Apple unveils new 64-bit Final Cut Pro X

123578

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 159
    zanshinzanshin Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Apple on Tuesday took the wraps off a revolutionary 64-bit upgrade to Final Cut Pro, dubbed version X, which will arrive on the Mac App Store in June for just $299.



    I'm confused. Did they actually say a complete new license will be $299, or is only the "upgrade" going to be $299? There's a lot of difference between those two items. I've bought lots of upgrades at reduced prices, but a new license of a professional app has almost never been so low, especially when being marketed to an industry like the video production world that pays close to that for a lens cap.



    Either way, my FCP 7 license will get upgraded as soon as it's available. Heck, with a price like that, I may be able to justify a newer Mac Pro to run it on.



    As for the huge download issue, I've elected to download versions of Adobe CS software suites for the past few years. In 2010 I went all the way and upgraded to the CS5 Master Suite. That was a monster download, made even worse because individual applications like Illustrator and Photoshop listed multiple packages of additional bonus software and extensions that in reality were merely duuplicate font and goodies files -- it probably added a superfluous 1Gb to my total downloads that evening. Just saying that while it's painful for some, I think many people have no problem with giant downloads anymore. It's part of (almost) instant gratification.
  • Reply 82 of 159
    diddydiddy Posts: 282member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zanshin View Post


    I'm confused. Did they actually say a complete new license will be $299, or is only the "upgrade" going to be $299?.



    It's an "upgrade" in the sense that FCPX is a different version than FCP7. THat's all. The $299 is not an upgrade fee.
  • Reply 83 of 159
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,716member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samwell View Post


    No editor I've ever worked with in 15 years as a producer has come from an art school.



    Really? You mean none has ever been to art school, or not gone directly from Art School to editing professionally. I definitely believe the latter though I have know one or two ex art schoolers that have ended up as editors

    Quote:

    Graphics and editing have nothing to do with one another. Anyone who's serious about becoming a pro editor eventually learns AVID.



    But people specialize. Knowing Avid is not the same as being highly experienced and thus your chances of being hired for major projects is pretty slim. If your projects are exclusively Avid based you would not be likely to hire an FCP editor.
  • Reply 84 of 159
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Onhka View Post


    Lots of jobs available. NBC, Disney, ABC, CBS, PIXAR, even Apple. http://www.simplyhired.com/a/jobs/li...c/l-california



    If anything AVID is becoming a legacy system. The kids coming out of such highly deemed 'graphic' schools around the world such as the Carnegie Mellon University College of Fine Arts is more evidence of where the future is headed.



    And as Apple cites, the list of high profile?just keeps growing. http://www.apple.com/finalcutstudio/in-action/



    Where did you come up with this nonsense?



    1. Avid is not a legacy program. It's actually a viable and current product that many professional editors use - including me. A lot of us have both but choose Avid over FCP.



    2. Carnegie Mellon doesn't have a film or television program. I can tell you this as alumnus. CMU has a great art and design program but that's not what's dictating the tools that are used in the professional tv and film world.



    3. This release of FCP will most likely drive most professional high end users back to Avid. That's just my opinion but it's also the buzz here at NAB.
  • Reply 85 of 159
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,716member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aviduser View Post


    This release of FCP will most likely drive most professional high end users back to Avid. That's just my opinion but it's also the buzz here at NAB.



    Care to elaborate?
  • Reply 86 of 159
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Jessi View Post




    I think Adobe's video editing just died. It isn't really used in the industry and the architecture is ancient and the usability is on the floor. I think Avid is just barely coming back from bankruptcy. I don't think Apple will kill them, but it isn't like they are in the dominant position in the industry. (I think Adobe fans and Avid fans talk like they are dominant, but the numbers really don't support it.. it is just wishful thinking.)



    Nobody is making use of these core OS X capabilities-- such as grand central dispatch. They have been shipping for awhile, but why would Avid (or Adobe) rewrite their product that is a =



    Adobe re-wrote Premiere Pro with CS5. It's a totally different product than what was around in the past. At NAB there are showing Premiere Pro CS 5.5 pushing 4k files natively while using thunderbolt on a macbook pro... and it's awesome. I'm not a Premiere Pro user but it definitely not the Premiere Pro of the 90's.
  • Reply 87 of 159
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lales View Post


    "promising it will be as "revolutionary" as the first version of the software"



    I'm a Apple fanboy, a very happy Apple stock owner, and a daily user of FCP.



    HOWEVER... this is a promise to take with a grain of salt. The first version of FCP was revolutionary only for its price point, and NOT for any other technical or creative reason. One could make the point that Premiere Pro was first at that price point.





    As usual they overstate. Not all cores-just 8-pathetic
  • Reply 88 of 159
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by diddy View Post


    It's an "upgrade" in the sense that FCPX is a different version than FCP7. THat's all. The $299 is not an upgrade fee.





    What about the studio?
  • Reply 89 of 159
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,523member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aviduser View Post


    Adobe re-wrote Premiere Pro with CS5. It's a totally different product than what was around in the past. At NAB there are showing Premiere Pro CS 5.5 pushing 4k files natively while using thunderbolt on a macbook pro... and it's awesome. I'm not a Premiere Pro user but it definitely not the Premiere Pro of the 90's.



    I shudder at the thought of Premiere and the 1990's in the same sentence. I took over a project for an ESPN series started on such a set up and still have nightmares. I managed to get it across to a Mac based Matrox which while not Avid was at least not prone to a crash of death on the last edit of the session as was Premiere.
  • Reply 90 of 159
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    With Grand Central Dispatch the application doesn't determine how the cores are used OS X does. I'm not sure where people keep getting its limited to 8 cores.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by huntson View Post


    As usual they overstate. Not all cores-just 8-pathetic



  • Reply 91 of 159
    welshdogwelshdog Posts: 1,854member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by revilre View Post


    After having gone though an "art" school, they should all be shut down, sold off and the money used to repay the tuition of the students they stole it from.



