New FCP due in spring

Question: Does a fully managed colorsync FCP mean no more need for "broadcast accurate" monitors? Basically, WYSIWYG for video color correction? What I see on my monitor is what I'll see on output to HDTV, etc.??

2nd Question: Does resolution independent rendering mean that I can just make one sequence with varying media sizes, and then output to HD, or SD, or web, or whatever, without having to worry like I do right now about this situation: Sometimes on FCP7 I'll have made an SD-sequence and using HD/SD footage, where I down-rez the HD, thinking I will have primarily SD footage. But then, later on wishing I had made an HD-sequence and upconverted the SD footage instead? Does resolution independence mean just one type of timeline and FCP figures out the rest and I never lose quality or have to re-scale/re-distort/un-distort footage and aspect ratios to get it right? (if you're wondering, this comes into play when I work on say a promo video that starts with mostly SD cameras, and then slowly over 2-3 years gets continually updated with newer footage from newer cameras and clips/footage gets replaced overtime, to the point where it's almost all HD). Does this do away with that worry?
 
Last edited:
Buck Forester & filmguy123 - You're right. I work for a web design company that packages video into some of our offerings. I and another guy handle all the video production. Sadly my job is being turned into a desk job as my boss is under the belief that anyone can go out and shoot anything with a hand held camera. To him all the magic happens in the computer in post. I never wanted to be an animator and I'm seriously debating keeping my job as a result. But you guys make it sound pretty grim out there for someone who has been considering starting their own video production company.
 
I'm not worried about unskilled people getting easy to use gear and trying to compete. The fact is if a client doesn't want to pay, they won't. My stuff looks good, and more importantly SOUNDS better than anyone in my area, which makes my clients notice when they see/hear other stuff after seeing mine. The tools make it not only more simple for the noobs, it makes it more simple for experienced pros. So I can knock out a 30 second TV ad that looks great for 300.00 in 5 hours. I know 300.00 is a disgustingly low amount. I have to do it for that because the going rate in this town. So the quicker I am able to crap out a 30 spot, the better work/pay ratio I get. And everyone knows my work now, so they call me when they want a "real" project like recording a live show, or to do a DVD etc. Then I get the bigger bucks. It's my skill that gets me the jobs and it's my gear that makes it take less time to execute the jobs.

Here's what I'm putting out for about 5 hrs and 300 bones: http://www.youtube.com/ChadWork1#p/c/EDF88C12C45E6872/0/Y2yPLh2Mp2M
 
roxics, I'd in no way want to paint a discouraging picture, it's just a different picture than what used to be. If one rolls with the changes and becomes an expert at the technology, as well as having good shooting skills, you're good. There are now so many niche publications and websites, as well as the internet in general, that opens up a whole new world that never existed. It's more than just taking good pictures or good video these days, it's also about learning and using technology to really work it.

I was a film photographer, shot Fuji Velvia 50 slides, wilderness landscapes, and did quite well with publications, assignment work, and selling prints. The digital revolution came along and made it much easier for hobbyists to crank out excellent stuff, even if it was inconsistent. A hobbyist can take 10,000 pics a day if they wanted and come away with one good shot, or they can take 100 pics and spend a couple hours in Photoshop and come away with a zinger. But that said, as Chadfish mentioned, these tools also allow for professionals to kick it up a notch too if they become very proficient with the technology. It's just not an art form anymore, it's art and technology combined.

But with the internet I can now get literally millions of views, even on a place like Flickr with tagged photos, and thus have a much larger market/audience/access to my images. So it's actually been a boon to me, not a bummer, although I'm behind on the tech curve because I got married and have a couple little kids and took a break from creating/learning new stuff. National Geographic can search Flickr tags and contact the photographer directly for publication (happened to me), or Outdoor Photographer, or people wanting prints, or niche websites or magazines you've never heard of find you. I've gotten very lucrative commissioned shoots from companies Googling a subject and finding my image in Google Images and hire me. These are fantastic times if you can get your head above everyone elses by using your talent and technology to your advantage. I sell prints for less $$ these days than before, but the cost of printing is down and I make up for it in volume from the internet exposure. Things are better than ever.

My video business model will be based on stock footage, wilderness adventures and wilderness docs sold directly from my website, hopefully some airtime on HD cable channels, eventually an HD channel outdoor show or two, so combined with photography I'm very excited about the future. As long as you're the best, or really good in your niche, you can rock it. Your experience in web design is a huge plus, wish I had that background.
 
