Final Cut Pro X - still Pro

Dave Hardy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
That's assuming they actually
> care. The Pro Apps are beginning to seem a bit out
> in left field for the new Apple Inc. consumer
> electronics company.
>
> Dave

The new FCP X pricing definitely falls right in line with consumer based pricing, that's for sure. Funny, with all the outcry from pros (not just me) about the event leaving many more questions than answers, have you seen a single response from Apple yet? Just some sort of a press release saying "X, Y, Z will still be included in Final Cut Pro X."

So your assumption about if they actually care..........

Walter Biscardi, Jr.
Biscardi Creative Media
biscardicreative.com

Why did you guys think Apple would tell you everything about the new FCP? When has Apple ever done this? By creating an aura of mystique they ensure that people will be talking about FCPX right up until the release. If they had given away everything this forum thread would probably have 10 replies instead of over 70 (and counting).

My software:
Pro Maintenance Tools - Tools to keep Final Cut Studio, Final Cut Pro X, Avid Media Composer and Adobe Premiere Pro running smoothly and fix problems when they arise
Pro Media Tools - Edit QuickTime chapters and metadata, detect gamma shifts, edit markers, watch renders and more
More tools...

Quote
The new FCP X pricing definitely falls right in line with consumer based pricing...

True, but you still have to factor in the cost of the other apps in the suite. Motion, Color, DVD Studio Pro (if they don't discontinue it), Soundtrack Pro and Compressor. (I can't see releasing FCP X without a Compressor like program at the same time). So I would say we could be looking at somthing close to $1,000 for the whole suite when it's all said and done.

"If they had given away everything this forum thread would probably have 10 replies instead of over 70 (and counting)."

Jon, the flip side of your "statistic" is that 35 of those 70 now are looking for alternative NLEs due to the lack of any available info. ;-)

I highly doubt that people will jump ship to Avid or Premiere simply because Apple didn't reveal everything in a presentation. Can they not wait two months to see for themselves? And switching all of your operations to another NLE isn't something that can be done lightly. If FCPX truly is unpopular, the ship-jumping will occur on a long-term basis.

My software:
Pro Maintenance Tools - Tools to keep Final Cut Studio, Final Cut Pro X, Avid Media Composer and Adobe Premiere Pro running smoothly and fix problems when they arise
Pro Media Tools - Edit QuickTime chapters and metadata, detect gamma shifts, edit markers, watch renders and more
More tools...

Tom you should be an actor not an editor... Soooooo overly dramatic darrrrling!

Personally I think Apple are doing a coup de grâce akin to their famous Floppy Disk dispatch of 1998.

I wouldn't be surprised in 1 year from now; that everyone using FCPX will be laughing at the 'out-of-date' NLEs and their silly convoluted workflows...


...and we will still be getting the question: "will FCPX run on my G4?"



For instant answers to more than one hundred common FCP questions, check out the LAFCPUG FAQ Wiki here : [www.lafcpug.org]

"Alas, poor FCP, I knew it well..."

Naw...I better stick with editing, Ben ;-) Hey, I gave it a shot and tried to get a feel for the new style of GUI / workflow that FCP X represents. My flaw was thinking that iMovies experience would give me insight into FCP X. NOT!

Tom Daigon
Avid DS / FCP / After Effects Editor
www.hdshotsandcuts.com

Quote
Tom
35 of those 70 now are looking for alternative NLEs due to the lack of any available info.

You know I tried starting Final Cut on my system this morning and I got this error:



I'm afraid to click OK.

Seriously though, I'm an editor. If you're paying me, you can sit me down in front of iMovie, or Windows Movie Maker, or a bench with a pair of scissors and some glue. The program does not make the editor.

If you judge FCP X is not what you need at your facility when it comes out, then just keep FCP 7 on your machines. Heck, I worked (and made money) with FCP 3 for years after FCP 4 and 4.5 came out because I didn't want to upgrade my G4 to OS X.

I also work with several facilities who are happily plugging away on Avid MC 4 (or even 3 in some cases) because MC 5 was such a piece of turd. I mean, it's not like they added much that was needed in a professional post workflow that MC 4 didn't already have.

The point is, anyone seriously considering "other options" for their post needs before the product is released isn't an editor. They are a toy collector.

And there's no available info yet, because Apple has not made an official announcement of any sort. It was a sneak preview. Something Apple rarely does (probably because of the runaway nature of speculanerds). When something official DOES comes out, go ahead and light the flamethrowers, crossgrade to Vegas and wait for the apocalypse. But until then, can we get back to speculating whether this will run on my MacBook Air?

Andy

I agree Andy, I will reserve my judgement on FCPX in my hands. I play around with the features in IMovie that will be in FCPX in my spare time. The kind of footage that Randy used for editing at the demo would be easy to edit with IMovie but it would be a bitch to try to cut drama footage with iMovie. When we get the new tool we will see its something we want to use.

I edited most of my 16mm work for many years on rewind benches with non-motorized synchronizers & a single mag head. When I had jobs at the TV networks & small production companies I used the upright Moviola or Steenbeck when the director or producer were in the suite to review my work. They didn't care what equipment I used to edit with & as zoom as they left I was back on the rewind bench, because I could actually work quicker that way.


