Well, the last two weeks certainly have been tumultuous. But this weekend is a good time to take stock and figure out where we go from here.
Over the years I’ve learned that Apple does not follow the market, it tries to lead the market. And, with megahits like the iMac, iPod, iPhone, and iPad, it is impossible to ignore their success.
However, it isn’t always successful, which is why we find ourselves in the position we are in now. And, keep in mind that it is US, not Apple, that are in a difficult position. Apple’s DNA (and vast bank account) insulates them from clamor and controversy in the marketplace.
Yesterday, as I was thinking about this blog, I sent an email to my contacts at Apple asking if they would either announce a timetable of when we could see the next “major release” of Final Cut Pro X, or whether Apple was considering re-releasing Final Cut Studio (3) to the market.
Apple did not respond to my email; which I’ve also learned is an answer in itself.
So, the decision is not up to Apple, they have already told us what they are going to do. The decision is up to us – how will we respond?
THE MARKET
Apple has opened up a huge new market to video editing – I call it the “middle market” – people that need more than iMovie, but don’t need the vast capabilities of Final Cut Studio (3).
This is a good thing, I think, because ultimately it will give many of us work as these users push up against the barriers of FCP X and need to accomplish tasks that can’t currently be met with FCP X.
I remember the desktop publishing wars of the 1980’s. Graphics designers did not go away when our computers starting displaying fonts and images. What happened was that the graphics design tools got better and designers with creativity and skill got more work.
The situation is the same today. Creativity and story-telling are still in demand, but the audience and tools continue to evolve.
OUR CHOICE
As I see it, we all have three choices:
1. Convert to Final Cut Pro X
2. Do nothing, at least for a while
3. Switch to a different editing program
CONVERTING
For single editor shops that work exclusively with tapeless formats and principally output to files, Final Cut Pro X is very attractive.
I am getting many emails each day from people that are working with it and are pleased with their results.
For non-mission-critical projects, the current version of FCP X may meet your needs.
ABSTAINING
As I’ve written for years, however, even if Apple released an all-singing, all-dancing, rock-star of a program, I would still counsel waiting until a dot One release.
This is especially true for large shops, edit houses with massive amounts of existing material that they need to repurpose, or editors working on deadlines that cannot be missed.
Apple’s emphasis on secrecy during development in order to maximize surprise at launch means that the initial release of a product is almost never stable enough for serious use.
As examples, FCP 4.0 didn’t stabilize until version 4.0.2, FCP 5 took until version 5.0.4 and, some would argue, 5.1.4 to become solid. FCP 6 took until version 6.0.2 (with four more versions after that), and FCP 7 is currently sitting at version 7.0.3. (And the sordid history of QuickTime releases and bug fixes is best left for a mature audience…)
As I’ve written many times in the past, waiting before upgrading is never a mistake. I tend to wait a few months before upgrading my production gear. However, at the same time, I will upgrade my testing gear to the latest version – and start to learn it – as soon as it is released.
There is no harm in waiting until FCP X starts to stabilize.
SWITCHING
The wild card in this whole equation is the cancellation of Final Cut Studio (3). Our decisions would be a lot easier if Apple had not forced our hand.
First, I am deeply saddened that Apple’s vaunted engineering prowess is unable to code a conversion utility from FCP 7 to FCP X. However, they say they can’t, so I believe them. (And, even if they can, they won’t; which works out to the same thing.)
This means that if you have a large number of FCP 7 projects that you have even a remote possibility of needing in the future, you would be foolish NOT to purchase a product that can read them.
Whether you go with Avid Media Composer and Automatic Duck, or Adobe Production Premium, you, your company, your media and your projects have a far greater priority than the political and emotional issues of supporting, or not supporting, the latest release of Final Cut Pro.
Protect yourself first.
Pick the software you are most comfortable working with. Hire an assistant editor to have them do tests to see how well your projects transfer from FCP 7 into it.
Both Avid and Adobe are running “Switcher” campaigns — which doesn’t surprise me. If I were doing their marketing I would do exactly the same thing. Take advantage of this special pricing – protect your assets.
Apple says FCP 7 will run on Lion. However, it would be foolish to expect it to run on every operating system in the future. At some point, you will need to convert your assets. The best time to do so is now while all your projects, media, and the software you are using is current.
Whether you want to convert your whole operation to a new platform depends upon many different factors; cost not the least of them.
But the first rule of business is to stay in business. Protect yourself. Make sure you can get access to your assets in the future.
LARRY’S RECOMMENDATION
For new Final Cut users, purchase FCP X and enjoy it. It has many good things to recommend it.
For existing Final Cut 7 users, it is too early to know what FCP X is really going to be. But it is also way too risky to bet the ranch on it.
Download FCP X and learn it, but be very cautious putting it into serious production.
I recommend you create a system for converting your FCP 7 assets to either Avid or Adobe.
Then, wait and see what Apple does with the next release of FCP X. For me, the next release, not the current one, will set the direction for the future.
But protect yourself now.
CONCLUSION
This event gives all of us a chance to stop and reflect on who we are and what we do.
The core of what I do, personally, is to train, teach, and inform. I do this across a wide variety of products and using a wide variety of media. My core value does not change with this update.
What changes are the subjects that I teach. And, as we all know, technology is a constantly evolving mix of old and new products.
Think about what YOU do – are you a Final Cut editor, OR are you an editor that uses Final Cut? Are you defined by the technology you use or the stories that you tell?
As you are deciding whether to convert, abstain, or switch, spend a few minutes thinking about who you are, what you do, and how you want to earn a living.
In the past, religious wars were fought over Apple vs. Avid. The new war is FCP 7 vs. FCP X. Like all wars, these battles create a flurry of impressive fireworks, but leave a bloody trail of destruction in their wake. And very rarely do they settle anything. Old tensions still simmer.
So, let’s slow down and take stock. Apple has given us an opportunity to make a choice. They aren’t going to change their direction, so we need to decide if we are comfortable where they are taking us.
And that choice is different for each one of us.
Let me know what you think.
Larry
I think, frankly, that Apple has screwed to the bottom.
if your bet, it seems perfect, but I think they will lose many customers, many ..
what they say they can not make a converter to fcpx fcp7 projects seems too big a lie because there is a market we know and costs $ 500, so that others with the story …
I think that I should have done a fcp8 and not this bad joke is fcpx …
Montner for those weddings, holidays, etc. can fcpx be perfect, but for someone who works in TV or cinema advertising is a real mess.
I’m trying out Adobe Premiere and Avid MC5, if the apple does not budge and continues with this joke, I left the Apple platform, as they have abandoned me to my ..
From Seville, Spain
Larry,
Thanks for posting your insights. I’m an Avid editor, and have been since the early 90’s. I’ve used MC to edit hundreds of hours of primetime network TV shows and won 2 Emmy awards for my work.
I use FCP 7 for editing my home videos, if for no other reason than to know how to use the software. I’ve been mostly pleased with it. Enough so, that I took a break from my editing career last year to teach FCP 7 and the Art of Editing at a film school overseas.
I’m perplexed at Apple’s new FC release (I’m loathe to call it “pro” because it’s anything but). Apple has not made a mistake. They have made a statement that they’re going after the middle “prosumer” market. Our pro market is just too niche and not particularly profitable for a company that’s defining many mass consumer market segments. I get it. But I feel for those editors who have embraced legacy FCP and spent their fortunes building businesses and careers around the software. They’re in trouble, and I feel their pain. The FC X release doesn’t affect me personally, but it does affect our profession in a negative way.