I'm generally disappointed. I was hoping for a release that would compete with PP CS5, or heck, even CS4. Like... hmm... DVDSP that will be blu-ray capable? Like Apple is so far behind with that it's not even funny.

I really feel that after they have done all their marketing analysis and realized that there is way more money in the amateur market to warrant an upgrade from iMovie and make it a FCExpress 'ish product for release. If they don't say anything about a full Pro Studio package within the next year, it is clear that they have abandoned the Pro market.

Some of you have comment that it is 'smart' for Apple to release this to draw in more people from Vegas or other PC market for Final Cut. That's probably true from the business perspective. But it is absolutely of no use for us pro users.
 
Some of you have comment that it is 'smart' for Apple to release this to draw in more people from Vegas or other PC market for Final Cut. That's probably true from the business perspective. But it is absolutely of no use for us pro users.
Click to expand...

You know it's funny that you mentioned this.
As a former Vegas user, this reminds me of Vegas on steroids.
Personally speaking I am psyched about this update, as the overall impression I got was that it was very Vegas like.
I love Vegas, as it was always rock solid, gave me a real time workflow, was very streamlined in it's workflow, and rendered everything great (even slow motion).
But when Vista came around, I finally had it with Windows and jumped ship to OSX.

I still use Vegas from time to time via Bootcamp, but preferred the power of FCP. Now at least to me I might finally be able to settle on an NLE that I love to work in. As I get a more streamlined interface that enables me to work from the timeline as well as FINALLY get the ability to work and preview in realtime. Not to mention the ability to get better audio preformance, Color reproduction workflow (Looks very Color like), and the ability to encode to any format from within the program itself. So in other words there might not be much of a need for full programs like Motion, Color, Compressor, DVDSP etc. If you need more functionality then you can purchase the full program from the Apple App store.

And in regards to your comment about BluRay. I don't think that Apple will ever address BluRay, as their focus and bread and butter is strictly now in digital delivery and streaming video. DVDSP didnt get touched for the last update, and I wouldn't be surprised if it isn't really touched this round, or even more is gone completely. Eventually streaming media will be the future. It's not here yet, but will be soon enough.
 
chromeboy007 said:
I'm generally disappointed. I was hoping for a release that would compete with PP CS5, or heck, even CS4. Like... hmm... DVDSP that will be blu-ray capable? Like Apple is so far behind with that it's not even funny.

I really feel that after they have done all their marketing analysis and realized that there is way more money in the amateur market to warrant an upgrade from iMovie and make it a FCExpress 'ish product for release. If they don't say anything about a full Pro Studio package within the next year, it is clear that they have abandoned the Pro market.

Some of you have comment that it is 'smart' for Apple to release this to draw in more people from Vegas or other PC market for Final Cut. That's probably true from the business perspective. But it is absolutely of no use for us pro users.
Click to expand...

Sorry but I'm not sure if you've really read up on FCP X or watched the video linked earlier in the thread. FCP X looks amazing from a professional standpoint. Did you see the video I linked to?? Color is basically incorporated in; STP is basically brought in. Nothing has been dumbed down, this blows doors on anything else I've seen at least in the areas that matter to ME. Like vegas06 said, it takes many ideas that were done before and incorporates and/or improves upon them, yet while on the foundation of FCP which has always been the most stable and well featured editor other than Avid, from what I have experienced. Maybe other people prefer a few features of another suite, but FCP X looks fantastic. This has not been made FCP Express-ish or iMovie-esque (incorporates great UI elements and features, but not at the expense of the full power of FCP), and forget the price or their reasoning - worry about the software itself.

You're main point is it being Blu-Ray capable and I won't disagree, except to say, are you surprised? I'll be shocked if Apple ever backs Blu-Ray. That is disappointing, but it's nothing new and has been widely realized and debated for 4 years. As far as non-linear editor goes, this thing kills it.

Also note that this is a SNEAK PEEK, not a launch - hence nothing on Apple.com - there is a whole lot they didn't talk about, and if you've been reading this thread or around the net you'd know they have yet to talk about the other suite apps. Watch the videos I posted a little bit ago. I've been editing for 12 years now and I'm completely stoked about what I've seen so far, with a couple questions and curiosities but I feel rather confident and at ease seeing the tremendous attention to detail put into the application thus far.
 
filmguy123 said:
HD Video of the event!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-77beFICSlI&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAXL7L9fToQ&feature=player_embedded

Hopefully Apple won't remove, I'd watch them while you can
Click to expand...

