FCPX going subscription

[Peter C.]

The way I could see the subscription model being applied to Final Cut would be existing purchased copies wouldn't get new updates or they would offer higher Pro subscription level that would give you access to a library of music, effects, graphics and education content on how to use the program, maybe even video hosting service. I'd imagine this would be targeted youtube content creators.

 

[ahalpert]

I'd do a subscription if the software is well-maintained and improved and if it's in the $10 or less range. Adobe has a photographer photoshop/lightroom package for around $10/mo. But all their other standalone apps are like $21/mo. I'd prefer not to pay monthly, but $10ish wouldn't make me jump ship.

 

[JAMedia]

The way I could see the subscription model being applied to Final Cut would be existing purchased copies wouldn't get new updates or they would offer higher Pro subscription level that would give you access to a library of music, effects, graphics and education content on how to use the program, maybe even video hosting service. I'd imagine this would be targeted youtube content creators.

Youtube has a free music library
FCPX has a huge built in effects library both visual and audio (the audio is over 1500 effects)
The graphics are easy very to do. (and motion is $50)
As for educational content. FCPX is very intuitive and there are very many books and free YouTube videos already.

I can't see what you could add to FCPX as a pro bundle for a subscription version.

 

[stoneinapond]

Good tip. I've been using FCP for ages and have never used the position tool. Just tried it out wow!

'A' and 'P'. Once you grasp those two commands, the rest is easy.

 

[stoneinapond]

On the other hand, Apple abandoned Aperture (as noted above) around the height of the DSLR boom. So I’m not sure what Apple sees as the value of these software applications. It may be that they prefer to support new markets where they see a lack of enabling software. Once that gap is filled with competent third-party apps (e.g. Lightroom for Raw photo development and DAM, Resolve for video editing), Apple may see its job as done … and move on to the next big thing.

Aperture was retired because rewriting it for a 64-bit OS was not worth the effort. FCP X on the other hand was built from scratch for that reason. AFWIW, Apple just posted an update for FCP X the other day targeting bugs, so I would assume they are still interested in it.

 

[JAMedia]

Aperture was retired because rewriting it for a 64-bit OS was not worth the effort. FCP X on the other hand was built from scratch for that reason.

Both true but the FCPX launch was a decade ago. Things change.

AFWIW, Apple just posted an update for FCP X the other day targeting bugs, so I would assume they are still interested in it.

Currently they are interested in keeping FCPX running. However the same was true of the PCC CPU's until it wasn't and the same was true of the Intel CPU's until it wasn't... FCPX could go on for another decade (or two) or not. That is up to Apple. Personally I am not happy with where they reaper to be going or rather what I see as their philosophy

 

[Peter C.]

Youtube has a free music library
FCPX has a huge built in effects library both visual and audio (the audio is over 1500 effects)
The graphics are easy very to do. (and motion is $50)
As for educational content. FCPX is very intuitive and there are very many books and free YouTube videos already.

I can't see what you could add to FCPX as a pro bundle for a subscription version.

Apple is hard to figure out what they're going to do. Their priority seems to be creating an eco system that people stay in. Buy an iphone, imac, iwatch, etc

The additional content I was talking about would be swoosh sound effect, intro music, instrumental sound track, etc. All those text/transition effects haven't changes since FCPX was released over a decade ago. There are only a few themes for lower thirds and once you create a few projects they get pretty tired. Saying that, it's unlikely Apple would want to get into the content creating business they also don't want to sour their relationship on 3rd party developers. They could form a partnership with but again that's not Apple style either. So who knows, best to only concern yourself with the present.

 

[stoneinapond]

Currently they are interested in keeping FCPX running. However the same was true of the PCC CPU's until it wasn't and the same was true of the Intel CPU's until it wasn't... FCPX could go on for another decade (or two) or not. That is up to Apple. Personally I am not happy with where they reaper to be going or rather what I see as their philosophy

So my reading of your comment is you want Apple to freeze all innovation at some point in time. The exact moment would be decided by Apple, or a user poll (what a chorus of vituperative arguments that would create), so that change never has to happen?

 

[NorBro]

Apple is hard to figure out what they're going to do.