You assume that legacy FCP editors should be default migrate to the new version of Apple’s totally new software which should never have used the name of its predecessor. It’s a fallacy that migration is a must. I highly recommend that editors take a close look at the competition, especially with the attractive current “switcher” prices. I’m surprised that many editors who haven’t used Avid are afraid of it. They assume it’s overly complicated or somehow “elitist” and only for Hollywood feature films and TV. Not so! MC is a wonderful, stable editing application, and Avid has maintained compatibility throughout successive releases. For script-based projects, I’d be lost without Avid’s script-based editing feature and so would most editors in Hollywood who edit scripted TV shows and some feature films. That’s an essential tool that FCP doesn’t offer.
Now about education. Should schools who have heavily invested in FCP continue to teach FCP 7, a dead end product students will not use in their careers because it will be obsolete? They certainly should not teach FCX in spite of it’s cheap price. It’s not ready and may never be ready for professional use. Should they switch to Premiere or Media Composer? NYU Tisch has said no to FCX. If you were an educational institution and need to teach your students the software they’re likely to use in their careers, what would you do?
Thanks again Larry. I plan to buy your FCX tutorials so I can get a handle on it. I need to edit my summer vacation video, and FCX “might” be acceptable for that.
Regards,
Kris Trexler
Los Angeles
This article had more characters than the FCPX press release.
Maybe we just move on and let Apple fix their mistakes instead of talking about it over and over and over… I’m shocked/impressed/saddened the discussion has gone on this long.
Apple removed important features for people in professional workflows. They released the product too early. They will realize they made a mistake and update it, or someone will provide 3rd party plugins to fill the gaps.
There’s not too much more to say on the matter.
Let’s talk about the craft of editing. Anyone like the Craft of Editing?
“Yesterday, as I was thinking about this blog, I sent an email to my contacts at Apple asking if they would either announce a timetable of when we could see the next “major release” of Final Cut Pro X, or whether Apple was considering re-releasing Final Cut Studio (3) to the market.
Apple did not respond to my email; which I’ve also learned is an answer in itself.”
Larry,
That does not mean they give no importance and no one, are self-centered and arrogant. They are today what they fought in 1984 against IBM.
From now on, no longer nominate or recommend any Apple product, not friends, not partners.
Can I survive without it.
August, I’m surprised that you have so much confidence in a company that disappoint so many in such a dishonest and unloyal way. I’m a loyal Apple customer and I feel betrayed. They might fix it, they might not… but they will never fix my thrust in them as a company that takes customers and companies seriously. As a business, you want to know where a product is heading… we were all blind sheep who followed the mighty leader who told us in a typical one sentenced e-mail that the new FCP is going to be ‘awesome’. It was awesome, in the most negative type of way.
I don’t say it is a bad product… but it should’ve been iMovie Pro or Final Cut Express. It wasn’t, which makes one point clear: Apple doesn’t understand or doesn’t want to understand the core FCP customer. I don’t blame them for going after the prosumer or consumer. But just tell us. They are still not being honest and clear about where they’re going with Final Cut Pro. So for me, end of story. I’m done with them.
And if you just analyze the data:
- No more color
- No more shake
- No more soundtrack
- No more Final Cut Server
I would be very, very afraid if I were a Logic Pro user.
I decided to switch to Adobe Production Premium. I was already using parts of it (Encore, Media Encoder and Photoshop), and am very happy with it. Not as good as Final Cut Pro yet, but with the influx of Final Cut Pro customers and Adobe’s focus to become the #1 in the video editing market (which they never succeeded in), I see it it working this time.
Most importantly, Avid and Adobe are talking to and with us and Apple is not. So Steve Jobs can go talk with himself and his billions in his bank account. Every general has his Waterloo… Steve will also!
Apple has become a blind / dumb and as such have to be very careful when crossing the street.
Great comments from Kris, thanks.
Any “Pro” editor (for me this is Broadcast) would have “seen this coming” a long time ago..Would you trust the architect of iMovie with your future?
As Kris says for the USA, most Broadcast Pro-s I know here in the UK use AVID anyway as they have had the workflows etc nailed a long time ago. Also as Kris says AVID is great to use and Kris encapsulates it all very well.
Also Apple (via their Final Cut 10/iMovie architect) have signalled their ambitions by “cutting the line” between Final Cut Pro 7 and Final Cut 10 (notice the missing Pro).
But Larry knows of my biggest beef, missing Chapter Markers and my reasoning goes far deeper than “just missing Chapter Markers” which I have fully explained to Larry via email.
BUT on a brighter note and from some feedback we are getting on our forum and some people I know who have downloaded it ..
THEY JUST LOVE IT.
So here we have a new and evolving situation of a portion of the industry who are perplexed/angry and a whole gamut of other emotions. Then a whole new breed of film maker/story teller (dare I say up and coming) who have “discovered” a wonderful new tool which will be a great “enabler” for them on a personal and creative level.
I view this as a mixed bag but one you can actually draw quite a few positives from if you step back, take a deep breath and ponder the issues.
For the Pro-s there are alternatives and very good ones too, too much emotional energy is being wasted by people who should just move on and keep on progressing forwards for their own sakes.
And another thing. I’m based in Australia and have up until now accepted that buying Apple software or hardware locally from an Apple Store or dealer in Australia is going to be more expensive than in the US due to delivery costs.
FCP X however is only available as a download, there are no delivery costs. Plus the Australian dollar is now valued higher than the US dollar, so why must I pay Aus$349 for FCP X when in the US it is US$299 (I should be paying about Aus$282).
If I order an item from the USA on eBay I pay the same amount as the US customer plus delivery costs. (The same as when I order one of your download tutorials Larry, you don’t charge me more because I’m not American).
Isn’t this some form of racism on Apple’s part?
Racism? No. I am convinced of that.
Geographic weirdness? Certainly.
Larry
One thing I should make clear to many editors who are afraid of Avid. Somehow, due to Avid’s dominance of feature film and TV editing in Hollywood, many editors have the impression that Avid is incredibly complex and somehow “elitist.” That could not be further from the truth! Anyone who’s slick on FCP 7 and earlier can learn Avid in a short time. I know this because I taught 2nd year students at a film school on FCP 7. As an elective in the 3rd year, we taught then Media Composer. Many were interested in trying MC because of my personal success with it in my career. At first they were intimidated. But it wasn’t long until they learned to love it!
Avid has (or had) and educational price of $400 with several years of free updates! You can’t get those free updates with the full version, so the educational version (exactly the same software) is quite desirable.
I encourage potential new Avid users to check out this site…”Avid for Final Cut Pro Users.” http://learn.avid.com/content/FCP/index.html
I’ve started to edit my vacation video with FCX (notice I omit the “P” which has no place in the name of this software). I think I’m going to have a fun vacation video. And it will be easy to upload it to YouTube. This perfect use for FCX. Would it have a place in the edit suite of my network TV series? Not a chance. Would I teach FCX to students who want to peruse careers as filmmakers? Not a chance…at least not at this time.
Regards,
Kris Trexler
PS…sorry for a few typos in the above. I’m not all that slick on typing with my iPhone.