If you missed these - after watching them and seeing it in action, I am very excited. I was also able to watch in HD and pause at certain points to read what was in the menus of features that WEREN'T covered and it looks like there's lots of good stuff!
 
I'm excited. I'm happy. Most of my editing happens on THE TIMELINE, and it seems like that's gotten way slicker. Sure, I'll have to re-think how I edit, but if I can nest sequences within sequences, and group stuff together, it seems like editing is going to be *so* much faster and easier! Also, I LOVE how the clips can be organized now.

I'm not psyched about auto-correcting this and that. I'm not so excited about keywording or auto-detecting medium shots. I'm not excited about every kid with a GoPro claiming they're an 'editor'. But I think making editing easier is tremendous. Resolution-independent editing (whatever *that* is), smoother timeline, 64-bit, and using all cores are things I can get REALLY excited about!
 
Oh, and forgot the one missing studio app that no one seems to be talking about: COMPRESSOR. It is the lifeblood of our TV doc post house. We get stuff in so many wacky formats, we use it ten times a day, and let it run over weekends. Sure, it has plenty of shortcomings, but we absolutely can't do without it!
 
Last edited:
Wowza, just saw the presentation for myself and I'm not sure what the complainers are talking about... it freakin' looks awesome!
 
Buck Forester said:
Professional photography clearly did not go through the same processes with polaroids and instamatics. Those weren't technologies that allowed for pictures to 'technically' be taken on the same par as a professional. Note the word 'technically' and not 'artistically'. So once you have the 'technical' parity, then one can use technology to approach the 'artistically'. Pro photographers in the 70's and 80's and much of the 90's did not have serious competition from hobbyists. Introduce affordable dslr's and Photoshop, and hobbyists now have a complete darkroom, so to speak, at their fingertips to manipulate images any way they wish... didn't know how to white balance? No prob... click. As good or better than a pro did in the field. Didn't know how to set exposure? No prob, slide exposure *perfectly* to taste in Lightroom. Blown out highlights and dark shadows a prob and don't know how to use filters in the field to nail it? No prob, simply bracket three RAW exposures in the field and come back to PS and merge them to nail a huge dynamic range perfectly. It's even better than a GND in the field because there's no dark areas from the filter. Or one can process the same RAW image for different exposures and combine them into a perfectly exposed image from shadows to highlites that normally could not be achieved on film. Need to dodge or burn specific areas? No prob in post. Don't like that dead branch in the corner? Crop it out or simply clone it out. Don't like your composition? Well, with 20 heckapixels to work with, crop as you want and still have a poster-sized print.

If you don't think that has had a huge impact on the pro market, then you're not in it. I'm in it. Art Wolfe and Peter Lik are in it. They're not doing "Edge" movies for kicks and giggles, it's part of their new business plan to make a living because the stock agencies are now inundated with amazing images. It's also much more difficult for a pro to charge $500 for a 16x20 when there are so many amazing pics of the same scene from gazillions of people only asking $60 for the same sized print from the same pro lab. The new big names you see in Outdoor Photographer Magazine are nearly all from within the last few years... hobbyists with new, inexpensive tools that allowed them to compete with the pros. There's a YouTube video on Art Wolfe talking about this too. The digital revolution has leveled the playing field and the old guard is rethinking their strategy or retiring.

You don't think wedding photographers and videographers are now competing in the marketplace with Uncle Bob with a new digital camera/vid who says he'll shoot the darn thing and edit with fancy transitions? The serious hobbyists (which probably many of us here are/were not long ago) hit the pro market big time, and now Uncle Bob is even hitting the semi-pro market. I'm not saying Uncle Bob will make a video on par as a pro by any means, but it DOES affect the $$ marketplace in a big way.

If you didn't think technology was important, you wouldn't be on this forum learning about the 'latest' tech stuff to improve your offerings. I don't care how good you are talent-wise, if you were shooting an old VHS camcorder and editing with two VHS machines, you could not compete with an end product against a serious hobbyist shooting an EX1 and editing on FCP with a Mac Pro who also had jibs/stabilizers, color correction and was to be shown on a 60" HD 1080p television. Technology DOES matter. A lot. It's why we're here in the first place. Those who always say, "it's all about the talent" are missing a big piece of the puzzle these days. It's usually the older guys saying it's all about the talent. And I'm getting pretty old, ha ha! But still young enough to see the young technologically-amazing whipper snappers pass me by.
Click to expand...

