Larry Jordan Blog

Ain’t Nothing Like It In the World

Posted by on June 21, 2011


David Pogue, New York Times, has written an excellent followup article with Apple’s response to missing features in Final Cut Pro X.

Read it here:

- – -

Apple released Final Cut Pro X this morning at 5:30 AM LA time. You can read Apple’s announcement here —

You can visit Apple’s new webpage here:

In three words – speed, power, cutting-edge.

The first time I saw Final Cut Pro X, back in February, this quote from the title of Stephen Ambrose’s book on the transcontinental railroad flashed into my head.

Just as the transcontinental railroad permanently changed 19th century America – in a wide variety of ways – Final Cut Pro X has the same capability.

During the last several months, I’ve had extensive discussions with engineers and product managers at Apple, read virtually all the Help files and, more recently, been running the software itself.

I’m knee-deep in a long newsletter which will provide a lot more detail when it comes out next week (subscribe for your FREE issue here:, so here, in this blog, I just want to provide a bigger picture approach.

In every conversation I’ve had with Apple, each person stressed: “The easy thing would be to just create an incremental upgrade. But, we felt that while the current version of Final Cut held up well for the last ten years, it wasn’t ready for the next ten. We needed to design something from the ground up to take us into the next ten years.”

With this release, Apple made four significant changes in direction:

* For the first time, two different versions of FCP can coexist on the same system. I’ve been running FCP 7 and FCP X on the same system for months.
* Maxing out performance to take full advantage of current hardware
* Almost exclusive support for tapeless workflows
* Distribution via the App Store


To me, this is one of the highlights!

Installing FCP X does not remove FCP 7. So you can take your own sweet time deciding when to make the switch. And, in fact, you can use FCP 7 where it makes sense and FCP X when that is a better choice. For the first time ever, we can have two different versions of FCP on the same system at the same time, without partitioning hard disks and jumping through hoops.


Its no secret that Final Cut Pro took forever to accomplish some tasks. (I have it on good authority that many families were significantly augmented while waiting for the render bar to complete its measured progress.)

Plus, the 4 GB RAM limit caused projects to corrupt, files to mysteriously disappear and spawned a new breed of tech: the Final Cut guru, who, with an apparent laying on of the hands, could bring nearly dead projects back to life. (That last may be a dramatic overstatement, but I like the allusion.)

This new version flies. Whenever Final Cut needs to think, it does so seamlessly, in the background, with a little indicator that tells you how its doing and a complete dashboard for the curious who want to monitor their system.

It allows editing files natively, but prefers to convert them to ProRes – a decision that I agree with, for both performance and image quality reasons.

Once you edit with the magnetic timeline, you’ll never want to go back. And, while the concept of connected clips is a bit weird initially, the benefits these provide are so well-thought out and obvious that I stopped worrying about them after the first couple of days.

Nesting is improved. Audio filters are amazing and first-rate. There is much tighter integration with Motion and Compressor.

There are as many ways to edit in the new version as the old and more ways to trim. Trimming can even be in real-time or slow-motion. Old barriers such as clips in the Browser, still image sizes, clips in a project, and tracks have all fallen away.

The context-sensitive nature of the Viewer window, and the speed it responds, make me completely comfortable editing with only one image window.

The whole system is designed for speed.

And, when it comes to keyboard shortcuts, there are already hundreds in the system and the new process for creating shortcuts is just amazingly powerful – and easy to use.

NOTE: Remind me to mention how much I like the new audio meters – big, fat, large, readable, and adjustable.

Soundtrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro, and Color are not in this release. (LiveType was discontinued when FCP 7 came out.)

We all have our favorites, but I will miss Soundtrack Pro the most.

HOWEVER, keep in mind that if you own this software now, you’ll still be able to use it with FCP X. But it is no longer available.


Much ink has been wasted and many pixels have died in the flame debate that FCP X is just a larger form of iMovie.

Yes, they share a similar approach to the interface.

Yes, FCP X imports iMovie projects and media. No, it doesn’t import FCP 7 projects. Yes, Apple should figure out a way to provide an FCP 7 translator. It can’t be that hard.

However, think about this for a minute. iMovie has been out for, what, eight years with ZERO ability to upgrade to Final Cut? Doesn’t it make just a little bit of sense to provide an upgrade option for the millions of future editors out there?

Of course it does.

There’s such in increase in power stepping from iMovie – which I’ve never liked – up to FCP X, that it would be like moving from a bike to a motorcycle. Yes, they both have two wheels and a handlebar, but there’s a huge difference in power in the seat!


If tapeless media is your life, it will take you a week to stop giggling once you fire up FCP X.

However, FCP X has only limited support for tape. Tape ingest is from FireWire-attached devices, and streaming-only, no timecode controlled positioning of ingest or output to tape.

I’m reminded of the hand-wringing that occurred when Apple dropped floppy disks for optical media “back in the day,” now that Apple has decreed that tape is dead.

In this case, though, I side with the “tapists.” Apple controls the eco-system of the Mac. They don’t control the eco-system of Hollywood; then, again, I’m not sure anyone does. I have clients today that are using 3/4″ Umatic cassettes for sound design and music composition, and EDL lists are used daily for conforming major feature films. Both those formats were declared dead AGES ago!

While FCP X can ingest from a Firewire-attached deck, its output options to tape are limited to live streaming.

This lack of support for layback to video tape using RS-422 control protocol with timecode accuracy gives the perception that Apple is not meeting the needs of professional output. It remains to be seen if companies like AJA, Matrox, or Blackmagic Design will step into the breech. If they do, great. If not, this will cause many of us problems.

However, if you are shooting tapeless, this new software is designed for you. Easy ingest, background transcoding, background rendering, background analysis… Very cool. And, best of all, you can stop or cancel a background process at any time.

Plus, if you are someone that likes to organize their files, FCP X supports that. If you HATE organization, FCP X will organize your files for you. Now, we have a choice.


This is a real biggie, as Apple explained it to me. Because no physical media is involved (think packages in an Apple Store), Apple can push out updates faster and at much lower cost because they are using the App Store.

In the past, Apple used a 18 month, or so, cycle between updates. Now, Apple is telling me they are hoping to do an update once or twice a year.

This ability to respond faster to the market and deliver economical updates has already born fruit with the new low prices for Final Cut, Motion, and Compressor.

This gives me lots of hope for the future.


Writing software like this is not easy, not fast, and not cheap. Its taken Apple several years, dozens of millions of dollars, and an engineering crew big enough to fill a small cruise ship.

You don’t go to that effort to meet the needs of a market you aren’t interested in.

Apple tells me they are committed to quickly improving this version and building on it. They tell me they are committed to making changes quickly and bringing them to market. They tell me they are interested in hearing our reactions to the software.

I believe them and look forward to them fulfilling their promises.


Final Cut Pro X is very impressive, but it isn’t perfect. There are a variety of design decisions that I disagree with – and I’ve shared these many times with Apple.

There’s no multicam support.

The audio capabilities in FCP X are far superior to FCP 7 in terms of technical specs and filters. But a completely unintuitive method for adding audio cross-dissolves and lack of support for track-based audio mixing leaves me fondly missing the power of Soundtrack Pro.

The process of adding an audio cross-fade is dangerous, unintuitive and dumb.

Worse, there’s no native way to export a project to send it to either Soundtrack Pro or ProTools for sound mixing.

I’ve already mentioned there is no native ability to layback to tape using timecode control.

The autosave is great, but what we need is the ability to freeze specific project builds so that the client can review and approve a version and KNOW that if the project is opened in the future that nothing will be changed.

Preferences need to include the ability to use frames, not just hundredths of a second for all timing decisions.

A clip needs to remember the In and the Out when you deselect it.

There needs to be a way to remove a project from the Project List without having to resort to the Finder.

There needs to be a preference setting so that all new projects default to Stereo vs Surround.

There are others, and I’m sure you’ll have your own list.


Look, you and I both know you’re going to buy it regardless of what I say. So here’s my main point. I think that within the next 18 months virtually all of us will be running FCP X and wondering how we lived without it.

It’s that good.

Is it perfect? No.

Whether this is right for you depends upon what you are doing. Here’s a list to help you decide:

* If you are exclusively shooting tapeless and outputting to the web, this product was designed with you in mind. However, some vendors – Sony comes first to mind – need to update their drivers to work with FCP X. Be sure to check the Sony website for updates before moving to FCP X.

* If you are shooting tape and sending XDCAM SR tapes to the network, you should stay with FCP 7 and complain to Apple to add improved support for video-tape output.

* If you are shooting (H)DSLR cameras, you’ll love the automatic transcoding, auto-image correction, and blinding speed built into the new system.

* If you shoot on DV or HDV and export your files for the web, Final Cut Pro X can make your life a lot simpler.

* If you shoot tapeless and distribute your files on DVD, you can use FCP X for your edit, export your footage, compress on Compressor (either old or new) and use DVD Studio Pro to create your DVD.

* If you simply need to burn your project to either DVD or Blu-ray, the new Final Cut makes this easy. If you need to author a DVD, or Blu-ray, you’ll need to use either DVD Studio Pro or Adobe Encore.

* If you are working in iMovie, you should step up to the new version and put some power in your pictures.

* If you are doing projects with complex audio mixes, stay with FCP 7 until Apple gives us improved audio mixing and audio export support.

* If you live for speed and high image quality, you have a new love in your life.

* If you are in the middle of an FCP 7 project, you should stay there. Don’t even think about trying to port your project into the new system. Finish your project. FCP X will be here when you are done.

* If you are responsible for meeting incredibly tight deadlines, stay with your current system. Buy FCP X – learn it. See what you like and what you don’t. Then, as it makes sense to you, roll it into production.

In other words, consider that your job is telling stories with pictures. Final Cut Pro X is another tool in your toolkit that can help you with your story-telling. For some of us, its perfect now. For others, it needs to mature a bit.

But, when the credits roll, it isn’t the power of the tool, its the power of your story that makes people care.

I’ll have much more in my newsletter next week. In the meantime, let me know what you think.


P.S. I’ve spent the last six weeks creating training for Final Cut Pro X. 88 movies, over eleven hours of in-depth training. All ready, right now, for you to discover the power and capability of this new software. Visit:


Use this link to trackback from your own site.


Leave a response

  1. Sarah Larsson Jun 21, 2011 09:57

    No multicam!? D:

    I cannot upgrade now… my concert footage… oh.. damn :(

  2. Peter Chung Jun 21, 2011 10:41

    I was going to say that no multicam is a big thumbs down from me, too!

    There are lots of people in the wedding and event industry that need multicam as it is a big part of the workflow.

  3. Brett Ramsey Jun 21, 2011 10:49

    No multicam is the real killer for me. I use it extensively in cutting motorsport so it’s either stay with FCP7 or look for an alternative like Edius or Avid.
    Very disappointing, I was really looking forward to this but too many downsides I’m afraid.

  4. Larry Jun 21, 2011 10:57

    Yeah, I was very surprised the multicam did not make this release. Apple did such a great job with it in FCP 5 – 7. All my podcasts are shot multicam. I’m keeping my fingers crossed it gets added back soon.


  5. tim Visterin Jun 21, 2011 11:09

    No multicam support kind of makes me worry a bit.
    I have been working on many occasions where I had to deal with multicam.
    This is a need for my workflow.
    I am sorry but I can not understand why they didn’t include this in the software.
    I think in the future this is going to be a topic of discussions and conversations.


  6. Greg Jun 21, 2011 11:29

    No Multicam?! Nooo!!!!!!! Literally every project I do is with multiple cameras that are synced and edited with multicam. How could they not include multicam editing???

  7. Matthew Norwood Jun 21, 2011 11:30

    “Worse, there’s no native way to export a project to send it to either Soundtrack Pro or ProTools for sound mixing.”

    Can you expand on this? Is there still OMF support in FCP X, or is that lost?

  8. Larry Jun 21, 2011 11:36

    FCP X does not, natively, support OMF export. So, that means a third-party will need to create it. Automatic Duck just sent me a note saying they are announcing a new version – I’m hoping that fixes the problem.


  9. Cabbage Jun 21, 2011 11:37

    No multicam means there’s no way I’m buying it.

    I’ve been very happy not transcoding anything for the last year since I moved to Adove Preimere. I suggest you guys check it out. With PluralEyes for syncing the tracks its awesome!

  10. Matthew Norwood Jun 21, 2011 11:48

    “Worse, there’s no native way to export a project to send it to either Soundtrack Pro or ProTools for sound mixing.”

    Can you expand on this? I’m sure the STP roundtripping is over, but is OMF still an option, or has that been eliminated?

  11. Lou Borella Jun 21, 2011 12:04

    Please tell the masses that, other than firewire, there has never been support for tape based input/output in ANY version of Final Cut.

    You have always needed to buy 3rd party hardware to get any form of tape based deckcontrol or analog/sdi input and output other than firewire (which is not frame accurate)


  12. Larry Jun 21, 2011 12:11


    Yes, you needed to get a third-party card to connect to the camera via, say, SDI. But File > Edit to tape was built into the application. So was Batch Capture, and the ability to specify an edit point using timecode. All these are missing in the current version.


  13. Lou Borella Jun 21, 2011 12:19

    They were all included in the original app assuming the source deck was firewire. Edit to Tape was never frame accurate making insert edits impossible. Apple never claimed otherwise. Batch capture was avail from firewire controlled devices only.

    Now if you are telling me that you cant batch capture from a FW deck with FCPX then I’m a little perplexed at the strategy. Tape isn’t COMPLETELY dead yet.

  14. Scott Countryman Jun 21, 2011 12:22

    Well, in my first 10 minutes with it just playing around I don’t like it. The new interface just doesn’t work for me, at least right off the bat. Just too different than any editor I’ve worked with before. The inability to read Soundtrack Pro files also seems to be a huge oversight.

    Typically I export out just video for manipulation with Shake and others, and split out audio for editing with STP. So now in trying to use FCP X I’ve got a bunch of video clips with no audio, but no seamless way to get my STP audio into this thing. Guess I’ll have to go render out all of the STP stuff as ACC. Not a huge time saver.

    After all the hype I was hoping to just hop into it and be instantly productive, but that’s a no go. Off to read the online help so I can figure out which end is up.

  15. Matthew Norwood Jun 21, 2011 12:26

    Answered my own question with a little more research. Answer: no OMF support. (yet, hopefully)

  16. Michael Jun 21, 2011 12:36


    I shoot with a Canon 7D and all my audio is recorded separately and edited in Soundtrack Pro. Do you think Apple will release a STP app later (ala the new Motion and Compressor) or are you saying STP is gone for good? I can’t imagine going to FCP X if I can’t edit my audio as well as I’ve been in STP.

  17. Larry Jun 21, 2011 13:12

    Apple has not shared their thoughts about STP with me.


  18. Larry Jun 21, 2011 13:14

    Scott, the easiest way to get your STP audio into FCP X is the same as for FCP 7. Export from STP as an AIFF file, and import that file into FCP X. Don’t render as AAC – takes too long and quality is too low. Stay with AIF.


  19. Larry Jun 21, 2011 13:14

    OK. that’s what I’m saying.


  20. ab Jun 21, 2011 13:20

    so is there still frame based TC in FCP X right? am I interpreting this correctly? You mentioned trimming is now by hundredths of a second…which scares me. Are there IN & OUT points at all anywhere? Or can you only drag and select sections? No ability to send separate picture edls? (picture/opticals/vfx), no more 24@25fps projects? no OMF export? What was the point of finally adding BWAV support?? These could slowly come back in or for some we could fork out for Automatic Duck for our audio export needs, but it surprises me that there’s literally no way to use this for serious theatrical film work right now. The only good news is the ability to run both on the same OS and not having to split your drive up. Should be an interesting few days hearing all the reports… Oh and still no R3D support??

  21. Vick Sepetjian Jun 21, 2011 13:25

    Hey Larry , Links not working for the complete training download of fcpx.

