[dancepuppy56]

Apple have announced at the FCPSM the new Final Cut Pro(X) software, that price $299.00, wow...I feel Final Cut Express is gone, but has FCP been dumbed down?, it looks more like iMovie than FCP, no real details but video and audio are synced, my issue here is what if the audio is out of sync coming in?, that would be messy, 64bit and core animation, background rendering (yeah right, if you have a render farm attached ), compound clips, but excellent colour matching....now we need the details.

[Htial]

I've been planing to move up to Final Cut Pro, but it's always just looked too expensive for what I want to do... ...now I'm doing more and more it might be worth it...

[mickdevlin]

Uh, don't get too excited yet: it's not released until June and $299 is the US price. There is also the question as to whether it will replace FCE. My guess is that it will.

One more item: it will be available from the (Mac) App Store.

[Htial]

So it will be cheaper here then... >_<

I'm still not in the full swing with the Mac App Store... ...I'd still want to get a DVD for any software over $100.oo...

[dancepuppy56]

My guess is that you will buy what components you want and not the whole box full at a premium price, It will help because you would be able to splash out say for compressor for about $45.00 if you want it, the downside is that if Apple upgrade you will have to pay full price and not just an upgrade price, personally it will be great for me, I can buy as i can afford instead of missing versions because of the high block price, If the exchange rate holds I doubt the price including GST will go over $350...Still a bargain, but with Lion coming too and i need to update my iPhone, plus I still haven't got an iPad yet, it is going to be an expensive winter...I need an i5 iMac for my Xplane X too...bugger.

[dancepuppy56]

I have since my last post I have watched the FCPX (if very shaky) video presentation, Is it a game changer, yes definitely, a dumbed down FCP, no, some features are outstanding, work flow would be excellent, but still many questions remain, but this is still a work in progress, one feature that always really bugged me with FCP was titling, it was average to beyond poor, the biggest problem is not the things that move but the things that don't, bring in a photoshop image for titles or for a background or whatever and it is in 72dpi, so how does that look, like jaggy, useless, certainly in HD form, so for me to bring the work quality up, I need a higher dpi import, that would revolution my workspace, as an editor it is still a cutting board no matter which way you cut it, but image quality is what you show your client, and at the moment that area it is beyond poor...

[Htial]

Any day now... ...Fingers crossed...

[lumeswell]

dancepuppy56, on 15 April 2011 - 10:24 PM, said:

work flow would be excellent, but still many questions remain

To say questions still remain is putting it lightly, the demo looks impressive, but there are some things which I see that could get in the way of a smooth workflow. They focussed on the new things, which I understand, but there are a bucketload of features that need to be there for editors that I didn't see, hopefully they carry over from the current version.

I am looking forward to getting my hands on it try it out, but for now, lots of questions.

dancepuppy56, on 15 April 2011 - 10:24 PM, said:

the biggest problem is not the things that move but the things that don't, bring in a photoshop image for titles or for a background or whatever and it is in 72dpi, so how does that look, like jaggy, useless, certainly in HD form

??
Not sure what you mean by this. Video does not have a 'dpi' setting like the print world, so all that really matters is how many pixels are in the image. Make your image in the right resolution for whatever format you are working in, or larger, and you should not have any problems. If you make the image 1920x1080 pixels minimum then you should be fine (unless you are working at 4K resolutions, in which case make them a bit bigger). Check the images scale in the motion tab of the Viewer after you drop it on the time line (while its still there, no viewer window in FCP X based on the demo) - FCP will by default scale images up or down so they fit the size of the video when you drop them on the time line.

The other thing that will impact it is the codec you use for your project - so if you are working in DV then things will also look pixellated compared to ProRes HQ for example.


Just looking at some of the original questions in your first post, from my understanding:
Audio and video being synced - audio and video are already synced in FCP, its a fundamental requirement for editing. What looks to be different now is that the sync audio ends up in the video tracks of the time line. Not sure about that myself, could make some things very confusing.

Audio out of sync coming in: this one does look interesting - currently you can slip audio at a per frame level, but supposedly FCP X will let you slip it at the sample level. So if you audio is recorded at 48kHz for example, instead of slipping it in increments of 1/25 of second (if you are working in PAL) you will be able to slip it in increments of 1/48,000 of a second. I htink anyone who can detect audio that is out by 1/48000 of a second deserves a medal - most people would not notice a single frame. For the most part I think it will be most useful when trying to sync audio of the same event recorded on 2 different devices which are not gen-locked - and could in theory be out by as much (!) as 1/50 of a second

Background rendering: you wont need a render farm, you just need a multi core Mac, which will be the minimum spec machine for this I would think. Current FCP is VERY DUMB when it comes to rendering. Not only is it locked to a single core, unless you tell it to render clips it will sit there happily doing nothing while you stop to think, wasting processor cycles. Then, when you tell it to render, it will go as fast as it can on a single core, and stop you from doing any other work while its at it. This is one of those things so overdue for fixing its not funyy, I hope they have it right now. My particular favourite is when you render your entire time line and then try to output to tape, only to have FCP lock up and render video (??) for a few more minutes first - I would love to know what its rendering when it does this!


