or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Report says dramatic, ambitious Final Cut Pro update coming in spring 2011
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Report says dramatic, ambitious Final Cut Pro update coming in spring 2011 - Page 2

post #41 of 49
Is there a site that compares FCP with FC Express? I've looked around at various reviews of one and the other but haven't found a comparison matrix.

TIA!
post #42 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulk001 View Post

When Apple abandoned Shake, didn't the key team members leave to various companies like The Foundry (who make Nuke)? While I have not used Nuke beyond watching a demo, it seems that Nuke does what it does so well that it would take Apple a lot to come up with something comparable and even more to come up with something that will convince major production companies that have moved their pipelines from Shake to say Nuke to go back to Apple (I am not saying they can't or that the next version of Motion won't be great but they are really going to have to put a lot of effort into the product to catch up and then surpass what is out there now).

You're probably right... though, perhaps the only thing I question is... I seriously doubt that Apple could do it, even if they wanted to. Their Mac software doesn't really shine anymore.
But then again, perhaps all the iPad work will now inspire how they develop and optimize for the Mac.
post #43 of 49
Dreaming out loud, here...

What if Apple has been rewriting/porting FCS to iOS as well as to 64-bit Mac OS X.

There are some interesting possibilities such as:
-- a Prosumer FCS running on an iPad (at least iMovie Pro)
-- using iPads as control surfaces for FCP running on a Mac
-- an optional, configurable touch UI for FCS

One of the most exciting possibilities -- assume the next Apple ARM (A5) has the rumored dual-core CPU and dual-core GPU (capable of running OpenCL), More/faster RAM, More SSD... and Thunderbolt. (and the new iPad 2 also, has Thunderbolt)

Say, this comes in a package similar to an ATV,

You could Blitzen a bunch of these together to form a low-power, inexpensive, blade server.

Now, if parts of FCS were able to run efficiently on this (unlimited CPU/GPU) server....

The Macs, iPads, Servers could be connected with WiFi or Thunderbolt what overtakes sense for the task at hand.

.
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #44 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by palegolas View Post

Hi,
I'm working with animation, visuals and post production. I like to stay in detailed control, and to have a great overview of my setup, and work fast.

Every time I work with Motion I have the feeling I'm using something very big and clumsy. I agree that the rendering engine itself seems pretty powerful, but I just think the user interface is too square. Also the constant hick-ups and unexplainable sudden wait-freezes that has been there from version 1.
The UI in Shake, (a software that Apple bought and discontinued, and assigned those developers to Motion and Final Cut I think) has another take on UI, it's "node based" and you can connect things the way you like... like a "mind map", as with the professional alternative Nuke etc. They might have a steeper learning curve, but developing for professionals I think you should go for the UI that can take you the furthest. Not necessarily the UI that is the easiest to grasp. We can learn complex tools. No problem. If they thought the node based UI was too hard to grasp, instead of going backwards to a good old list with a timeline - they should have gone "This Node based view has real advantages. How do we make THAT even more accessible?

It's not always the best solution to lay pieces of images in a stack. Sometimes you need to spread them out on a big light box and connect different results in a smarter way than just from top to bottom. If someone, then Apple should understand this... think different, the crazy ones and all.

But this is really not a Node View vs List View issue.
No, my biggest remark is the following:
If they made this software as a part of a pro package, and it turns out the users who appreciate it the most are users like yourself, home enthusiasts and hobbyists that like to go beyond iMovie - and then people who liked Shake, (that they bought and discontinued), moved on to professional products like Nuke... then I think they missed the mark with Motion.

Thanks for the considered answer.

I, too, find the Motion UI a bit "clunky" -- it just seems to take soooo many levels to accomplish something -- you do lose your place.

I dabbled a bit with QC but it quickly becomes too cluttered.

I briefly experimented with a node-based (FCP Color FX) system -- but found it less than intuitive.


Of all the points you made, the following hit home:

Quote:
It's not always the best solution to lay pieces of images in a stack. Sometimes you need to spread them out on a big light box and connect different results in a smarter way than just from top to bottom. If someone, then Apple should understand this...

Can you spread your "images" out on a light table, and have each effect (filter, whatever) you create display the result rather than the underlying details of the node?

That, to me, would be very intuitive -- something like:

1) Tap an image to create a duplicate of the original
2) Select the new duplicate and specify whatever filter, effect, etc.
3) Deselect the duplicate and the result is shown

Repeat the above as many times as desired and one result node can be dropped on top of another to form a composite result.

Possible?
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
"Swift generally gets you to the right way much quicker." - auxio -

"The perfect [birth]day -- A little playtime, a good poop, and a long nap." - Tomato Greeting Cards -
Reply
post #45 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob55 View Post

Native H.264 support, not this conversion to ProRes stuff. Though ProRes does seem to work well enough, I recently picked up Adobe's Production Premium suite on an educational discount and I prefer being able to drag my AVCHD files right into the timeline. I haven't abandoned FCS completely however and eagerly await the next FCS update.

Somehow, I think Apple is going after Avid users in the Pro space, not the easily-impressed-by-Adobe crowd.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #46 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dick Applebaum View Post

Thanks for the considered answer.

I, too, find the Motion UI a bit "clunky" -- it just seems to take soooo many levels to accomplish something -- you do lose your place.

I dabbled a bit with QC but it quickly becomes too cluttered.

I briefly experimented with a node-based (FCP Color FX) system -- but found it less than intuitive.


Of all the points you made, the following hit home:



Can you spread your "images" out on a light table, and have each effect (filter, whatever) you create display the result rather than the underlying details of the node?

That, to me, would be very intuitive -- something like:

1) Tap an image to create a duplicate of the original
2) Select the new duplicate and specify whatever filter, effect, etc.
3) Deselect the duplicate and the result is shown

Repeat the above as many times as desired and one result node can be dropped on top of another to form a composite result.

Possible?

Yes. That's the power of node based systems. But you don't even have to duplicate the original, it only has to be loaded once and different branches of processes/ filters can be connected to one file. Let's say you wanna make a manual green screen key.
1) you have the footage and the greenscreen is bad.
2) send the image without alpha to a color correction filter of your choice to make the green stand out. Don't worry about messing up the colors. Don't connect the result to the final composit.
3) send the saturated result to a color range selection filter and get it to make a alpha mask of the greens.
4) send the alpha mask result to the original unprocessed footage as a mask.
5) send the result from the original footage, now with alpha, through another color corrector of choice, this time making it look good and send it to the final composit.

Sure there are good keyers out there that does this for you, but it's just an example of how flexible a node based system is.
post #47 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onhka View Post

For cripes sake. Just how stupid do you think Apple is that it needs such advice from the likes of the above.

Amen

Quote:
Amazing that such productions could have been accomplished by such an amateur application as some here seem to describe it.

No kidding. For a company that's so stupid, it must be a fluke they are the largest tech company in the world right now
post #48 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecphorizer View Post

Is there a site that compares FCP with FC Express? I've looked around at various reviews of one and the other but haven't found a comparison matrix.

Hmm - I googled "Final cut Express" vs. "Final Cut" and got this for the first link which looks pretty good.
post #49 of 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocNo42 View Post

Hmm - I googled "Final cut Express" vs. "Final Cut" and got this for the first link which looks pretty good.

DocNo42 - thanks! I know that google is my friend. I did make a couple of attempts but didn't think of the "vs." and the quote marks. You've helped a lot.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Report says dramatic, ambitious Final Cut Pro update coming in spring 2011