  22. Andrea Vassalini Jun 21, 2011 13:39

    Hi Larry,You’re always the best trainer in the world I think ! I’m in love with Apple Color. Do you think Apple has killed this application? I’ve seen some screenshot about Color correction and grading in FCP X but are there curves? Color balance control? Do you think we can replace Color with the features included in FCPX?

  23. Hardijs Jun 21, 2011 13:41

    featurewise the FCP_X looks like version 1.0 – a restart for the project probably stuck and probably gone the Copland way.

    2 questions:
    is the release version that different from the beta you got 2 months ago? ie was there the feel of finalising and wrapping the product and were any features that were in beta and did not make to the final version (just a yes or no will do ;)

    is there any kind of RED support? ya know – it’s a form of tapeless so it should be though no mention on interweebs.

  24. Andrea Vassalini Jun 21, 2011 13:44

    Hi Larry, I’m in love with Apple Color. Do you think they killed that application definitively? Are there hue curves and so on in FCPX? I’m in doubt about the color correction features in FCPX . Do you think we can replace Color with color correction includeded in FCPX? I’ve seen only some screenshot online about that and I can’t judge it. Thanks a lot.

  25. Paul Jun 21, 2011 13:44

    The software sounds intriguing, but I can bet there will be no huge rush into it in the professional reality arena until they do something about multicam. All those shops set up with FCP have got to be shaking their heads right now. Apple is bound to correct this sooner than later, or forfeit that professional user.

  26. Vick Sepetjian Jun 21, 2011 13:45

    I got it , I’m navigationally challenged. 14 hour download though. Very anxious to get learning from the best.

  27. Michael Jun 21, 2011 13:45

    Larry, from your comments and what I’m gathering, the new workflow for audio is:

    Import audio into STP > Edit > Save as AIFF > Import into FCPX > Synch up with footage

    Is this about right?

  28. Paul Jun 21, 2011 13:50

    P.S. Larry, what’s new with Compressor? And Apple is really going to send DVD authoring needs over to Adobe? I’m still a little baffled by the last update to Compressor, where it asks to burn the file to disk as part of the compression process. What about Menus? What about interesting layouts – all of which you put together in DVDSP – although we can’t create BluRay in DVDSP, eventho Compressor will compress for BlueRay – a bit baffling, actually. So, what’s the new Compressor like? Incremental upgrade, I assume. And Motion? Easier to use?

  29. Jon Howard Jun 21, 2011 14:04

    I don’t disagree with Larry’s original comments from a while back that FCP X is not ready for pro use. I work in commercial post and there is absolutely no way this software will be used for any of the shops I work for without multicam support or the ability to output audio data for a mix. Every job I’ve worked on in the last 3 years, regardless of whether it was cut in FCP or Avid, was mixed by professional mixers using Pro Tools. It seems like Apple wants FCP X to be a one stop shop, so that all audio, color and VFX work would be done by FCP and Motion. However, at least in broadcast commercial post, it’s an offline editor ONLY.

    For finishing, you must be able to get your work into other boxes, namely colorists using Baselight or DaVinci Resolve, Smoke/Flame artists and mixers with specialized expertise. If Automatic Duck has to solve this – and it’s software has historically been really pricey – then there goes the cost savings of the $299 price tag. Overall this is very disappointing. I saw Angus Wall gave it a positive quote on the Apple announcement, but I don’t know how he’d use this for his work without multicam at the very least. It’s one thing to charge into the future, it’s another to completely ignore current everyday needs, even if they are antiquated or in need of an update.

    Larry, what does FCP X have in the way of EDL or XML export for getting a cut to a finisher? Thanks for all your work keeping us up to date on this stuff!

  30. Larry Jun 21, 2011 14:10

    Timecode is frame based and can be subdivied into sub-frames. You can trim AUDIO by the hundreds of the second, not video frames. Yes, there are In and Out points, set via mouse or keyboard (i/ o) YOu can copy projects – something that is easy but not part of my normal workflow. Automatic Duck JUST announced an FCP X to ProTools converter… YAY!

    Also, RED support for FCP 7 was a plug-in from RED. I expect the same for FCP X – but haven’t been told anything.


  31. Larry Jun 21, 2011 14:11

    If you have a problem with a download, contact Debbie in my office, as I’m in London: Include a copy of your receipt so she can track the order.


  32. Larry Jun 21, 2011 14:11

    Great questions on Color – I haven’t played with that part of FCP X to give you a good answer. So, for now, all I can say is that I don’t know.


  33. Larry Jun 21, 2011 14:12

    I think I probably can’t talk about the beta process. But I DO know that there were many builds between what I got and what shipped.

    And, if you remember, RED support for FCP 7 came from RED, I expect the same thing for FCP X.


  34. Larry Jun 21, 2011 14:13

    Honestly, i don’t know. I didn’t have time to work with that part of the program.


  35. Andrea Vassalini Jun 21, 2011 14:13

    Ok, we only can stay tuned..:-)
    All the best and thanks for your answer

  36. Larry Jun 21, 2011 14:14

    Sorry for the slow speed – our poor server is barely holding together under the load.


  37. Cooper Jun 21, 2011 14:14

    Thanks as usual Larry. Looking forward to the live training session in July!

    Still in shock about no multi-cam support or being able to import FCP 7 files.

  38. Larry Jun 21, 2011 14:15

    The problem is getting the audio from FCP X to STP – as far as I can see, it can’t be done. Check into the BRAND NEW FCP 5 transfer from Automatic Duck and use it to transfer audio from FCP X to ProTools.


  39. Larry Jun 21, 2011 14:17

    Compressor is not a DVD Authoring tool – that’s what DVD Studio Pro does.

    I like Compressor. The new version integrates with FCP X and provides more robust distributed Compression.

    Motion is more tightly integrated with FCP X – and handles a lot of the effects creation work.


  40. Larry Jun 21, 2011 14:18

    At this moment, on the day of release, there is no native support for either EDL or XML.


  41. Jon Howard Jun 21, 2011 14:25

    Wow. $500 software to export an OMF for a pro audio mix, something that has to be done on every job I work on. So much for the $299 pricetag. Hopefully this gets ironed out soonish. Yikes.

  42. Bolle Gijs Jun 21, 2011 14:29

    Already very disappointed only by reading comments on the internet! No multicam, no update from Soundtrack Pro and no new application to author “real” Blu-ray Discs. What are they doing? Sure, I can use my older software. But that also doesn’t allow me to make decent BD’s. If I want I also can dig up my rusty A/B roll Betacam set and use that.
    Now I have to buy Adobe Premiere Pro CS 5.5 for US $799 to get Encore for my BD-authoring. Maybe I’m not as smart as all those i-toy guys together, but to me this totally makes no sense. Why can Adobe do this, and Apple who’s always is claiming that they are at least one step further then their concurrents, not? It’s not because Mr. streaming downloadable Apple TV thinks that there is no place for Blu-ray or DVD anymore, the rest of the world is also going to think this. It’s said before, and now they have confirmed it. They just want to get rid from their pro-software because they get much more money from all their other i-trash crap being bought by fan boys.
    I really regret buying Apple hard- and software. The biggest mistake I’ve made in my 20 year career. Should have gone with EDIUS and the Adobe Production suite two years ago, not for fancy boxes with nothing in it! Oops, now those fancy boxes also don’t exist anymore. So, thanks for nothing Jobs.

  43. Brian Summa Jun 21, 2011 14:30

    You can delete project and events without going to the Finder with command+del or control+click and choose Move Project/Event to Trash…

  44. Driftwoodtv Jun 21, 2011 14:42

    I quite like fcp X. Still using fcp7 for multicam but ingesting and colour matchin/correction is so quick and easy and on it in fcpX. Once u get your head around the new timeline its a breeze.

  45. Driftwoodtv Jun 21, 2011 14:48

    Also Larry you forgot to mention clips can have multiple ‘favourites’ on and out points or ‘rejected’ in/out cuts which will disappear from the viewer if u like :)

  46. Tom Jun 21, 2011 14:51

    Really the best FCP X overview out there. Thanks Larry! Answers lots of questions. Seems like Apple has a great product here… but unfortunately I’ll need to wait until it gets some more of the basic features a pro house needs… like XML output. Seems crazy to have to buy Automatic Duck just to send something out to ProTools. Will Apple add all these before my studio goes to Premiere? Thanks again!

  47. Jon Howard Jun 21, 2011 15:04

    So, without built-in OMF, XML or EDL export options, how can anyone say that this is a professional tool? Professional tools are designed to work within a pipeline of artists using a range of tools from a range of manufacturers. It seems like a project started on FCP X is on FCP X island.

  48. ChrisHarlan Jun 21, 2011 15:15

    My personal reaction is that an un-named sage had it right: Final Cut Pro is not ready for professional use.

  49. Don B Jun 21, 2011 15:19

    They called it ‘X’ so they didn’t have to call it ‘1.0,’ which it is.

  50. george manzanilla Jun 21, 2011 16:10

    As someone who was there from the beginning of FCP, I can only say I am pretty disappointed with this release. Why the heck do they release a program if it doesn’t even come close to replacing the one that came before it? why? because apple doesn’t care about editing software as much as Adobe or Avid does. They care about selling iphones and ipads…

    Disappointing release. Wish they would have just made FCP 8.

  51. Dustin Ebsen Jun 21, 2011 16:47

    It is as if you are the lone man on the Titanic trying to joyfully convince the passengers all the wonderful advantages of hitting an iceberg. We’ll all have more ice for our drinks! If you gather up all the ice on the deck you can make a snow angel! I’m an editor. I work in the big world of TV and movie deadlines. I know what tools and features work after 25 plus years in the business. Why don’t they re-design a hammer? Because it works.

    Wedding shooter can rejoice! For the rest of us… unless Apple does something very fast, Avid will win this engineering cycle.

    Easy on the Kool-Aid my friend.


  52. Caesar Darias Jun 21, 2011 17:04

    When I read about Thunderbolt I was very excited that I’d be able to edit high quality HD multicam projects. A hard drive with Thunderbolt and 64 bit FCP, I thought, would be perfect for smooth and quick multicam editing.

    I now want to echo what others have said. I am so disappointed that there’s no multicam support. Why in the world would this great feature of FCP 7 be excluded from this supposedly much more advanced system?

    I shoot and edit many multicam projects. I use 5-7 cameras on most projects. I need multicam support.

    Larry, please ask Apple if multicam support is coming in their next upgrade. Ugh!

  53. Caesar Darias Jun 21, 2011 17:15

    BTW, if you purchase FCP X for your desktop, can you also install it on your MacBook Pro for one price?

  54. Phil Jun 21, 2011 17:23

    Hmm…, well I downloaded it and have a quick project on it. For me, it looks overall like a winner, BUT…. my needs are quite simple. I’m really a 3D CGI artist that simply needs a nice, simple editor to mix some simple stills, video with my CGI animation. There are a LOT of things here, however, that look really really bad for the major pro videographer and editors I know.

    1) For large houses with lots of editors how in the world do you use this? This has clearly been designed for the 1 user edit station.
    2) How in blazes do you move your project to an external drive? It sets itself up and puts everything on the main system drive. Whats the deal with having Thunderbolt if the main app that would use it doesn’t even set itself up to use it? I did RTFM. Lots on what to do IF you move your project. NADA on HOW you actually accomplish that feat.
    3) Open in Timeline edits appears to make permanent changes to the source media. You’ve got to be kidding me right?
    4) Multi-monitor support appears to be marginal at best.
    5) No multicam? Give me a break.
    6) Delete something from an event and the source is trashed!
    7) No native XDCAM support and from what I understand, no XDCAM transfer support for Lion.

    For me, FCPX will probably work fine. It is quite fast, I will give it that, even on my 2 yr old MBP. If I was only doing professional editing for a living however, I think I’d be looking for alternatives right about now.

  55. Larry Jun 21, 2011 17:36


    good questions, but some of your answers are incorrect.

    1. Agreed – workgroups have a problem.
    2. Moving is actually easy. I cover it in my training – and, if you go to chapter 3 in my Final Cut Pro X training, I have a free download that shows you how –
    3. I haven’t seen ANYTHING that changes source media. What are you seeing?
    4. The second monitor is designed to show the Event Library and Event Browser – OR – the Viewer.
    5. Agreed.
    6. I’m not sure what you mean by this.
    7. If you remember for XDCAM for FCP 6 and 7 you needed to download drivers from Sony before it would work. As for XDCAM Transfer, I haven’t spoken to Sony, so I don’t have an answer for that.


  56. Larry Jun 21, 2011 17:36


  57. Larry Jun 21, 2011 17:36

    I have asked, but they won’t tell me.


  58. Ken Wortendyke Jun 21, 2011 17:38

    Thanks for the honest and detailed review. No OMF is a bummer. That changes our workflow into Logic Pro as well until they get that resolved.

    One question outstanding for me is for Asst. Editor / Editor workflows:
    Can the meta data content be shared between FCPX seats? Either pointed at over a network – or copied with the project file? Or do the smart searches have to be rebuilt on each system?

  59. Enge Gray Jun 21, 2011 17:41

    Hi Larry

    AJA have released documentation on FCPX and it’s Kona card integration.

    Hope it’s OK to post the link….


  60. Adrian Jun 21, 2011 17:48

    Hey Larry,
    I have a client monitor via Matrox mini. Any thoughts on why there is no mention of going to a client monitor in the menu/view? Or did I miss something?

  61. Phil Jun 21, 2011 18:00

    On moving, one would think that since this would be something a lot of users would do, the manual would at least cover this procedure. I’m glad you cover it in a tutorial. You shouldn’t have to do that.

    On my initial project, I had 17 clips I brought in. I decided one was not needed for the project. I deleted it from the event. It deleted it OFF the disk as well. Thank goodness I have a copy elsewhere but that is not something I ever expected it to do, especially without warning.

    On multi-monitors, with FCP 7 I liked to put my video scopes there as well as other ancillary windows. Limiting a user to only what you mentioned, to me, is rather limiting.

    On the “Open in Timeline” issue, I’ve not seen this but it is being reported on the COW
    So I’ve got no reason to doubt it at the moment.

    Like I said, for my simple needs, I think its good, but I don’t think it is worthy of a lot of the hype. Time will tell. I suspect it will see good sales in the typical Apple market, which is, the old 80/20 rule. Steve has never cared about the bottom 10% nor the top 10% and I really can’t fault him at that. I see, however, high end pro needs to be in that top 10% so I’m betting they will lose market share there. And, as I said, I really don’t think Steve cares. Apple will laugh all the way to the bank. You can’t fault their business strategy, I just don’t see this particular product filling the high end pro needs. I’ve seen posts where people say Apple says they realize this and plan to fix it. I’ll believe it when I see it.

  62. Chadwick Jun 21, 2011 18:14

    Is there a great limiter similar to the one I use daily in STP? Something to help me pump some VO up without doing a global gain?

  63. Chadwick Jun 21, 2011 18:18

    Sorry 1 more question.

    Can you export split stems to get mixed instead of a traditional OMF?

  64. Jamie Jun 21, 2011 19:14

    I just hope the price doesn’t inflate forcing you to purchase updates where the *standard* gaps are now. It’s new and shiny and I’ll probably cave and buy it before the end of the day is over…but I’m not as enthused as I should be. Bad Apple!

  65. Bryan Jun 21, 2011 19:36

    Larry, I think this really, really, really sucks. Apple just ceded the pro editing market to Avid.

    I can’t even import an FCP7 project – a simple 10 minute short film I’ve been editing, just so I can try out the new editing workflow in FCPX. If nothing else, I was really keen to try cutting in FCPX.

    I can’t believe they didn’t include XML/EDL in this release. I can’t believe there’s not even a way to get audio in & out of it. I can’t believe they made it totally incompatible with everything on the planet. Final Cut “Pro” X? I think not.

    The magnetic timeline is very impressive as a cutting tool, but this is like having a saw to cut wood, and no hammer or nails to put the pieces together. For anything other than totally self-contained projects which can live within this one app from beginning to end, FCPX is basically worthless. This is iMovie!

