Very positive about FCPX, and Thunderbolt future.

[olof]

The only way that FCPX makes sense to me is if Apple is being really clever and bold, they have always been very innovative and ready to make extreme moves that seem crazy at first. Like abandoning the floppy. OK I show my age here. Now they are dropping DVD's on many products.

My guess is that Apple will be abandoning the tower computer and only be making Imac style computers in the future, no PCIe or internal additional bays. This is only speculation, but this makes sense to me.

I think everything external will be Thunderbolt in the future. It is very fast and versatile and according to apple replaces PCI and display port.

"That’s because Thunderbolt is based on two fundamental technologies: PCI Express and DisplayPort." Quote from Apple.

"To connect a DisplayPort, DVI, HDMI, or VGA display, just use an existing adapter." Quote from Apple.

It already works with Matrox MX02 and Blackmagic UltraStudio 3D.

And it will be RAID storage as well.

"Adapters
Promise SAN Link Fibre Channel adapter
Sonnet Allegro FireWire 800 adapter
Sonnet Presto Gigabit Ethernet adapter"
Quote from Apple.

If I am right then this is really cool and makes sense.

Apple is just lowering the cost and simplifying the Pro Video editing situation.

Remember when you had to change all your NUBUS cards to PCI based cards. Well I think this is the way of the future.

With this in mind I feel very positive about the new FCPX.

And I bet we will have XML or similar import/export real soon from Apple or 3rd parties.

What is more I really like the database based media management, and the new timeline is very promising and fast.

Lets hope I am right.

[joelmcafee]

I think i'm with you on this. Most of my concern with apple is the lack of resources for current FCP users to make the switch and help us know what's changed and how the missing features will be supplemented. It concerns me that the industry may not adapt b/c of some key missing tools, but strictly from an editing standpoint, i see it's going to make things fast and take the "computing" (for lack of a better word) out of the way. I still have my questions, but I also have hope.

[VMT]

The only way that FCPX makes sense to me is if Apple is being really clever and bold, they have always been very innovative and ready to make extreme moves that seem crazy at first. Like abandoning the floppy. OK I show my age here. Now they are dropping DVD's on many products.

My guess is that Apple will be abandoning the tower computer and only be making Imac style computers in the future, no PCIe or internal additional bays. This is only speculation, but this makes sense to me.

I think everything external will be Thunderbolt in the future. It is very fast and versatile and according to apple replaces PCI and display port.

"That’s because Thunderbolt is based on two fundamental technologies: PCI Express and DisplayPort." Quote from Apple.

"To connect a DisplayPort, DVI, HDMI, or VGA display, just use an existing adapter." Quote from Apple.

It already works with Matrox MX02 and Blackmagic UltraStudio 3D.

And it will be RAID storage as well.

"Adapters
Promise SAN Link Fibre Channel adapter
Sonnet Allegro FireWire 800 adapter
Sonnet Presto Gigabit Ethernet adapter"
Quote from Apple.

If I am right then this is really cool and makes sense.

Apple is just lowering the cost and simplifying the Pro Video editing situation.

Remember when you had to change all your NUBUS cards to PCI based cards. Well I think this is the way of the future.

With this in mind I feel very positive about the new FCPX.

And I bet we will have XML or similar import/export real soon from Apple or 3rd parties.

What is more I really like the database based media management, and the new timeline is very promising and fast.

Lets hope I am right.

I'm hopeful that something like this--being farsighted and bold about new and emerging tech trends-- is the path Apple will take for pro users. It makes no sense for Apple to abandon pro users, even if their $$ is in consumer products. FCPX has a lot of potential. Time will tell.

[filmguy123]

I'm hopeful this quote is true about Apple investing heavily into MacPro:

http://9to5mac.com/2011/06/23/apple-gearing-up-to-launch-upgraded-mac-pro-with-16-core-processor/

I think we'll know by year's end. It is possible the lack of pro support on this release is not due to Apple dropping the ball or shifting it's attention as much as it is possible that they're trying to push the industry into a new digital paradigm and leave behind old technology like EDLs and tape based workflows (right or wrong irrelevant to the point, just saying it's possible this is their intention).

If XML, MultiCam, and 3rd party hardware/plugin support + a number of preferences and tweaks to FCP X surface by the end of the year, I think things may be looking good. If Apple is silent than probably not. Hopefully they move on this soon.

The next MacPro release will be telling. As for them dropping server/raid hardware, this isn't necessarily indicative of them abandoning the pro market, as they may feel there are plenty of great 3rd party solutions that they have no desire to compete with. If they are heavily investing in the MacPro the one driver of sales is pro video. I think we will have a very good idea of Apple's take on this by the end of the year and their response to the current FCP X situation.

[TheReverend]

FCPX is not going anywhere. They will add some support that people are complaining about; multicam editing for sure, audio export more than most likely. Some stuff won't make that cut; probly XML, opening Legacy projects etc. But, the fact that FCP7 is not overwritten keeps legacy projects from getting lost. XML would be a great option, and that will SURELY get a third party solution no matter what Apple does. So with these issues out of the way, it seems to me that FCPX is completely workable. Alot of the other issues that people seemed to have (media/project management, timing adjustments, magnetic timeline, saving projects, etc.) are literally lack of knowledge of the app. Much of the terminology is different but it's really quite simple. Event = Project, Project = Sequence. Boom. Done.

