This rumour is building and makes sense.

Apple to Introduce New Final Cut Pro on April 12th? - Mac Rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/05/apple-to-introduce-new-final-cut-pro-on-april-12th/)


Apple to take over the SuperMeet to show us the new Final Cut Pro (http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/302-apple-to-take-over-the-supermeet-to-show-us-the-new-final-cut-pro)

with bated breath I await.

maybe i should call them on my case IDs once again regarding compressor.

let's hope the upgrade cost isn't alot and that the upgrades are up to industry standards wrt HD footage etc...

I'd be happy if they just fixed all the bugs and let us use more ram :) Also hoping there's a price drop and they split up the Final Cut Studio "bundle" (which was never a bundle because if you wanted FCP you had to buy all the additional stuff even if you didn't want it). I really just want FCP, no Color, Motion, Compressor, etc.

My wish list is for a more consistent UI, and for us Express users, a more up-to-date list of codecs...

Anyone else going to be at the Supermeet?

Pro? Meh....what about EXPRESS?

Anyone else going to be at the Supermeet?

Wish I could.

Wish I could.

me too. i'm very curious and will be checking online for any info on Tuesday.

It seems like the new FCP is going to be a complete rethink of non-linear editing, probably borrowing a lot of the recent imovie features and including a lot we haven't seen yet.

This pre-NAB talk(link below) with people who have seen the new FCP makes me think FCP 8 isn't just going to be updated gui graphics & performance, they will be pushing new ways of editing like they did with the new imovie & possibly throw us some curves that no one is expecting. As a final cut user I've never really looked much at the new imovie aside from ripping some map animations, it isn't really my cup of tea as I like to have precise control over everything. I guess we will have to see what they have to offer us on Tuesday and what they(apple) think the next generation of editing will be.

PreNAB Editors' Lounge 2011 Part 1 on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/22057617)
(parts 2, 3 & 4 are linked on the right)

If they really screw things up it might be time to get a cuda card and go Adobe.

I really hope they don't go the way of iMovie and don't try to reinvent the wheel when it comes to representing timelines ... IMHO it's not needed. What is needed is a modern application that has all the advantages of such (threading, proper 64bit handling for memory, the ability to render things in the background, ditching that whole enforcing of the non-standard 1.8 gamma nightmare, etc). I guess we'll find out soon enough.

Wish I could.

And here I was hoping I could meet some ehMacers/ehMacians today before the exhibits open tomorrow.

And here I was hoping I could meet some ehMacers/ehMacians today before the exhibits open tomorrow.

sure...rub it in our faces that you're there :) lol

take pics at least! :)

mguertin, ditto on your last post. i still can't believe how long render times take on my mac pro. unacceptable given it's a quad and full of ram. i should be able to click a button that says "make this puppy roar at full capacity" when i want!

sure...rub it in our faces that you're there :) lol

take pics at least! :)

mguertin, ditto on your last post. i still can't believe how long render times take on my mac pro. unacceptable given it's a quad and full of ram. i should be able to click a button that says "make this puppy roar at full capacity" when i want!

With all the cores we have today you shouldn't ever have to click a button. All that rendering can be happening in the background while we're still editing! :)

If they really screw things up it might be time to get a cuda card and go Adobe.

Or, just stick with FCP7 for the time being. It's still pretty good.

The hue any cry that builds up every time some scrap of info filters out about the next version of FCP is kind of silly. Ok, yes, it's people's careers and livelihoods and the natural impulse is to get agitated when dealing with Apple's uber-secretive approach to new versions of software.

But the nice thing, generally speaking, about being a professional editor is that your skills translate well to a bunch of different platforms.

The only thing...really...that irritates me is when I have a lovely Kona card in my Mac Pro and I can't use it with Avid MC! Well, that's Avid's way..."proprietary" hardware. At least my hardware investment works with Premiere Pro, even if it's my least favourite of the "big three."

Right now, the Avid $995 promotion for Final Cut users (http://www.avid.com/US/specialoffers/fcppromotion?intcmp=AV-HP-S3) looks very tempting. I was working out the numbers this morning and if you own a Mac, you can get Final Cut Studio 3 for about $1000 and then use the serial number to pick up Media Composer for another $1000 and have two heavy nonlinear video packages for about $2000 when Media Composer normally sells for about three grand for the software only. If you have Final Cut already, it's a very inexpensive way to add Media Composer to your arsenal of software.