Regards,
Kris Trexler
Phil,
You can hardly blame Apple for that.
They are a globa tradingl company influenced by how the banking system dictates terms and conditions. Do not forget their trading position may be influenced by the futures market and not necessarily the current US dollar vs. Australian dollar currency rate at that particular time.
You can hardly compare a multi billion dollar company to Larry Jordan and Associates who are just trying to make an honest living in a much comparatively small and reasonable way.
The same happens here for transacations in Europe where the Eurozone which may be potentially collapsing due to Greece, thus affecting both Germany and France who “prop up’ the Eurozone which in turn affects us in the UK who are members of the EEC. It is called the “knock on” effect and the innocent pay the price!!
The global economy is subject to the dubious economic practices of banks who of course pay their CEOs and other executives disproportionate salaries and bonuses which may not reflect their skill levels or competence.
Kris,
You can type on whatever you like with typographical errors included.
It is YOUR content that counts.
I really enjoy reading your comments.
Thank you!!!
Hi Larry. Thanks for a really well thought out post.
Personally, I think I’m moving to Avid. I’m not sure that I can wait on a vague and poorly communicated release timetable for my business future.
There will be pain in the transition, but I feel it’s best to get it sorted now and move on.
It seems odd that in targeting the enthusiast market, Apple is pitching X at $299. To me this seems overpriced. Maybe it will drop like a stone when they realise they are not making the volume of sales they expected.
Best wishes.
Hi Larry,
I don’t envy the position you are in but you’ve handled the current situation with the professionalism and honesty that we’ve come to expect from you. I’ve received your monthly newsletters, read you blog entries, bought your books and have always felt like I was learning something each time. I will take your advice to heart and protect myself, learn as much as I can in the future about Final Cut X and strongly consider switching to Premiere, and Media Composer.
(At work we currently have at least a dozen of projects started on good ol’ 7 so we’ll be hanging on to nursing that for a while and most likely set up a separate bay for X and beat it like a rag doll. If it turns out to be a dud, at least the machine’s still good.)
I’m more familiar with and always find myself using the various Adobe products in conjunction with the projects so they are receiving my initial nod. As long as I can satisfy the clients and feel confident in getting continued support and improvements from the Adobe folk, I will be content once the transition phase is complete if I decide to go in that direction. The writing is on the wall and it is futile to keep banging our heads on it because we feel abandoned about FCP Studio.
Many of us started with Final Cut Pro (It wasn’t even officially called 1 anywhere in the manual). I still have the programs and manuals from FCP 1-4 archived. Below is the opening paragraph and also the system requirements from the very first manual published in 1999 by Apple Computer, Inc. simply titled, “Final Cut Pro User’s Manual.” We’ve come a long way and we’ll certainly successfully ride the next wave out as well.
“Chapter 1
Getting Started
‘Welcome to Apple Final Cut Pro, the all-in-one solution for professional digital video editing,
compositing, and special effects. Final Cut Pro has been designed to work with professional
broadcast equipment in post-production environments. In addition, the program has been
thoughtfully designed to take advantage of leading-edge digital technologies, enabling you to
be creative as well as productive. Final Cut Pro supports Digital Video (DV) as well as all
QuickTime formats, including MJPEG and streaming video. Final Cut Pro includes powerful
production management capabilities in an intuitive interface. There are also powerful, builtin
effects generators as well as support for Adobe™
After Effects third-party plug-in filters.
With Final Cut Pro you can produce broadcast-quality productions in a flexible, easy-to-use
environment.”
“System Requirements
- A Power Macintosh G3/266 computer or faster (G3/300 or faster required for DV), or a
PowerBook G3/300 or faster
- Mac OS 8.6 or later
- 128 MB of RAM
- A CD-ROM drive
- A 6 GB, A/V (Audio/Video rated) drive (16 GB recommended)
- A true-color display
- ATI built-in video support on G3 models (required for DV)
- An Apple FireWire or other QuickTime-compatible digital video card for capturing video
from an external source or exporting video to tape
- The correct FireWire or device control cable and any additional cables you may need for
connecting your deck or camcorder to your computer”
P.S. Also hoping to take advantage of your X Seminar on the 12th if possible.
I have been editing for 20 years. I started with Avid Version 5 on the Mac when PCs could not handle video or graphics. Mac was King. Then Avid sent a letter they would not support the Mac based systems anymore. Our small post house (2 Avids, 2 Online bays) was in danger of having their non-linear department become obsolete an loose their investment. That year, Apple, who’s major seller of Macs was Avid, saw their business in jeopardy. At NAB they came out with a solution, Final Cut Pro. I remember people started following Apple guys down the floor of the convention floor who had editing systems on laptops. “ Are you editing on a laptop?”…“ yes sir we are and so can you”.
Apple, out of survival, invested in the future of their hardware.
Today, as a “forced” freelancer, have been using both Avids and FCP7 pretty much equally. Avid never stopped being the most reliable editing software out there. FCP has become very reliable and professional too.
With the “SWITCH” campaigns from Adobe and Avid, thankfully, both companies are seising the moment. And I am sooooo glad they do. I was fortunate to buy FC Studio 3 at the nick of time before they pulled it off the shelves. Now, and I have to thank Apple and the marketing wizards at Adobe and Avid, I will be able to own all 3 applications for about the same price of just the Avid MC 5.5. Not bad!
I wonder if Autodesk will follow suit with a Smoke version for $999.99.
Happy Editing! Again, thanks Larry for your insights.
David
Maybe you guys should have read the Steve Jobs “smoke and mirrors” tactics over a year ago.
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/10/06/02/jobs_apple_tv_a_hobby_because_theres_no_market.html
I remember watching this at the time and thinking “Oh yes there is a game plan going on here”
Great remark– Apple TV “a hobby” wish the funds flowed in to my bank account.
Steve Jobs has merely added Final Cut 10 in to the overall Apple ‘eco” system plan whereby you will get locked in with all their tools/hardware/appliances then of course the iCloud which I am convinced he will turn in to a charging model some time in the future. It is really easy to see Steve’s utter disdain and contempt for “TV” in it’s present form if you watch the video. As a guess he will aim to gain control over visual content, lock it in like iTunes. Then make bucket loads of money in the process charging out for it via his iCloud system. Do you really think he spent over a billion dollars down in North Carolina for the fun of it??
Let’s not forget that a few years ago Adobe dropped Premiere on the Mac with little explanation or concern, and that Avid was thinking of ditching Mac support too.
http://www.independent-magazine.org/node/416
This might have little relevance to the whole FCPX debate but none of these companies are angels who unconditionally put the interests of their customers first.
Larry, I must also admit that I like a lot of things of the new FCPX and it’s interface. For one, I do like the skimmer and I do like the filmstrip view, as it gives a very good impression of what you have in your footage without the need to playback. Apple nailed this one for me.
The problem is I’m not sure wether I can thrust Apple to fix all the flaws. I’m 100% sure they won’t put all the Final Cut Pro features back, they shouldn’t, but I hope some of the major features will be back soon. I.e. XML import/export, send clip to motion, a 64-bit compressor with the same UI as Motion and FCPX, variable interval speed changes etc.
For now, I just stick with Final Cut Pro X for home projects and Adobe for professional work. I also would like to try out Avid, but I don’t like the prehistoric look and feel of their current software. I have the feeling that Media Composer 6 will be a major upgrade, 64-bit, and I hope they will announce it at IBC in September, which I’m attending.
