New Features Coming To FCP X

kolak said:
Yes, but 90% out of this 100M was made on iPhone and iPad and this is the main market for Apple now. I won't be surprised if we won't see new MAC PRO.
FCPX confirms that Apple is done with Pro industry- I don't understand how people can't see it....or they don't want to see it :)
I think best times for Apple are about to end- it's already starting with phones- Android phones are taking over Apple phones.
Click to expand...

Really? Done with Pros? How then do you explain the recent news of a collaboration with Autodesk to port Smoke $3,500 to the Mac?
If that's not a Pro ticket for the 21st Century I'd sure like to see one that is.
Here's the NAB presentation....
http://youtu.be/EufqQ_6hLTY
 
Last edited:
Zephyrnoid said:
Really? Done with Pros? How then do you explain the recent news of a collaboration with Autodesk to port Smoke $3,500 to the Mac?
If that's not a Pro ticket for the 21st Century I'd sure like to see one that is.
Here's the NAB presentation....
http://youtu.be/EufqQ_6hLTY
Click to expand...
Aw man I can't wait for this. Done with pros? LOL! Some pro's are going to be done if they don't get out of that box they're in!
This is why everyday I spend at least 1/2 hour editing anything with FCPX, so that I'm intuitive when it all comes together.
By the way, in that video you see a MBP17, a thunderbolt media center, and the 27in TB display. That program was cooking on that setup.
 
Mac Pro towers are the only "pro" computers? Seriously? Smoke 2013 now runs on a MBP. FCP's original claim to fame was that it ran on a laptop, and "pros" climbed all over that fact. It was that it did the work with less hardware. Now PPro and MC run on laptops, following FCP's lead. So what does a Mac Pro tower do? And if we get a new one, everyone is demanding it have T'bolt ports.

I have a maxed out Mac Pro tower. A couple months ago I edited for two weeks at someone elses office, on their brand new MBP, RAM maxed out, an a LaCie 2TB T'bolt drive. It out performed my Mac Pro tower by a great deal. Was more stable, faster, just better in every possible way. So why would I spend the money on a tower when I can get that power in a laptop and have the portability? To think something isn't professional unless it's a tower, well, that's just not so true any longer.

And if Apple is done with supporting the professional market, then why is there a 10 year development plan in place for FCP X, and why are those folks on the "In Action" page on Apple's web site using FCP X? Why does Resolve and Smoke read FCPXML? Why are all of the FCP X classes I've been teaching for months sell out, and half of the students are long time seasoned pros who are just crazy over using FCP X cause it's better than legacy NLEs?

To say at this time Apple doesn't care about the professional market, and that FCP X is not a professional editing application is simply ignorance of the facts.

Adobe has already copied much of FCP X with skimming, interface, Prelude. Resolve's new interface looks a lot like FCP X now. Everyone's dropping prices now that FCP X delivers a lot of professional editing tools for only $300. Metadata, digital workflow based on digital technology rather than physical film negative cutting technology and workflow, that's the future. Like it or not, that's where everyone is going. More and better digital film cameras are being released all the time. Look at Blackmagic Cinema Camera. But the last manufacturer of film movie cameras stopped making them, and their days are now numbered. The amount of video tape (of any type) being sold is shrinking. Codecs are improving all the time. The need of massive towers is not really something I consider "pro", but "out of date".

FCP X and Apple not "pro" anymore? That's the most laughable statement I've heard in awhile. Besides, no one can agree on what is "pro" any more, anyway. Wedding videographers can do same day edits with iMovie. I know a couple who do, and took my FCP X class at a local university (LSU) two weeks ago, and now do those same day edits with FCP X on the same MBPs. Are they not pros? I have several clients who work for broadcast stations, and are now cutting news in the field on MBP's with FCP X. Are they not pros? Hollywood and cable broadcast are a drop in the bucket of what is "pro" today.

Think I'll go watch Leverage and see how that show is not produced by professionals because they use FCP X...
 
If they would have respect to pro users than they would not make everything going through MOV.
Something like AVC-I should be in MXF container as this is its spec- not in MOV. They are the main to blame for whole mess with the file formats as they don't give a sxxx about spec- just pack everything into MOV!
Everyone can do it properly/per spec but not Apple. FCP7 is a joke in terms of performance these days, FCPX is good, but nothing special. FCPX should shine as it's very new NLE, but it's not even on pair with other NLEs out there, which actually need also new engines.
No- they don't care, but if someone is happy with FCPX than there is no reason to stop using it.
 