    Professionals have to look ahead, and decide where to spend money. FCP7 is end of lifed. FCPX is hopelessly crippled until further notice. If I had to make a purchase decision today, I would have no choice but to abandon FCP and go with Media Composer 5.5. I have no doubt every post facility in Hollywood is rolling its eyes and saying “Goodbye Apple”.

    FCP7 and FCPX can live on the same system. Great. But when Lion drops this fall, then what? Obviously we’re all going to be preserving our turnkey FCP7 systems running Mac OS 10.6 for quite a while. (Not that I wasn’t expecting that).

    It’s not even a big win for iMovie users. Are people cutting home movies really willing to drop $399 on these tools? I don’t know. This is all pocket change compared to Apple’s iPhone/iPad business. If FCPX is not driving any hardware sales where Apple’s real money is made, then what is the purpose of it? Why did they even bother with this? They should have waited another year, if that’s what it would take, to release a truly “Pro” Final Cut X.

  66. Rob Moragas Jun 21, 2011 20:28


    They should not have called it FCP at least not at the moment. It’s an insult as to how far FCP has come. Sure it’s fine to introduce a tapeless editing system (although the broadcast world is always about 20 years behind on that) but my greatest fear was that they were going to release a half baked editor program and unfortunately that is what they have done. I am appalled at all the things it can’t do so I think I’ll be waiting for version XXX.

    Nothing wrong with re-engineering software but don’t tie it to an existing program if it can’t do some serious basics.

    Rob M

  67. alex cutter Jun 21, 2011 21:34

    Look at Larry being the loyal Apple butt-boy!

    Final Cut Pro X is a fucking joke.

  68. [...] Larry Jordan who has been frequently quoted for his early comments about the Final Cut Pro X also weighs in. Jordan points out several of the improvements and disadvantages of the new system. He also points out that Apple is planning a quicker upgrade cycle for Final Cut Pro than they have in the past now that its in the App Store: In the past, Apple used a 18 month, or so, cycle between updates. Now, Apple is telling me they are hoping to do an update once or twice a year. [...]

  69. Walter Jun 21, 2011 22:52

    I think your qualifications as a professional need to be checked out. Between your statements, backpedalling with your last post, and this post. I don’t believe anyone other than the indie free market honestly should take you seriously.

    Grow some balls man, call them out, some bending over and taking it from Apple PR. Call them out on that they are now way behind and their competitors have products that have been doing all this in real-time for years now.

    “In other words, consider that your job is telling stories with pictures. Final Cut Pro X is another tool in your toolkit that can help you with your story-telling. For some of us, its perfect now. For others, it needs to mature a bit.”

    I mean really? If you’re in an indie production fine, take all the time you need, but for people that actually do this for work and make money with it, we can’t afford to take the long way of doing things when there use to be a much simpler option.

    “For some of us, its perfect now.” You’re including yourself in that, you’re far from a professional in my opinion.

    Also regarding #3 from a question from Phil, apple already published that as a bug, but looks like they are backpeddeling now, they’ve deleted their post. google this “Final Cut Pro X: “Open in Timeline” edits cause permanent change”.


  70. Gary St. Martin Jun 21, 2011 23:00

    Sorry, but I spent the day working in the new finalcutX my conclusion is a waste of money! I give it a -9 Its a bad version of iMovie. I have been using finalcut since version 1 has a few nice things, but overall WOW what a disappointment. If you like imovie you will like this. But if your a pro editor, dont buy it…

  71. Markus Jun 21, 2011 23:21

    Thank you Larry for your great analysis. I too love the new interface, the color controls, the smoothness of this app and so and so on – amazing!

    Even though it’s already running on my personal 17″ MacBook Pro, I also work with FCP professionally on a daily basis. And we do collaborate on a daily basis. Footage gets brought in, many editors work with the same footage, we use a SAN (FiberJet – volume locked – won’t work with FCP X I assume) we hand off projects (FCP 7 term) to other editors, they open up our sequences, make changes, everything under deadlines – we’ve got many many projects where high security is an issue – not everybody is supposed to have access to everything….

    So looking at FCP X from that point of view – I am really worried that this application just was not designed with us in mind. And yet – Apple seems to have included one of our competitors as beta testers (big place with many editors – now I don’t see how they can possibly have run X in a real workflow environment,… It’s just not possible. With no way of importing a 7 project. With no way of going back and forth, there is simply too much at stake…)

    Do you have any insight into their thinking as far as collaborative environments are concerned?

  72. proeditor456 Jun 21, 2011 23:21

    FCP – RIP 2011.

    FCPX is not a professional-grade editing system. The inability to import/export FCP, EDL, OMF files make it highly inefficient when considering the entire post-production process.

    Alot of prosumers and software reviewers seem to be unaware of this obvious aspect of “professional” post-production workflow. So stop calling FCPX a “professional” editing solution and call it what it is:


  73. tmconnolly Jun 21, 2011 23:28

    Larry, You said, “It allows editing files natively, but prefers to convert them to ProRes – a decision that I agree with, for both performance and image quality reasons.” I hope you can elaborate on why you agree in your newsletter, providing greater understanding for both experts and newbies. Thanks. Thomas

  74. L Jun 21, 2011 23:33

    I think you mean HDCAM-SR tapes not XDCAM-SR which doesn’t exits and if it did it would be a disc format not a tape.

  75. L Jun 21, 2011 23:34

    oops meant to say XDCAM-SR doesn’t exist not exits – sorry for spelling.

  76. [...] projects. Larry Jordan has a really detailed blog talking about FCP X which you can check out here. He covers a lot more detail of what is included in FCP X and his thoughts on the [...]

  77. Paco Jun 22, 2011 00:36

    Only three times in my life, reading the news has made me sick to my stomach: 9/11, Bush’s reelection and FCP X release.

    Since I switched from Avid to FCP (1.0) over a decade ago, I never, ever, thought of switching platforms … well, today that has happened.

    I made wonders with this amazing and breakthrough piece of software (at the time, the only reliable, software-only, professional editing solution); I introduced clients, colleagues and networks to it when everybody was fixated on Avid … all those years of knowledge, tweaks, tricks … all going directly to the trash.

    Larry, I understand you have to make sure your business keeps running and that it’s in your best interest that everybody buys FCp_x (lowercase p & x) but it’s irresponsible to let professionals spend a dime on this worthless piece of app, suitable only for iPads, if any.

    Fellow professional editors, it’s time to look somewhere else … it was great while it lasted … RIP the Great FCP.

  78. [...] are a few reviews for you. Ain’t Nothing Like It In the World – Larry’s Blog What are the Answers to the Unanswered Questions about Final Cut Pro X? | The present and future of [...]

  79. Jim Huenergardt Jun 22, 2011 02:13

    Hey Larry,

    Thanks for the great article.

    One thing that has me concerned is I work off of external drives a lot. One for each project. I take them and edit on my MacBookPro, then bring them back and edit on my MacPro. I’ve heard there is no setting for the ’scratch’ disc. Is that true? What I had is too much ‘automation’ as it limits how I need/want to work.

  80. Josh Brown Jun 22, 2011 02:15

    Larry, thanks for all the calm and reasoned out thinking. Yes, it does feel a bit like being duped… ok, a lot a bit. Hopefully Apple gets their butts in gear and makes this thing a app that people can stand behind… I’m betting on it.

  81. Marc Morola Jun 22, 2011 02:47

    My Theory on the missing Soundtrack Pro is that a new app store version of Logic Pro (Logic X) is on it’s way and Apple will then add a ‘Send to Logic’ option to FCP X.

  82. Glenn Jun 22, 2011 03:41

    One review claimed that installing FCPX on the same system as FCP7 will move some files and/or folders that both use. Is that true? If so, will it cause any problems on projects you’re in the midst of working on in FCP7?

  83. Larry Jun 22, 2011 04:32


    Read this link:


  84. Larry Jun 22, 2011 04:33

    Your system will work with the new version. FCP X looks for and finds all Event folders – and Project folders – on any connected hard disks. Scratch disks, as such, no longer exist.


  85. Larry Jun 22, 2011 04:34

    Agreed. Where ever I said XDCAM SR, I means HDCAM SR.

    Sorry, Larry

  86. Larry Jun 22, 2011 04:36

    Not that I know of.


  87. Larry Jun 22, 2011 04:36

    Yes. In fact it’s the same limiter.


  88. Bart Jun 22, 2011 05:28

    This looks like a torrent candidate to me. I like to try out new software, but to pay 400 euro to see if it fit’s my workflow is a bit steep.

    Another thing that concerns me, I read that it is a unified window, no support for 2 monitors. That is a big downer for me as I like to rearrange my floating windows on two monitors.

    Sound is a big issue in my workflow, so I guess that Macintoys will have to wait for my FCPX money untill they provide me with a solution to export to or integrate with Logic.


  89. Dominc Witherow Jun 22, 2011 05:35

    The biggest issue I have at the moment, is that there is no option for critical external monitoring – even with a top flight AJA card! What on Earth is the point in having wonderful grading tools if there is no way to monitor the output other than on a computer screen? That alone makes the ‘all-in-one’ aspirations of this software a fallacy, but with the inability to move projects to software that does have external monitoring the result is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to accurately grade ANYTHING cut in FCP X!!!!!

    The problem we all face here is Apple’s infuriating policy of never talking to customers at large. A bit of clarity from them would make all the difference. Really, why can’t they make a statement about forthcoming features? Why? If they don’t intend to make this software useable in a professional sense then they should really let us know that too.

    Terrible PR for Apple and Adobe, in particular, must be laughing themselves stupid at the moment.

    What a shame.

  90. Leo E. Jun 22, 2011 05:39

    You wrote: “You [Apple] don’t go to that effort to meet the needs of a market you aren’t interested in.”

    Good point. But this may also mean that Apple may be targeting another market: the general consumer as opposed to a professional crowd. Preformatted templates and filters give me chills.

    regards, Leo

  91. Leo E. Jun 22, 2011 05:41

    Oh, and I forgot to ask: if this really is a totally new application, why did Apple rip the name ‘Final Cut Pro’ from its existing application? They will not support two different applications with the same name, will they?

  92. Mitchel Mills Jun 22, 2011 08:05

    Just purchased your FCPX training DVD. Can I get mymoney back?

  93. J.D. Wilcox Jun 22, 2011 09:10

    Everybody Stay Calm.

    FCP X changes nothing for those who already have and use FCP7.

    If FCP X can be used with your post workflow, then download and enjoy it.

    If it can’t, then stick with what you are already using, or switch to Avid, Premiere, Vegas etc.

    As far as FCP X not being a “Pro” app, that’s simply BS.

    I just finished working on a nationally syndicated daily show, that used HDSLR footage, and Sony XDCam footage, edited together in AVID (because FCP couldn’t edit the footage without converting to ProRes)

    And for those doubters among you, the ENTIRE post workflow was contained within AVID MC3.5 — That’s right, edit, color correct, audio mixing, effects… Everything. We did not export OMF’s for audio sweetening, we did not output an EDL for On-line in another program, and we did not deliver an EDL to the syndicator as a deliverable.

    We sent a set of master tapes, and a stack of legal forms. We made multiple timelines for split audio and textless versions.

    This show was HIGHLY rated. It more than doubled the ratings of the show that it replaced.

    And I can assure you, we all got paid.

    It’s not the tools, it’s the talent.

    This show’s post workflow could be done in FCP X, version 1, today, without any changes.

    If FCP X does not work for YOU, that’s cool.

    But any extrapolations about what the majority of “pro” users must have in a program to use it and get paid, will have to wait until someone can actually find a “majority” that use the same post workflow and have the same deliverable requirements.

  94. conran Jun 22, 2011 09:16

    I’ve been using FCE for about 18 months, and thought FCP X would be a major upgrade.

    But I can’t see that it is. It is much faster, rendering is no longer intrusive and the UI is at least contemporary. It looks very like iMovie at first sight, however, and the use of templates for transitions and titles makes it look like a hobbyist app to me, rather than something aimed first and foremost at professionals. Can you imagine many pro editors wanting to produce movies that all use these “specially designed for Apple” things?

    I’m still finding exploring FCX P, but can you tell me whether the same range of options exist for titles and transitions as in FCE, Larry? And if so, where to find them?

  95. DavidH Jun 22, 2011 09:49

    Larry, what I think is crazy, among many things, is that you say FCP X does NOT allow the editor to specify a specific FRAME??

    I understand the cool capabilities of the iMovie type of clip but why couldn’t this new program allow a right click or shortcut to open up the behind-the-scenes (so to speak) edit window for isolating a single frame?

    When you consider that honoring the individual video frame is as important as opening up a single jpeg or tiff I don’t understand why obscuring the most basic unit of editing–a frame–is unobtainable in FCP X.

    Opening up a clip to its rock bottom structure, the frame, is a jaw-dropping omission.

    Furthermore, what about working with odd and even fields in various video formats outside of progressive?

    How do you ingest interlaced and decide to convert it to progressive later?

  96. Bjarki Jun 22, 2011 09:53

    Here’s another thought. I’m an online editor. I receive Final Cut Pro projects, varying in complexity, which I am expected to some graphics work on, export to my sound guy and color grade. Even with a future OMF export tool – the timeline – uh, sorry – project – looks very unfriendly to me. I want to be able to organize my timeline, and see all the audio lined up. Therefore I propose (and hope you’ll forward it to Apple with my name on it) a switch for the timeline between Magnetic (the editor’s default setting) and Classic – complete with numbered layers and all.


  97. DavidH Jun 22, 2011 10:01

    Larry, FCP 7 needed tutorials to explain to new editors why certain transitions did not work and produced errors regarding “not enough” information to perform…

    Say I import MXF files directly into FCP X. The start and stop creates one .mov file. If I accidentally trim one side of a clip too much and drop it into ye olde timeline in FCP 7 I will get one of these errors when trying to apply a transition whose time or frame requirements exceed that clip’s padding.

    What happens in FCP X with this same sort of problem that is better or more intuitive or saves our bacon? Or are there new problems introduced with this new program?

    And speaking of .mov– have I read correctly that it is an upgraded file spec that can only be utilized in its full glory with an upgrading of Quicktime Pro for X?

    Thank you, Larry

  98. Michael Jun 22, 2011 10:05


    How do we burn a FCPX project to a DVD? Can a FCPX / Compressor 5 project be imported into the old DVDSP?

  99. Mike Johnson Jun 22, 2011 10:16

    It seems to me that FCPX is very powerful, as long as you work how Apple wants you to. There are certainly some AMAZING features, but a lot of extremely important features for pro use is missing right now. I compared it this morning to giving a client a rough cut of a video without telling them its a rough cut and without telling them what you’re still working on. Personally, I feel it would have been better for Apple to be open with the post production communities about the development of FCPX and wait to release it when its complete, rather than just hurrying to get it to market. Now we have a product that’s great for certain workflows, but not ready for mainstream post to adopt. If this version had multicam, better audio controls, TC synced tape I/O, true video I/O, and the ability to import FCP7 projects, I would be all over it doing everything I could to move to FCPX. Instead, we wait for the unknown and uncertain updates to hopefully add these features. And if they don’t happen, Apple will almost certainly be losing a share of the pro market – not that they care.

  100. DirkNYC Jun 22, 2011 10:21

    I wonder what kind blowback this will have on Apple. Will they give up the pro market? Or will they quickly add the missing features?

  101. Dan Poarch Jun 22, 2011 10:40


    I used to do print production. I stopped. Not just because print was dead, but because innovation was dead too. After 20 years I’m back in school because my beloved career dead-ended when my life had become a non-stop compensation for management’s bad decisions and Adobe’s competition-less deaf ear to print.

    So here you guys are. Apple made your careers by snagging a Macromedia project and turning it into an industry. If FCP didn’t exist you’d still be paying $X00,000 for Unity systems or suffering with Avid’s half-wit cousin Premiere.

    Now, Apple has made a huge investment and taken a huge step with FCPX. Sure, it’s short some features, but it’s a huge step forward for interface, which is actually what you do with your day. Interface. If your only incumbent value is FCP7 then yeah you’ll lose your job as you should, as did numerous of my friends that knew trapping software and nothing else.