But, after all that, it should be any day now, just in time for the end of the financial year!

[Htial]

Oh no... ...I'm now at the point where I'm checking the App Store every five minutes... >_<

[lumeswell]

I review by Gary Adcock has gone up on Creative COW, and he has had a chance to use it, and if you are a professional editor its pretty much a case of move along, nothing for you here yet. Ironically he has titled the article 'Ready or not, here it comes...' - I think editors have been ready for it for a while, it just sounds like FCX isn't ready.

Bummer, I was looking forward to it, but with what has been ripped out and/or not carried over from the current version it is just not a tool for professionals. I hope they update it quickly as seems to be expected, but I don't think I will be wasting any time on it yet. For someone cutting videos at home from a single tapeless camera I think it will be a big step up from FCE, unfortunately that seems to be the direction Apple are heading - worrying for someone who has built a business around an Apple workflow.

[lumeswell]

And its on the App Store now at AUS$349.99 - not as bad as I expected, but, as per previous post, to much missing for me to rush out and buy it straight away.

And I think they should remove 'Pro' from the title for now - it ain't pro yet

[Htial]

What about someone that has only ever used iMovie? Worth the upgrade?

I ask because at the moment I'm doing a lot of "export/import" to get the effects I want in iMovie.

[lumeswell]

Htial, on 22 June 2011 - 01:21 PM, said:

What about someone that has only ever used iMovie? Worth the upgrade?

I ask because at the moment I'm doing a lot of "export/import" to get the effects I want in iMovie.

I would think yes, it will be a great step up from iMovie provided you are working tapeless, and at the price you might as well.
I also think your learning curve may not be as steep as someone coming from FCP/FCE.

Depending on the types of effects you are trying to achieve you will probably be able to keep the entire project in FCX (I'm not going to use the 'P' just yet) as well.

[Htial]

lumeswell, on 22 June 2011 - 02:30 PM, said:

I would think yes, it will be a great step up from iMovie provided you are working tapeless, and at the price you might as well.
I also think your learning curve may not be as steep as someone coming from FCP/FCE.

Depending on the types of effects you are trying to achieve you will probably be able to keep the entire project in FCX (I'm not going to use the 'P' just yet) as well.

Hahaha... ...I've read a few comments where people are dropping the "Pro" out of the title...

You could have a look at my two YouTube channels to see what I'm doing... ...It's mostly titles and watermarks that need the export / import to get them all to work the way I want...

http://www.youtube.com/user/sauvictv
http://www.youtube.c...ightystreetcars

Watching all the Audi stuff is giving me ideas to improve my own stuff...

[lumeswell]

Htial, on 22 June 2011 - 02:42 PM, said:

You could have a look at my two YouTube channels to see what I'm doing... ...It's mostly titles and watermarks that need the export / import to get them all to work the way I want...

http://www.youtube.com/user/sauvictv
http://www.youtube.c...ightystreetcars

Comments are based on FCP, not FCX - I would think they should be similar, this is pretty basic stuff.

The breakers and titles in the first video would probably still need to be made outside of FC, but if you make them as templates in Motion you would be able to reuse them in FC and change the text.

The BOFs in the second video ( Bottom Of Frame super straps etc) would be pretty easy, you make them as a template in motion and then just drop them in as a new video track in FC - you then just use the Motion tab in final cut to change the text in them, so you just need 1 template to make them all, you don't need to export the video to go underneath, add the super in super something else to render the video and then bring it back.

The colour grading features should be of interest to you as well - should let you lift the look of the footage.

Hope this makes sense.

[Htial]

lumeswell, on 22 June 2011 - 03:07 PM, said:

Comments are based on FCP, not FCX - I would think they should be similar, this is pretty basic stuff.

The breakers and titles in the first video would probably still need to be made outside of FC, but if you make them as templates in Motion you would be able to reuse them in FC and change the text.