Just a reminder, please stay on topic.

This thread is about new features coming to FCP X.

It will not permitted to fall into a "Apple hates the pros," or "Apple loves the pros" flame war.

Take those exchanges off the boards.

Thanks.
 
Hey David, can I drop one more in here? How about "Apple makes people pros". LOL, I had too.

But back to topic. Apple has, will, and continue to release better and better updates to FCPX. No doubt. But the good thing is, if FCPX doesn't work for you, there are lots of choices out there for you to go with. I'm gonna stick with a company that thinks outside the box. The 10.0.4 update was very nice. The program flies now. 10.0.5, then .6, and maybe 11.0.1 should be exciting.
 
I don't think they'll do a version 11. I think they are doing 10.0.4, and 10.0.5 so that "FCPX 2.0" would actually be 10.1 (sort of like they do with OS X). Haha I know it's minor and random but I always like to think about their future product naming schemes.

As far as towers, I think they go hand-in. yes, laptops are great and speedy nowadays! But there absolutely is need for towers still, more than ever with FCPX actually, since it can actually take full advantage of the hardware. If a laptop ran faster than a tower that says nothing about the power of a tower VS a laptop, but the power of specific hardware configurations.

Can't wait for 10.0.5. The big bullet point items are great, but my highest hopes are around all the little features that hopefully get addressed (copy/paste individual filters, color wheel, saved in/out points, export work area, etc.)
 
QT Pro player will import image files, and export to whatever codec you want.

One more step, but it doesn't take very long.
 
Can I set render format in FCPX to something different than ProRes (something uncompressed, like v210)?
 
If this is a generation shift with the new Ivy chips everyone is hanging on for, plus Thunderbolt tech built-in, then there may well not be MacPros.
In the same way that the PowerMacs got discontinued.

I think there will be a totally new product.

A slab of tech - cores, RAM, GPU, rather like the Aleph in Mona Lisa Overdrive.
And the ability to be inter-connected and unified with others via Thunderbolt into a cluster, rather like the CrayLink on the old SGI's.

'Cos as fantastic as my Dec2011 MacbookPro is for running all this stuff, if huffs and puffs with fans when it's taxed.
It's when I sit on my 2010 specced out MacPro with a new Quadro card and Nuke, it's like a knife through butter through jobs. Pure brute force.


'iAleph'
 
KyleProhaska said:
No, not for the timeline you can't. You can export to a different format though.
Click to expand...


Hmmm- so what if I have a nice uncompressed footage, do my editing/grading/effects and want to export to v210- will it go first to ProRes and than convert to v210?
Can I keep uncompressed quality from the source to the export or will it always go through ProRes? Does it always render in background and during export use rendered file?
 
Okay.

Stop the the exchanges relating to whether FCP X supports or doesn't support the "pros."

We went down that route in a couple of dozen thread here last June, and there is no need to revisit the same pro and cons arguments that were soundly debated then.

My last warning.

Thank you.
 
David Saraceno said:
Okay.

Stop the the exchanges relating to whether FCP X supports or doesn't support the "pros."

We went down that route in a couple of dozen thread here last June, and there is no need to revisit the same pro and cons arguments that were soundly debated then.

My last warning.

Thank you.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but this has nothing to do with "pro" discussion.
Just asked about FCPX feature/possibilities.
 
kolak said:
Hmmm- so what if I have a nice uncompressed footage, do my editing/grading/effects and want to export to v210- will it go first to ProRes and than convert to v210?
Can I keep uncompressed quality from the source to the export or will it always go through ProRes? Does it always render in background and during export use rendered file?
Click to expand...

You can edit in ProRes lite as a proxy and then before exporting you can change it back to the original files, simply by hitting a button and then export it as uncompressed.
 
Cory Braun said:
You can edit in ProRes lite as a proxy and then before exporting you can change it back to the original files, simply by hitting a button and then export it as uncompressed.
Click to expand...

Ok- but this is bit different thing and also makes background rendering basically pointless.

I want edit my v210 file, add color correction/effects and export back to v210. Can I do it or will it always put my footage through ProRes, due to background rendering (which is always ProRes)?
Can I turn off background rendering?

Thanks
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top