Dave

If VTR input/output and control are removed from the upcoming Final Cut Pro, I'll be on version 7 for a long while to come. A large share of my customers provide their source material to me on videotape and want the final product on videotape. Few of them will accept a self-contained QuickTime movie on a hard drive as an "edit master" for their media library.

Despite Apple's remark that they are welcoming feedback, it seems to me Final Cut Pro X would be virtually complete by now if the product is to ship in two months.

Have you ever, ever heard a company say they have no interest in user feedback? They all say they care. What they do is often a different story.

All the best,

Tom

I think we may be losing sight of reality in some ways...

$300 is NOT consumer pricing. No casual consumer I know would spend more than $70-$80 on a piece of software, max. That has always been the consumer price point, since I was shoveling software for Electronics Boutique in my youth.

I don't think the price point (which is similar to what it was as a quarter piece of the Studio) is a factor as to its' pro-ness. Features, well, we'll see.

>Apparently Randy Ubillos isn't so fond of the frame view at all. It took them twelve
>years and eight versions before the thumbnails were of a size big enough to even
>be useful!

Gotta admit that stuff like that is tricky. Waveforms cause a lot of lag. Especially on long form. You want everything in real time, and all that stuff adds up. Hopefully grand central and the ability to tap into all that RAM is the magic bullet, even on long GOP formats and REDCODE. I do like thumbnails not because I can see the details in the shot, but because I can quickly take reference to the scene and shot size so I know where I am in the middle of a timeline.



www.strypesinpost.com

>They all say they care. What they do is often a different story.

That reminds me of once cutting a TV show, and I had a producer who was so hyped up on every single feedback he heard from everyone. It was hard to get anything done. But if Apple cared about long term sales, they would take the general feedback from the pro users and see if their software catered to it. Points like being able to work with tape, the ability to handle large projects, being able to work efficiently in a collaborative environment, being able to work with high end finishing tools are all valid make or break selling points.

>$300 is NOT consumer pricing.

It is pro-sumer pricing. Almost every editor that I know of would purchase FCP at that price at the drop of a hat. Then add almost every film student, directors, some home users waiting to cut their home videos, etc... An editing suite used to go for loads of money, but let's not go there. When FCP first came out with the desktop based editing solution at a fraction of the price, editing rates also plummeted because suites became so cheap. Then they realized that you still needed editors to cut a good story. Today it's a different story. A director just asked me whether grading on a Quantel eQ is the same as grading it on a DaVinci. Truth is you can really do a lot on the machines these days, it's all about hiring the right guy to work on it, whether the system is set up right so he can properly monitor the work, and how much money you have to afford renting a suite with the proper LUT, monitors, tuned room, etc...

It's hard for the software companies to compete dollar for dollar, because as someone mentioned, Apple has a huge dongle for their products. It's called a Mac. But on a way OT note, it is interesting to see how Apple has set up and is expanding their own App Store marketplace. Even Facebook is doing a marketplace, albeit in the eBay style.



www.strypesinpost.com

Yes, it is prosumer pricing, but I think that's the way the whole industry is headed. Apple's taking it on the chin from editors for lowering their price into the reach of regular people (I can't believe I'm writing that), but everybody's doing it - look at DaVinci and Smoke. They used to be 200K+ with a proprietary hardware install. Now they're available on laptops for a thousand bucks.

Bottom line is that it's silly to be threatened by a price drop. It's like if Final Draft lowered their prices and the professional screenwriters complained "Now ANYONE can write a screenplay!" Well, yeah. But can they write a GOOD one?

The good writers - and editors - will still get paid quite well.

So then the question really becomes...

Are you a good editor?

Well then folks...if the price is low and everyone will have it...guess what that dictates? TALENT WILL BE KING. Any monkey can push and drag....but tell the story...ahhh...they will be exposed very quickly as frauds. This will introduce MORE "Editors" into the workplace that don't know what they are doing and that translates to more phone calls / emails to me = "Hey Joey...can you fix something for me?"

Bring it

When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

This is somewhat like what happened in the graphic design industry back in the mid 90's, right before Jobs came back to Apple. Adobe was pushing the graphic programs to the PC'er because, one reason was, they thought Apple was going under. All of a sudden everybody with a PC (Windows) in their bedrooms was doing graphic design. And what crap came out of it! The only difference, Adobe didn't lower their prices on their software. In fact, their path to upgrading is way too high for the mid and low level designers playing in throe bedroom. God forbid if you skip a version.

>>In fact, their path to upgrading is way too high for the mid and low level designers playing in throe bedroom.<<

Which is why Photoshop is such a stolen piece of software, I guess.

People I know (mostly students) hardly blink before deciding whether to spend thousands or get it free from any of their mates who has a cracked copy. As a disclaimer, I own my copy, because I use the hell out of it, make good money with it and want it to continue to develop. But I think people like us are more the exception in the userbase of software that's 'too expensive' for the general user.

Here's a bootleg video, BTW, for anyone who wants to keep analysing.

You can see it here : [wideopencamera.com]

or here if that works for you





I did notice he just said at about 10.30 that 'we give you the option to analyse your media for stabilsation [on the way in]' That's one scary down. And also that it's just the analysis, not the actual correction you might then apply for stabilisation or rolling shutter.

And the same with audio. It pre-anaylses and flags problem areas, then gives you the option of repairing or not, or having it be completely automatic.