The only thing...really...that irritates me is when I have a lovely Kona card in my Mac Pro and I can't use it with Avid MC! Well, that's Avid's way..."proprietary" hardware. At least my hardware investment works with Premiere Pro, even if it's my least favourite of the "big three."

With the comment about a company making proprietary hardware and software that are inextricably linked to each other, I thought you were talking about Apple there! So Apple gets a free pass for tying their software to their hardware but Avid doesn't? What gives? How come people are so willing to let Apple get away with stuff they'd normally complain about other companies doing? I don't understand it. I really don't.

Oh, no, I don't generally give out free passes. Avid and Apple both have their flaws. Sometimes similar flaws.

The Avid crossgrade is a great deal. I just skimmed the offer...I assume it's software only...which also means an upgrade to Kona 3!

I miss my Amiga 2000.

With all the cores we have today you shouldn't ever have to click a button. All that rendering can be happening in the background while we're still editing! :)

no kidding. just met with a colleague who is processing 2 hour mpeg2s on an 8 core pc is under 15 minutes - utilizing full 64 bit etc..etc..

that made me really interested in tomorrow.
ridiculous it takes me an hour or just over.
grrrr...

Or, just stick with FCP7 for the time being. It's still pretty good.

That depends what you do I suppose. It causes me tons of headaches due to the whole 1.8/2.2 gamma issue with quicktime. I've used it to produce a lot of video that is destined for the web, to be played cross platform, and for an audience that is very critical of colour processing (pro photographers). Given that combination it's a nightmare because depending on what player it's going to be played back with it can look totally different. It's not all FCP's fault, it's Quicktime's fault too .. but it's all Apple's fault and it all needs to be fixed.

no kidding. just met with a colleague who is processing 2 hour mpeg2s on an 8 core pc is under 15 minutes - utilizing full 64 bit etc..etc..

I haven't used FCP/Compressor for compressing final deliverable video for a long time. Pretty much anything modern and ffmpeg based will do circles around them. The only rendering I do with FCP (and it's painful) is for titling and colour correction stuff. It's so painful to watch my 8 core (16 thread) Mac Pro sit there using about 65% of a single core rendering this stuff while the whole FCP interface is locked out and the machine is mostly idling.

I haven't used FCP/Compressor for compressing final deliverable video for a long time. Pretty much anything modern and ffmpeg based will do circles around them. The only rendering I do with FCP (and it's painful) is for titling and colour correction stuff. It's so painful to watch my 8 core (16 thread) Mac Pro sit there using about 65% of a single core rendering this stuff while the whole FCP interface is locked out and the machine is mostly idling.

I've been outputting non-self-contained .movs and then using bitvice which utilizes all cores (currently, I only have a quad).

I used a matrox max card for any i-device or youtube files (VERY FAST! :)

i can't wait for tomorrow. been awhile since I was pumped about something directly relating to work.

That depends what you do I suppose. It causes me tons of headaches due to the whole 1.8/2.2 gamma issue with quicktime. I've used it to produce a lot of video that is destined for the web, to be played cross platform, and for an audience that is very critical of colour processing (pro photographers). Given that combination it's a nightmare because depending on what player it's going to be played back with it can look totally different. It's not all FCP's fault, it's Quicktime's fault too .. but it's all Apple's fault and it all needs to be fixed.

I would imagine/hope that the gamma shift issue is one of the problems with FCP that will be taken care of with version 8. It's been a pain in the ass for a lot of different people for years now. It's probably one of the biggest gripes about FCP that I've seen. I wonder if there'll be changes to QuickTime X announced today, as well?

Personally, I'd like to see MXF support and more flexible project organization. It's been trivial to use Preference Manager to automate setting the scratch folders, etc per project but it would be nice to see features like that actually included in the application itself.

Things like an Apple version of Avid's ScriptSync or UI updates would just be additional features, to me, at this point.

I guess we'll find out soon!

I would imagine/hope that the gamma shift issue is one of the problems with FCP that will be taken care of with version 8. It's been a pain in the ass for a lot of different people for years now. It's probably one of the biggest gripes about FCP that I've seen. I wonder if there'll be changes to QuickTime X announced today, as well?


Yep I think they would pretty much have to go hand in hand if things are going to be fixed. Quicktime X is something along the lines of a bad joke.

Yup, looks like they just announced Final Cut Pro X. Rebuilt from scratch, 64 bit, yadda yadda.. updates slowly appearing on engadget and other sites..

audio here with occasional live shot:
FoxtrotYankee on USTREAM: . (http://www.ustream.tv/channel/foxtrotyankee)

photo stream here:
Twitpic / robimbs (http://twitpic.com/photos/robimbs)

For some reason this is final cut pro 10, don't know what happened to 8 & 9.

looks interesting. i wonder when (if) there will be more info on exporting. this was all about the import, editing and rendering, but nothing about exporting. must be something on the way for that....