    I take it then that you didn't attend The Art Center College or Cranbrook or RISD or some similar? I doubt any grads from those institutions want their money back.
  • Reply 92 of 159
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    A new license will be $299. The Mac App Store does not allow you to upgrade from a license that was not originally obtained from the Mac App Store.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by zanshin View Post


    I'm confused. Did they actually say a complete new license will be $299, or is only the "upgrade" going to be $299?



  • Reply 93 of 159
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    Why do they believe that Apple is no longer interested in the pro market?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samwell View Post


    Even prior to yesterday's preview, they were seriously considering moving to something else due to Apple's disinterest in the pro market.



  • Reply 94 of 159
    zanshinzanshin Posts: 350member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by TenoBell View Post


    A new license will be $299. The Mac App Store does not allow you to upgrade from a license that was not originally obtained from the Mac App Store.



    Thanks for that clarification. I am now officially gobsmacked at the new price.
  • Reply 95 of 159
    tenobelltenobell Posts: 7,014member
    No they didn't.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by steveblue View Post


    All the changes that were made were fairly predictable in my opinion. It looks like Apple just combined FCP, Color, and Soundtrack Pro into 1 App.



  • Reply 96 of 159
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,523member
    I've been scouring the internet for more videos (I saw Randy's close). I assume Apple will post one soon. Anyone any links to more vids of this product presentation?



    By the way, I recall not too long ago a heated discussion here regarding the Mac Apps Store. Many stated that the likes of FCP would never be available on the Mac Apps Store after I suggested due to ever faster internet connections I suspect it might be, one day soon. Just wanted to say ... Told you so
  • Reply 97 of 159
    paxmanpaxman Posts: 4,716member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


    I've been scouring the internet for more videos (I saw Randy's close). I assume Apple will post one soon. Anyone any links to more vids of this product presentation?



    By the way, I recall not too long ago a heated discussion here regarding the Mac Apps Store. Many stated that the likes of FCP would never be available on the Mac Apps Store after I suggested due to ever faster internet connections I suspect it might be, one day soon. Just wanted to say ... Told you so



    No Vids - I presume you saw Larry Jordan's Blog?
  • Reply 98 of 159
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by allmypeople View Post


    Having used FCP for 9 years, I still am a bit hesitant on the interface.



    Excited to give it a go though...



    There are many things to like about FCP, but I still prefer certain aspects of Avid. Avid has a better work flow and bin system. Ingesting media is easier in Avid. File management seems simpler in Avid. Trimming and slip/slide are more intuitive in Avid. There are faster ways to accomplish often-used tasks in Avid. FCP has its pluses, of course. At least it did. I have not tried the newer Avid programs, but FCP was always simpler for making mpegs, DVDs and QuickTime files. I had to learn FCP, but my heart is Avid!
  • Reply 99 of 159
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by samwell View Post


    No editor I've ever worked with in 15 years as a producer has come from an art school.



    Graphics and editing have a symbiotic relationship. However, when I was in film school, we were not expected to do graphics work. That was the purview of the art school or graphic arts department.



    Anyone who's serious about becoming a pro editor eventually learns AVID.



    While I agree that graphics and editing are separate disciplines, clients demand that we know both. This is the new reality. Cheap post-production trumps mastery. When I bought my first Avid, it was $75,000 for one seat. You had to be a serious pro to afford that investment. Clients were willing to pay us for our talent and investment in tech and demanded we had the latest-greatest equipment. Now, for $299 plus a Mac and monitor, you, too, can be a "pro" editor. The barrier of entry is so low, a caveman can do it. Now, asking corporate clients for a wage that is more or less equal to a plumber's hourly wage, we are told, is too much. They hire the kid in the mail room who has iMovie on his laptop. Which reminds me of a joke: A plumber hands his bill to the homeowner. The homeowners says "Geez, my doctor doesn't even charge this much". The plumber replies, "yeah, I know, I used to be a doctor".
  • Reply 100 of 159
    onhkaonhka Posts: 1,025member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by aviduser View Post


    Where did you come up with this nonsense?



    1. Avid is not a legacy program. It's actually a viable and current product that many professional editors use - including me. A lot of us have both but choose Avid over FCP.



    2. Carnegie Mellon doesn't have a film or television program. I can tell you this as alumnus. CMU has a great art and design program but that's not what's dictating the tools that are used in the professional tv and film world.



    3. This release of FCP will most likely drive most professional high end users back to Avid. That's just my opinion but it's also the buzz here at NAB.



    1. I never said it is a legacy program.



    2. Perhaps not, however, Carnegie Mellon and virtually all the like schools will eventually force the industry towards the newer options.

    http://www.cmu.edu/computing/softwar...pro/index.html

    http://www.cmu.edu/computing/software/all/index.html



    3. Unless the trend is being reversed, evidence indicates to the contrary.

    http://ace-filmeditors.org/blog/2009...y-full-results



    In today's economy, the $ will win out. Films aren't being made with million dollar cameras. Heck, we are now seeing major efforts using cell phones.



    The old guys, and I am one of them, will buck and buck with our older stuff. Primarily because man is a creature of habit. But our kids won't stand for it faced with technology that defies following in our footsteps.



    And for sure, unless we oldies are willing to fund their future, we will be looking for the less expensive way out and hope they are as artistic as we were.
Sign In or Register to comment.