The additional content I was talking about is if you wanted a swoosh sound effect, intro music, instrumental sound track, etc. All those text/transition effects haven't changes since FCPX was released over a decade ago. There are only a few themes for lower thirds and once you create a few projects they get pretty tired. Saying that it's unlikely Apple would want to get into the business of creating content because they rely on 3rd parties to develop for FCP so they wouldn't want to sour that relationship. They could form a partnership with but again that's not Apple style either. So who knows, best to only concern yourself with the present.

There's no relationship; Apple doesn't care about others making content for their software.

All of those effects that are inside of FCP X are from Motion. They are created and animated there and published to work inside of FCP X; mostly shapes and particles and masks of different sizes and colors interacting with each other to produce lower-thirds and transitions.

They are there because of old software ideology and the concept of offering "starter" graphical elements.

___

IMO, Apple's future with FCP X is developing it into an AI application that is focused on optimizing video captured with their iPhones and iPads, with [some] continued legacy support and maintenance for manual human editing.

As someone who dearly loves FCP X, let's face it...this is a hobby for them.

They have maintained a presence in the industry that they helped build only for our contentment. But the bigger picture is barely anyone in Hollywood uses FCP X. IMO, there's no motivation to make it any better as Apple understands FCP X will never be Hollywood's main NLE while also knowing it's good enough for 99% of the rest of the world.

So what's left for your resources for this part of your business? Focusing on supplying billions of people AI editing for their photos and videos inside of their devices with few clicks.

Dozens of different results, instantly, that you can browse, swipe through and choose to upload to multiple online platforms. Sky replacements, object removal, image stabilization, deep learning, CC; all of this completed by the machine in your hands. (You would toggle your commands and what you'd like attempted like an iPhone menu.)

That's the kind of thinking these corporations have.

The way I see it, we are very lucky to still have FCP X and maybe will forever, but I would not expect major software advancements for FCP X's current form, only maintenance.

And unfortunately most-definitely a subscription model not only for the fact that these sort of business models increase revenues, but because they have our attention when the payments are recurring.

 

[JAMedia]

So my reading of your comment is you want Apple to freeze all innovation at some point in time. The exact moment would be decided by Apple, or a user poll (what a chorus of vituperative arguments that would create), so that change never has to happen?

I didn't say that and neither did I imply that.

However you are right that if Apple decide to freeze or stop any application or hardware they will do that regardless of what (some of) their customers think. They have done it multiple times before.

 

[JAMedia]

IMO, Apple's future with FCP X is developing it into an AI application that is focused on optimizing video captured with their iPhones and iPads, with [some] continued legacy support and maintenance for manual human editing. As someone who dearly loves FCP X, let's face it...this is a hobby for them.

I agree with that. The time when the Media Industry was the a core market for Apple has long gone.

They have maintained a presence in the industry that they helped build only for our contentment. But the bigger picture is barely anyone in Hollywood uses FCP X. IMO, there's no motivation to make it any better as Apple understands FCP X will never be Hollywood's main NLE while also knowing it's good enough for 99% of the rest of the world.

To be fair Hollywood is not the centre of the film world. It is a minor market for film production these days. Mumbai is bigger by all measures and over took Hollywood about 5 years ago. Other parts of the world have increased their footprint but it tends ot be more dispersed and agile these days. Even BlackMagic have realised this with their new ATEMS and Cameras.

So what's left for your resources for this part of your business? Focusing on supplying billions of people AI editing for their photos and videos inside of their devices with few clicks.

Dozens of different results, instantly, that you can browse, swipe through and choose to upload to multiple online platforms. Sky replacements, object removal, image stabilization, deep learning, CC; all of this completed by the machine in your hands. (You would toggle your commands and what you'd like attempted like an iPhone menu.) That's the kind of thinking these corporations have.

I think you are right. That is where it is going. Apple are chasing the iPhone, iPad, MacBook Air market of trendies. There are millions of them compared with thousands of us in the traditional film market. Also the New Apple M1 brings the Apple computer range in line with the iPhones and iPads. Also the OS is merging.

The way I see it, we are very lucky to still have FCP X and maybe will forever, but I would not expect major software advancements for FCP X's current form, only maintenance.

I think there will be more development but not in the same direction as most of NLE's but as you mentioned above of effects and swapping backgrounds for tiktok, Facebook and other social media. Also YouTube which is in both camps of social media and serious work.

And unfortunately most-definitely a subscription model not only for the fact that these sort of business models increase revenues, but because they have our attention when the payments are recurring.