From a quick read through it sounds like just what the doctor ordered. Time will tell ... but I have to say I like the new pricing too. Sounds like they decided to break up the whole suite, which is great news for most people that i know ... we won't have to pay a premium now for apps that we don't use.

It does look like they did a good job adding and changing to make it better and more intuitive. I wonder what will change with Motion, Soundtrack Pro etc. now they have ended Studio.

I'm wondering if anything with change with them or if they will just leave them as is until end of life. I honestly don't know many people that use them -- the only ones that do is because they were part of the suite and they already had them installed. I'm not sure that Motion every really took off (going head to head with after effects is a tough gig) and soundtrack pro is honestly pretty terrible as far as real audio work goes ... there are many better options including Apple's own Logic Pro. The only app in the suite that I know people that used any amount on it's own merits was Colour .. and even then it was a small crowd.

Motion is actually fairly powerful for simple clean stuff that you use repeatedly. If you know how to create motion master templates for final cut pro it can save you a lot of time for repeating animated supers & lower thirds with the same style but different text/subject image.

FCP X Built from the ground up - 64 bit will be able to utilize more than 4 gigabytes of memory. You can use all 8-cores

Cocoa, Core Animation, Open CL, Grand Central Dispatch

FCP x will allow you to edit as you're importing, you don't have to wait to ingest.
Can start editing during ingest of AVCHD and other media, switches silently to local media as it ingests
"render dialog is gone"


Resolution independent playback/timeline all the way up to 4K

Built in pluraleyes functionality with DSLR scratch tracks.
Instant render in the background all the time, does not at all effect editing.

Can detect close ups, medium, wide shots. People detection. Shot detection

Shipping in June, downloads directly down to your mac. Price... $299

Yeah, the interface looks pretty wild. On the level, it looks more iMovie-like but also seems like a step forward.

Although it doesn't look like there's a viewer window. What gives? I dislike pop-up viewer/source windows ala old-school Avid Xpress or Premiere Elements. (Probably because I tend to sub-clip a lot and that made the Avid Xpress interface super cluttered.)

I'll reserve judgment until it gets closer to release. If there's one thing about FCP historically it's that many options (including UI layout and keyboard shortcuts) are pretty flexible and there's multiple ways to do multiple things. Apple wouldn't mess with flexibility, would they?

As for the other apps in the suite, I think it would be smart to ditch STP. As another poster said, Logic Pro does a better job of audio. Realistically, and especially for anyone who has ever done "quick" animations on stills, the only thing Motion has going for it is the keyframe editor is miles ahead of FCP7. Put that keyframe editor in FCPX and the main reason I use Motion is gone.

(Granted, Motion is a pretty neat program. It's no AE, but it doesn't seem to want to be AE completely either.)

I like Color, but I already own Color 1.5 and can certainly stomach running it (as long as it will work with FCPX) until there's a reason not to.

It sounds like some of the functionality of Compressor is being built into FCPX, so we may see that app eventually disappear, too. That'd be the only one I'd miss, but something would fill the void.

I didn't see anything mentioned for upgrade pricing.

Does anyone know if there's a way to make a backup copy on DVD of something downloaded from the App Store?

That's my 2 cents. I'll return to my lurking now.

It looks more like iMovie “Pro”.
I hope there will be a way to bring back the viewer window. Some of the features looks great however thats a huge change and it’ll be a while before the long time users of FCP jump over to that version.
I also want to know if it’ll accept 3rd Party filters, if it’ll do a better job with BluRay (or DVDs for that matter).
My wallet likes the $299 price but my head just says it’s more amateur (iMovie Pro).

Hi Corey,

You need to take the time to watch these videos.

At first glance, I thought similar, but after watching these videos, I don't think it will be an imovie pro.

But even it is, I don't care b/c the changes they made are going to save me time right off the bat. They've made some fantastic common sense changes.

I'm jacked now.

(and waiting to hear what they'll do with compressor)

Video of Final Cut Pro X Introduction Now Available - Mac Rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/13/video-of-final-cut-pro-x-introduction-now-available/)

Enjoy!

Cheers,
Keebler

I did watch those, it does have a lot of pros, I can’t wait for the speed improvements, the changing speeds, and new capture settings. I just did not see anything in regards to importing tape, exporting to disc, motion templates and viewer window.
Longtime users will have to learn the software from scratch.
Don’t get me wrong I’m going to get it and probably learn it at home for a while, but I won’t be using it my office for years.