Larry, I have heard from numerous beta testers and from some of those who were in the first presentation back in February. Like yourself, they all told me they submitted pages and pages of notes of things that would have to change in order for the product to be used in a professional video editing workflow. That is a workflow designed for collaboration between two to 100+ editors. A workflow where any one of 100 editors working in a facility could simply step in for someone who would be out of the office or just looking for some added creative spark from a colleague. A workflow that supported numerous freelancers sharing projects back and forth with the main company. A workflow that supported a workflow from tape to disc to edit and back to tape or disc or file format. A workflow that supported the industry standard tools such as reference monitors, project sharing with sound mixing and color correction programs.
To a person, they all told me “Apple didn’t listen.” Most told me they were hard pressed to find even one suggestion that had made it to the final public release of Final Cut Pro 10. So how many dozens, maybe hundreds of pages of notes were exchanged with Apple during the beta program that were simply ignored? Makes me wonder what the beta program was even for except to somehow get these production houses behind Apple’s concept of a new world in video editing. If that was truly their goal, they were sorely mistaken.
From what I can see Apple completely abandoned the discipline of editing for the “let’s make it super easy so they don’t have to think” style of editing. While this is an incredibly creative field, there is a discipline that separates a professional editor from everyone one else. From what I can see the basic mechanics used in organizing a project, managing your timeline(s) have been removed. I supposed it’s because Apple’s not big on mechanics, witness the ‘iCloud it just happens’ line and the move in Lion to make organization more of something that “just happens” so people don’t have to organize their materials.
So what we’re going to end up with is a generation of very creative people with very bad habits. Since they are not forced to manage their projects and assets, it just happens, it could create issues when trying to collaborate with other artists. In fact it could create issues if they want to get a job in a facility or a broadcast facility. Basic discipline and project management is key to working in a collaborative environment, even moreso than the creative skills.
It’s clear Apple had a vision and expected most to fall in line with the new product since it was so revolutionary and forward thinking. It’s clear to me that’s what the beta program was intended to do all along, not to solicit outside input. Apple will undoubtedly gain overall market share in terms of units sold, but from where I’m sitting, the emails / phone calls I’m getting, they are in a position to lose educational (colleges / universities) and post houses / broadcasters to both Adobe and Avid. I’ve yet to speak to a single editor / facility that we work with that will go along with FCP 10.
What Larry has suggested above all is that if you are using FCP 7 and are utilizing features and tools that are not found in FCP X then, of course, obviously, pick another system that will allow conversion of your FCP 7 projects.
And start this process soon.
I think what disturbs people about Avid is that it pushes other control boxes to fully harness its power. Controllers that cost more money. But it leaves you open to thinking, hmmmm, I am missing some ease by just using a keyboard and mouse to work with Avid.
Avid is still pushing a hybrid. The model started with completely proprietary controllers and Avid box technology and software that would not simply install on a Windows or linux box–before Apple was truly a hardware contender. Then Avid saw the necessity to offer Avid Lite installable on PC’s.
I know that custom edit controllers can also be configured for FCP 7 and Adobe Creative Suite 5.5 Production Premium but it is Avid that urges people to move beyond keyboard access from a personal computer installation.
But, since you know that Apple deliberately moved away from its own invention, the .fcp file to contain an entire project, then if you have a vast or substantial library you had better use this time to convert them!
But, Avid and Adobe are plainly committed to professional video production until we are using MediaHolography 2027.
FCP X is a good tool for beginning and intermediate editors and people will easily produce very entertaining projects and even movies because it is technically feasible if you find workarounds. Maybe people will even set up FCP X productions studios because they plan on configuring one “virtual local machine” that everyone has access to because they have Thunderbolt * Light Peak connections.
If all of their media is going to the internet then FCP X will more than suffice and they will have fun. Maybe a third party app will hook in and expand the Events transitions and the controls on such transitions. Once the third-party geniuses show up they will expand FCP X beyond its current limitations, unless Apple wants to thwart this for some silly reason.
I, meanwhile, am going to Adobe. They look like fun, have 64 bit gpl processing, and seem committed to the Professional market for a least a few more years.
“Yesterday, as I was thinking about this blog, I sent an email to my contacts at Apple asking if they would either announce a timetable of when we could see the next “major release” of Final Cut Pro X, or whether Apple was considering re-releasing Final Cut Studio (3) to the market.
Apple did not respond to my email; which I’ve also learned is an answer in itself.”
The fact that they did not respond, is sad indeed! At the very least a “no comment” should be expected.
I am not a pro editor, but from what I have read, the main issues for the pros are:
1) FCP7 capabilities currently missing in FCPX
2) XML sharing of the FCPX content/workflow with other products during the editing process
3) EOLing of FCP7/FCS
4) Inability to import FCP7 projects into FCPX — if only on a “best effort” basis.
The last two are related.
IMO, Apple are creating an issue, for the pros, where none need exist.
The issue is, simply stated: THE PRO CANNOT BUY AN APPLE PRODUCT TODAY THAT WILL ALLOW HIM TO WORK ON HIS CURRENT FCP PROJECTS OR ACCES HIS LEGACY FCP PROJECTS.
(sorry for the all-caps)
The savvy pro needs to start looking at alternatives from other vendors if Apple won’t satisfy his requirements.!
If Apple were to announce support for a “best effort” import of FCP7 projects into FCPX, it would, largely, mitigate the issue, IMO.
This would give the pro assurance, and FCPX time to grow and evolve. And when the import becomes available it will be easier for the pro to experiment with FCPX — “let’s see how I can handle this (FCP7) project/workflow in FCPX”.
On the other hand, regardless of how many FCP7 features (multicam, etc.) Apple adds to FCPX…
If Apple’s doesn’t allow the pro to bring forward his legacy FCP7 projects into FCPX — the pro has no choice but to find a vendor/product who does.
AS A MEETS MIN FEATURE — FCPX MUST IMPORT FCP7 PROJECTS!
(sorry, again for the all-caps)
P.S. I have been using FCS for 3 years (personal) and like FCPX, a lot!
Larry, so much of my uncertainty of what to do next stems from not knowing whether my FCP7 projects will ever get to FCPX. My business model is that I revise and update my films between production runs and there is no end in sight so I need to continue to access them indefinitely.
Do I invest the time and dollars into transitioning to Avid or Adobe and forget about FCPX only to have someone come out with a conversion utility 6 or 12 months from now??
I’d like to get into FCPX and transition to it as it gets all of it’s missing features but if I’m going to have to run 2 systems forever then this is not exactly an efficient approach.
So I’m in a perpetual holding pattern.
What frustrates me the most is the idea getting around that because they couldn’t build a 100% transfer utility they choose to build none. If I could just get the video and audio clips onto the timeline in the right place then I’d rebuild from there. Frankly I’d be happy to ditch filters, text and any other FCP7 legacy stuff to be able to use potentially more efficient versions in FCPX.
I REALLY hope that someone is working on building the bridge – it’s a million dollar opportunity there for the taking.
Fortunately there is nothing in Lion that I’ve seen that makes me think I need to upgrade my FCP7 workstation so I’ll leave the status quo for a few months.
