or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Final Cut Pro for X
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Final Cut Pro for X

post #1 of 58
Thread Starter 
Well, any info?
That's one of my few reasons for rebooting into OS 9.

I heard a while back that it was supposed to be nearing completion late spring '02 and sheduled to be released at MWNY'02.
post #2 of 58
I really hope it will come out soon. I need to do lots of video work and I don't wanna use OS 9.
post #3 of 58
I wonder if they are going to change the GUI. I hope they keep the same feel but just revamp it fo look it's bast in OS X.
post #4 of 58
The FCP UI is awesome; changing it for the sake of OSX would be extremely dumb.

Why do I have no doubt they'll do it \
AIM: Cipher1387
ICQ: 48111606
cipher13@mac.com
Reply
AIM: Cipher1387
ICQ: 48111606
cipher13@mac.com
Reply
post #5 of 58
I doubt they'll change it much. It just works. Make the buttons a little more Aqua-y and it'll be perfect.
post #6 of 58
[quote]Originally posted by Cipher13:
<strong>The FCP UI is awesome; changing it for the sake of OSX would be extremely dumb.

Why do I have no doubt they'll do it \</strong><hr></blockquote>
I did not mean toatly change it and make it aqau. I just ment make them a little more photo realistic.
post #7 of 58
I can't see Apple releasing FCP X in January, it's too soon. I hope too they don't change the UI, it's rocking as it is.

Same with iTunes' UI. Some apps shouldn't look too Aqua IMHO.
post #8 of 58
There was a beta behind the apple firewall about 1 month ago for a VERY brief time. I heard that it would be final by the end of the year... Now would Apple hold it till Macworld? Sure.
da da da
Reply
da da da
Reply
post #9 of 58
Re the UI: Let's hope Apple adds a FCP theme to the OS rather than changing the FCP UI for Aqua proper. That would rock.

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Pegges ]</p>
"Moving to the country, gonna eat a lot of peaches."
Reply
"Moving to the country, gonna eat a lot of peaches."
Reply
post #10 of 58
Apple will release FCP for OSX Dec 4 at
DV Expo. See <a href="http://www.thinksecret.com." target="_blank">http://www.thinksecret.com.</a>

It's about f***king time. I am holding off on moving to OSX until that comes out.

Also rumors that FCP for OSX will increase render time by a big factor. Lastly, Sorensen 3.1 codec for QT is now Multiprocossor enabled.

let the good times roll.
renoski

ciao-der
post #11 of 58
[quote]Originally posted by Renoski:
<strong>Apple will release FCP for OSX Dec 4 at
DV Expo. See <a href="http://www.thinksecret.com." target="_blank">http://www.thinksecret.com.</a>

It's about f***king time. I am holding off on moving to OSX until that comes out.

Also rumors that FCP for OSX will increase render time by a big factor. Lastly, Sorensen 3.1 codec for QT is now Multiprocossor enabled.

let the good times roll.
renoski

ciao-der</strong><hr></blockquote>

I too think DV Expo is the perfect time for the announcement (doesn't mean it will ship) of FCP X

Yeah...I have Sorenson 3.1 Pro codec and it flies with MP machines....the speed is roughly 190% of the SP machines with the same clock rate

[ 11-13-2001: Message edited by: Leonis ]</p>
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
post #12 of 58
[quote]Originally posted by Renoski:
<strong>Also rumors that FCP for OSX will increase render time by a big factor.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Please tell me you meant to say decrease?!

I'm willing to wait for Final Cut Pro, so long as they do a really great job on it. The wonderful iDVD 2 gives me hope that perhaps Final Cut Pro will be a Cocoa app. It deserves to be Apple's flagship product on OS X.
Chicanery.
Reply
Chicanery.
Reply
post #13 of 58
I think he means the the speed increase, not the render time increase.
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
post #14 of 58
[quote]Originally posted by Leonis:
<strong>I think he means the the speed increase, not the render time increase.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sorry, I meant to say that render times will decrease. under OSX, rumors are that rendering performance will increase. sorry for the confusion.

i wonder what this means for the matrox rendering card. Q. will it warrant a $1000 price tag? I guess only if you are doing lots of After Effects.