    If you’re a digital artist with talent and skill you’ll roll with punches, find some work arounds, send some passionate emails to Apple, and come out on top.

    Look, workflow adjustments are nothing new. They are PART of the job. Otherwise your job description would chair filler, not Technical Director or Senior Editor.

    Be thankful someone cares about your profession and has made a significant investment in improving it.

    Be thankful you have jobs. Suck it up. If you want to move to Avid, shut up and do it. You’re wasting more time whining about Final Cut than it would take to call Avid.

    PS if you can’t make a movie in iMovie you shouldn’t be editing. I prefer InDesign, but I can use Word, SimpleText or any other tool you throw at me because I know how to make things work, I just need a tool.

  102. Visor Jun 22, 2011 11:01

    I have no idea what people are complaining about. This is the Final Cut Pro version Adobe has been praying for! :-)

    I’m not buying this one nor waiting around for Apple to fix/replace/add things to make FCPX viable for professionals. As I type this I’m downloading the 30-day demo of Premiere Pro, et al. and will probably switch. A shame FCPX didn’t have a 30-day version, might have saved a bunch of people some money and grief.

  103. pxlmvr Jun 22, 2011 12:11

    I see all this as the normal Apple SOP; introduce a new product and evolve it over time.

    Remember when people complained that the iPod didn’t have this or that when it came out; same with the iPhone, iPad and even OSX?? Within in a year or so, the complaints faded away as Apple did their updates. So, I don’t think there is any need to panic.

    Of course as a professional, you *never, never, EVER* jump on a 1.0 product for mission critical work. You wait for at least few dot releases or for 2.0 when all of the kinks are worked out. We all know that Apple is exceptional at listening to their customers, so let them know your concerns and they will likely do the updates.

    In the meantime, FCP7 will do *fine* for the next year or so, while Apple matures FCPX and we get used to using the new product.

    Again, I say, no need to *panic* people.

  104. Larry Jun 22, 2011 13:33

    Of course – we offer a full !00% money back guarantee. Always have.


  105. Larry Jun 22, 2011 13:42

    I agree that there is no reason to panic. And I also agree that waiting to upgrade is imperative because essential third-party updates for filters and hardware are not yet shipping.


  106. Larry Jun 22, 2011 13:46

    You create a DVD using FCP X the same way we did using FCP 7. Export your movie from FCP. Compress it using Compressor. Build the DVD using DVD Studio Pro.

    Yes, anything you compress in the new compressor can be imported into DVD SP for a DVD. (Remember, DVD SP does not create HD movies.)


  107. Larry Jun 22, 2011 13:48

    I don’t have an answer for the MXF question – I haven’t worked with that format yet.

    As for Quicktime, FCP X imports old QuickTimes just fine – all my training was working with older quicktime – back to 2004. It uses a new media architecture called Core Media, but works with QT just great.


  108. Larry Jun 22, 2011 13:49


    The problem isn’t the magnetic timeline, its the lack of tracks. And I agree with you, the new FCP is very unfriendly to audio mixers.


  109. Larry Jun 22, 2011 13:51


    I don’t think I said that – or if I did, I was wrong. FCP X DOES allow frame accurate editing, frame accurate Ins and Frame accurate Outs. It supports frame accurate still frames. Audio is frame accurate. Ingest and export are frame accurate.

    What is NOT frame accurate is output to tape when you need to OUTPUT to a specific timecode frame on a video tape.


  110. Larry Jun 22, 2011 13:52

    A better way to think of this is that instead of creating effects using Final Cut, you create your effects using Motion and they are immediately integrated into Final Cut Pro’s effects. The good news is vastly superior effects. The bad news is taking the time to learn Motion.


  111. Larry Jun 22, 2011 13:53

    This is a very cool comment. Thanks for sending it.


  112. Larry Jun 22, 2011 13:55

    Just as a thought – support for grading monitors is partly provided by Apple and partly by AJA, Matrox, and Blackmagic Design. We need to hear what these developers are doing – which could change the entire equation.


  113. bob Jun 22, 2011 14:03

    The ONLY camera and workflow we use is RED. NO native RED support for R3ds means after being with Final Cut since version 1.0, we now have to swtich. Apple completely blew it on this one!!

    We’ll stay with FCP7 in the near future, but if they don’t release an update that supports RED, it’s off to Adobe for us… which I HATE saying.

    APPLE are you listening????

  114. Larry Jun 22, 2011 14:07


    If you remember, we needed to get the RED drivers from RED for FCP 7. Check the RED website and see what their plans are – because it will require both Apple and RED to support RED.


  115. Glenn Jun 22, 2011 14:45


    THANK YOU for that Apple Support link! I would have screwed up majorly had I tried installing FCPX without reading that.

    It seems vital that everyone read that page before installing FCPX on a system with FCP7/FCS3.

    If you don’t want to deal with the complications of partitioning your startup hard drive (which I certainly don’t), you have to follow a fairly tedious and unintuitive process to ensure that FCP7/FCS updates and 3rd party workflows will not be screwed up by the FCPX install process.

    Here’s the link again, for anyone interested:


  116. LPowell Jun 22, 2011 14:59

    Final Cut Studio is in fact dead – as of Jun 21, 2011, Apple no longer sells or supports this product, and there will be no further updates released. As there is currently no upgrade path that supports migration of existing Final Cut Studio projects, this product line has effectively been terminated. Professionals who have built workflows based on Final Cut Studio must now determine whether it makes sound business sense to continue to invest time and resources into a discontinued video production system, or develop new workflows based on established professional tools.

  117. Glenn Jun 22, 2011 15:31

    Just for further clarification: Can you put the Canvas (or Viewer or whatever they’re calling it now) on one monitor, and the Timeline (or Storyline), event Library, and some other windows on another? And can you move some windows between the two monitors depending on your needs at the moment (e.g. the bigger Audio Meters)?

    If so, can you save these setups so you can quickly switch depending on your needs, as you can in FCP7?

    These are dealbreakers for me.

  118. Larry Jun 22, 2011 16:21

    Yes and no.

    Yes, you can put EITHER the Event Browser/Library on one monitor (and everything else on the other) OR you can put the Viewer on one monitor (and everything else on the other).

    No, you can’t arbitrarily put anything anywhere. And, no, you can’t save screen layouts, as the screen doesn’t “come apart” like FCP 7 did.


  119. Glenn Jun 22, 2011 16:30

    Thank you again. And drat!

    I’ll give it a try on someone else’s system someday just in case, but I don’t think I can work comfortably or efficiently that way. As time goes on, I’ll be very curious to hear how others who are used to truly exploiting 2-monitor setups feel about working in FCPX.

    I use a 30″ and 24″ monitor, and I like as much visible as possible, arranged how I like to work depending on what I’m doing. I also often like to hide everything but the bit(s) I’m focused on — with the speed of a single keyboard combo, as you can in FCP7. I’d sure hate to move to a system that eliminates these options and makes it take longer to achieve anything close. I’ve loved FCP, but may well consider Avid or Premiere next.

  120. zarac Jun 22, 2011 16:55

    No OMF (or AAF), no XML, no EDL means this is NOT A PROFESSIONAL EDITING SYSTEM.

    How am I supposed to send the finished project to ProTools or to DaVinci with this “editing suite”?

  121. Eric Jun 22, 2011 17:16

    I would like to comment on what Dustin Esbin wrote above:

    “Wedding shooter can rejoice! For the rest of us… unless Apple does something very fast, Avid will win this engineering cycle.”

    As a professional “wedding shooter” :o ) Having no multi-cam support pretty much cripples the ability to produce wedding films in a timely fashion. Any “GOOD” wedding videographer in the business this day-n-age is using multiple HD sources to capture “the moment”. So……should we put our 4+ HD camera sources on the timeline and edit them the old fashion way?!?!?! I am sure that will go over well with the professional wedding & event videographers out there. I know that some may look at someone filming/editing weddings as low-level and not the same level as someone in Hollywood, however it IS what some of us rely on full-time for a living. Last year I filmed/edited over 50 weddings and events, all shot using 4 HD cameras and cut using FCP 7’s multi-clip editor. As a business owner I provide for my family and serve a fairly large client base. No multi-camera ability makes FCP X TOTALLY USELESS for someone like me.

    Oh and btw Steve……NOBODY WANTS TO WATCH THEIR WEDDING ON iTUNES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Blu-ray is a must for my business….(seems Hollywood likes it too) ;o)

    (I have been producing cinematic wedding films professionally for quite a few years now….not because I cant get a job doing anything else in the world of video, (been there done that) but because I am truly enjoying filming weddings, and working for myself.)

    I just recently built 2 PC editing stations…. AMD 6-core, 16 gb RAM, GTX 470 cards, running Windows 7 64-bit and Adobe CS5 with Mercury. Adobe has seemless integration between its suite full of apps. Let’s face it everyone…..there is nothing that can compete with Photoshop, After Effects…..and to have native seemless integration between those apps and Ppro….that makes life easy. Plus Adobe still has Soundbooth, and Encore (which can author blu-ray)

    Looks like the world of editing is gonna change alright…..Wedding/Event/indie on Adobe…..and big production houses (that still use EDL, XML, OMF etc. in their everyday workflow) will be on Avid…….Goodbye MacinTOYS

    As someone else already said……this is iMovie Pro….not FCP. Whatta joke.

    FCP – RIP 2011

    So sad :o (

  122. Heinz Knarren Jun 22, 2011 17:52

    WTF, not possible to use 2 monitors? What am I going to do with the second $1500 one? trash it or what? Come Apple get your head out of the deep sand and give us what we professionals want, not what you or some fanboys want!

    If I had the time I would make a typical Apple vs PC commercial like this one here ( FCPX vs Media Composer or Premiere. Avid an Adobe are laughing in your face.

  123. Spence Jun 22, 2011 19:16

    I believe Apple will eventually work out all of the kinks that make it literally impossible for professionals to use FCP X. Hopefully it comes before the death of FCP 7. I am a little sad, but also a little excited about getting back to Avid and learning the new 5.5.

  124. David Tames Jun 22, 2011 19:17

    Larry, this post has been very useful and thought provoking. While Final Cut Pro X has a slick interface and provides sizzling performance, I can’t imagine using it in a professional environment. Without the ability to place audio in individual tracks for exporting to a sound editing and mixing application, without multi-cam, without the ability to import legacy Final Cut Pro projects, without EDL or XML export for transferring work I can’t take it seriously in a professional environment. This resets the clock back to version 1.0 and it’s a travesty. [PAUSE] sip on Apple Kool-Aid [PAUSE] Final Cut Pro X is revolutionary, it’s awesome, it’s what we’ve all been waiting for! 64 bit performance, background rendering, new interface, none of this could have been done in an evolutionary way the way Adobe does with their applications, Apple is about revolution and what Apple tells us we’re going to like, we’re going to like, and two or three versions later, we’re all going to say, why did we not do it like this all along?

  125. [...] since it came out yesterday. Check out the mixed FCPX articles/reviews by Philip Hodgetts and Larry Jordan. And App store comments like: “2 hours of use: 3 crashes” and then ”As a new, [...]

  126. george manzanilla Jun 22, 2011 20:42

    Here’s an answer you can take to apple Mr Jordan.

    Give editors the ability to turn all this stuff OFF and turn some of the stuff we are used to using ON. Meaning, magnetic timeline, events?, ONE window, OFF…

    Give us our TRACKS BACK! the ability to rearrange our windows! For gawd sakes… how is this a step forward? explain? who ever asked for TRACKLESS editing??? i Use my timeline as a canvas.

  127. Michael Jun 22, 2011 20:57


    Is there any value added for those who choose to await the updates on FCX and continue to run FCP 7 to download/install the new Motion and Compressor Apps now?

    If they are compatible, I’m thinking now would be a good time to familiarize myself with the new versions and take advantage of new functionality IS this sound thinking?


  128. Rob Moragas Jun 22, 2011 21:18

    Hi Larry,

    I have some Pro Res HQ Clips that are 16×9. I have already created a 16×9 Project but when I bring them into FCPX Project it thinks they are 4×3. (Black Bars down the side) There is a spatial conform box you can select but all this does is a linear scale up of the clip to fit a 16×9 time line. It doesn’t allow me to do a “anamorphic tick” like in FCP 7 anywhere that I can see in the interface.

    I could do an X Scale transform on the clip to make it fit in the time line, 133% but I am assuming that would affect image quality.

    Any Thoughts?

    Rob M

  129. Rob Moragas Jun 23, 2011 00:06


    Been doing some testing on the program as I have some time. (rare I know)

    What a diaster of a program!

    It doesn’t recognise my HD footage, either 10 bit uncompressed or Pro Res HQ. Just endlessly tries to import it and fails to load the footage.

    It doesn’t allow me to “pop out” 720 x 576 Pal Anamorphic footage.

    When I loaded five stills and did a dissolve on them it doesn’t play the timeline smoothly. If I set the preference playback quality to High Quality it can’t keep up and stutters and staggers, even after it renders. The rendering keeps hanging and crashing.

    It won’t skim on the thumbnails without holding down the left mouse button.

    If I have lots of media having millions of thumbnails in the events bin is completely unmanageable.

    Funnily enough what it could cope with was some crap avi footage that I had EX DV. Almost imported this instantly. This is NOT for pro use. So no idea why they would call this Final Cut pro and it’s very very slow!

    Your tutorials are great but at this stage it’s so clunky with standard pro res HQ footage. Grrr

    Rob M

  130. Rand Jun 23, 2011 00:15

    As far as the elements popping onto different tracks concern… I wonder
    IF we were able to lock elements to their current ‘virtual track’ and also any elements that we add or move could only move to a open ‘track’ if this would ‘fix’ things a bit.

  131. Tim Jun 23, 2011 00:30

    “Writing software like this is not easy, not fast, and not cheap. Its taken Apple several years, dozens of millions of dollars, and an engineering crew big enough to fill a small cruise ship.

    You don’t go to that effort to meet the needs of a market you aren’t interested in.”

    I’m sure Apple has taken the same amount of effort in almost everything it produces, doing so does not make it a pro application. One might say, the more effort they spend, the more likely it will be a consumer-level app.

    As for years, Apple has been quite clear it’s more interested in the consumer market than the pro market. Apple doesn’t care who brought them to the dance, but who’s the cutest girl on the floor right now.

    I knew instantly when they announced a $300 price tag, that this would happen. You get what you pay for.

    Steve Jobs has a well-known quote about selling sugar water or changing the world. I’d say if you’re a pro user, Apple is selling you sugar water now.

    I love Apple, but it doesn’t always love me.

  132. alf hanna Jun 23, 2011 01:27

    OK. I appreciate your bits about the pros in this release. I need to point out that you are a world class editor, but you make your living these days, it seems to me, touting FCP…would you really crush it if its’ as bad as many seem to be saying????

    Ok, now my thoughts….

    if you liked iMovie you’ll love FCPX? I threw out iMovie about 30 minutes into it. I really wanted to love that package, but it was so unintuitive I actually took it off my laptop less than one hour into it. The way it works is totally different than all the modern video NLEs. This does not seem positive, but like a bad design that the devs are foisting on us. How much customer input did they get????

    Having the kind of data management that Aperture has, is a total loser situation to me. After seriously trying to adjust to Aperture’s latest incarnation, I went back to Lightroom and love it. Aperture’s data management is very non intuitive, and the idea of being forced into it for video management is a big non starter for me. I hate having some developer forcing me to manage data his/her way. We all have our was of thinking…flexibility is good! Believe me, I did try. I spent hours watching videos from experts telling me how great Aperture was, I gave Apple what $300? It sits on a shelf. … It was just some geek’s idea of how I should work. Not how I work. (that reminds me, I should sell it off).

    Your comment about ‘hundreds of people working on it” doesn’t jive with the massive layoffs reported in that division last year. Please explain that to us. My guess is that the FCP team left/were fired and the iMovie team won the day. This is a typical situation that happens in big software companies. Been there, seen that.

    How does not being able to totally customize the screen layout help a professional editor???? I mean, really Larry!

    Your list of “things I don’t like” makes me wonder why I should like this at all!