For what it’s worth I’ve been banging the Apple drum for 20 years and no matter how this all pans out now, that banging has stopped for good.
Larry, I saw this
PowerUP: Discover Final Cut Pro X!
Larry Jordan Final Cut Pro X Training in Burbank, CA
So, you will be in Burbank on July 12 and ADOBE SYSTEMS (Adobe Creative Suite 5.5 Production Premium) will be ONE of the Stage sponsors!
So, how does that work? I am curious as to how they participate in your Final Cut Pro X Training experience.
Sponsorship means they get to show up with promotional material at the very least.
The saddest thing is that if Apple had simply NOT discontinued FCP7, we would be debating the merits of FCX but no one would be too worried about the future. By cutting off the installed base at the knees, Apple has created a very serious fork in the road (whose alternatives your post aptly describes).
Hi Larry,
I think you should add Media 100 (www.media100.com) to the list of options here. It is a great editing platform, extremely solid and it supports FCP XML import and export with the associated media files. It also works on Aja Kona, Blackmagic and Matrox MXO2 hardware, and it has great Multicam editing as well as support for native RED camera files. Plus, they also have a reduced price currently, plus a free trial version. And Boris Red and transfer to AfterEffects is included with it for free.
Larry, thank you for all your honest input.
Just one reminder: Switching to Adobe Premiere Pro might NOT be an option if you are working mostly tape based. It seems you can import HDV through firewire, but playing out to tape (which I usually do for back up reasons) is not possible on a Mac, only on Windows. Bummer!
Participants note – the ‘Russ’ who appears here is not the one one (from Australia) who has posted to Larry’s blogs over recent times, or in fact over recent years.
First off, Larry, I appreciate your balance on this very heated issue. I’ve worked in media for over 35 years. I’ve used any number of systems to edit film and video. They were all great in their day. The years with FinalCut is the longest time I’ve ever used one piece of software for editing video.
Now that FCP as we knew it is not going forward, I too am faced with choices. As someone else pointed out, neither Adobe Premiere nor Avid are rock-solid choices. I had a functioning setup with Adobe Premiere and seriously considered implementing it in the video shop I was setting up, but instead went with the newbie FCP. Glad I did, as it was a short time later that Adobe pulled the plug on Premiere for Mac. My investment would have been worthless overnight. Then a few years ago Adobe came back to the Mac and want to be the white knight. I am just not sure I trust their strategy either.
I am confident that any company, hardware or software, can decide to change direction tomorrow, and won’t think twice of leaving their user base stranded. In desktop publishing, I’ve been through PageMaker (which Adobe lost interest in), Quark Express (which Quark lost interest in for a long time) and am now using InDesign (which in spite of being by Adobe, doesn’t open PageMaker projects).
When I edited video on tape back in the day, I guided our shop through 3 totally different generations of editing controllers in 10 years. Each time we had to change setups and go through the learning curve (again).
I have little doubt that whatever I choose to edit on going forward will itself be changing in 5 or so years. Adobe is moving toward a pricing structure that makes me consider totally changing professions. Avid is doing who knows what.
What I do know is that my FCP 7 works just as well today as it did yesterday. Going forward, I will evaluate my options, probably including checking out what FCX really can do. I do not intend to be rushed. After all, this is just one of many software/hardware changes that are part of working in media. I am sure there will be more to come in future years.
David:
Adobe joined us as a sponsor before the release of FCP X. I expected them to talk about the integration of Adobe with Apple software.
With the release of FCP X, they have a wider field for discussion. They will have a table at the event – like all sponsors – and be one of three sponsors to do a 20 minute presentation from the stage – along with AJA and Blackmagic Design.
I am very interested to hear what they have to say.
Larry
I’m not quite sure I understand, (which I’m sure would surprise anyone that knew me,) and maybe someone could enlighten me. When Apple releases a new OS, they stop producing a previous OS. The new one may, or may not, be to your liking, or even run on your machine. You do have a choice whether you want to upgrade or not.
What I don’t quite get is why would you, at a whole two weeks in, be making a death prediction of your current workflow? Why should your current workflow change at all? Does FCP7 suddenly stop working at all? Were there that many people making the decision of buying hundreds of new FCPS boxes and suddenly can’t?
Why can’t, when you really decide to outfit a new cutting studio, do you then decide which software fits you best? My ignorance might really be showing, but does a pro buy a new copy of FCP every time they do a new job? Not trying to be flippant here, just trying to understand why you can’t wait a few weeks for learning exactly what’s what.
Wayne:
This is a good, and reasonable, question. The best analogy I can use to answer it is this: imagine how you would feel if, when upgrading to the latest operating system, you lost access to ALL your existing data.
The new features of FCP X are interesting – many of them amazing – but that isn’t the heart of the issue. The core of this controversy is that when Apple did not provide a conversion utility from FCP 7 to FCP X, then immediately canceled FCP 7, they, in effect, cut off all future access to past data.
If the two programs had both been available and supported, for a year or two after the launch of FCP X, much of this controversy and all of the angst could have been avoided.
On the other hand, if you have not used FCP 7, and are new to the market, FCP X has a lot to recommend it. That’s why you see such wide ranging comments.
Larry
Okay I will become Russ (-1) and revert to my true nickname “russtafa” as I did not know that Russ had become a proprietary trademark. Maybe if you pop over to the forum I can introduce myself.
But in the meantime pop over to Vimeo to see…
http://www.vimeo.com/25506555
I have to say for the years I have followed Walter Biscardi’s posts/articles on CreativeCow and other places. This will be a great loss to the Final Cut Pro community as with other I am afraid will also follow this path.
Apple are down right stupid to alienate people of such high creative and other notable qualities.
Signed.
Russtafa
Hello Larry,
Thanks for the thoughtful blog. As editors, we live in interesting times.
I admit it, I drank the Kool-aid. I bought FCP X on day one, more out of curiosity than actual need. And a bit of response to the marketing hype. Another thing that swayed me to jump in is the fact that Randy Ubilos has been involved in the development. FCP 7 has been working quite well for me. In fact, FCP 5 still works on my G5.
There is a lot that I like in FCP X – I find the interface much easier on the eyes, especially how images stand out from the gray GUI. The scopes are much improved. Titling is improved, with changes easily made in the Inspector. Background rendering, 64 bit speed are a couple of other things to like. There is, however, a learning curve to this new editing paradigm. I will continue using FCP 7 until I’m up to speed and comfortable with X. I thought of asking for a refund, but then decided to hang in and learn this new radically different tool set.
As a one man band shop shooting HDV on a Sony Z5U, the lack of tape ingest is a disappointment. I could add a digital back for $800 or buy a Nikon D7000 (I’m a Nikon guy) for $1200. But I can buy a lot of tape for that money. So Log & Batch Capture in FCP7 will be the workaround.
I can certainly understand the sense of abandonment and betrayal felt by large post houses with a lot more invested than I have. But I’m not about to take advantage of cross grade offers from Adobe and Avid. I’ve already spent $400 with Apple (Compressor and Motion) and have no compelling reason to switch. Who knows – FCP X might just develop into the next great editing thing.
Larry
I am a little confused. Can’t someone continuing using FCP 7, thereby not losing access to all their existing data, and also have FCP X on their system ?
I don’t mean running at the same time, but on the boot drive, so one can explore and learn ? Does a new Mac OS prevent me from accessing FCP 7 ?