I'm not sure that long time users will have to completely re-learn how to use it .. it seems that it's not that big a departure in the grand scheme of things, just more refined and there are more automated things to help you out. They have basically included Pluraleyes type functionality, which is awesome, and they seem to have built in footage proxy type stuff that happens automatically behind the scenes. These 2 things alone will make it a joy for me. The timeline has been changed up some, but I think the overall workings of it aren't going to be that different once you get used to it.

I'm sure they haven't enforced window layouts with it and that you can still choose what you want and where ... I use multiple monitors so if they have enforced that single window type approach I'll be pissed! I really really hope they sorted out all the issues with multiple screens as well. Not being able to full screen preview on a secondary monitor has been a royal pain.

I think the similarities to iMovie are more cosmetic than functional.

I did watch those, it does have a lot of pros, I can’t wait for the speed improvements, the changing speeds, and new capture settings. I just did not see anything in regards to importing tape, exporting to disc, motion templates and viewer window.
Longtime users will have to learn the software from scratch.
Don’t get me wrong I’m going to get it and probably learn it at home for a while, but I won’t be using it my office for years.

Word on the street is FCPX does not support any tape capturing, just print to tape.
Separate utilities or a capture card for tape capture. Makes sense though since tape has been dying off and all new cameras are card capture.

I won't make my comment about the viewer window until I see a dual screen setup, it still may be possible just not on the single screen interface. In the demo they mentioned dual screen setup support so I wouldn't be worried about single screen only.

The demo setup seemed to just use the default layout .. I really really can't see them taking away the ability to do all the custom layouts for where you want things to be.

I can see using another piece of software to lay to tape (like a more comprehensive AJA VTR Xchange) but capturing is problematic. I don't see a *really* compelling reason to drop tape capture at this point when everyone at least backs up their masters to some sort of tape.

Is it Apple anticipating the inexorable future path of acquisition? Sure, but it ain't quite there yet, IMO.

more is to come:

Final Cut Pro X Demo: 'Nowhere Near' Final Version, More on Final Cut Studio Apps Coming - Mac Rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/13/final-cut-pro-x-demo-nowhere-near-final-version-more-on-final-cut-studio-apps-coming/)

more is to come:

Final Cut Pro X Demo: 'Nowhere Near' Final Version, More on Final Cut Studio Apps Coming - Mac Rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/13/final-cut-pro-x-demo-nowhere-near-final-version-more-on-final-cut-studio-apps-coming/)

I’m looking forward to seeing what they’ve done with the other apps.
With all these new video formats ready to use in FCP, I think it could do a lot to improve their BluRay output.

I'm reasonably hopeful that some things we're accustomed to will still be available (hello viewer window) but I'm not so sure about Blu-Ray...it seems like a dead end with Apple.

IIRC, though, the whole licensing issue with Blu-Ray was dealt with and now it's just Apple's obstinacy that's keeping Blu-Ray from being supported more robustly. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

Does anyone think that the "this isn't the final version yet" statement is part of a classic "throw up a trial balloon" operation? Seems pretty clever; show off an early demo in public, watch the message boards for features that people love (or hate) and adjust accordingly.

I'm reasonably hopeful that some things we're accustomed to will still be available (hello viewer window) but I'm not so sure about Blu-Ray...it seems like a dead end with Apple.

IIRC, though, the whole licensing issue with Blu-Ray was dealt with and now it's just Apple's obstinacy that's keeping Blu-Ray from being supported more robustly. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.I think you're correct, Apple has been pretty quiet since Jobs labeled BR's licensing "a bag of hurt" and frankly there's a reason why Apple doesn't brag about how much video they sell (as opposed to music and apps). Their HD offerings are less than stellar--especially price-wise--and adding BR wouldn't exactly help (IMO).

While I respect Jobs vision, he's not always right -- he did drop the ball back when people wanted CD-R in next-gen. iMacs…*he didn't foresee people wanting to make music CDs despite demand from customers. :rolleyes:

And so it goes. BR is trucking along and gaining momentum -- stores are reducing the amount of space dedicated to DVDs to make room for BR titles.

But I do try to send Apple a note at least once a month just to kick the BR hornets nest.

Absolutely. At least he *has* vision.

Personally, I dunno about Blu-Ray. It may be picking up in sales, but so, it seems, is Netflix. Both of which bypass Apple's bank account.