    And yes, I worked on a multicam project today. Multicam is important to all of us that shoot as well as edit. There is no way I will give that up. So there is no way I will move to FCPX until that shows up, in a significant new way. I don’t care what the ‘cool’ geeks in Cupertino tell you Larry, until multicam is there, I don’t want to even waste my time downloading FCPX.

  133. duncan shepherd Jun 23, 2011 02:04

    All this is just confusing the issue.

    For broadcast TV work there are only 2 fundamental things.

    Either provide an EDL for output for finishing,

    Or provide broadcast quality monitoring to finish in the box.

    The first of these is the backbone of postproduction since the advent of off-line/on-line editing. And it’s not even that difficult to implement.

    FCPX seems to provide neither and until it does simply cannot be considered a professional system. Unless 2 x 3/4 inch and an RM 440 controller floats your boat.

  134. Kenneth Moody Jun 23, 2011 02:25

    I personally think Apple isn’t slipping, i think they’re going to address the concerns fairly quickly in terms of missing features, but on the audio side, for those of you missing soundtrack pro, you forget it’s bigger badder stronger brother, Logic, we know nothing of the strategy for the Logic X which is also due, I imagine Logic Pro X will tie in very tightly to Final Cut Pro X, I expect the new Logic Pro X to become a vital part of the Pro App Ecosystem than ever before. Also I imagine the main missing features like, Multi Cam, legacy compatibility, Robust Tape Capture will be added soon, and will be implented very well, I think upon the release of Lion and IOS 5 FCP X will really rev up, I would say come the fall the big picture, should be a lot clearer, give the boys over at cupertino some time, and stop worrying and just slowly transition over to the new baby, remember it’s a newborn, it’s still got to grow and develop

  135. Larry Jun 23, 2011 02:25

    All good thoughts.

    Just in reply, I agree about the importance of multicam — all my podcasts are shot using it. And my comment about customization was regarding keyboard shortcuts which can be customized extensively – there is virtually no screen customization at all.


  136. Larry Jun 23, 2011 02:28

    There’s two sides to the pricing issue – one is a reflection of product quality/features/perforamce. However, the second interpretation is typified by pricing on the app store – where lower prices equate to massively larger volume. The iPhone ecosystem has conclusively proven the validity of the second approach. My suggestion is not to judge the program based on the price, but to judge the program based on whether it meets your needs as an editor. As I’ve written in my blog, for many people that will be yes. For many others, it will be no.


  137. Larry Jun 23, 2011 02:29

    There is currently no way to “lock an element” into a track, first as there are no tracks and, second, because the magnetic timeline would override them.


  138. Larry Jun 23, 2011 02:31

    No thoughts – I don’t disagree but haven’t had footage to play with that I can test. If you can send me a couple of seconds via email, I’ll take a look at it over the weekend.


  139. Larry Jun 23, 2011 02:32

    The differences in Compressor are important but modest. You can hold of upgrading that for the moment. Motion has gone thru some significant changes – spending time learning that might be a good idea.


  140. Larry Jun 23, 2011 02:35

    Yeah, Mike Horton has described this as a v1.0 product that will be useful when it gets to v3. FCP X has so much potential, it’s like a ungainly teenager tripping over his own feet as he tries to race.


  141. Grant McCulloch Jun 23, 2011 04:07

    Larry, please don’t let me down. I can honestly say that my editing career/experience has been built on lessons and tutorials from you.
    From Lynda and beyond you’ve been my guru and I’ve always thought of you as the the go to guy for all things editing. Clear, honest and concise.
    I hate to say it but you’re sounding like a Apple schill. You’re turning me off and sounding a bit pathetic.
    I’m sure you’ve heard Biscardi’s review. That’s real.
    Work arounds, and excuses for this piece of consumer crap is just not you. I thought.
    Larry, please don’t let me down.
    Get some balls on this one … please.


  142. Larry Jun 23, 2011 04:21

    Thanks for your concern.

    The KEY thing to remember is that everyone’s editing needs are different. Walter is correct that for the high-end user – as I mentioned in my blog – there are far too many gaps in this program to make it useable.

    But, not all editors work at Walter’s level.

    My key point, which I’ve made before is look at the kind of editing work you are doing. If Final Cut Pro X can help – then use it. If it can’t, then continue using FCP 7. They both coexist.

    NEVER feel that you are forced to choose one or the other. You aren’t.


  143. Eric Jun 23, 2011 12:33

    Larry, they are discontinuing the “PRO” version of FCP. So evenetually you WILL be forced to choose….either a sub-par feature deprived FCP X or choose another company’s software. Apple has given only that as a choice. Even as a “wedding shooter” this program has not the ability to perform even close to what I need from it. Not being able to sweeten audio or do multi-camera work makes it totally unusable even for most “wedding shooters” alot of which are one man bands on a single machine. Walter’s level is high-end sure….and FCP X can’t work there……I guess my wedding business is ALSO too “high-end” fro this new FCP.

    That leaves me with this question for you:

    If everyone’s editing needs are different as you say, and FCP X is obviously not good in the market Walter works in, and/or the market that I as a wedding guy work in…….WHAT market is it good for? cutting single camera home videos where real editing doesn’t matter??


  144. Larry Jun 23, 2011 13:26

    Frankly, I was shocked that Apple discontinued FCP 7. There was NO reason to do this and every reason to continue selling it for people who are not able to use FCP X.

    Apple tells me they will be upgrading FCP – and I believe them. But there was no call for them to remove the older version. Very, very poor decision.


  145. Caesar Darias Jun 23, 2011 13:37

    Larry, everybody knows that we’re not forced to do anything. That’s not the point. And the outpouring of anger misdirected at you has nothing to do with FCP X being too cheap and/or too accessible to the masses.

    A lot of people are very upset, I believe, because they’ve invested a lot years and money in FCP. Suddenly, FCP is, in effect, dead. There’s now something new with a lot of missing parts.

    Does Apple really think that the casual birthday party, tribute to granma and vacation video iMovie user is going to bother to pay $300 and take the time to learn the intricacies of FCP X? That’s ridiculous.

    Only in the world of video production can companies release problematic & premature software, computers and cameras and cavalierly issue updates and “firmware” fixes to correct what should have been known before the product was sold to consumers.

    In the automotive industry it’s referred to as a recall and you just might get hauled before a Congressional hearing if it happens too often. But there’s really no consumer accountability in video production. There’s a like-it-or-lump-it mentality.

    Perhaps FCP X will eventually turn out to be a home run. Right now it appears to barely be a bloop single. For some, Apple has struck out, looking.

  146. DavidH Jun 23, 2011 14:18

    Larry, here is what baffles me. Final Cut Studio because of its price and sophistication was clearly intended for people whose occupations went beyond uploading Youtube and Vimeo videos.

    Apple plainly proclaimed and marketed Final Cut Pro 7 and the suite of Color, Motion, Compressor, SoundTrack, yada, yada as a “professional editing solution”. The promotions featured working professionals with sophisticated needs extolling the sophisticated features of Final Cut Pro, etc. Most of the promotional material for the past few years that Apple has pumped out was not aimed to the iMovie crowd, far from it.

    They marketing department solicited and exalted online testimonials for years precisely from the kind of industry professionals in the MEDIA INDUSTRY who slathered on praise for the technical capabilities of FCP.

    Then Apple disappears into a dark cavern in Cupertino, keeps high-end editors in the dark while continuously using guys like you, Larry, to keep us hopeful and calm despite our worst fears.

    Larry Jordan, supposedly, was an “inside source” who understood the more sophisticated needs of working professionals, and who “asked tons of questions” directly of the programming team.

    The people who bought into the whole studio concept of dedicated components integrated with FCP 7 and the industry who created imaginative and timesaving plugins and Motion templates were exactly the people such bloggers and authors such as yourself have placated for the past years….don’t worry, don’t worry….Apple has your back.

    Apple knows what you need–enhancements to FCP 7 and Motion and Color, etc…etc… this has been your mantra, Larry.

    I read your review and then I read Walter Biscardi’s– world of difference and astuteness.

    The very features most FCP 7 users, whether high end or middle range use on a daily basis are missing. After “years of feedback and development and LISTENING” the paranoia of FCP 7 users has been completely, entirely fulfilled. Round trip?? You cannot roundtrip specific audio tracks to SoundTrack Pro?

    You cannot open up yesterday’s FCP project? No IMPORT?

    A media Event browser that insists on LOADING EVERYTHING it can find every time you open up FCP X? You have to Offload a drive to hide it?

    Look, Larry, what Apple has done is terrific, no kidding, for iMovie users.

    And some great features that would have been very exciting in Final Cut Pro 8!

    But this has to be the single WORST launch of any high end product in Apple’s history!

    A slap in the face to all the Apple devotees working in the video and media industry.

    I know you sell great FCP STUDIO Training videos and courses for a living, Larry, but don’t YOU feel somewhat USED, too?

  147. Alex Jun 23, 2011 14:34

    Eric, I totally agree with you. This software is useless for broadcast people, Film people, wedding people… Who is demographic target for this software? Students? Like with FCP v.1? At the time it was different, Avid was unaffordable for students, but FCPX competitors are much more affordable today. If I were a student today I would learn Avid and Premiere, as this could get me a job, you know, a paying one. Not FCPX because it’s useless, and not FCP 7 because it’s gonna die.

    And the all “It’s only a v.1!” is BS. I would be ok with that if FCP7 was still available. At least until FCPX is up to the task.

    Grant, don’t be mad at Larry, he has to sell his tutorials, so he’s not gonna ditch the software he made those tutorials about.

    Larry, Despite what I just said I respect you and what you do, but Apple just screwed you too, and you should realize it. We’re all somewhat obsolete now.

    “Apple tells me they will be upgrading FCP – and I believe them.”

    But When? It took Apple 5 versions of FCP to add multicam, and at the time it is my opinion that it’s the one feature that put the “Pro” in Final Cut Pro.

    And we don’t have time to wait Larry. In our business as it is in manny, it’s do or die. It is not 2001 anymore, and Avid does, and Premiere does.

    I work in the broadcast world, so I can only speak for this segment of our industry, and the problem we have is not the interface, that we could learn easily. it’s the missing features. FCPX doesn’t allow us to deliver the shows the way we are obligated by contract with our clients to deliver them. And by the way, we don’t get to decide how we’re gonna deliver our show, the client does. If Steve Jobs wants the industry to go tapeless, I think we’re all ok with that (that would save a lot of money in decks and tape stock), but he should talk to the network execs, not try to force a half baked application on us.

    I’m gonna buy a copy of Avid (first one in 10 years!) to brush up my skills, which I wanted to do anyway, and one of CS 5.5 (first time) and learn Premier which I wanted to do anyway too. Because the networks don’t have time to wait for FCPX to be ready, my boss doesn’t have time to wait for FCPX to be ready, I don’t have time to wait for FCPX to be ready.

    And when a middle class worker is willing to shell out thousands in pro apps versus $300 for a singler one, everything is said.

    Have a good day, and enjoy FXP7 while it last…

  148. Paul Jun 23, 2011 20:14

    Came back to take a look at the comments after a few days. Feel surprised, although I don’t suppose I should be. Very heavily negative. Wow.

    Just want to thank you, Larry, for all the support over the years, making yourself available for the occasional email, the quick response (haven’t had to ask lately, and maybe now that your business has grown perhaps you wouldn’t be able to as quickly, but) – anyway, don’t expect you’re taking any of this personally, and hope you won’t. Apple will obviously move on changes, upgrades, fixes.

    I was tempted to try it at first, but as a professional editor I move back and forth between Avid and FCP, in and out of the production houses, and don’t need to rush it personally.

    I can understand the furor; although I’ve been an Apple platform devotee from day one (and still have my Apple Classic – which still works by the way, what with a 4 MB hard drive – which managed to drive all sorts of programs – Word, Word Perfect, Final Draft, games – this was all way before FCP) I’ve gotten used to Apple’s boundless desire to control things, and frankly its scary what they’re doing with the iPhone, but it’s all neither here nor there; when FCP X fully comes together, more professionals will try it. Some in the meantime may even find ways to make X sing.

    And Larry, your efforts will always be helpful, so thanks, now, and in advance.


  149. Tom Jun 23, 2011 21:10

    I have to agree about moving to Adobe. I love their ability to manage metadata all my images, audio, and movies – not inside of an unstable app that Apple is willing to simply pull the plug on a whimsy.

    I moved to Apple 5 years ago because of my frustration with dealing with video on Windows… but now, I’m on my way back. I simply don’t want Apple jerking me around like this.

    An AMD 6-core, 16 gb RAM, GTX 470 cards, running Windows 7 64-bit and Adobe CS5 with Mercury costs less than $1500. A nice quad core i7 laptop costs $900.

    I think its time to move on…

  150. Larry Jun 24, 2011 04:33


    Thanks for your very kind comments – they are very much appreciated.


  151. Larry Jun 24, 2011 04:37


    I appreciate the pain you feel. I don’t write the software. I can only help people learn it. FCP X is not ready for your needs. It would decrease everyone’s stress if it were. However, you, not Apple, are responsible for making decisions about your work and career. If there’s anything I can do to help, let me know.


  152. Larry Jun 24, 2011 04:41

    I don’t feel used because I’ve tried to present both my perceptions and what I’ve learned from Apple as fairly and as quickly as I was allowed.

    However, I am disappointed because I think Apple handled this launch very poorly. There was no need to cancel FCP 7 so quickly. There was no need to name the product Final Cut Pro – it could have been called something else and live in harmony with FCP 7 and let the inherent benefits of fCP X sway editors to its side.

    This launch was set up to be polarizing – which is something I have never liked. There is too much screaming in the world – finding a balanced voice is very, very difficult.

    I still believe that most of us will be editing with FCP X in the next 18 months – but the road to get there is now much more rocky than it needs to be.


  153. DavidH Jun 24, 2011 05:29

    Larry, Apple had many naming conventions open to them on this product .. iMovie ’12 would have been extremely apropos and accurate.

    I think the iMovie 11 application is a great product. You can actually make great productions. But this is all centered on a local computer, assuming that you, Larry Jordan, have one account with the Apple Apps store to get this software from and that only you will be working on that movie on your local computer. It is all local, computer centric, and ASSUMES that, of course, all your iMovie resources, including movie, will by DEFAULT be stored on that one MacBook Pro or even MacPro.

    But Apple, by naming this iMovie 12 editor “FINAL CUT PRO X” indicated many falsities, deliberate, thought out, with malice aforesight, LIES had been the core, the very administrative CORE of their intent for this product for the past few years.

    Did it not seem suspicious to the Apple community of professional users that you could not find any heavy duty commercial, television, and Film editors blogging “Hey, fellow Pros, I’ve sworn an oath of secrecy not to reveal the details, but I just got back from a sneak peak at what we have all accomplished in the Studio 4, Final Cut Pro 8 upgrade. Gonna be AWESOME!”

    And, you, Larry, Final Cut Pro INSTRUCTOR, live in the heart of the industry where, evidently, you never educated your ownself on the day to day NECESSITIES of the cutting houses and post houses all around you.

    Your review gave such emphasis to praising an upgraded iMovie editor and very very plainly de-emphasized the most important not just “deal breakers” but INDUSTRY PLATFORM BREAKERS.

    How about that after how many years of waiting that Apple did not deliver a 64-bit Final Cut 8?

    That ON-GOING PROJECTS could not be IMPORTED into this 64 bit application?

    That post houses and creatives in the very industrial area where you yourself reside would not be able to resume the workflow that their CLIENTS expect and have contracted for?

    For Lord’s sakes, Larry, you can get in your car and drive up and down Ventura highway and drop in and learn what the big houses are doing, not just the community colleges!

    It is not about TIPS and shortcuts on the keyboard for professionals who have made such an investment in learning and training and installing FCP, it is about COMPATABILITY and COOPERATION between multiple editors or Colorists or Audio Sweetening or Conforming Editors.

    Larry, where have you been in this arena?

    You have represented yourself as being a fellow Professional in the LA Area.

