Apple targets video pros with major updates to Final Cut Pro X, Motion & Compressor

Posted:
in Mac Software edited April 2015
Apple on Monday issued a series of significant updates for its trio of apps geared toward video professionals, adding features like new 3D titles, support for more camera formats, and more to Final Cut Pro X, Compressor, and Motion.




Final Cut Pro 10.2 includes new 3D titles that are easy to use, and it also adds improved masking for color grading and effects. Apple has also included native support for more camera formats, and GPU-accelerated RED RAW processing.

Also available is Motion 5.2, which expands the capabilities of 3D titles. With the new Motion, users can create custom materials and environments, and instantly publish them to Final Cut Pro X.

In addition, Compressor 4.2 is also available, and makes it easy to package a movie for sale on the iTunes Store.

"From Hollywood blockbuster directors to first time movie makers, Final Cut Pro X is changing the way we edit movies today," said Philip Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of Worldwide Marketing. "The updated Final Cut Pro X, Motion and Compressor make it even easier to edit, title and package everything from short videos to feature-length films."




All three updates are available for free for existing owners of the software. New purchases of Final Cut Pro 10.2 cost $299.99 on the Mac App Store, while both Motion 5.2 and Compressor 4.2 are available for $49.99 each.

According to Apple, Final Cut Pro 10.2 will allow video editors to create 3D titles with drag-and-drop ease and ships with simple templates to get started quickly, as well as cinematic templates with built-in backgrounds and animations. Users can choose from a set of text styles to customize the look of their titles with hundreds of combinations of materials, lighting and edges, and instantly convert 2D titles to 3D and see changes in real time.

Final Cut Pro 10.2 has also been updated to let editors view up to four video scopes simultaneously, for more precision when color grading, and includes improved Shape masks on any effect that can be saved as presets for quick access later.

In addition, Final Cut Pro 10.2 natively supports even more video formats, including Panasonic AVC-Ultra and Sony XAVC-S, and makes working with RED RAW files faster than ever with GPU-accelerated transcoding, playback and rendering--including support for dual GPUs on Mac Pro.

As for Motion 5.2, Apple has included even more options for 3D titles. According to the company, the app now lets users create dynamic titles with multiple lights and cameras, as well as multilayered scenes with 3D titles that cast ultra-realistic shadows and reflections on other objects.

Dozens of third-party partners offer even more options for 3D titles, and hundreds of new 3D templates are said to be coming soon from developers including Ripple Training, motionVFX and FxFactory--all of which work seamlessly in the new versions of Motion and Final Cut Pro. Motion also includes 12 new generator effects, improved keyframing and enhanced controls for mask and shape creation.

Finally, Apple said Compressor 4.2 makes it easier than ever to prepare a movie for sale on the iTunes Store. Users can choose the movie, trailer, closed captions, and more, and Compressor creates an iTunes Store Package, which users can submit to an iTunes Delivery Partner for sale on the store.

Compressor also delivers key performance improvements for encoding tasks, including fast GPU rendering when using Send to Compressor and hardware-accelerated multi-pass H.264 encoding on compatible systems.

In announcing the update on Monday, Apple once again spotlighted the film "Focus," whose directors used Final Cut Pro to produce the feature film starring Will Smith. "Focus" was previously highlighted by the company in February.

"We loved using Final Cut Pro X to edit Focus," said Glenn Ficarra and John Requa, co-directors of the 2015 feature film, Focus. "We created the final theatrical titles for the movie right in Final Cut Pro, and the new 3D titling and effects features will let us take in-app graphics even further. We're using the new Final Cut Pro on our next feature film."
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 31

    I have to imagine these kinds of improvements will happen with Photos as well.

  • Reply 2 of 31
    irnchrizirnchriz Posts: 1,617member
    I have to imagine these kinds of improvements will happen with Photos as well.

    This seems to be the way Apple have been treating their software recently. Release new versions, add back missing features from previous versions then add new features.
  • Reply 3 of 31
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member

    I bought FCP X when it was first released, however I haven't used it at all. The difficult part for me is relearning a completely new and rather unconventional video editing suite like FCP X. I knew FCP 7 very well but I retired it along with my old Mac Pro. I just don't seem to have the time or the motivation to get up to speed in FCP X. Lately I've been using Premiere on an iMac 5K. I find Premiere's conventional timeline very familiar. It is really nice to work with as is the iMac 5K, which I love.

     

    I decided not to go with the new Mac Pro last year but I might this year. Waiting to see what updates they offer. I'm curious about the roadmap for Thunderbolt now that USB-C is out.

  • Reply 4 of 31
    john.bjohn.b Posts: 2,742member

    Just days after killing Aperture in the MAS.  Nice...

  • Reply 5 of 31
    I like FCPX. It's much more intiutive than FCP7. Worth the learning curve.
  • Reply 6 of 31
    irnchriz wrote: »
    This seems to be the way Apple have been treating their software recently. Release new versions, add back missing features from previous versions then add new features.