I am looking forward to this and it is a big reason to upgrade to OSX. It is the only thing holding me back at this point.

Phil Shiller, VP Mktg at Apple is doing the
keynote.

I imagine it will ship sometime in January 2002.
post #15 of 58
I heard that the makers of RTmac have allready bagged future production, even though they spent alot on R&D, but considering the near real time rendering in the future with OSX.... we can spend that extra 1000 on equipment!!
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
"They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."
--George W Bush

"Narrative is what starts to happen after eight minutes
--Franklin Miller.

"Nothing...

Reply
post #16 of 58
Thread Starter 
Interesting news from Apple!!

[quote]Quoted from <a href="http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=106582" target="_blank">Enhancements delivered with Mac OS X Update 10.1.1</a>
<strong>Provides enhanced application stability when a FireWire-based (DV) camera is disconnected in certain situations when Final Cut Pro is open; improves data transfer reliability</strong><hr></blockquote>

Okay, this either means that somehow it is possible to run FCP in Classic... or better yet Final Cut Pro is already running in OS X in Cupertino!

post #17 of 58
So.....FCP X on Dec 4th. FOR SURE!
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
post #18 of 58
yes, word :cool:
post #19 of 58
[quote] i wonder what this means for the matrox rendering card. Q. will it warrant a $1000 price tag? I guess only if you are doing lots of After Effects. <hr></blockquote>

The Matrox card doesn't speed up effects in After Effects only FCP.

[quote]I heard that the makers of RTmac have allready bagged future production, even though they spent alot on R&D <hr></blockquote>

No. It's the promax card that has been cancelled. I haven't heard anything about the matrox card being cancelled.

Auroras Igniter is now doing single stream realtime effects on un-compressed video and Digital Voodoo's Card is doing real-time cross dissolves also on uncompressed video at 10bit.

I won't be able to leave OS9 until Final Cut, After Effects and Commmotion are all carbon.
--
move forward.
--
Reply
--
move forward.
--
Reply
post #20 of 58
After Effects 5 runs fine under Classic unless you allocate more than 438MB or RAM to it......
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
post #21 of 58
Well if it isn't Final Cut Pro that's introduced, it will likely be a Mac OS X native version of Adobe Premiere. That's also highly possible at this point...given the fact Premiere was demoed in OS X-native beta mode at NAB back in April of this year.
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #22 of 58
Bringing this thread back to the top...

The DV Expo is next Tuesday (Dec. 4th), and after the burst of info on the OS X-version two weeks ago, everything has gone mum. Anyone know of anything further...were mere days away from the expo....
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #23 of 58
For those of you who like the FCP UI, apparently you haven't used Avid Xpress. It kicks FCP's arse as far as functionality goes.

Oh well. That's what you get for letting computer people design a video editing program. FCP's UI is still MUCH better than iMovie. Good golly it's horrible and totally counterintuitive!
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #24 of 58
[quote]Originally posted by CosmoNut:
<strong>For those of you who like the FCP UI, apparently you haven't used Avid Xpress. It kicks FCP's arse as far as functionality goes.

Oh well. That's what you get for letting computer people design a video editing program. FCP's UI is still MUCH better than iMovie. Good golly it's horrible and totally counterintuitive!</strong><hr></blockquote>


I find Avids GUI not nerly as good as FCP's. And FCP is WAY easyer to use than avid. Avid is a bitch.

<a href="http://homepage.mac.com/mikesicons/Menu3.html" target="_blank"></a>
post #25 of 58
Thread Starter 
So, Avid has a better GUI that FCP? <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
Let's have some pictures of Avid then.
I've never used it before.
post #26 of 58
[quote]Originally posted by CosmoNut:
<strong>For those of you who like the FCP UI, apparently you haven't used Avid Xpress. It kicks FCP's arse as far as functionality goes.