I agree... those under 40 seem to see subscription for these things as "normal" it is getting on for a decade since Adobe started Creative cloud. I know a couple of 20 something's who had no idea that you used to be able to buy it outright. It's called "progress" and I am apparently a grumpy old man :-(

 

[morgan_moore]

Noone mentions/has thought of pay per click.

Im happy to pay when Im earning but a sub is a killer on the down times.

With pay per click Id have everything on my machine and use the appropriate tool.

With decent history/project management passing fees to client would be simple.

;;
App FCPx
Project: MyBrandChristmasVideo2021
Clicks 7821
Price per click, $.01
Cost of project $7.82
;;

You could even multiply this to create an edit fee.

 

[Samuel Dilworth]

As someone who dearly loves FCP X, let's face it...this is a hobby for them.

They have maintained a presence in the industry that they helped build only for our contentment. But the bigger picture is barely anyone in Hollywood uses FCP X. IMO, there's no motivation to make it any better as Apple understands FCP X will never be Hollywood's main NLE while also knowing it's good enough for 99% of the rest of the world.

Hollywood isn’t the bigger picture for software but a niche, irrelevant market to a company of Apple’s size. Likewise, making Final Cut Pro more suitable for Hollywood productions wouldn’t make it “better”. Going in the opposite direction might make it better: easier to use, cheaper, more relevant to more users. Huge numbers of hobbyists will never pay hundreds of dollars for a video editor with a 900-page user guide. There’s a big gap between free iMovie and $300 (or nearly $400 here in France) FCP.

The AI stuff you speculate about is depressingly likely, though it might taken another couple of years to arrive.

I can’t see Apple straightforwardly charging $10 a month for Final Cut Pro as we know it. Even less likely is a choice of perpetual licence or subscription for the same software. That wouldn’t be very Apple. Unless I’m missing the purpose of Apple developing FCP. It’s a little unclear to me why they dropped Aperture but continued to develop FCP. The transition to 64-bit mysteriously preventing only Aperture from being re-optimised doesn’t cut it as a plausible reason.

 

[JAMedia]

Unless I’m missing the purpose of Apple developing FCP. It’s a little unclear to me why they dropped Aperture but continued to develop FCP. The transition to 64-bit mysteriously preventing only Aperture from being re-optimised doesn’t cut it as a plausible reason.

It was to do with licenseing and legalities of some of the components inside FCPX. It think form memory another company bought the company who supplied some of the components inside FCP 7 and said these would not me made available to Apple for a 64 bit FCP. So Apple had to ether drop FCP or do an all new 64 Bit app or kill it. As we can see FCP7 was popular. It also gave Apple the chance to move FCP(X) in look and feel to be more of an iMovie plus to attrace the casual/trendy user rather than the serious "hollywood" market.

AFAIK FCPX is used world wide and has as many paying users (outside Holywood) as Resolve has paying+ Free, with both being approximately the same cost. So Apple made a good financial call there. It is clear Apple is not primarily targeting the traditional Hollywood type market.

For Aperture I think it was already loosing out to Lightroom but who knows? Was it also using software components that it could not licence for the 64 bit version.

This is why I am moving off Apple to PC. I have more options, it is not all proprietary and locked in to some one else's unfathomable strategy.

 

[Samuel Dilworth]

How many FCP users has Apple got?

The installed Mac base is pretty big these days, and more and more people are editing video. Almost everyone still uses a Mac in the Parisian ad agencies I work for. Maybe the FCP numbers are bigger than I imagine.

This is why I am moving off Apple to PC. I have more options, it is not all proprietary and locked in to some one else's unfathomable strategy.

Totally understand. It drives me crazy. The abrupt termination of Aperture (I loved that program and spent a long time mastering its use, especially the DAM side) continues to haunt me. You never know when capricious Apple will pull the rug from under your feet. Even this rumoured subscription change: Apple won’t say a word about it until the last moment. Makes planning any kind of change needlessly difficult.

 

[JAMedia]

How many FCP users has Apple got?

I can't substantiate this but I believe that both FCPX and Resolve have about 2 million users each. I have seen these figures from more than one source but I don't know if they are all repeating the same Urban Myth or if anyone has a solid source for one or both.

FCPX is HUGE through out the whole world except Southern California
Most of the Resolve users get it free either with a BMD camera, edit desk hardware or like me I paid for it and got a $250 Speed Editor Keybaord free.
Many just use the Free version that has a few limitations compared to the Studio version.
I am not sure how may pay full price for just Resolve Studio.