Personally, I like where OSX Lion (and FCPX) is going with lack of saving. Save state is coming like a train as Apple rolls this feature from iOS to OSX, and it's great because you never lose anything and come right back to where you were.

And the price difference is staggering! Currently I work in a non-profit environment and we have volunteers come in and edit. We have a couple stations, but only one Final Cut license because it is fairly prohibitively expensive (as we have some laptops too, etc). But with the new price drop, this is fantastic! And with the potentially easier to use interface, training volunteers will be MUCH easier.

I have to say, FCPX is growing on me. Our current plan was to investigate Premiere. I'm thinking of doing that still, but leaning more heavily toward transitioning to FCPX right before fall.

[simonpwood]

Agreed 100%

This is the way forward. People are annoyed to find that their expensive hardware is suddenly obsolete. But this happens eventually. In a decade or so everything will be digital, no need for vectorscopes and broadcast monitors, tapes, decks and edl. The software will calibrate it all for you and all the work will be shuttled around on the icloud (or whatever comes next). Content will be created, produced, corrected, delivered and received digitally.

In the meantime 3rd party producers will be able to create apps for older technology (so long as there is demand and need and people are willing to buy it), and keep them in the ecosystem.

Bring it on.

[handsome pete]

In a decade or so everything will be digital, no need for vectorscopes and broadcast monitors, tapes, decks and edl. The software will calibrate it all for you and all the work will be shuttled around on the icloud (or whatever comes next). Content will be created, produced, corrected, delivered and received digitally.


I don't think you understand how any of this works. Digital distribution doesn't affect any of that. We distribute 90% of our broadcast material digitally. It never touches tape. Yet we still need our scopes and monitors.

As for your thoughts on auto-calibration, that's fine for simple fixes and quick adjustments. But we will always need the option to do things manually. Having a computer make all of your decisions takes the art out of it.

[Ben Totman]

Having a computer make all of your decisions takes the art out of it.

+1

[VMT]

Having a computer make all of your decisions takes the art out of it.

Leonardo da Vinci had assistants. A computer is an assistant.

[TimTheFoolMan]

Leonardo da Vinci had assistants. A computer is an assistant.This reminds me of the Lee Trevino quote when someone asked him about a specific brand of golf club: "It's not the arrow, it's the indian." - Tim

[florisvaneck]

They already stated that XML support is coming and they will release a tool to import legacy projects.

I don't understand that people have blind trust in Apple. They created a big mess... managed expectations badly, don't communicatie with their customers (otherwise you could have never done such a dramatic release). If you open Motion 5... it looks like Motion 4 in a new shiny jacket with much better performance. They should've done the same with Final Cut Pro... but they didn't. They took the Final Cut Pro 'house', threw all stuff out... only the walls are left. I'm sure they will start redecorating... but I really can't say that this is the way.

They should have released a beta or something or maybe even a paid FCP X with FCP 7 living next to it but with a clear 'this is the future, but not ready yet' announcement. But no, Apple said this is the future and we're going to revolutionize editing... right now. They didn't, no professional can work properly with the current state of the application.

[handsome pete]

Leonardo da Vinci had assistants. A computer is an assistant.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure his assistants didn't tell old Leo how to paint.

[simonpwood]

I don't think you understand how any of this works. Digital distribution doesn't affect any of that. We distribute 90% of our broadcast material digitally. It never touches tape. Yet we still need our scopes and monitors.

As for your thoughts on auto-calibration, that's fine for simple fixes and quick adjustments. But we will always need the option to do things manually. Having a computer make all of your decisions takes the art out of it.

No. I did not mean that the computer will do it for you. I meant that these items that are currently hardware based will eventually be software based - so calibration tools will be done via software interface. No doubt software will be able to help though, as humans are not infallible after all.

[VMT]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure his assistants didn't tell old Leo how to paint.

But a computer does? Don't follow you. FCPX is a tool like any other tool to assist the artist. Implying that FCPX will make one a lesser artist is probably an over reaction.

[john deaver]

I think it's worth remembering that some awfully good movies have been edited with little more than a razor blade and scotch tape

[JY_Blue]

maybe Steve Jobs should have led with that when he told everybody how awesome FCPX was :).

[simonpwood]

I think it's worth remembering that some awfully good movies have been edited with little more than a razor blade and scotch tape

Very true. But not many people would want to go back to that stage. Hence FCPX is moving on, and it has just put another nail in the coffin of ancient tape based workflows that broadcasters (and hence some post-houses) are still clinging on to.

In 10 years from now edl will seem as archaic as sellotape.

[J Michael]

FCPX on iPad3 as a control surface with storage on your iCloud.