    Why are you so slow on the uptake to acknowledge that Apple has truly let down the guys who work all around you in the Los Angeles Movie, Television, and Production House industry—just for starters.

    Do you know any of these people? Have you ever ventured deeply into their world to look beyond the keystroke issues?

    In your review you should have gotten the big picture earlier than the rest of us and said “It”s great, but it is NOT Final Cut 8″

  154. David Stacy Jun 24, 2011 06:17

    Thanks for all your input Larry. I am very disappointed in loosing Color. The program is very deep and versatile, a fantastic tool. I am guessing that it can still be used but no more round tripping to FCP.

    I understand that Apple wants to get their product to market ASAP to start cash rolling in. I am betting a lot of pros are not happy loosing their high end functionality in a trade of for speed.

    What about the functionality of all the plug-ins that work with FCP 7?

  155. Larry Jun 24, 2011 06:29

    As with the transition from FCP 3 to FCP 4 — and converting from FCScript to FCPlug — the new conversion to FCPlug2 will take a few months. I expect plugins will be back to “normal” in 3-4 months.


  156. Jack Jun 24, 2011 06:43

    Hi Larry
    I was at the FCPUG last night, and first off I want to say that took some balls in the face of all that adversity.

    I’ve already received a refund for FCPX, mainly because there is no deck support. But looking back, I see much larger issues.

    Last night someone mentioned Walter Murch using FCP 3 on Cold Mountain. Well, by coincidence, I worked on the digital intermediate for Cold Mountain. You know how we were able to make it happen smoothly? EDL. Yes, a 30 year-old format. We still use it today, because it’s human readable, and extremely simple.

    Apple doesn’t seem to understand the need for an interchange format, which given they recently created one of the most widely adopted ones (FCPXML), seems bizarre. I was talking to the Adobe guy last night, and even Premiere Pro uses FCPXML as its interchange format. I appreciate that it will be possible for 3rd parties to implement support, but without a de facto standard interchange format, it will be useful. FCPXML was starting to become the “modern” EDL.

    Here’s the problem. Let’s assume switches to digital cameras within the next few years (everyone except Spielberg and Tarantino, at least). How can I recreate anyone’s FCPX offline edit in any sort of online environment. Forget even worrying about a DCinema grade, a 3D movie, or film recording. How can I get a commercial that was cut in FCPX into smoke, without flattening the whole thing into a quicktime?

  157. Jack Jun 24, 2011 06:45

    Also, is there any chance you will publish that email you read last night on your blog? It’s the closest thing any of us have had to an “official response” from Apple, and I daresay it might reassure some people.

  158. DavidH Jun 24, 2011 07:45

    Larry, I was looking at Your Inside Source forum at this response from you–


    All QuickTime files, from any version, CAN – repeat CAN, be imported into FCP X .

    All my training was done using imported FCP 7, and earlier files.”

    So, Larry, what does IMPORT actually mean?

    Do folders of .mov files, no matter what codec was used to create them in a previous FCP 7 project, actually show up as iMovie resources after IMPORT?

    If a user has terabytes of files, common situation, doesn’t the Final Cut Pro x import function automatically start converting terabytes of files into Pro Res?

    In other words, is the truth actually that you cannot simply USE pre-existing media in its own specific QuickTime specs…for instance, custom file size, and 25 frames per second *European tapeless standard using DVCPRO 25, as an example?

    By IMPORT don’t you really mean “CONVERT”?

    And if that is so, can you specify where such ProRes file duplicates are stored and used, say to another external SATA drive?

    Will Final Cut Pro X HONOR the .mov format as simply what it is , how it was created and stored originally on a FCP 7 project from 2009?

    Thank you for your expertise.

  159. Alvaro Tobar Jun 24, 2011 10:51

    Found this in Apple’s support “It is strongly recommended that you install Final Cut Pro X, Motion 5, and Compressor 4 on a startup disk that does not have Final Cut Studio (2009) already installed.” Could you elaborate on that? What is the risk of installing without a partition? Thank you.

  160. Tim Garber Jun 24, 2011 11:00

    In the professional world of broadcast, no tape support is a deal killer in itself, but FCPX has so many deal killers it is laughable.

    No OMF, no XML, no export to Color, heck no Color, no layered Photoshop support, no backward project support, no multicam, from what I have heard no way to reconnect media to another drive, it copies media to local (we have hundreds of TBs on multiple XSANs), you can’t assign audio tracks (I organize my tracks for sweetening – oh wait you can’t sweeten since you can’t output an OMF, XML, or AAF.)

    I think even attaching the word “professional” to FCPX is a stretch. If you are self-contained, work alone using files and FW ingest, complete the project (edit, effects, and sweeten) in the same machine with plenty of internal storage, then FCPX is golden.

    If you work in a professional environment with archival footage coming from various tape formats, cut multicam programming or performances, revisit old projects, share my project with multiple editors, access TBs of footage, need to send the project to a colorist, need to have high-end sweetening added, then FCPX is a joke.

    Those are a ton of conditions NOT met by FCPX. After looking at it I question the premise that this was a ground-up build. Could be true, but rather it looks like a pattern rebuild using iMovie as the pattern.

    We joke about Apple fanboys drinking the coolaid…

  161. David Stacy Jun 24, 2011 13:16

    Your amazing Larry! You help everyone by answering all their concerns. There are so many questions and a Google search comes up with very little answers and even more questions. I was looking for an honest review and this blog is the only real source I have found. It is a relief not to “guess” about the features and “all the problems”. It is one thing to have problems and another to wait until the monkey jumps out of the bush and surprises you. People’s greatest fear is fear of the unknown. To substitute for the facts, fear and worry create lots of negative press.

    Apple had to know their new child was not going to work for the professional or serious editor they worked so hard to convert from Avid. They had a complete professional tool set and a price line that Avid couldn’t compete with. Now for the first time I think people are going to consider the Adobe Studio of products as an alternative who were doing the best they could to copy Apply and compete with those slow to move to an Apple computer or who had a solid foundation in multiple Adobe products by completing their suite of features.

    The biggest surprise is that Apple knew exactly what they were doing by killing the professional workflow, but they haven’t said that they would take care of them in future versions. You said Apple would make future revisions for the professional but Apple hasn’t addressed their top end audience. That comes down to a lack of commitment on their end.

    I agree with you that Apple may have made a mistake by immediately pulling FCP 7 off the shelf. One of the first things I did was to see if it was still available at a discount. OK its clear they want to kill the old editing software and force a new product but all the time they knew the top editors couldn’t use the new FCP. Especially top end users are the first people that want to spend the money to get an edge with the latest greatest. It is hard to imagine that they took their hands and covered their eyes and ears to leave the top editors to figure out on their own that they couldn’t stop using FCP 7 even if they wanted to.

    I am excited that finally there is a FCP has the programming to use power of our significantly better computers. I have always been handcuffed by the rendering bar especially when doing special effects. The only previous solution is to buy more and more expensive hardware to try to solve the problem. Yes, I am happy that they finally listened to you and put in a useful audio bar, but what to do about mixing and voice overs?

    I am just one of the many unknown students who have loved your excellent presentation in your tutorials above and beyond the information you teach. I have caught several other authors trying to copy both some of your style and even your quips. I guess that waiting for all the professional functionality in the new FCP will be like sitting and waiting for oil “paint to dry”. This conversion is probably going to create lots of extra work for you as an educator and producer. Do you take interns?

  162. nickeditor Jun 24, 2011 14:30

    Hello Larry,

    FCPlug is interesting Larry, but for third-party developers ¿what about Apple?
    ¿Is only third-party solutions can we expect?


  163. Jason Lyons Jun 24, 2011 15:40

    Hi Larry,
    Thanks for providing another perspective on this issue. Sounds like FCPX.x might be a real tool someday…

    I must take issue with one point you raised.

    Its nice that YOU have been able to consult with the software engineers and that Apple has reassured YOU that they are committed… what are all the rest of us users? chopped liver :)

    …but its really the actions of Apple and their pro hardware and software positioning that tells me something completely different.

    Apple XRAID – gone
    Apple XServe – gone
    Apple Shake – gone
    Apple Color – gone
    Apple STP – gone
    What’s next ? Mac Pro Desktops?

    Back to chopped liver:
    Yes their journey of re-writing the software, the millions of dollars spent on development means something indeed. Where you see a promise to be fulfilled I see a big question to be answered, “Apple, if you are going to all these lengths to develop this ground breaking software, and you are indeed committed to the pro market, then why keep your user base in limbo for years and be so secretive about all this effort and why not include a large collective of users to provide feedback, or even an official statement, a timeline, a shared forward looking vision about the future of the product beyond a rogue email by Steve Jobs saying how cool or great it is going to be?”

    I agree with you FCP 7 is not dead, it is still very functional as long as you know the work-arounds and are willing to work with it. As for me I don’t want to be in your article a few years from now as an example of people still using the 3/4″ UMATIC equivalent NLE editor – Final Cut Pro 7.x… :)

    (BTW-that mention of Umatic made me grin, that’s what I started cutting on back in 1989)

    My bet is on the companies that show that they are committed to the Pro markets. Namely, AVID and Adobe in that order.

  164. Allynn Jun 24, 2011 15:58

    Here’s my two cents on Apple’s whole strategy… I think they are moving out of the computer market and into the personal electronics market. There was a CNN report the other day that Apple is going to start making TVs ( iPhones, iFads, iPods and iMacs are consumer electronics. Sure you can (probably) make a really slick YouTube video using them maybe even cut an indie movie on the cheap but they are all designed to sell (in volume) to a mass market. Not so a high end video editing suite or the hardware it runs on (which is why I think Mac towers are going away very soon too).

    Apple has always been a hardware company; we all know that. And the profit margin in computers is really, *really* slim these days. But consumer electronics? That’s a different story. How many iPods have you bought in the past ten years versus how many Mac Pros?

    I think we have a major paradigm shift going on here and I suppose, from a profit standpoint, it’s inevitable. I’m sure FCP X will get updates and some missing features added back in but I don’t **ever** see it catering to a high-end pro market. Apple wouldn’t have launched it the way it did if they didn’t **intend** to alienate pro users.

  165. Andrea Jun 24, 2011 16:00

    Well, first of all I’d like to express my solidarity to Larry. I’ve read some comments against his person in this blog which are almost surreal. As though to say: “FCP doesn’t include Multicamera Editing. It’s Larry Jordan fault” . I think Larry has helped al lot part of us (maybe everyone of us) with his perfect training job in this years. We have the right to be angry for a lot of things about what’s happened with FCPX, FCP 7, Color and so on, but to attack Larry in some way it’s the wrong thing to do. Instead I’d like to think to him like an huge resources in this transition moment.

    Second: I’ve just started to have little business using Color. Perfect. Color is dead. I think I can continue to work with this software for a while, but can anyone of you, Larry and the others on this blog, to help me to understand if it’s better to learn similar application? For example Da Vinci Resolve? This is just a simple questions but i think it’s the right way to face this moment. To debate our problems with this new situation and to find new workflows and solutions.

    My apologies for my english. Thanks to Larry and to everyone here.

  166. Jimbo Jun 24, 2011 16:29

    No multicam, oh heck. But on second thought, with the new features of FC X I think we are met halfway. In the old FCP we needed to set up multicams for many reasons, but one reason was that we in the sequence weren’t able to see the tracks below the upper one. Of course we could turn off the upper one, then the next and so forth, but that could jeopardize render etc. Now we can scrub and see and hear a multitude of “tracks” on top of each other. We can even sync the soundtrack from the external audio recording device without use of timecode.
    For music productions with perhaps 3 or 4 cameras I wouldn’t hesitate to use FC X.

  167. Caesar Darias Jun 24, 2011 17:29

    As with FCP 7, can you put all your files in an external drive… edit part of the project… eject the drive… move that drive to another Mac… open the project… continue to work exactly where you left off?

  168. Paul Jun 24, 2011 17:47

    Omg, everyone, and Larry, you’ve got to lean back and just have a laugh.

    The guys at Conan have come through hilariously. Enjoy.

  169. Peter Jun 24, 2011 19:03

    Wow. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a flame war of this magnitude before. People are not just attacking Apple, but anyone with a dissenting opinion, using completely uncivil and insulting rhetoric. How do you keep your composure?

    The sad part about this whole mess is: as people raise their pitchforks in response to the missing I/O features, they have completely missed the fact that the actual EDITING engine is amazing–elegant, powerful, and fun. I’ve been testing the program for 3 days now, and your review is pretty darn accurate.

    I’m an editing professional, but this week, with all the whining and flaming going on, I’m kinda embarrassed to call myself such.

  170. Caesar Darias Jun 24, 2011 19:26

    Larry, last question from me on this topic, please: Are .MOV files still “native” in FCP X? In other words, will a camera like the JVC GY-HM700U shoot files that can simply be dragged and dropped into FCP X?

  171. Ryan Broom Jun 24, 2011 20:07


    I have heard conflicting reports on installing FCP X with FCP 7 still on the main OS drive. I read the support document detailed here Did you go through these steps before you installed FCP X or did you just install it side by side on the main OS drive. If so are both programs working well?

    What do you recommend?

    Thanks for all the great info.


  172. Daniel Jun 25, 2011 03:44

    Wow… I can its true what they say that “anyone can be bought”.

    Larry, I’m speechless. Just speechless.

    I wonder how much did they paid you to back this backwards, pro-sumer-oriented, impotent excuse for a professional NLE ? I watched your videos on Lynda back in the day. No amount of backpedalling can white-wash your bought-and-sold support such a poorly designed contender.

    Most people would agree you can’t put a price on professional credibility. I guess you’re not one of them.

  173. Ankur Bishaya Jun 25, 2011 08:25

    Thanks Larry,

    Its indeed a very neutral article. I’ve read lots of articles but yours gave the real picture.

    Cheers !

  174. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:38


    I’m sorry you feel that way. FCP X is not yet for everyone and it is not ready for many pros. But it is useful for many others. All I can do is show you how it works and let you decide for yourself.


  175. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:39


    I just installed it side-by-side. However, I was not installing the release version. I am not a fan of partitioned drives for a wide variety of reasons.

    However, as I have not installed the release version yet and I DO need to run FCP 7, I don’t know what really works and what doesn’t. For this reason, I don’t have a recommendation.


  176. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:41

    Based on my experience creating my training, FCP X plays all QuickTime files with no problem – PROVIDED you have the driving installed on your system. For instance, RED and XDCAM EX files require updated drivers from Red, and Sony.

    The problem isn’t the QuickTime file, its support for the codec (driver) that the video is encoded with. You’ll need to either check Apple — — or your camera vendor for compatibility and updates.


  177. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:44

    Yes, but… it uses a different file structure. You would need to put both the Events folder and the Projects folder on the second drive.


  178. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:46


    Thanks for your kind words!

    FCP X does color correction, but it doesn’t really do color grading. After talking with Alexis Van Hurkman and seeing his demo of Davinci Resolve, published by Blackmagic Design, I would suggest you look into that program for high-end color correction.


  179. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:48


    Allow me to disagree. Apple is predominantly a software company – they use their hardware to sell their software. (Think of a Mac as a big dongle.) I agree with you that they are moving into the consumer space, but what is allowing that move is not their hardware but the software that runs on it. That which makes an iPhone exciting is not that it is the size it is, it what the software – and the apps in the App Store – can do with it.

    What this portends for the video segment remains to be seen.


  180. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:51


    Thanks for your thoughtful comments.

    And we are always interested in working with good people.


  181. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:54

    First, let me clarify. FCP X can import – which can mean EITHER link to or copy – any QuickTime file PROVIDED you have the codec installed on your system and FCP X supports the codec. (This is an additional element I did not know when I wrote my earlier statement.) For instance, XDCAM codecs need to be updated by Sony before you can play XDCAM material in FCP X — something I discovered to my dismay when creating my training as much of my exercise files are in XDCAM EX.

    Second, you control whether media is copied or linked and you further control whether it gets transcoded to ProRes. Both of these are preference choices.

    Third, should you decide to transcode to ProRes, yes, you can decide which hard drive to store these to.


