Final Cut Pro X details start to emerge

No more Express version ?

Is this going back to iMovie09 type of editing ?

Can we install & run both version (Final Cut Pro X and FInal Cut Express 4) on the same Mac ? WIll it clash ?

Thanks

What is it with the iMovie-like comments? I see people saying that all over the web. Do all these people who say negative things even use FCP? Have they even used the latest version of iMovie?

I find the new look vastly improved over the old FCP UI. The timeline is superior, the metadata abilities great, the browsing so much better, the color correction better - what the heck is there to be negative about? I think it is time for people to shut up about just their conclusions and start listing details that support a negative opinion. However, I don't think they can list any. Not with any authority yet. The new version isn't even out yet.

I really think Adobe and especially Avid have launched a PR war against Apple and it's FCP to try and destroy Apple's business. All this talk about no longer doing pro apps, Apple going to sell off their pro apps, no longer caring about Pro level hardware. Avid is getting their butts kicked by Apple so they are disparate to find another way to win. I just wish people were not so gullible to believe all this trash.

You also saw it with the iPhone, the iPad, iTunes. People bad mouth Apple all the time and lie through their teeth to try and slam Apple in the press. Meanwhile Apple keeps making great products and is taking over everything tech. That is not to say Apple is perfect on everything. But even their service is excellent and fixes most of the problems that come up.

It is time that people like me start calling these Avid, Adobe, or Microsoft plants out and tell them to support their opinions with facts or shut up and go away. The new Final Cut is awesome. People who use these tools know this. Those who don't probably have ulterior motives and are on some other company's payroll.

I've used FCP since version 1. I have used it for a number of tv shows and I support production houses that do 100s of tv shows. So I know FCP inside and out. I know its strengths and its weaknesses. I also have used iMovie since version 1. Not as much since I usually use FCP, but I know both programs.

I also have used Premiere too, going back to version 1. Haven't used the latest version though. I also have experience with Avid a little. Even before this, I worked on Amiga systems, so I have been doing video with computers from the very beginning. About 25 years I think. So I have been using these programs longer then most people and have a very good perspective on this software.

The new upcoming version of Final Cut does have some similarities to the latest version of iMovie. So what. A VW Bug has similarities to a Porsche. Both have four wheels and a steering wheel. Does that mean the sports car is junk? No. It just means both cars are designed for a similar function.

When people say they hate iMovie, they need to give some details why. Same thing for the new Final Cut. If they do not give details, then we question the experience and motivations of the person making the comments. I really think people from Avid and Adobe are trying to bad mouth Apple unjustly. They have a good reason too. They are getting their butts handed to them on a platter.

So if you have something to say, back it up with good proof. That is all. Don't just give us a conclusion that doesn't have any facts to back it up. If you notice, I did give details to back up my conclusion. You have not responded to these specifics. You do not have to if you do not want to, but you automatically lose the debate if you fail to engage. Just restating your conclusion and then attacking the man does not make a good logic case.

I actually am interested to know why people do not like the new UI. This is a genuine question and I really want to understand what it is people see that I do not see.

I love the new UI.
What has been borrowed from iMovie is minimal, and the parts they borrowed do make sense, like scrubbing videos and such.

It seems like they choose wisely; create a great working editor that fixes things we are struggling with on daily basis.

I am very curious how they will handle the following stuff:
- titling, captioning
- filters and transitions
- network support (final cut server)
- exporting (especially physical distribution,
hopefully batch queue replacement for Cinema Tools)
- multi-cam and 3D cam support
- plugin architecture
- detailed color correction (Color app replacement,
Hopefully it's embedded in the editor)
- Motion X (hopefully a separate app)
- optical flow hopefully also in fpcx, greatly improved
- remove cables and objects in video
- 2d and 3G motion tracking
- FBX and 3DSMax support
- ..?
- Sound editing
(Soundtrack Pro; again hopefully embedded in FCPX
or perhaps they bundle with 'Logic Pro X')

In regards to Logic Pro X, I would think they would merge Soundtrack Pro with Logic Pro X. As it stands Garage Band is for both amateur recording and amateur scoring, so why shouldn't the pro apps be married together to do one in the same as well?

The problem is with the new pricing of FCPX there's going to be three new users for every defector. Final Cut Pro's sales are only going to go up.

No one external to Apple other than a privileged few really know what the features are going to be

When it comes to UI design, people usually prefer what they know to that which is new. That is why so many people stick with Windows even though it has been vastly inferior over the years. Once they finally get over the initial hump, they find out the grass really is greener on the Mac side of the fence.

I think that is what we will find with Final Cut. I am looking forward to the latest improvements and think a year or two from now everybody will be raving how good it is. Those people who initially complained will be forgotten and they will silently join the bandwagon hoping nobody remembers their earlier complaints.