Thank you
Dennis
Dennis:
You are correct. You can have both versions installed on the same system, but can only run one at time.
Larry
Hola Larry, saludos desde España. Mi eterna duda (la cuál me llega a indignar) es porque no consta el español como idioma de cabecera .
Esto si es preocupante en pleno siglo XXI, y además de mal gusto, de poca cultura y de una prepotencia inusitada.
Mientras tanto iré tanteando FCPX y sus venideras actualizaciones.
[ Rough Translation via Google & SDL ]
Hello Larry, Greetings from Spain. My eternal question (which comes to enrage me) is because it has Spanish as the language header. This is worrisome in the 21ST century, and in addition to bad taste, of little culture and a unusual arrogance. In the meantime [i'm looking at] FCP X and its succeeding updates.
Just to clarify one issue.
I think Final Cut 10 is going to suit some people really really well and I am sure that this will be a truly great experience for some people who will use it for interesting creative projects.
Apple should have just given a timeline for continuing support for Final Cut Pro 7..say an 18 month timeline then us..the end users could have made thoughtful and logical decisions on how to proceed.
I am not sure this complies with EEC trading and consumer law which applies to use here in Europe..Interesting!!!
I am in this business for 15 years. I had an online editor on my AMiga 4000, then SpeedRazor, then FAST Edition (later Pinnacle and finally Avid Liquid), then I used Edius and ended up in MAC-Land with FCP6 and 7.
Every time I switched I had to leave some good workflows behind (well, maybe not from the Amiga; but the OS rocked). And FCP7 was actually the WORSt editor I used for its time. It was based on old technology. AVID had the same problem with Liquid: a superior editor, but not ready for HD. So they simply EOLed it. Just like Apple did now with FCP…which was MIA anyway. I know many have their stuido built around it, many broadcaststation still use their standard-def facility, due to the costs involved, but does that mean it is a standard still?
APPLE looks forward. Always. They throw out the floppy and the FW400-plug while we all still use them.
I used FCPX now for a few weeks and today edited in FCP7 and man do I miss the skimmer there…and the connected clips, and many other features…..FCPX is just soooooo much faster and easier to edit.
Apple will fix the audio-bus, the XML and AJA, Matrox and BM will bring drivers. Then we are already halfway there.
A couple tweaks in the UI and a few old features back and we are all smiling again.
I will use FCPx for a big project next. The only real questionmark is the Audio-output, but we will find a workaround…..
I just realized something that could mitigate one of the issues!
With Lion, you will be able to run multiple instances of OS X on a single computer.
If done properly, that would mean that you could run FCPX under one instance and FCP7 under another — and have access to the files from either system.
Not as nice as an import or running both under a single OS X instance… but hey, we’re creative, right?
In a tragic sort of way, I think it’s funny: for years we despaired of Avid’s arrogance, refusal to listen, etc etc in the face of FCP’s responsive ascendancy … and now Apple is behaving the way Avid used to. Me, I’ve spent the last 7 years working exclusively on the Avid and panicking that my atrophying FCP skills were going to make me unmarketable … and now I feel like Apple may have saved my career. Sure, I’m brushing up on FCP 7, since I bet a lot of shops will wait as long as possible to reinvest – but I think the need for technically strong Avid editors just got a serious boost. Thank you, Apple!
I am following David Roth Weiss’ advice and will run and maintain separate partitions: http://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1
I have a quad core Intel Xeon Mac Pro running 10.6.7.
In one partition I will have Snow Leopard, FCS 3 and CS5 Production Suite. In there I can revisit FCP 7 projects and revise them within FCP 7 or output them as XML.
Meanwhile I will learn Premiere Pro and FCP X. In another partition I will have CS5, FCP X and the new Motion and Compressor – first on Snow Leopard and then on Lion.
Currently, FCP X is nowhere near ready for all I need to do. But after a year I hope to be able to make a decision to switch to FCP X or another NLE. I hope to be able to indefinitely keep a machine for long-term legacy access to FCP 7 work once the OS outgrows my current hardware.
My initial worry is resurrecting DSLR-based projects. I usually import these into Log & Transfer – direct from camera disk or cloned disk images – as ProRes transcodes. I have yet to discover how to translate this acquisition workflow completely accurately from XML to Premiere Pro, but I’m sure there’s a way.
But in the middle of the night I wake up convinced I must restore all my projects from backup, delete the graphics and output clean versions to 4444 and separate checkerboarded audio files because there’s no way legacy text, fx and audio settings are gonna translate every time …
**Hopefully this is seen as constructive criticism, more along the line of gentle ribbing — not to be taken too seriously**
Mellifluous, easy-going, likeable voice and manner notwithstanding, Larry, you’ve flip-flopped on this issue more than a fresh fish that’s just landed in the boat.
Many years ago in my home town, the major football league wanted two professional teams to merge. It seemed a fait accompli. It was all but done. One influential football journalist (on the day before the teams’ members voted) wrote an article in full support of the merger; glowing about the league and the way forward.
Little did he realize that the members at their respective meetings would just about RIOT with flaming torches and any idea of a merger was well and truly demolished. This same journalist the very next day came out with an article savaging the fact that the league had ever considered a merger and what a terrible idea it was.
This is what’s called having an opinion that you think fits with the popular trend.
Larry, you were quoted as saying that the software FCPX was not ready for primetime and that you had serious reservations; THEN you came out and changed your opinion, saying that after meeting with Apple your fears were well and truly addressed, in fact you were wrong, and that you fully supported the release — this was followed by a glowing review — THEN — as the flaming torches and pitchforks stormed past your door you come out with criticisms and quite pointed requiems. Somewhere squeezed in there you may have presented that it wasn’t the program itself, rather the handling of the release.
Imagine a movie reviewer who gets to see a movie courtesy of the studio and comes out saying it’s the BEST movie ever. Then it dies disastrously in a cauldron of hatred and suddenly the reviewer (sensing the mood) says that the movie is very flawed and there’s clearly horrible mistakes.
In the issue of FCPX, someone who had access to and had done extensive training videos should have seen exactly the issues that would cause a storm.
I don’t know if you had a conflict of interest and failed to navigate it as best you could, no matter how you want to spin it (and I generally think you’re a nice guy trying to do his best and not rock too many boats) — I hope next time you stand by your convictions (whatever they are!!!) from the beginning.
Thanks for the response, Larry. I guess this is exactly like, as aegger mentioned, when the latest Mac came out… And it didn’t contain a floppy disc! What about all those floppies people still had? Apple didn’t seem too worried about anyone who had important data on old disks. Yet it still worked out, and not only were they the industry leader in that respect, everyone agrees now it was a necessary evil to move technology forward.
Just like this supposed move by Apple that not only seems to have killed every pro’s respect for the company, but also their businesses somehow. (Seems that way from what I’ve been reading in the blogs, anyway.) And, just like the previous example I made, not only will there more likely third party workarounds made for all the current “faults,” but will survive, prosper, and become a standard for everyone. (Everyone seems to also forget all the pundits saying that the new Apple Tablet will be a huge mistake that will take the company down. “Net-Books are king!”
Of course, I might be wrong.
Mal:
I agree – constantly changing opinions is worse than no opinions at all. However, in my case, I discovered that the information I had when I first started writing was incorrect. I far prefer to admit I was wrong and provide revised advice when I discover that what I knew was incorrect, than to steadfastly repeat the same opinion which is based on false information.