  182. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:54

    No. I have not been given permission to publish it.


  183. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:56


    This is a critically important question that, so far, Apple has not provided an answer to. I agree, it is a big limitation of FCP X.


  184. Larry Jun 25, 2011 12:58


    They are referring to this Apple support document:


  185. David Stacy Jun 25, 2011 16:41


    Do you feel like Atlas with the new world of editing on your shoulders?

    Here are 30 more questions:

    1. Cannot open both versions at the same time: FCP 7 and FCP X?
    2. FCP X media on the applications local drive instead of a stratch disk?
    3. Reconnect Media-Media Management?
    4. Consolidating projects?
    5. Saving different versions?
    6. Restore to a saved version?
    7. Importing to other software: Pro Tools, After Effects, Resolve, DVD authoring?
    8. Red Support?
    9. Color correcting on a reference monitor?
    10. Checking for interlacing?
    11. Mirroring to another monitor?
    12. Organizing multiple audio tracks per your previous tutorials?
    13. Layered Photoshop import support?
    14. Blending modes in video inspector? Limited contextual menu?
    15. Custom video presets?
    16. Irregular frame rates?
    17. No true native editing?
    18. Everything is automaticly transcoded and converted to Apple Pro Res in the background?
    19. Transcoding storage problem?
    20. Every project is locked to the machine?
    21. Shared workflow? – Can’t exchange data with other users?
    22. Audio export format choices?
    23. Who is King of the Hill now for post production software? Adobe?
    24. Film based workflows?
    25. Apple’s new version release history – 2 years?
    26. No volume licencing?
    27. Has FCP 7 certification stopped?
    28. Baselight color correcting for FCP X coming?
    29. Four point, and replace editing gone?
    30. Work-space is not customizable?

    Thanks for the big shoulder,


  186. Larry Jun 25, 2011 16:58


    Take a look at this post from David Pogue of the New York Times:

    Many of your questions are answered there.

    Specifically, the following points in your list are incorrect: 2, 14, 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 29.

    And many answers to more of your questions are answered in the Pogue article.



  187. Caesar Darias Jun 25, 2011 17:58

    Many people here are way out of line with the strong personal attacks against a person who is obviously trying to be very helpful. How many other people are answering all these questions and concerns on a Saturday? I’ve found one. And his name isn’t Steve.

    I’ve never met Larry Jordan. However, it’s obvious that Larry is caught in a difficult position. It’s also obvious he’s too civilized to unload against the multiple attacks on his professional credibilty.

    He has stated several times that he pointed out certain flaws to Apple.
    Look, Larry can lead Apple to water. But he can’t make them drink.

  188. Alex Jun 25, 2011 19:42


    First of all, I have to say I am impressed about the way you manage to read all comments and answer to everybody. I command you for that.

    And I agree with what everybody as said since my last comment, with the exception of a couple people. And I disagree with most of your positions.

    Second of all, you’re answer was beside the point but you’re absolutely right: I am absolutely responsible for my professional choices. But to my defense, Premiere Pro wasn’t considered a viable option up until the past couple of years, and having been lucky enough to work continuously for the past 6 years in an FCP based company, I haven’t had many occasions to flex my Avid muscle memory. But as I said, I’ve been meaning to flex that muscle for a while, and I’m excited to learn Premiere. I needed an incentive to stop procrastinating, I just never thought that that incentive would come from… Apple.

    And I’m not angry or in pain, really. I know what I have to do to stay ahead of the game. But I do feel for the fresh out of school and in debt young AE’s I work with who’ve been dedicated to FCP for a couple of years and who are now back to square one.

    On that note, you’re telling people that everybody will be working on FCPX 18 months from now. And unless you know something from Apple that we don’t (and I hope you do), you know it is impossible in its actual form. Therefore you are partly responsible of the a choice that some of us are going to make and that is going to impact their professional career. And you become part of the problem.

    Also you keep saying to deceived (yes, deceived) FCP professionals that FCPX might not be useful to them, but will be to some. And I just want/need to ask: Who are those people who are working alone and who manages to make a leaving producing single camera shows, not properly color balance (no I/O, no XML, no EDL), not properly sound mix (no Soundtrack and no OMF), and not delivering tapes (again no I/O) to the networks, or to Blue-Ray or DVD (no DVDstudioPro, although there is many alternative for that) to their clients? Who are those people Larry? And why are they so important to Apple that they’re being favored that way?

    I want to know because if they are the same people who’ve been telling for the past week to broadcast professionals like me that the missing features were useless anyway, that we don’t see the big picture, I’d like to tell them this:
    If you didn’t know how to use any of the now missing features and why they were used… I would seriously re-evaluate your FCP7, AND Post-Production expertise.
    If you have problem keeping your FCP7 project in sync… Man, you kinda suck.
    Same thing if you can’t move things around in your project quickly and keep everything organized.
    FCPX is not a v.1. It would be had Apple not killed FCP7.
    And it’s not the interface the problem (although an interface being fully clickable is hardly exciting)

    And finally, Larry (and everybody else who triumphantly says so hoping to end the debate), YES, Apple will fix FCP. As they did when they released Imovie X without any of the features of Imovie 6 that were useful to home editor. It took some years but they reluctantly brought back all of those features. Coincidently it was the same team who worked on Imovie X who just committed FCPX. And do we really have to go through that long and painful process with FCP? We waited 10 years to see FCP becoming the tool it became with version 7, only to see it thrown out the widow. Why should we wait another 10 years and maybe take the same risk again? Some Editor at my company have already started to look for Avid jobs once their assignment ends. Why should we keep working on a platform that, even if it will remain useable for few years, is now officially obsolete? And if my boss can’t find experience FCP editors (that he couldn’t find anywhere 10 years ago) he’ll have to switch platform too. Now, are you still sure everybody will be on FCPX 18 months from now?

    Again Larry, I hope you know something that we don’t. If not, I suggest you start creating Avid and Premiere Pro tutorials. I’ll buy the Premiere ones.

    Have a good day.


  189. Larry Jun 25, 2011 19:51


    Thanks for writing.

    What I’m saying is that if FCP X fits your workflow, use it. If it doesn’t, don’t. I am not using FCP X in my production system because it lacks features that I need. On the other hand, I am using FCP X in my training system so that I can continue to learn it and teach others.

    It is up to Apple to decide what features to add or fix. All I can do is provide comments back to Apple and keep everyone informed on what I learn.

    For now, I’m urging most people to wait on making a decision on what to do for a while. Let the dust settle. Let’s see what Apple releases. Let’s give the third-party developers time to catch up.

    Personally, I think that in 3-4 months the situation will be radically different than it is today. But, in fact, only time will tell.

    I’ve been using FCP 7 quite happily since it was released. I plan to continue to do so, to give FCP X time to mature.


  190. Andy Jun 25, 2011 20:25

    I don’t believe there will be huge sales of “Final Cut X” by some mysterious “Mass Market”.

    1st, students “liked” Final Cut because it was the editing software of choice for many professionals and learning it could perhaps open future doors in the business. If Final Cut X is not used by pros it will not be used by students or budding filmmakers.

    2nd, it will not be used by the typical family editor because Dad’s software budget is closer to $99 and unless he already owns a Mac Computer, he’s certainly not buying one to run this software.

    3rd, “Prosumers” won’t use it because “Final Cut X” will just push them back or to Adobe 5.5 and save them the extra $$ they were fretting losing by investing in that iMac” or Macbook.

    So let’s see, no Mom & Pops, no Students, no Prosumers, no Professionals. What’s left are the minority of folks who don’t fit into an above category yet currently own a MacBook Pro. Oh, but wait, not even them because they’ll just stick with their Final Cut 7.

    Apple’s Mac Computer sales are going to nosedive because of Final Cut X.

    I for one was expecting a great new Final Cut and was preparing to buy a fully loaded iMac to use it. Now I’m simply going to invest in Adobe’s Creative Suite and call it a day.

  191. David Stacy Jun 25, 2011 23:28


    Thank you for the support. Good tag teamwork with referrals to other links and other people’s blogs! I am not as hurt during this software transition period because I am just a year out of film school at Orange Coast College in California where I was taught Avid and FCP. I’m new in the job market and its tough to apply and compete with 200 other people looking for the same job posting. New all new FCP X means a new opportunity to learn the program and be the best from the ground floor up. But during this transition period of uncertainty it also seems wise to do extra duty by being able to do whatever the employer or client wants and needs: Avid, FCP 7, FCP X, or Adobe.

    It was only three years ago when I toured Fox Studios in Hollywood just after they converted most of their editing stations from Avid to FCP. There were their Emmy award winning editors complaining because they didn’t know how to use FCP. Change comes tough for everyone especially those who have been cashing in on the goose with the golden egg. But just as a reminder to all the hotshots, people make big dollars because they are fast at doing something few others know how to do. Now is the window of opportunity to teach and use the newest greatest and latest.

    I believe when all the other loyal Apple fans think about it they will recognize that Apple prides itself on being cutting edge. It is impossible to believe that they didn’t have their check list of previous features and decided to hurt the professional industry. They just weren’t ready but needed a fresh supply of blood: U.S. dollars. The give away price point makes everyone a beta tester. I seriously doubt that 90% of the people would have complained if Apple called the program iMovie Pro. Its all about expectations and fear. Granted, Apple didn’t take a needed review course in 101 psychology for dummies. But lets face it look at all the talk and press this release is getting and it is not going to stop for a very long time: that equals more opportunity.

    It is only a matter of time before Apple finishes what it started in this new release and again blows its horn as the best program with the best features at the best price. Clearly getting consumer dollars must be their strongest motivation by splitting the package. I am sure they did a statistical study and found that few users ever did more than open the other programs so split the program to stimulate dollars with a lower price and maximize the new generation of editors, tomorrow’s market. Still, I do hope that they are as smart as those that put together Maya who bought out the best related software and made one monster state of the art program that is so deep that I have never heard anyone mastering all its features. Consumer buying habits prefer one stop shopping at lower prices.

    Adapting to this new program sort of makes me think its emotionally like going back to using maps after being dependent on GPS. There is nothing like being lost to give you an opportunity to really find your way around the new program because you are forced to learn!

    A little knowledge and understanding goes a long way. Thanks to you I’ve calmed down from the knee jerk initial panic. Everything is going to be alright!

    Thank you for your support for everyone who writes,


  192. Nivardo Cavalcante Jun 25, 2011 23:33

    Hi Larry,

    We do not want to relearn how to edit, we want to keep working and keep our families with our work. Apple has betrayed us. Whenever we ask is that improved FCP 7 will not have him killed.

  193. David Stacy Jun 26, 2011 02:12

    Larry and fellow readers,

    The real question for crystal ball readers is what are Apple’s intentions. According to Apple Product Managers reported that “Apple concedes that some complaints will likely go unrectified. For instance, Final Cut Pro X can’t import old Final Cut Pro projects and there’s reportedly no plans to address the matter. Instead, editors will need to keep both programs — Final Cut Pro 7 and Final Cut Pro X– on their hard drive, and edit the old projects in the old program.”

    Does Apple intend to develop FCPX as state of the art editing software to better any other competition and be top editor’s number one choice? That question remains to be addressed.

    Below is a copy of a comment posted on David Pogue’s, New York Times blog I added here because it clearly defines the production or any other multi-user workflow which is not supported by FCPX:

    “FCPX is NOT cross-platformed. By killing FCP Server and forcing media to be saved to the local machine, FCPX becomes 100% unusable in a professional editorial and post-production facility. The way FCP7 has been incorporated into most post-production/editorial facilities, is the local machine is connected to an X-san server, which is a network that connects all machines to a central server via fibre. This ensures the quickest transfer of data as your machine accesses files from the server.”

    “This way, you maximize editorial muscle by having multiple editors work from the same source footage without having to duplicate them onto your local machine. Not only does it free up harddrive space, it speeds up editing time exponentially as you can have multiple editors work on multiple projects that require the same footage. It also means that if footage is updated, it can be applied across the board to all machines and edits that are using it.”

    “FCPX is a closed sandbox environment meaning that users are forced to work only on their local machine.”

    “That and the fact that OMF/EDL/XML support in the current version is “missing” means that even after an edit is complete in FCPX – you can not send it to a 3rd party post environment to finish the video at high-quality. That means you can’t send project files to a sound studio for sound design or to a visual effects environment to do composition and color correction.”

    “By killing the import/export functionality of EDL’s/OMFs/XML — Apple has blown up the bridge connecting FCP to the rest of the post-production workflow.”

    …end quote.

    With a current customer ratings for FCPX of only 2.5 my prediction is that Apple has a very narrow window to restore confidence and fix this problem or loose its professional support base. The needs for companies to purchase additional workstations continue but FCP7 has been pulled off the shelves to force the issue for which Apple presently owns no solution! Whereas Avid has a solution that is tried and true and thanks to Apple has become much more affordable. There is an old saying in sports: “Never change a winning game and always change a loosing one.”

    This scenario reminds me of the blunder Coca-Cola made when it came out with the New Coke. It immediately received highly negative reviews but quickly brought back Classic Coke as part of a comparison contest. The interesting question is, how will Apple adjust to this negative media blitz?

  194. Terry S. Jun 26, 2011 04:29

    Hi Larry,

    If anyone out there is a Final Cut Guru, it’s definitely you! Congrats on your collection of Training Material for FCP X, probably the only resource for FCP X that’s currently available. Thank you for your efforts to keep us on the know about these new products and how we can make the most of these powerful creative tools.

    I bet it was so frustrating for you these past six weeks, learning the new Final Cut Pro app, and not being able to speak a word of its real capabilities. I can imagine you wanted to just share some of the cool features or point out its flaws to your colleagues. At least now you can speak and share it with the world, thank you.

    Take care and safe journey home from London, if you have not yet returned.

  195. Terry S. Jun 26, 2011 04:42

    I certainly agree with what you told Alex. The dust has to settle and hopefully with all the feedback Apple receives, they will fix a lot of the issues we editors will find with FCP X.

    One question, I noticed that the space requirements are quite leaner compared to previous versions. Do they still provide a content library with the apps or does it just tap into the previous content library that was installed off the DVDs in the Final Cut Studio bundle of apps? They seem to suggest that they do provide a refreshed or new content library with Motion 5. My conclusion with at least Motion 5, is that they have converted most of the effects to vector-based graphics, hence the reduced space requirements.

  196. Larry Jun 26, 2011 04:51

    Apple provides two content libraries – one for FCP and the other for Motion. Both are about 1 GB in size.

    Both are available via Software Update after you install Final Cut Pro X.


  197. Kilroy Jun 26, 2011 04:56

    Does anyone think before speaking anymore these days….

    The FCP X dev. team has said for some time that X would not be ready for the switch from its release… That’s why you have the ability to use FCP 7 (They actually mention that the ability to use FCP 7 at the same time as FCP X was developed specifically for the purpose of easing things during the transition period, and would have otherwise been a feature left out).

    As always with Apple products the first release is more like a beta. Clever way to make money and test a product, as many people fail to catch on to this almost decade long trend…

    BTW wasn’t it like two weeks ago that Premier and Avid were the black plague compared to FCP 7? Where are all the complaints of Premiers poor programming, or failure to run on case-sensative drives (BTW many professional environments use case-sensative drives for a multitude of reasons, so I fail to see how switching to a software that will not even install on one’s drive trumps hit or miss software in those situations)? Where are all the complaints of Avid’s poor integration and support?

    As always those who produce drama for a living, seem unable to stop there. Listen to the emotion and the passion, but unfortunately you’ll find little logic or reason for the high stress and anger levels. The fact is Apple has been surprisingly transparent for a very long time that Final Cut Pro X would be released while still being developed. They told us all that FCP 7 would be usable at the same time long before the release, and that they were abandoning an easy upgrade for a new program that takes things in a new direction. For more than 6 moths it’s been know that FCP X is the 1.0 of a whole new beast and should be approached accordingly. They have also been very clear that updates will come in 6-8 month increments, once again to ease the transition period by decreasing the amount of time between updates that respond to the needs of the users.