I still have to read one good reason why the new FCP is not good. I understand people have a bunch of questions regarding things Apple has not showed yet, but they are not reasons to knock the latest version about to come out. Just stating it has some similarities to iMovie does not tell any details either. Give us specifics.

Specifics are the problem. What we have now are knee jerk responses. They see "dark UI" they think iMovie.

The reality is most of the major complaints about FCP have been addressed along with a lot of new improvements. The pricing is phenomenal.

For every Avid or Premier defector there's going to be three new Final Cut Pro users. I think it's smart to reserve judgment until the final version ships and editors have had a chance to test FCPX out but let's not fool ourselves into thinking that a vocal minority is really going to have any bearing on the success/failure of FCPX

What I find interesting. The understanding that FCP7 is using a 10 year old UI. For a decade Apple has been grafting new functionality onto an antiquated UI. The result has been some inelegant work arounds to get new things working.

Instead of continuing to graft new functionality onto an old UI. Apple chose to refresh the entire project around what we do today. I can understand some hesitancy (FUD) around what these changes mean and are they really better. Some people choose the immediately knee jerk reaction before they've even given it a chance.

Funny, watching the Final Cut Pro X announcement, I did not hear one gasp or sigh in the audience (filled with professional editors mind you), but rather an uproar in applause through out.

Something tells me they are not concerned over the iMove type UI.

The source monitor of course.

That armchair reviewer kept going on about the source monitor perhaps not realising that when a clip is active in filmstrip view etc that the output viewer doubles as the source monitor.

Context sensitive actions seem to play quite a strong role to keep the UI efficient. Instead of not having both a source display and output display side by side when you only use one at a time, it switches roles when you need it. This has the huge benefit of giving you a much larger output viewer on a single screen.

Also, they may allow spawning other windows to multiple displays like Shake and allow you to have whatever you want in it e.g bin + source viewer on the left monitor, timeline + output on the right.

What we're seeing right now is the usual 'if Apple doesn't do exactly what I want, I'm going to use competitor software x (Avid, Windows bah blah) and will never buy Mac hardware again and Apple will rue the day they crossed me'. But as always, Apple doesn't care, they do what they think is right and they clearly do talk to the mythical 'pros' (who've never been photographed in the wild) to find out what the right way to do things is.

People underestimate how much of a connection a software company has to their software. Every time you push/pull a UI element in Final Cut, a software designer had to think about what that element does, why it's there, how much importance it should have based on the frequency and importance of its use and in which way best to present it. They have to do this for every single action or command in the entire program. Yet people who use a fraction of the software come along and moan about such vague things like there not being a source viewer and we're all supposed to go 'hey, he's right, why the hell didn't Apple notice that?'

The point about colorsync is so stupid. What difference does it make if some people don't finish using Final Cut? It still means that what you see in Quicktime, Motion, Photoshop or anything will look as you intend during the edit process to save you time even if you do colour correction elsewhere. Whether its important or not is completely irrelevant and certainly not a negative point.

Oh but these people work for the usual gawker/gizmodo crowd where anything Apple-related is negative until they get their event invites back.

Don't you think this is a little egotistical of that armchair reviewer? After all, he's saying that if people don't agree with his opinion they're not professional. What I always like is when 'pros' get mentioned in the 3rd-person. There seems to be a dissociation made with the intention of pointing to a higher yet unaccountable authority.

What does it take to qualify for the title of 'professional'? Is there an earning threshold?

People who have reviewed it (actually used it) had positive things to say about it and love the UI and they make a living from it.

I have no doubt that when it arrives there will be those who have a little weep when they launch the new version and mourn the passing of the old UI and try their best to look for faults instead of getting on with their work (like professionals) but it will quickly pass.


It's more the opposite way round. People are seeing/hearing the new features and deciding that they are better as they were demonstrated in the video and all the assumptions that new is worse are coming from people with unanswered questions.

The Final Cut X presentation took you through an editing example and people were rightly blown away by it. But of course being receptive to anything makes you a consumer and being a critic makes you a professional so it's time to focus on what you don't see. Maybe they have screwed up the layout of the preferences dialog, why didn't they cover that? Don't they know professionals use the preferences dialog all the time to set where the scratch disk is? I need to know what it looks like, is there even a scratch disk option any more? :worried emoticon:


This is indeed worrying as 'the net' is the usual hangout for 'pros' and the appropriate place for them to voice complaints about unreleased software they haven't used to other 'pros' hanging out on 'the net'. With their powers of presuming imperfection combined, they might prevent an almost certain disaster. Is there a blog where we can thank them?