[handsome pete]

But a computer does? Don't follow you. FCPX is a tool like any other tool to assist the artist. Implying that FCPX will make one a lesser artist is probably an over reaction.

The post I was replying to insinuated that full auto-calibration is the future. He has clarified his post since then.

I'm all for more automation to make things easier, but not at the expense of still having the manual option. That's the impression that FCPX is giving long time editors, which is scary. Those fears won't be eased until Apple shows us what direction they're heading, be it through updates or some other avenue.

[handsome pete]

In 10 years from now edl will seem as archaic as sellotape.

I'm not sure why you think EDLs apply only to tape-based workflows.

[Batutta]

No. I did not mean that the computer will do it for you. I meant that these items that are currently hardware based will eventually be software based - so calibration tools will be done via software interface. No doubt software will be able to help though, as humans are not infallible after all.

But who is going to do that calibration, the editor? This is what prosumers do not understand...At the professional level, an editor edits and that's it. He hands his project off to be finished by a trained specialist who has spent years learning his craft, just as the editor has spent years perfecting his. There is no editor who is going to be as good at color correction as someone that's been trained to do it and has done it exclusively for years. There is currently no way to get a FCP X project into the hands of a competent professional for finishing (color correction, audio mixing and sweetening, compression, output, etc) in a format their programs will accept. Once a project is born in FCP X, it dies in FCP X. The only option is for the color correction artist or sound mixer to work in FCP X, and I highly doubt that it will ever be the tool of choice for them.

[simonpwood]

I'm not sure why you think EDLs apply only to tape-based workflows.

They dont apply to tape-based only work flows these days. But the edl is a throw back to tape-based days. There are better solutions out there; in this digital age its an archaic system.

[simonpwood]

But who is going to do that calibration, the editor? This is what prosumers do not understand...At the professional level, an editor edits and that's it. He hands his project off to be finished by a trained specialist who has spent years learning his craft, just as the editor has spent years perfecting his. There is no editor who is going to be as good at color correction as someone that's been trained to do it and has done it exclusively for years. There is currently no way to get a FCP X project into the hands of a competent professional for finishing (color correction, audio mixing and sweetening, compression, output, etc) in a format their programs will accept. Once project is born in FCP X, it dies in FCP X. The only option is for the color correction artist or sound mixer to work in FCP X, and I highly doubt that it will ever be the tool of choice for them.

You're missing the bigger picture because you're nitpicking at small details.

The project would be edited by the editor, and the information would be stored on the icloud (or whatever else), then the colorist would just log in to the project and do the corrections. Apps will be built for pros no doubt, or current color programs will be updated to read FCPX projects. We're only a couple of days into a new program here; best to wait and see the direction that it goes before panicking.

The point of the original poster is that the vision of this program is forward looking and it will adopt new technology (like thunderbolt) - as a result its less concerned with older systems. You can bet that there is money to be made using thunderbolt for Pro applications, pro in/out connections, and companies will want to profit from that. Wait and see.

[Batutta]

You're missing the bigger picture because you're nitpicking at small details.

The project would be edited by the editor, and the information would be stored on the icloud (or whatever else), then the colorist would just log in to the project and do the corrections. Apps will be built for pros no doubt, or current color programs will be updated to read FCPX projects. We're only a couple of days into a new program here; best to wait and see the direction that it goes before panicking.

The point of the original poster is that the vision of this program is forward looking and it will adopt new technology (like thunderbolt) - as a result its less concerned with older systems. You can bet that there is money to be made using thunderbolt for Pro applications, pro in/out connections, and companies will want to profit from that. Wait and see.

You're making a lot of assumptions based on zero knowledge. It's just as possible that Apple will never implement these features, and FCP X will end up being just a nice prosumer app. Post production houses aren't going to hedge their bets on what might come, they'll move onto other programs, and by the time the new FCP X features they need show up (which may be never), they'll have no reason to switch back. Your icloud theory is dubious as well. File sizes at the online level are gigantic and won't be able to be streamed over the net in anything approaching real time in quite a while, if ever. Just the lag involved in streaming data to and from servers hundreds maybe thousands of miles away makes that technology unusable for an editor. Editors work in fractions of a second. As digital cameras will keep getting higher in resolution, file sizes will get bigger. I don't think bandwidth will ever keep pace, but the amount needed is at least 15-20 years away.

[Gary Huff]

Personally, I like where OSX Lion (and FCPX) is going with lack of saving. Save state is coming like a train as Apple rolls this feature from iOS to OSX, and it's great because you never lose anything and come right back to where you were.

Do you really trust the software to properly save in a way that doesn't muck up the project you've spent hours working on?

[TheReverend]

Do you really trust the software to properly save in a way that doesn't muck up the project you've spent hours working on?

I use it everyday with fairly important things on my phone. And yes, I have been super happy with the way Apple has done their iOS saving and with Time Machine; both which work super well and don't need my constant attention.

I understand the comfort with hard saves, but truly very soon, this will be a thing of the past. As long as Time Machine works with versions in OSX Lion, you will have an hourly backup of the versions of your edit all without worry. That sounds pretty trustworthy to me.