I think you're missing an important point. You kinda want to have your cake and eat it, too... professionals have always paid a lot more for their equipment than consumers. A Brownie or a Polaroid did indeed raise the bar and threaten the quality that "older" professionals achieved with their more expensive equipment at the time. I certainly paid a lot more money 5 years ago for my first HD camera - a lot less capable than many much cheaper cameras available now. The same with audio equipment. I am not saying equipment is NOT important to a professional.. it's that proferssionals have to keep investing in new technologies to stay ahead of the consumers. That's always been the case. Maybe now the issue is 3D. Maybe it's 4k. Likely it's something we're not even thinking about. But the level of "professional" is still far above the level of "consumer." In your example, "an EX1 and editing on FCP with a Mac Pro who also had jibs/stabilizers, color correction" already is a huge step above the "consumer" level that you're worried about. Even knowing how (and being willing to) assemble all that gear for a shoot is more effort than your auto-assisted consumer will ever make.

And, the doofus with autofocus and auto white balance auto gain will still not match the pro with older equipment that knows how to use it. And can't come near the pro who just invested in the latest and greatest. The doofus still won't have lighting, audio, framing, camera motion, scene setup, etc. to match. Fixing it in post is still not as good as doing it right. And the post processes you talk about take skill, creativity, and time to be other than cheeseball automatic effects. Maybe one demo of a template "trailer" is good looking. By the third "trailer" made by the same template, it's pretty sucky.

When disposable cameras appeared, and people started dropping a camera on each table at a wedding for guests to shoot themselves, some photographers worried... needlessly. The same for cheap digital cameras. The same with cheap audio and video recorders at performances. Pro skills and pro gear have always trumped in situations where people WANT a pro product.


What's more interesting, and more to the point, is that CONSUMERS are accepting much lower quality these days. Audio quality, since the advent of MP3 players, has dropped overall. On-line video still doesn't match the smoothness and quality of disc-based formats. Reality TV doesn't have (or demand, or even generally want) the artistry of traditional programming. The consumer these days is kind of enthralled with consumer-produced media; and that changes a lot of what people will expect.
 
Last edited:
From http://provideocoalition.com/index....._flashy_things_are_seen_questions_are_asked/

A user has been using the beta of FCP X Chimes in:


Ronny Courtens posted some helpful info that I think professionals want to hear.

” Hi Steve,

I have been working on a major project during the past six months and I was not able to participate in any board anymore. From today you can count me in again.

As to your concern about FCP X:

You are correct that the new GUI may take some time to adapt to. But althhough It looks a bit like iMovie that’s where the comparison ends. While in iMovie you are stuck with the specific iMovie way of editing, in FCPX you can edit exactly the same way you as did in FCP7. You can just open clips in the viewer, place in and out points, use 3-point editing etc… And if you don’t wish to use the advaced timeline features your timeline will look much like any timeline in FCP, Avid or PPro.

But if you wish you can also use some handy extra features that were taken from iMovie (such as skimming in timeline and viewer) as well as lots of advanced features that are specific to this new app. These of course will take time to get used to, but many of them really seem worth while learning. The new application is still being beta tested and it remains to be seen what Apple will add or drop in the final version.

I don’t mind getting used to a new interface and new features IF this adds functionality and speed to my current workflow. When we switched from Avid to FCP it took some time to adapt to the different GUI, but editing was the same and the GUI was quickly forgotten. I still switch from FCP to Avid and PPro on rare occasions and frankly this does not bother me.

Best wishes

Ronny”
Click to expand...
 
roxics said:
How do you do that whole thing in five hours? I'd be billing that as a half day shoot by itself, just to drive out, setup lights and camera in multiple locations and direct the acting. None of that would be counting pre or post production time.
Click to expand...

Well my motto is, "Keep it simple". I first either get a script or bullet points from the client. Crank out 25 sec of copy, then record the VO and add music either from Final Cut Studio, or Footage Firm libraries I bought for 8 bucks a pop. There's about 30 min. Then based on the script I write the shots I want (Pots, Plants, Store Wide Shot, Fountain, etc) , or the client has ideas that I execute. I usually only bring my 2 small LED lights if I have someone on camera, and I keep a look out for the best light coming in a window. I try to keep the shoot to under 2 hours. So there's 2.5 hrs. Then I dump it and edit. If my shot list was well thought out, I don't need to think much in editing - just put up the shot I planned, slather on some magic bullet looks, render, youtube for approval, NTSC version for TV - upload to server of whatever station. It's not always 5 hours. But a lot of my spots are just Chad VO and shots of the store/products. Sometimes they want to do an on-cam. My brother will act for free for me because he thinks its fun, so that opens up some possibilities. Sometimes I go over. Sometimes I want to go over because I see I'm on to a good thing, and want to build up my work examples. The way I figure it, before I was making 15.00 an hour which came to 120.00 or so a day before tax. So if I can make 300.00 in a day I'm doing pretty good. Problem is I don't have one job a day.... So I do jingles and other video related stuff wherever I can get it.

