy. For me it’s really a backwards step. And once I loose my trust in some product it’s difficult to gain it back. Same thing goes for companies like Blackmagic, and their policy of lying about their products (some of them don’t do what they advertise). Nice products, the camera, the Hyperdeck, if they perform as promised, which they don’t. That’s more than a disappointment when you have spend some thousands of hardly earned dough.
            When you are against the wall, between a tight schedule and a shrinking budget, and it’s on your shoulders deliver a sustained quality product on time, so your bosses could issue six-figured invoices for a show that millions are watching, then experimentation takes second to reliability.
            I’ve cut TV series and features shot with RED, F55, C100, Alexa. For 2011 season they use this Atomos Ninja (really stupid machine then) and I tell you, a lot of the “improvements” went to the production budget and the camera crew… at the expense of the longer hours in the post team.
            Young people can make fun about we dinosaurs, addicted to tapes. Well they only see the bright side, and don’t realize the few drawbacks. One of the biggest is that material now (with what they wrongly call “digitalization”, tapes are also digital) rely on a more volatile medium. Production save money and people… and I loose some sleep. Partly because my hours run longer, and some nights I lay in bed worrying if that disc from location will arrive tonight safe and complete or I will receive a late call from my assistants telling me some shots are missing (this happened a lot with the extremely expensive RED discs). Then I need to call the director and break the bad news to him/her, and prove everyone it was not our fault. That is a burden with costs no one wants to assume. No worries, they can fix it in post.

            Well, I don’t know what kind of hackintosh you have, but mines work steadily and very fast. I watch and record HDTV every day with a $300 hack mini with few problems once configuration was stable (a couple of weeks try-and-error). I have built a bigger one, with Thunderbolt, full of RAM, endless TBs inside, a really cutting edge NVIDIA card, for half what an entry-level MacPro costs, and better performance. And I can upgrade them anytime. They are not so reliable, and sure uglier, and Mac laptops are the best. But I’m happy and it will not take long for me to leave Apple completely. What made me change my mind? FCPX, That was the turning point after decades of loyalty. I don’t dare yet using hackintosh outside my personal and pro-bono editing, but Premiere is seducing me more everyday, with the use of CUDA and the easy collaboration with AE. Do I like the interface? NO. Neither the obsolete AE timeline, the same since the times of “La Cosa”
            You can call me whatever you want, but it’s a fact you can see: a lot of editors and post facilities just dumping FCP. Look at Apple moves in recent years, with Shake, Logic, FCPX, you can’t deny it, are aimed at letting the “pro-market” go. So bye, it was good while it lasted.

  • I’m not a fan of FCP, but what happened with its interface? It looks like a cheap app now.

  • I’m one of many who are still hanging out in FCS 3 (FCP 7), and will stay there indefinitely. It’s not that I hate everything about FCPX. Though there are some things (e.g. the timeline) that are aggravating to me, I do see some of the merits, but it’s the professional tools that I need and that Apple chose to omit in FCPX that keep me away.

    The absolute biggest killer for me, and the one thing that well keep me away until it is fixed by Apple to operate natively within FCPX, is the lack of OMF/AAF and other ways of moving projects. I do all my audio post in ProTools, and I do not want to change. I have worked with SoundTrack Pro, the functionality of which is now built-in to FCPX, and I just don’t like it. I’m a ProTools guy, and I need to be able to take my audio there.

    The other thing that has me a bit trapped right now… I have so many projects on my drives in FCP 7, and not being able to open them in FCPX is nonsense.

    I know that there are third-party apps and plug-ins that can work around these things, sort of, but they’re buggy and unreliable. Again, until Apple unlocks these abilities natively within FCP, they aren’t going to move me away from 7.

  • I loved Final Cut. I loved using it. Right up to Final Cut 7. I figured with proper 64bit architecture built into it’s operating system, to take full advantage of the powerful computers we have now it would be brilliant. They did build Final Cut 8. But they scrapped it.

    Well Apple, you are so used to ‘leading’ the market to where you think we should go, you’ve got the people that put their faith in you lost in a desert.
    I’ve moved back to AVID, and at times use Premiere Pro now. I feel shame, that I persuaded small boutique editing houses to invest in Final Cut. Now they’ve had to upgrade to something else with egg on my face and theirs.

    And regarding those that talk of ‘intuitive’ editing with FCPX, forget it. If you want to be a professional editor, no I repeat NO decent post house will have FCPX.

    Apple are a greedy, snide company. That was run by a man with a God complex. When it comes down to the wire, AVID and ADOBE are in it for the long haul. We, the technicians and artists that use their software are their bread and butter when it comes to income. We’re not some sideline, and we’re not treated like that.

    I would come back in an instant if Apple gave us FCP 8, so that I wasn’t being told to use what is ostensibly iMovie PRO.

    I’ve been editing for 12 years on everything from Fictiion / Documentary Features and Shorts, Music Promo’s and Corporate Videos.

  • Melrose man on 04.29.13 @ 2:26PM

    Wow what cry babies, so there are still choices stop crying and get to editing.

  • I cut a lot of promos, online commercials, short films etc. and for me FCP X has really sped my workflow up. It’s frustrating for me that nearly nobody will even consider it. Apple definitely botched the launch but for those of us following it through the upgrade cycle, it’s a pretty amazing program. I’ve edited projects which require everything from old vhs material and new 2k shots to be combined and I don’t need to wait for a render bar. I’m often editing on the fly with my Macbook Air and a CalDigit Mini Raid drive and I see no lag. Working with complex layered photoshop files is a breeze too. I know sharing needs to be improved, but outside of that, I just wish I could convince people to give it a change again. I’ll regularly ask editors why they hate the program and they cite issues that have long since been resolved. I’m not sure Apple will win this battle with editors unless AVID really does go bankrupt but I actually look forward to cutting with it whenever I can.

  • It’s all about the money. That’s all people really care about at these big companies. I would jump ship (again) if FCPX was up to pro levels, but I can’t depend on it when I need to have an edit done in a few hours time.
    BUT i’m not going to start paying a monthly fee to use premiere in the cloud…so who knows if people will all jump back to apple. Maybe this was their plan all along. I don’t think many editors are ‘loyal’ to certain companies, they just go with whoever has the best, most reliable software.

  • I recently downloaded FCPX determined to give it a try and the benefit of the doubt. After struggling to understand things that were basic in FCP and in almost any other NLE program, I discovered that they just can’t be done in FCP! I’ve been an editor for 30 years, and my verdict is that X just isn’t up to the task. I jutst deleted the program and would rather switch to PC and Lightoworks, for example, if Apple have this little respect for us professionals. The description “iMovie Pro” is sadly not over-used! And it is sad, since FCP7 really is a beautiful program and should have been sustained into an eighth version and further. Quite what collective madness lies behind Apple’s decision to destroy FCP with this amateur program is hard to fathom – really hard to understand!

  • “Haters” — that’s the word tossed around in these forums for anyone who doesn’t like FCPX. Well, I own up to it. I am, undeniably a “hater” of FCPX. I bought it when it first came out and have used it on countless projects. But in the past year and a half, I’ve been moving to Premiere Pro — and it’s like a breath of fresh air. I’m almost completely on board, though I have editors who work for me in FCPX, so I still have to stay involved — but only under duress. If you are reading these forums to decide whether to use it, my answer is, only if you must, and maybe not even then.

Comments pages: 1 [2]