I don’t like making mistakes. However, I especially don’t like repeating them.
Thanks!
Larry
Apple has stated in their FCPX FAQ:
“Can I import projects from Final Cut Pro 7 into Final Cut Pro X?
Final Cut Pro X includes an all-new project architecture structured around a trackless timeline and connected clips. In addition, Final Cut Pro X features new and redesigned audio effects, video effects, and color grading tools. Because of these changes, there is no way to “translate” or bring in old projects without changing or losing data.”
http://www.apple.com/finalcutpro/faq/
I have seen, elsewhere, that Apple has some hooks in FCPX that, potentially, could be activated to allow FCPX to import FCP7 projects.
I have also read that Apple abandoned the import effort because they can’t do a “complete” job — up to Apple standards.
Adobe offers an FCP7 import capability to Premiere on a “best effort” basis.
Adobe’s solution isn’t perfect nor complete, but at least you can bring your FCP7 projects into their app and start using it.
It is a way to bring your legacy FCP7 projects forward.
With all that in mind, I wondered if it were possible to build a tool that would allow import of FCP7 projects into FCPX.
There are some issues, but I think the short answer is yes!
The 2 biggest issues are:
1) the FCPX magnetic “trackless” timeline
2) the lack of FCPX effects equivalent to those available in FCP7
I believe that 2) will fade as an issue, over time, as developers rewrite their plugins for FCPX
The magnetic/trackless timeline issue isn’t quite so easy. If you import your FCP7 project, and then FCPX rearranges everything — how do you get your mind around “your project” so you can start working on it.
What if there were a way to preserve (or approximate) the FCP7 track layout within FCPX.
I think there is a way!
Over the holiday weekend, I exported the XML from a small FCP7 sequence, opened it in a text editor, and manually recreated it in FCPX.
Some things needed to be kludged together to preserve the FCP7 “track look” within the FCPX “trackless” timeline. And, though they may look like tracks, they aren’t tracks — they can’t be manipulated as an entity.
It wasn’t perfect, but it was close enough!
I was able to manually import a simple project.
I believe, with a little effort, and a few tweaks to the FCPX UI, that Apple could do an acceptable job of importing FCP7 projects — bringing them forward to the new FCPX editing paradigm.
For anyone interested, I posted some pictures and links at:
http://forums.appleinsider.com/showthread.php?p=1894933#post1894933
Larry,
What exactly was the incorrect information that you had and why do you think Apple provided you with it?
If the past has proven one thing: Apple has been right an awful amount of times with deadly precision. And I like a lot in the new FCP X.
However, they have proven that they are not good for you if you run a business. Lesson learned: don’t depend on them for your survival.
I’ve decided to move to Adobe (a year ago already, because of the Dynamic Link and great community) but I’m currently learning FCP X for smaller and more experimental projects. When the XML import/export is back, many new possibilities open again.
People also shouldn’t not forget that they can update for $800 now to Adobe or $995 to Avid, but the next upgrade (CS6/Avid 6) is going to cost them as much or even more. So decide now if you can afford these feature updates… FCP X is very cheap in that regard!
Interesting times… someone has to move the industry forward. I like Premiere Pro a lot, many people to do, but most of us are looking at it from a Final Cut Pro perspective (it can do almost anything, and some things more). That’s not how you change workflows or the way people interact with software in general.
And also think of this:
- Final Cut Pro X has a touch ready interface (think of it and then look at the application, the large buttons… the skimmer, the range selection tool… coming from iMovie.. .which is on iPad already)
- The future is touch (or gestures like Microsoft Kinect)
- Tablets will become far more powerful in the near future
Also think of this: will Avid or Adobe work this way? So in a way, Apple is investing now in the future. They’ve done it in a very wrong and customer unfriendly way (screw you customer!) but I do think they have a vision… which I can’t say of Adobe and Avid.
Larry, something that could be tremendously valuable for you to do at this point would be to create a comparison document or training seminar on the merits of Media Composer vs. Premiere (w/ Production Premium), for those coming from Final Cut. I haven’t seen anything like this online, and it would be a great help for those who are contemplating switching, and would like something more objective and comprehensive than promotional materials and anecdotal accounts. I realize that Adobe and Avid are not your forte, so perhaps you can get assistance from people who are already experts on those platforms.
Larry,
I have a friend who made some money with Apple stock and he took my wife and me to dinner. Ergo: Apple took me to dinner. Thank you i-Pad! I’m also used to the FCP X routine: I had a Discreet edit*.
We only have two editors working at a time, so it’s very easy to keep working with Studio 3 while being courted by Avid and Adobe. I am told that CNN has 200 FCP’s, which is a problem. I don’t know how long Apple will support Studio 3, but for us, it’s easy enough to bail any time.
Mike G
Larry,
I completely disagree with the user who wants you to stick to your original convictions regardless of the facts, that’s what politician do. I commend you for changing your opinion as new information or lack thereof comes out.
Floris made some points above that I think reveal his editing does not even have to consider workflow or collaboration in seeming to praise the “vision” of Apple even while upsetting their own apple cart.
To quote Floris after he gives Adobe Premiere some respect :
“(But) That’s not how you change workflows or the way people interact with software in general.
And also think of this:
- Final Cut Pro X has a touch ready interface (think of it and then look at the application, the large buttons… the skimmer, the range selection tool… coming from iMovie.. .which is on iPad already)
- The future is touch (or gestures like Microsoft Kinect)
- Tablets will become far more powerful in the near future
Also think of this: will Avid or Adobe work this way? So in a way, Apple is investing now in the future. They’ve done it in a very wrong and customer unfriendly way (screw you customer!) but I do think they have a vision… which I can’t say of Adobe and Avid.”
All I can say is thank God that Adobe and Avid did not jump on the “touch vision” bandwagon!
And to Floris I will say that video editing can NOT work solely and exclusively on an Apple xPad Infinitum no matter how powerful it becomes. You are enamored with “touch” interface, apparently over “display” parameters.
Video is NOT converging. As everyone trumpets.
No indeed.
To merit the term “converge” one video output would have to wind up in only one display medium. The fact that a movie or television show winds up displayed on an iPad, on Apple tv, in a web browser, even on an iPhone is NOT CONVERGENCE. This is an illusion, plain and simple.
What a professional video editor deals with is that THEY are the only ones who HAVE to see what they are editing with the finest amount of control over color values, sound values, and the biggest screen details on the highest resolution and most standardized color monitoring.
This is not the territory for a handheld device, nor will it EVER EVER be the tool useful for the requirements of high-end editing. This is the stage where the “quality is built-in” no matter how many different formats and encodings follow so that I can watch a watered down version on my iPad.
You will certainly be able to create touchpad editing for Avid and Adobe but you are going to need more screen real estate than is available on a handheld pad.
I agree that Apple has a “vision” for THEIR hardware, of course. But Apple’s vision has left behind more sophisticated requirements for compositing the first generation of more highly financed productions.
Video is now many different formats both on the generation platforms and in the editing platform.
Video as a universally recognized “media label” has expanded and headed into a super high definition realm with uncompressed media formats, while at the same time squeezed itself down into a highly encoded, extremely lossy version of what we used to call “video” so that it can be delivered to the web and small devices.