Oh well. That's what you get for letting computer people design a video editing program. FCP's UI is still MUCH better than iMovie. Good golly it's horrible and totally counterintuitive!</strong><hr></blockquote>

funny. video pros across the world seem to think otherwise
post #27 of 58
Regarding the Avid Interface think about this:

The Avid Mediacomposer is at version 10.5 right now, and the app is identical to Avid Xpress (features are dependent on the dongle)

Xpress DV is only at version 2, but still gets most its interface features from the over 10 years of R&D.

Being a daily Avid mediacomposer and Fcp user, my observations are like this:

Avid: the best Editing features from viever into timeline, and editing in timeline with in/out points. Also the trim features, and slip / slide with keyboard shortcuts rules. Keyboard interface (which is fully configurable) is an editors dream, with the possibillity of adding a menu item to a botton or creating a macro.

FCP: moving segments in the timeline is much more elegant and powerfull than avids, FX interface is better (Not taking the Avid symphony into consiterration) and speed/motion fx metaphor is much much bettter. Also overall mouse based operations are more powerfull.

This is comparing the full avid mediacomposer app to fcp, as I hvent tried Xpress Dv.

Also speaking of platforms, the avid is on a 800 mhz pentium III Xeon IBM with RDram, FCP is on my DP 450

[ 11-29-2001: Message edited by: a holck ]</p>
post #28 of 58
Guys,

Who give a shit about the Avid software...I'm interested in the OS X version of Final Cut Pro for Christ's sake! After all, that's the title of this friggin' thread. If you want to talk about Avid vs. Final Cut Pro create a thread about it, but please don't tangent the subject and get into pissing contests over which is better.

I want my OS X Version of Final Cut Pro dammit!
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
You think Im an arrogant [expletive] who thinks hes above the law, and I think youre a slime bucket who gets most of his facts wrong. Steve Jobs
Reply
post #29 of 58
Read my "I got some news on Final Cut Pro 3" in this forum
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
post #30 of 58
the FCP UI is so pretty becuase the window bars are thin so they dont take up too much space. I am very interested to see how Apple changes the UI, if they do! :eek: <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
post #31 of 58
[quote]Originally posted by applenut:
<strong>

funny. video pros across the world seem to think otherwise</strong><hr></blockquote>

From what I understand, video pros (in Broadcast and Cable television at least) use Avid or Media 100.

Just now is FCP becoming more popular because it's a fairly viable program and it costs a LOT less than the others.

FCP on G4 867Mhz: $5,000 give or take
Avid Xpress on whatever: $15,000 and up
Getting into a pissing contest: Priceless


Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #32 of 58
i just talked to a guy from fox yesterday and when i told him that i use fcp he started to chuckle. he explains to a degree how his 30,000 dollar camera works then invites me to use one of his editing systems that he uses for work. this may just be cuz he is from an older generation but he didn't even like avid and im talking about the full blow 70 grand version. just thought i'd relay from a real pro.
If you had game like me You would still have your girl.
Reply
If you had game like me You would still have your girl.
Reply
post #33 of 58
I'm just being honest, but that didn't make sense to me. What does the camera have anything to do with it? What DOES he edit on if he doesn't like Avid?
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #34 of 58
[quote]Originally posted by myahmac:
<strong>i just talked to a guy from fox yesterday and when i told him that i use fcp he started to chuckle. he explains to a degree how his 30,000 dollar camera works then invites me to use one of his editing systems that he uses for work. this may just be cuz he is from an older generation but he didn't even like avid and im talking about the full blow 70 grand version. just thought i'd relay from a real pro.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Sounds like a blowhard to me. It's all about the right tool for the job. The networks don't have unlimited number of half-million to multi-million dollar edit bays.

Sure, FCP isn't going to push out the top-end custom editing suites, but that's not what it's built to do. Anyone who thought it would is delusional. It does what it's built to do extremely well -- provide a stable editing platform that can handle a wide range of media formats and run on a mass-market computer and operating system. Compare FCP and a Titanium G4 laptop to the Panasonic AJ-LT95 laptop editing system costing $42,000.