    You all sound like a bunch of 12 year olds who don’t get what they want for Christmas, so they don’t appreciate what they have (Whats more ma and pa warned you not to get your hopes up either…). It’s been known that Apple’s new FCP X was going to hobble in some areas at the release, but does anyone talk about the amazing power the program is capable of due to its programing efficiency and its from the ground up real time development frameworks. The program, in as much as it is a computer program, is far superior to FCP 7, it’s just lacking some functionality.

    And thats what it really comes down to… Instead of listening to the surprisingly transparent information for Apple about what FCP X was going to be, everyone decided to instead make up their own unrealistic expectations of what FCP X would be.

    All the evidence you need is in the posts that precede mine. Full of anger, emotion, and disappointment they map some surprisingly unintelligent reactions from what I would hope are otherwise intelligent people. Reducing oneself to such irrational arguments only shows a weakness of oneself. I see virtually no large scoped negative reactions that maintain rational reasoning.

    Think not of what you lack, but rather focus on what you have.
    Try not to tear a thing down, spending energy on regression is unwise.
    Reject a tool and you reduce yourself, Apply a tool and you expand yourself.

    I know I , for one, will be doing all I can to learn everything about FCP X (The same way I spent time learning Avid and Premiere despite all the previous poo poos they received) so that I can produce the highest quality material with the best tools for the job, no matter which tool that may be.

    In this ever changing production/editing industry my knack for adaptation and my “always keep your options open” attitude has opened some really big doors for me. At the same time most of the people I left behind were the ones that would use any excuse they could to reject a new product. Something like, oh IDK no multicam support… All I’m saying is if 6 months from now Apple updates FCP X and its all of the sudden the best tool for you to use, will you know how to use it? I will, and so will everyone else on my design team, you can be Goddamn sure of that. And if that happens can you be sure it won’t be my firm or one like it, one familiar with the product at hand, that won’t start taking some of your jobs? I’ve found that knowing a product that many others are new on the scene to can be a great trump card in landing a job. And you can be Goddamn sure I’ll use that trump card if it takes your work and makes it mine.

    Whether for better or worse, FCP X is here, it’s a brand new beast, and it has serious potential of being a front running program in the industry for a decade or so. I’d suggest at least giving it a try.

  198. Kilroy Jun 26, 2011 05:08

    Just an after thought…

    At the programming level the new X-san2 and the continued growth of the use of case-sesative drives in certain environments may also provide glimpses into the dev. teams thoughts… Could it be close sandbox until X-san2 to prevent having to code for two conventions? If X-san2 provides even further advantages for the use of case-sensativity, and such environments become more prevalent, FCP X would almost certainly crush Adobe (Which cannot run or even be installed on case-sensative drives), and respectfully control Avid as far as the Mac market share would be concerned.

    Perhaps the team was concentrating on the core programming with such zest for political reasons as well. Maybe they are hoping to leverage core design advantages over the other suites in the long term. In a sense it would be the only way to truly do something the other guys can’t.

    IDK just a couple thoughts…

    I wish everyone the best, and be prepared for whatever hits the ground next.
    -Kilroy was here-

  199. Kilroy Jun 26, 2011 05:15

    Oh yeah, and as always thanks to Larry for ALWAYS thinking before he speaks (writes).

    Pretty out of control emotion in some of the posts, amazing composure on your part my friend.

    I think I speak for everyone rational when I say THANKS LARRY!
    -Kilroy was here-

  200. Alex Jun 26, 2011 13:33


    You didn’t answer any of my questions (and gave me the same line of defense you give to anybody that has a point), but that’s ok.

    I couldn’t make it to the LAFCPG meeting. And I know you cannot print that letter you got from Apple. But can you give us the general lines? thank you.

    What get people emotional is not the software. As I said before, everybody can get used to that. Plus, we’re all geeks. We learn softwares on the week-end for fun (I do). What’s getting people emotional is the fact that despite their years of expertise and trying to point out the weaknesses of a new product, they’re called whiny kids by people who clearly are not professionals and have no idea what they’re talking about. Larry mention David Pogue’s blog, well Pogues’s blog was downright, wrong, badly researched, misleading, and condescending. And after the avalanche of comments reminding him that he has no idea what he’s talking about, his line of defense was even more condescending.
    It’s like we’re being told shut up and just drink the Cool-Aid already!

    And I’m not being emotional about it, but pragmatic. The fact is that no one can work in the broadcast world as long as ANY. AND. ALL of the missing features are not being reinstated. And How long is that gonna take? You’re talking about transparency but Apple, aside from saying that they’ll release update every 6 to 8 month (to slow in regard to the lack of feature in FCPX), hasn’t given us some sort of timeline, or even just a statement that they’re aware of the problem. And as David mentioned, we now know that FCP7 project will never open in FCPX. If you’re a true Pro Kill, you probably keep using projects that you created 5, 6 years ago. So 5, 6 years from now you’ll still have to have that old FCP7 on your machine to open projects you created this year on FCP7? That is just unacceptable Killroy. Plain and simple.

    And then you say: “Focus on what you have.” Well what I have In FCPX doesn’t change the way I edit much. But what I am missing prevents me from doing my job. So there is really no reason to focus on FCPX much.

    And again, this is not a V.1. It would be if they had called the software Beta and kept FCP7 on the shelves.

    Dust will settle yes. But if FCPX is better tomorrow is because we are pointing its flows today.

  201. Alex Jun 26, 2011 13:51

    One more thing,

    Larry, we obviously disagree that FCPX is a good product that meets any kind of professional needs. But we do agree that Apple has blown it. You are caught in the middle of this, but only because you seem to be one of the few people Apple listen to. And we make noise on yours and David Pogue’s page so that they are aware that what they’re doing is far from being ok. And also because no one was speaking for us. All we kept hearing after FCPX release is that we were just a bunch of pathetic nay-sayers afraid of change, despite our expertise and for pointing out that we were being robbed of our tools while we could not work with this new tool.

    So I just want to say that I’m sorry you’re being caught in the middle. It’s a position that comes with your job but it sucks. And I do appreciate that you’re giving us a platform to be heard and that you’re relaying our voice to Apple. And I’ve never had to use your product, but I have no doubt that they are of great quality and I appreciate the fact that you’ve help many people switching to the great platform that was FCP.

    So, thank you Larry. For all that you’ve done, and all that you keep doing.

    Have a good. And I hope you’re coming week will be better than the previous one.


  202. Larry Jun 26, 2011 14:00


    it is posts like yours that make this discussion worth having. I never have a problem with people who disagree with me as politely as you do.


  203. Larry Jun 26, 2011 14:04


    The general outline of the letter is that FCP X is a work in progress and that Apple is already at work adding new features, such as multicam editing, that are highly requested by users.

    I did not read David Pogue’s original article, but for him to write such a mea culpa in the article I DID read indicates that he was pretty much off the mark.

    I don’t agree with you that ALL missing features need to be restored – however, I do agree with you that we need more than we have currently.

    As I have said before, FCP X is not ready for everyone – for many it does meet their needs, but for the professional market, in many cases, it does not.


  204. maxpromedia Jun 27, 2011 00:58

    I think everyone is missing the point. Software always evolves or it dies. FCP7 was dying. You might have loved FCP7 because it does this and that (most of it you could live without the “pro” features but you are an uber edit geek, and get lost in having full godlike control) but the code for FCP was strangling the ability to use a modern OS, modern processors, modern IOs.

    I learned on Toaster and a SONY BVE900 and then moved on to Avid Media Composer and was there when FCP 1.0 came out and it was running on scsi G3 (which I still have). I’ve seen editing systems evolve. Be thankful that we aren’t stuck with just one choice.

    So Apple decides to revamp the look and feel of their editing software to fit a philosophy of easier computing makes a better life. Geez did you guys all gripe when the iPhone came out , no you ran out and bought one. Why ? The iPhone has very little customization, no pro uber geek features, it is a tool to be used to make life easier. Why not trust Apple long enough to try out FCPX and see if it makes your editing life easier. Apple looked at the demographics at what the average editor needs and built a product with some new innovations.

    So you cant print to tape who cares? Tape is dead you just don’t know it. If you don’t believe me I have some M2 and 3/4 Umatic decks you need to buy off of me. Apple is pushing these changes, you cant please everyone. And in some cases why should they?

    No Multicam, yeah that kinda sucks, and maybe there will be an update to fix that. Maybe a new product, maybe it couldn’t be done in the code at this stage.

    So you cant import previous FCP7 projects into FCPX. I guess you want to put a 99 engine in your 2011 Prius . Ever think that it is just a bad idea to mix the old with the new. If you think you need that then go back to Microsoft they cater to everything old to make everyone happy.

    Ideally they need a FCP7 update to export to FCPX, but more than likely that is like asking too much of FCPX to have to deal with the limitations of FCP7 code wise.

    Something to consider. all you old salty dogs, you live in the past you stay in the past. Time to stop whining and start looking into the future of media processing, pre, mid and post production workflows. Maybe you might see what Apple is looking at and how we all need to get there.

  205. Snow R. Shai Jun 27, 2011 12:10

    Thanks for a great post.
    In my opinion, Apple should keep support for FCP7 in updates and sell unsold software suites.
    I believe that is the only wrong thing about this.
    Post Houses should take serious time with upgrading any software anyway, and until they take a breath, most of their problems will be solved. I agree that most of the missing functions will come back soon.

    I recently had to explain to a student what an EDL is.
    I have been using XMLs for quite a while, and hardly any EDLs anymore.
    I opened an EDL in a text file, to explain how is works.
    I was amazed that this crude way of communication is still so spread today.
    There has always been a price for progress. The panic is overwhelming, sometimes, unfortunately, entertaining.
    I’ll keep using FCP7 for a while, of course. No problem.
    Once the new Apple XML code is out, Audio zones and we get ext. monitoring, all very soon, some people might understand, how hasty their reactions were.

  206. Terry S. Jun 27, 2011 17:27

    “Define Professional”

    The many editors, videographers, cinematographers, motionographers (motion graphics designers and artists), and visual effects artists who work in the entertainment industry are not the only professionals in the world. That group only makes up a small percentage of the Media Professionals in our world. So many more who use Final Cut Pro, Premiere, and AVID in the commercial, educational, and local broadcast sectors on a daily basis for their livelihood, are also PROFESSIONALS.

    I have been discussing this with Philip Hodgetts over the past few weeks leading up to Apple’s release of Final Cut Pro X, and I have to agree with his point.

    Quote: “It largely comes down to what is a professional editor. If you limit it to that niche that are doing movies and broadcast/cable TV then those people are probably not the target for Apple. However the other million plus professional editors working in lesser TV/cable, education, corporate and event videography will be well served by FCP X.”

    That was most of us in the room that night at Bally’s for the FCPUG Supermeet Sneak Peek of FCP X. That was where most of the cheers and screams of excitement were coming from. All of that was what Apple’s Final Cut Pro development team members heard aloud, confirming what they created in Final Cut Pro X was going to help the majority of the world’s Video Professionals – NOT HOLLYWOOD, NOT STUDIO CITY, NOT BURBANK (and any other entertainment sector of Southern California that I missed – lol). Apple made it very clear at the Supermeet that the foremost important client from the film sector was the Independent Film Maker, and most IFMs do not work in Hollywood. I have plenty of colleagues and friends (like you Larry) that do work in Hollywood and these comments are not in anyway to put them down, but to address that Apple will not cater to their needs, nor should they believe that they are the only professionals out there.

    Check out this blog posting of Philip Hodgetts, it just gets right to it, plain and simple.
    “What the heck is a “pro” anyway?”

    Take Care. Always a pleasure to read and hear your thoughts Larry.

  207. Andrew Jun 28, 2011 09:40

    Hi Larry,

    many thanks for all your work, l have bought FCP X Motion 5 and Compressor 4 plus your tutorial, which is just fine.

    BUT a big but, apart from all the missing things from FCP X that have been mentioned, l find the playback of video on my 27″ Mac cinema display is soft, my screen ain’t soft.

    THa exact same clip plays in FCP7 as crisp as crisp can be, same clip into Premier Pro, crisp again, but play it back in FCPX when the play head is static the picture is crisp, when play back starts the picture goes soft. Am l missing something!! is there a control to control the output picture quality. If it is as it is then this is not acceptable in any shape or form.

    Please let me know if l have missed the obvious.


  208. Andrew Jun 28, 2011 10:05

    Up date.

    Yes found the play back quality in preferences, so OK now.

    A BIG plus point for FCPX is that the colour l see on my cinema display monitor is the same as the exported video signal from FCP and PPr to my external broadcast monitor a first :-) as normally the video picture in the cinema playback window is not quite the same as on my external monitor.

    This is important.

    Working through your training.


  209. Hugh Chatfield Jun 29, 2011 14:36

    > * For the first time, two different versions of FCP can coexist on the same system. I’ve been running FCP 7 and FCP X on the same system for months.

    I was running FCP 6 – and tried to update it – and wound up with a separate FCP 7 installed. Now idea how or why. I seem to be able to run either with no apparently problems so far.

    > Yes, FCP X imports iMovie projects and media. No, it doesn’t import FCP 7 projects. Yes, Apple should figure out a way to provide an FCP 7 translator. It can’t be that hard.

    Not being able to import FCP 7 projects seems to be a major hiccup. Will FCP X allow import of FCP7 XML – and will it export XML like previous versions – perhaps with an updated DTD??

  210. Simon morton Jul 01, 2011 10:09

    Hi Larry, totally agree with your comments. Everyone should just take a few breaths and wait a little.

    Anyway, have some great GREAT news from FCP 7 pros, thought I should share it, as it will cheer everyone up I think!

    I have made a short video about it;

    Kind regards,

    Simon Morton, Orange Eye ltd

  211. Mike Janowski Jul 01, 2011 10:44

    I clicked on the link to Apple’s “response” (a/k/a, more marketing crap).

    I’d feel a whole lot better if they’d STOP saying they’ve “revolutionized” video editing. They haven’t…how can you revolutionize anything by making it incapable of doing things pro editors need to do? This is Orwellian double-speak of the first degree!

    As someone who routinely drags, drops and moves the clips in the timeline around with abandon, I’m having a hard time figuring out what’s so amazing about a “magnetic timeline”. Now maybe if they made the damn render files magnetic so they didn’t get lost from time to time, that’d qualify as revolutionary. But instead, they’re brilliant idea is to put the render files with the project file, instead of on the media drives where they belong. Gee, I can’t wait to see my system hard drive get clogged up with old render files (as nowhere have I read that they have incorporated a “smart” render system which trashed old, unused render files ala Media Composer).

    I’m glad to read they’re concentrating on metadata, and I’ve got no problem with converting everything to ProRes…but if I was a third-party developer I’d be damned if I’d develop anything for this no-frills, no features program, just to have the Theives from Cupertino come in and swipe my ideas in release dot-1…

    Finally, I’ve read (in David Pogue’s ramblings, and elsewhere in comments) that some are attributing the disdain for “X” as a resistance to the learning curve. This is complete BS…every day is a learning curve for the video pro. What many are resenting is that this program presents a learning curve with no payoff…once you figure out how to work the damn thing, and where Randy Ubilos and Co. have hidden all the stuff you usually use, you find out that all your work is for naught, that it doesn’t do half of the stuff you need it to do in your facility…and at least at this moment, Randy, Steve and the so-called “Wizards” don’t really give a damn.

  212. Ronald Henry Jul 07, 2011 14:08

    So I get that not everything from FCP-7 comes with FCP-X, including a program I have come to love – Color. Does FCP-X include a color correction mode as part of the program, or are we left to seek elsewhere?

  213. Larry Jul 07, 2011 14:33

    Yes, color correction is a built-in effect, including vignettes, with FCP X.


  214. Neil Aug 04, 2011 08:57

    Let me say this IT is the way forward BUT the sound issue rely need,s fixing soon and the display graphic while it looks very trendy feels to me as if I where a brain surgeon trying to operate using the stump’s of my arm’s and not my finger’s that said I do hope apple are listening a fix thing’s quickley and I’ll keep training my self to adapt as it is the future.