But the magic behind what goes into all these boxes starts way back in the delivery chain with much more powerful tools than an iPad can handle.
Thank you Adobe and Avid for your lack of “vision”.
The comments by Mal were interesting.
I do reflect back to the “1700 jaws dropping” at the SuperMeet blah blah.
It is easy to get caught up in the hype and hysteria but I DO hope the very first question Larry asked the guys at Apple began with the big “C” word. Compatibility….!!!
During my battle hardened years in Engineering that has been the very first word that springs to mind when dealing with manufacturers. Larry really cannot be blamed for anything during this debacle as I have HAD manufacturers in meetings telling me bare-faced lies to get sales. Later to be shown as liars when I test equipment for example using my Audio Precision test set. To be fair there are a great deal of people who are very passionate about Final Cut Pro. Then another small group who deal in training and disseminating information at more of an educational level, and Larry is amongst that group. I do believe Larry did state/or was quoted as saying Final Cut 10 “was not really ready for professionals’ so people were warned.
For many FCP 7 became a “way of life” and most importantly a key method to earning money. Go back to Steve Jobs re: Final Cut 10 “Awesome” (please Steve for an intelligent chap get some more words in your vocabulary) Has Steve or the Apple FC gang ever edited much video one would ask. Although I have a great deal of time for Steve Jobs, a youngster of 14 who tried to beg parts from HP to build his first oscillator, so he knows how to use a soldering iron..all power to Steve!!
Maybe they can post their home videos, and other works of note on Youtube for us to really understand if they are well equipped to design and implement such software.
A good challenge for Randy Ubilos would be to show us some of his FCP 7 projects then carry on editing them in Final Cut 10 (DUH my brain hurts.) Maybe he can do some tutorials for us in his spare time for Youtube.
So you have all this pent up expectation, which was clear to see across the Internet rumour mills during 2010/2011 about this new release.
I got caught up in this to a small degree (in the interests of my daughter’s education) FCP 7 is not an important part for my continuing livelihood, but it is easy to see how important it is to a lot of people.
But I asked my daughter who is at Uni. what she thought of it all?
To quote
“Dad I am not at all bothered I will use FCP 7/Final Cut 10/Premiere whatever tools I have available. I just need to get my story out there with ideas/concepts and the rest with my motion graphics stuff/content etc” Quite a nice simple view from a young adult
We all know the river runs a bit deeper than this statement, but we have alternatives to FCP 7 if we need them. Let Final Cut 10 grow up a bit.
Has the world stopped spinning/Ozone layer disappeared? NO
So we should all calm down a bit, life will still go on, and hopefully everyone can still keep earning money and creating good “stuff”
Apple left hooks in FCP X for XML so third party vendors to add functionality to their software, the plugins are called; Avid and Premiere! So disappointed… I really think we are at a tipping point in Apples history were they care little for the end user and more about the bucks, wheres their love gone?
I think most “pros” are not giving FCP X a fair and serious look. They start playing, things are different, features are missing, they start screaming and ranting.
As Larry suggests, getting some training for FCP X is the best thing you can do. There are many, many online tutorials out there right now. I have gone through quite a few. It really helps a lot. It shows you the right way of looking at this new piece of software. It widens your narrow professional horizon. As many of you have said – there are some really powerful new concepts in FCP X.
I’ll take the “keep using the old FCP” approach while testing and learning the new X version.
I don’t think we have to start converting FCP 7 projects yet. We run a professional shop here with lots of FCP bays and very high profile clients. We’re still running FCP 5.1.4. Why? Because clients pay us to come up with concepts and solutions and not with finished products right away. We have special FCP 7 bays to do just that – finish our offline edits once our ideas have made it to the finish line. In the professional field it’s never important to be on the latest and greatest gear. We’ve survived on FCP 5.1.4 all those years. There are ways to survive on FCP 7 for quite a few years to come until X is ready.
FCP 7 will run on Lion. Great. But why upgrade to Lion? Snow Leopard runs great. Just keep it that way. Period. These are editing computers. We don’t use ours for anything else. Absolutely no need to upgrade the OS. For experimenting and playing – we have our personal ones.
So as long as you keep your editing stations on 7 and Snow Leopard, there is no need to convert anything. That’s what I call “protect yourselves”.
In a few years, I will be shooting on a camera and editing on my iPad few minutes after and the whole workflow will be automated to my Mac and people can collaborate with me on iCloud.
That’s were Apple is going. If they listened to their customers, we would still be on Mac OS 9 and using Floppy drives.
Avid can be gone tomorrow, that’s how small they are if something goes wrong. Another example, which I think is similar to Avid: Research in Motion. Two years ago they were everything… the #1 business phone… and look at them now. In a few years, I think they’re gone and the iPhone and Android phones have taken over. If you’re so focused on one segment… and don’t innovate, you will lose eventually and that’s the position Avid is in.
At the end… these applications are just tools to get something done, so chose the one that suits you best. But don’t be blind.
First off, Larry – always appreciate your insight and thoughts and of course wish you all success with your training and tutorials.
I would contest that Apple has not opened a new market with FCP X. Between, iMovie and FCP7 you had Final Cut Express. In addition, since no one considered Premiere Pro a ‘Pro’ app, it also would be in this market. On the PC obviously, there are plenty of candidates for this non-new market. I think Apple sees more revenue on their platform and if true, that’s their guiding principle.
@Stuart @Claes – Adobe left the Mac platform at the time of its total re-write that became Premiere Pro (not Premiere) This was closer to 7 years ago. FCP was just coming of age (FCP 3) and the decision to be Windows only initially was made due to market conditions at the time. Adobe has remained a committed cross-platform company and beginning with CS3, Adobe returned to the Mac platform with Premiere Pro. With CS5, Adobe re-wrote the application again for 64-bit, so the foundation and Adobe’s commitment to long-term development should be encouraging to all potential users.
@Chri Hu – We allowed our hardware partners (AJA, Matrox, Blackmagic, etc.) to take over tape control and capture since a) you need a hardware i/o to capture anyway and b) most already had their own private capture programs anyway. Like Apple, we retain deck control over firewire capable devices such as DV and HDV and of course superior file based support for tapeless cameras.
@Tom Ackroyd – You can export your FCP XML with ProRes transcoded DSLR footage and import it into Premiere Pro without difficulty. You can edit ProRes on Premiere Pro no problem.
Dennis – Adobe
Dennis:
Thank you for taking the time to explain this. It is always good to hear directly from Adobe.
larry
Really good article Larry! You managed to go straight down the middle, acknowledging the genuineness of both sides’ arguments. This article is about unbiased as it can get with no apologies to either side for its frankness.
Regardless of the emotion and drama that FCP X has drawn from the pro community, they are not the entirety of the market for this product, and the other mid-level users deserve to be represented too, even if that means accepting concessions they never knew were taking place (or may not care about anyways).
With all the talk about audio roles, here’s what I still can’t figure out. Please help if you can.
I work in the news biz. I edit on dual channel mono. I need the reporter’s audio to play out on one track, and all the other audio mixed to play out on the second track.
Very easy in 7.
Can I do this in X yet?
Thanks!
Yes – you’ve always been able to do this in FCP X, but it is not obvious.
Duplicate the clip.
Select each clip.
Go to the Inspector and select the channel you want to hear and uncheck the one you don’t.
Repeat.
Larry