When you say "real pro," just bear in mind that you're actually talking about the small number of people who work in national broadcast television. Saying that everyone else is not a "real pro" is like saying that your doctor is not a "real doctor" because he or she doesn't do heart surgery at a major hospital in New York or Boston.
post #35 of 58
[quote]Originally posted by Osakans:
<strong>

When you say "real pro," just bear in mind that you're actually talking about the small number of people who work in national broadcast television. Saying that everyone else is not a "real pro" is like saying that your doctor is not a "real doctor" because he or she doesn't do heart surgery at a major hospital in New York or Boston.</strong><hr></blockquote>

But there are many "real pros" that work on Avids, Media 100, etc. at the local level. I'd imagine a majority of "local" TV stations run them. I consider those people just as "real pro" as the network level.

To keep this thread on topic, however, I'd like to see what Apple does with FCP for OS X. I'd imagine they may add some new features but keep the interface fairly similar.

It'd be nice if they could shrink down the manual, though. Over 1400 pages is a bit excessive if you ask me.
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #36 of 58
[quote]Originally posted by CosmoNut:
<strong>

But there are many "real pros" that work on Avids, Media 100, etc. at the local level. I'd imagine a majority of "local" TV stations run them. I consider those people just as "real pro" as the network level.

(snip)

It'd be nice if they could shrink down the manual, though. Over 1400 pages is a bit excessive if you ask me. </strong><hr></blockquote>

I agree entirely. My point was in response to myahmac who had implied that only people shooting and editing in a national broadcast environment were "real pros." My point about the doctors was that just because someone isn't working in the most public and "sexy" segment of a field doesn't make them any less professional. Clearly there are lots of people doing exciting, creative and polished work at the network affiliate and small cable network level.

With respect to new features, etc. for FCP 3, I'm just as eager to hear as the next person. In particular, now that iDVD 2 has come out for OS X, it's a pain to have to flip back and forth between operating systems for editing and DVD authoring.

I also agree about the manual. Every review treats it glowingly, but I suspect most of the reviewers haven't actually tried to read it front to back (which I did and gave up on after about 1/3 of the way through).
post #37 of 58
WELL, TOMMOROW IS THE BIG DAY

TOMMOROW, AT 2-3 PST, CAPT. SCHILLER WILL ANNOUNCE, AS QUOTED BY DVEXPO.COM: [quote] the growing number of professional video solutions available on Mac OS X.<hr></blockquote>

PLEASE, APPLE WOULD BE A FOOL NOT TO ANNOUNCE FINAL CUT PRO FOR MAC OS X,

THIS IS WHERE APPLE ****S WINDOWS STRAIT IN THE ARSE


I PREDICT, NO, I FORESHADOW AS IF I KNOW THE ENDING OF THIS VOLUME, THAT IN TWO YEARS TIME..... APPLE WILL RISE AGAIN AND DESTROY ALL YOUR FEEBLE OSes

AND THEY SAID:

ALL YOUR BASE ARE BELONG TO US :cool:

word :cool:
post #38 of 58
We should also see DVD Studio Pro 2.0 tomorrow

I don't have insider info on this but it actually is common sense. <img src="graemlins/smokin.gif" border="0" alt="[Chilling]" />
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
Mac Pro 2.66, 5GB RAM, 250+120 HD, 23" Cinema Display
MacBook 1.83GHz, 2GB RAM
Reply
post #39 of 58
you think? i dont...'cuase there are a smaller group of people who use DVD STudio pro

The groups of people are like this::::

iMoves&lt;iDVD&lt;Final Cut Pro&lt;DVD STUDIO PRO

FCP and iDVD could be flipped, but just saying, those who are using DVD STudio are in no rush if their systems are running fine without X...Apple has no real reason to do it before March...when they MUST...must have all their apps done

even eric's solitare sampler
post #40 of 58
Tommorow.

We will see;

FinalCutPro 3.0 for OS9 & OS X
: RealTime effect for DV
: Great Title generator
: Professinal Color correction
And Many Many more function
with New User interface

DVD Studio Pro 2.0 for OS9 & OS X


QuickTime 5.5 for OS9 & OS X
:support MPEG-4 & possibly MPEG-2 ( IF License deal has been agreed. )

We will see.
Guess! Who I was
Reply
Guess! Who I was
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac Software
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac Software › Final Cut Pro for X