You just gotta hustle.
 
filmguy123 said:
Sorry but I'm not sure if you've really read up on FCP X or watched the video linked earlier in the thread. FCP X looks amazing from a professional standpoint. Did you see the video I linked to?? Color is basically incorporated in; STP is basically brought in. Nothing has been dumbed down, this blows doors on anything else I've seen at least in the areas that matter to ME. Like vegas06 said, it takes many ideas that were done before and incorporates and/or improves upon them, yet while on the foundation of FCP which has always been the most stable and well featured editor other than Avid, from what I have experienced. Maybe other people prefer a few features of another suite, but FCP X looks fantastic. This has not been made FCP Express-ish or iMovie-esque (incorporates great UI elements and features, but not at the expense of the full power of FCP), and forget the price or their reasoning - worry about the software itself.

You're main point is it being Blu-Ray capable and I won't disagree, except to say, are you surprised? I'll be shocked if Apple ever backs Blu-Ray. That is disappointing, but it's nothing new and has been widely realized and debated for 4 years. As far as non-linear editor goes, this thing kills it.

Also note that this is a SNEAK PEEK, not a launch - hence nothing on Apple.com - there is a whole lot they didn't talk about, and if you've been reading this thread or around the net you'd know they have yet to talk about the other suite apps. Watch the videos I posted a little bit ago. I've been editing for 12 years now and I'm completely stoked about what I've seen so far, with a couple questions and curiosities but I feel rather confident and at ease seeing the tremendous attention to detail put into the application thus far.
Click to expand...

Yeah. I hope in the coming months some of my concerns will be addressed and the release is to have all the things I want. We'll see.

But how can Apple NOT back blu-ray? It's only a matter of time until the BR market moves ahead of the DVD market...
 
Guys,
Don't worry about your jobs because of FCP X price. It won't change anything, simply because Average Joes don't buy softwares, they download hacked versions. So FCP X could be $1500 i wouldn't matter, they will download it for free anyways. They always did.
I buy my softwares because I am a pro and I support our industry... and I wan't my sh*t to work and deliver on time. But the Average Joe everybody is so afraid of is sketchy, (if he wasn't, he would be a pro) therefore, he hacks softwares No Matter It's Price!!

Blame it on DSLRs, since you can't have a hacked copy if a 7D :p

Im not worried about my job anyways, yes there are a bunch of sketchy Joes around town, but big companies don't do business with them. or if they do, it's a one time deal untill they realise they ended up with an B-quality product
 
chromeboy007 said:
But how can Apple NOT back blu-ray? It's only a matter of time until the BR market moves ahead of the DVD market...
Click to expand...

Well I don't want to beat a dead horse so I'll give you the summary from the past 4 years: Apple thinks Blu-Ray is a very temporary format for the vast majority of people. They see the future as being completely online/on demand digital delivery and don't see the point in investing time/resource into Blu-Ray, either in software development for pro-apps or including it in any Macbook/iMac/Mac Pro system. Not fighting for their view in any way, I think Blu Ray is more important than that personally, but I'll unfortunately be shocked to see support from Apple.

Other than that gripe though, I have little to complain about. I actually own Premiere/Encore CS5 and tried out Premiere for a couple projects. Even with it's feature list, Final Cut Pro just feels and functions cleaner and more stable. And I say that having started with Premiere CS2 originally. Though, NLEs are certainly left up to personal preference and need at a personal point and I think that's a great thing. That said, unless some fears come to pass and they actually manage to screw up FCP X, I think this new release is gonna kill it. At the very least, for my personal needs.
 
filmguy123 said:
Well I don't want to beat a dead horse so I'll give you the summary from the past 4 years: Apple thinks Blu-Ray is a very temporary format for the vast majority of people. They see the future as being completely online/on demand digital deliver....
Click to expand...

Thanks man... but I'm tired of hearing how digital download is gonna kill the physical copy market... video is not music. You can't download 50GB's to watch a blu-ray quality movie, renting at the store will be cheaper even if internet speed is fast enough to dl 50GB's.

One thing I do like about FCP over Premiere is its stability. So at $300 bones it's not bad... we'll see the full specs soon hopefully.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top