The installed Mac base is pretty big these days, and more and more people are editing video. Almost everyone still uses a Mac in the Parisian ad agencies I work for. Maybe the FCP numbers are bigger than I imagine.

Yes the Mac base is growing but this is the "trendy" iPhone/iPad and MacBook Air community. The heavy pro Media users still have macs but they are now a very small minority of Mac users. The New users are moving up from iMovie and are only looking to go as far as social media and YouTube. Unlike Resolve which has only just added the ability to upload to ONE YouTube account and ONE Vimeo account FCPX lets you set up any number to tempaltes to deliver to any number of different YouTube accounts. Apple seems to be aiming for a different market (As does BMD slowly). This is clear from the Trash Can Pro and the latest one which does not make sense for the entry and mid range models. It really only makes sense for the high end Pro studios that are going to buy the maxed out $50K versions.

Totally understand. It drives me crazy. The abrupt termination of Aperture (I loved that program and spent a long time mastering its use, especially the DAM side) continues to haunt me. You never know when capricious Apple will pull the rug from under your feet. Even this rumoured subscription change: Apple won’t say a word about it until the last moment. Makes planning any kind of change needlessly difficult.

BTW same happened with Lightroom despite "promises" that it would always be stand-alone after the 6.17 version they said NO MORE UPDATES. and they only updated the CC subscription version. :-( then google changed the interface to google maps and Lightroom 6.17 cant access the maps anymore. Adobe won't update it. So Apple isn't the only not quite so good guy.

I nearly went for Aperture but at the time Lightroom just piped it because it was both Mac and PC... a decision that has paid off as I can and have moved my Lightroom to my new PC.

 

[NorBro]

To be fair Hollywood is not the centre of the film world. It is a minor market for film production these days. Mumbai is bigger by all measures and over took Hollywood about 5 years ago. Other parts of the world have increased their footprint but it tends ot be more dispersed and agile these days. Even BlackMagic have realised this with their new ATEMS and Cameras.

Hollywood isn’t the bigger picture for software but a niche, irrelevant market to a company of Apple’s size. Likewise, making Final Cut Pro more suitable for Hollywood productions wouldn’t make it “better”. Going in the opposite direction might make it better: easier to use, cheaper, more relevant to more users. Huge numbers of hobbyists will never pay hundreds of dollars for a video editor with a 900-page user guide. There’s a big gap between free iMovie and $300 (or nearly $400 here in France) FCP.

Hollywood is very much the bigger picture for software.

BUT...although Hollywood, California USA is the only Hollywood in my own world, there are many Hollywoods that exist.

The comment was about a status symbol; chasing money, users, popularity, fame.

You can ask almost anyone in world - even those who do not have a computer - what people use to edit photos, and it's likely 99% will answer Photoshop. This is a term that has been ingrained in brains, especially by various social media trends.

"Can't you just photoshop it?"

That's Hollywood.

If you can't sell as much software as your iPhones then you want Hollywood fame.

FCP X has been stuck in a plateau for a long time.

 

[JAMedia]

Hollywood is very much the bigger picture for software.

It hasn't been for years. Ask Apple.
Just because you live in the bubble it doesn't mean the rest of the world views it as the centre of anything. Which is doesn't.
I expect that many extinct species didn't think the end was near until after it happened.

You can ask almost anyone in world - even those who do not have a computer - what people use to edit photos, and it's likely 99% will answer Photoshop. This is a term that has been ingrained in brains, especially by various social media trends. "Can't you just photoshop it?"

Except the Trade name has become a common noun like "hoover", "biro" etc There are many other programs out there eg gimp but it's users still refer to photoshoping an image...
Also a lot of people have moved to other programs, Affinity springs to mind, after CC started.

FCP X has been stuck in a plateau for a long time.

Yes a plateau of being at the top. It has more users than many of the other NLE's that they are non and semi pro's moving up from iMovie is neither here not there.

 

[NorBro]

It hasn't been for years. Ask Apple.
Just because you live in the bubble it doesn't mean the rest of the world views it as the centre of anything. Which is doesn't.

Are you reading, or just itching to write a reply to everything?

That grumpy old man is coming out...lol.

 

[JAMedia]

Are you reading, or just itching to write a reply to everything?

That grumpy old man is coming out...lol.

Are you reading, or just itching to write a reply to everything?

That grumpy old man is coming out...lol.