Even if it does harm your other businesses, developing FCP puts you in the content creation business and it seems short-sighted (and petty, frankly) to shaft customers who want to deliver on a certain type of media. Especially since the licensing issue is over.

Regardless of what Apple thinks about adding BR playing hardware and support into the OS, for a professional video environment and pro disc mastering type tools if they skipped out on BR creation it would be a big mistake on their end, especially since this is a shot at a big reboot for the pro video toolset they are providing. They need to cater to the professional's needs and video pro's most certainly need to produce BR discs. DVD Studio pro is ok and all but it's so 20th century ... we need a way to create out own masters for BR content at the very least.

And then of course if they do add the support to create them they've already taken that first big step ... so why not go the extra step and add support to play them back. I mean if you're burning a BR disc it's much more convenient to be able to test it on your mac than to have to go to other hardware to test it ;) I'd be happy even if they didn't include BR hardware in the mac models, but at least gave us the software to allow playback.

Regardless of what Apple thinks about adding BR playing hardware and support into the OS, for a professional video environment and pro disc mastering type tools if they skipped out on BR creation it would be a big mistake on their end, especially since this is a shot at a big reboot for the pro video toolset they are providing. They need to cater to the professional's needs and video pro's most certainly need to produce BR discs. DVD Studio pro is ok and all but it's so 20th century ... we need a way to create out own masters for BR content at the very least.

And then of course if they do add the support to create them they've already taken that first big step ... so why not go the extra step and add support to play them back. I mean if you're burning a BR disc it's much more convenient to be able to test it on your mac than to have to go to other hardware to test it ;) I'd be happy even if they didn't include BR hardware in the mac models, but at least gave us the software to allow playback.

bingo! the only way to have BR available is for both output and playback.
You're right - they need to suck it up and realize ppl are using BR in pro environments (and amateurs).

Hi Friends
I'm on Ken Stone's mailing list, and today I received this FCP X update.
It's still a collection of conjecture and educated guessing, but likely of interest to anyone who's curious about what might be coming:

Hi Everyone,

As you know Apple will soon be shipping the new FCP X. If you have looked around the internet you'll see hundreds of blogs and posts about FCP X. I find it interesting that all of these people are writing about an application that they have not even seen yet. The results is a lot of guess work and speculation.

Richard Taylor has put together a FCP X article based on the Apple demo at the Las Vegas Supermeet this year and from screen shots provided by Apple.

"I've assembled some the key points of FCP X garnered from the Las Vegas Supermeet. Any text in this article in quotation marks are direct quotes from the FCP X Sneak Peek videos. All images are screen grabs from these videos or from the high quality FCP X images that Apple released."

Found in the Final Cut Pro section

Final Cut Pro X Rundown (http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/fcp_x_rundown_taylor.html)

Enjoy,

--ken



Ken Stone's Final Cut Pro Web Site
Ken Stone's Final Cut Pro (http://www.kenstone.net/fcp_homepage/fcp_homepage_index.html)

Ken Stone's Photographic web site
Kenneth Stone Photography (http://www.kenstone.net/ksphotos_root/ksphoto_index.html)

I'm pretty "meh" about the whole FCPX thing, the more I see of it.

And it's not the usual gripes, either: no viewer window, no this, no that. Whatever.

It's just that I don't see it being that useful for me...yet. 64-bit, GCD, the database/metadata functions, yes, that seems useful (any chance we can access any of that P2 metadata, Apple?) but I'm gonna take a wait and see approach.

A friend of mine and I were talking on Saturday about Apple and a few other things and it dawned on me that FCPX may actually be the bastard child of iMovie and Final Cut Express. Rewriting the entire piece of software from the ground up must be a big undertaking...not to mention dealing with the other software in the suite. A streamlined (and still fairly cheap) NLE with some of the revolutionary features they're pushing might only be the first step.

How many FCE/iMovie users will be upset with the disappearance of Log & Capture?

Perhaps we'll see a different version of FCPX with features we're more accustomed to using in our NLEs coming down the pipe in the future.

And with Apple, you'll never know what they're up to until just before they release!

I'm taking the wait and see approach too. Some of the stuff I saw in the demo was interesting, some was troubling, but as you say with Apple you never really know until it hits the streets. I just hope they address some of the more serious underlying issues like all the gamma shifts and assumed gamma levels, etc. Oh ya .. and properly implemented multi-screen support would be nice instead of the hackish way it was done in the past. I would like to be able to actually choose which monitor to use for playback, etc without having to jump through hoops and/or have it actually work as expected.