The BOFs in the second video ( Bottom Of Frame super straps etc) would be pretty easy, you make them as a template in motion and then just drop them in as a new video track in FC - you then just use the Motion tab in final cut to change the text in them, so you just need 1 template to make them all, you don't need to export the video to go underneath, add the super in super something else to render the video and then bring it back.

The colour grading features should be of interest to you as well - should let you lift the look of the footage.

Hope this makes sense.

I was thinking I'd need Motion too... ...Guess I've got some more research to do over the next few hours before I download...

[lumeswell]

Htial, on 22 June 2011 - 05:17 PM, said:

I was thinking I'd need Motion too... ...Guess I've got some more research to do over the next few hours before I download...

You don't need it, but it will make life easier if you can master it. I should warn you that the learning curve for Motion will be pretty big. I started doing motion graphics using After Effects, and I just can't seem to get my head around the way Motion works, but I know a few people who use it and use it well, and I work at a facility where Motion templates for supers etc make life a lot easier.

In straight final cut you should be able to use one layer for your video, one layer for the super background, and one layer for your text, and use the built in transitions to bring things on and off and make it look good, although I have read a tweet today that some transitions wont work on text layers, which is just insane if true.

I'm getting more and more depressed the more read today from people who have now got their hands on it and are finding more and more problems. It is beginning to sound like it really is iMovie on steroids, which is what professionals were worried about. I'm sitting here cutting a project which I only started today where I have about 12 hours of source material from 3 different camera types (1 of them tape), and I could really use the new media management tools to sort through some of it, would have been a great project to try it out on, would have been willing to ditch the first few hours I spent on it today in FCP7 before the announcement, but without so many current features in 7 its just not an option.

*sigh*

[dancepuppy56]

Steve may be happy on the move to an all digital workflow, but meanwhile in the real world tape still works, if you work with any Television Station they still require tape, my customers turn up at my door with tapes, mostly with VHS (yes remember that relic) technology has yes moved on, but many people don't, can't or mostly won't, pro means that, covers all the bases, personally I'll wait till the 1st upgrade then put my money down and the early issues should be fixed, for me it looks like i can use it better, but if i can't import it, it useless for me...

[lumeswell]

dancepuppy56, on 24 June 2011 - 10:53 AM, said:

Steve may be happy on the move to an all digital workflow, but meanwhile in the real world tape still works, if you work with any Television Station they still require tape

Don't worry, I can't see this thing getting anywhere near the broadcast world in any serious sense. General feeling I'm picking up is FC is now pretty much dead for the broadcast market and people will be looking to Avid MC.

When you are a big facility you have to look a long way into the future to make sure things are going to work, and there is now no long term path for final cut to work in that environment that I think anyone will trust, let alone commit further money to. I'm not willing to spend $350 on it yet, why would a facilities manager commit hundreds of thousands or even millions? Something amazing will have to happen to it very quickly to change this - Apple burned a lot of bridges very quickly this week.

Its the same argument Apple were pushing when Vista came out - if you have to buy new hardware and learn everything from scratch why not consider Apple? Well, if all you existing Final Cut projects are toast, and you have to learn something new, why not consider something that actually has a future and understands the professional needs of the systems you provide?

I think we need to check if Randy Ubillos has any shares in Avid, it is the best explanation I can think of at this stage.

Let me be clear on this - I have no problem if Apple wants to drop the professional community and focus on the consumer market - if thats where they are making their money and it works for them then fine, thats business. I read a good post the other day which points out the professional users are the exception, not the rule. But don't insult us by using the word 'Professional' in the name of the product, and bank on the goodwill of the existing product line. Call it iMove Pro if you must, but it ain't Final Cut.

[NightStalker]

And WHY is it $350 here, as opposed to $299 in the US? We still have to pay for the bandwidth to download it (unless done in an Apple Store using their bandwidth).

And with our dollar the way it is, our price SHOULD be around $273 or so.

So just WHY the price gouging? And where, exactly, is the ACCC? Oh sorry - I forgot - they're probably off at lunch or jaunting somewhere at our expense. Useless bunch of hypocrites...!

There is NO logical reason for the price difference. It even applies to apps on the iPhone or iPad - i even had one a couple of days ago that was being advertised as "Free introductory offer" - which turned out to be $2.49 here.

We are being price gouged, yet nobody seems to mind or to stand up to it and object.

Why doesn't an organization with some clout - like Macworld - get onto the ACCC and use name and shame to rectify the situation?

Same applies to Apple hardware too - and it all comes from Shanghai, which i think is actually closer to here than it is to the USA...

I will be in the US in a couple of months, and will buy it while I'm there, when I'll be on an American IP address.