    I think they see which features are most missed, then add them back in, leaving the less used ones out.
  • Reply 7 of 31
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,728member
    mstone wrote: »
    I bought FCP X when it was first released, however I haven't used it at all. <span style="line-height:1.4em;">The difficult part for me is relearning a completely new and rather</span>
    unconventional <span style="line-height:1.4em;">video editing suite like FCP X. I knew FCP 7 very well but I retired it along with my old Mac Pro. I just don't seem to have the time or the motivation to get up to speed in FCP X. Lately I've been using Premiere on an iMac 5K. I find Premiere's conventional timeline very familiar. It is really nice to work with as is the iMac 5K, which I love.</span>


    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">I decided not to go with the new Mac Pro last year but I might this year. Waiting to see what updates they offer. I'm curious about the roadmap for Thunderbolt now that USB-C is out.</span>

    Funny thing is now I am used to FCPX, using 7 now seems like something out of the dark ages of OS 9.
  • Reply 8 of 31
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    irnchriz wrote: »
    This seems to be the way Apple have been treating their software recently. Release new versions, add back missing features from previous versions then add new features.

    From a software development stand point what Apple does makes a lot of sense. They get rid of old dodgy code bases and release new software built upon new technologies. This allows them to maintain high quality and performance with their software.

    All the people that had emotional melt downs over these Pro packages seem to not understand that the alternative to not updating code bases is to have the app die. In the case of FCPX they now have a new code base that will make it easy for them to maintain for some years into the future.
  • Reply 9 of 31
    irnchrizirnchriz Posts: 1,617member
    wizard69 wrote: »
    From a software development stand point what Apple does makes a lot of sense. They get rid of old dodgy code bases and release new software built upon new technologies. This allows them to maintain high quality and performance with their software.

    All the people that had emotional melt downs over these Pro packages seem to not understand that the alternative to not updating code bases is to have the app die. In the case of FCPX they now have a new code base that will make it easy for them to maintain for some years into the future.

    I didn't say it was a bad thing, but you pretty much cover what I couldn't be bothered to type :)
  • Reply 10 of 31
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    mstone wrote: »
    I bought FCP X when it was first released, however I haven't used it at all. <span style="line-height:1.4em;">The difficult part for me is relearning a completely new and rather</span>
    unconventional <span style="line-height:1.4em;">video editing suite like FCP X. I knew FCP 7 very well but I retired it along with my old Mac Pro. I just don't seem to have the time or the motivation to get up to speed in FCP X. Lately I've been using Premiere on an iMac 5K. I find Premiere's conventional timeline very familiar. It is really nice to work with as is the iMac 5K, which I love.</span>
    Interesting!

    <span style="line-height:1.4em;">I decided not to go with the new Mac Pro last year but I might this year. Waiting to see what updates they offer. I'm curious about the roadmap for Thunderbolt now that USB-C is out.</span>

    I'm not sure why people are so perplexed by the idea that a computer can have more than one port type. There is very little overlap in the technology sets that compose TB and USB-C. They will exist side by side for years. USB-C is still a low performance interface and is not suitable for the uses that TB is put to. More interesting is this, will TB see a new connector or maybe even go all optical.
  • Reply 11 of 31
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    I like FCPX. It's much more intiutive than FCP7. Worth the learning curve.

    The funny thing here is that professionals have returned to the app after realizing that some of the concerns where over blown.
  • Reply 12 of 31
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    I'm not sure why people are so perplexed by the idea that a computer can have more than one port type. There is very little overlap in the technology sets that compose TB and USB-C. They will exist side by side for years. USB-C is still a low performance interface and is not suitable for the uses that TB is put to. More interesting is this, will TB see a new connector or maybe even go all optical.

     

    Thunderbolt and USB-C both have theoretical 10 Gbps, both have DisplayPort, both have 100 watts of power. Seems like a fair amount of overlap. Sure the Mac Pro should have several both, but if you are using Thunderbolt to convert to other formats like I am, you can't daisy chain them. Two TB ports is not enough. I have need for at least one more right now on my iMac.

  • Reply 13 of 31
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    The funny thing here is that professionals have returned to the app after realizing that some of the concerns where over blown.



    Is this true?

     

    I think a lot of pros prefer actual tracks over magnetic timelines. That is my preference anyway.

     

    Premiere and Avid are very popular among TV pros around SoCal. One reason is Premiere and Avid are both cross platform. I think FCP/FCP X has always been, and is still, in the minority in the pro video industry. 

  • Reply 14 of 31
    rcfarcfa Posts: 1,124member
    Who in their right mind would trust Apple
    for ANY PRO APP after Apple just royally screwed PRO PHOTOGRAPHERS by PULLING APERTURE and replacing it with some sophomoric imposter called "Photos"???

    As much as I like FinalCut, Logic, and (ex)Aperture: how at this point can you trust Apple for anything but mass market consumer toy apps? They castrated OS X
    server, they nixed Aperture, they offered no transition for FinalCut Pro projects to FinalCut X projects, they disappeared WebObjects and Enterprise Objects after transmogrifying it to a Java base, they offer no road map for any pro/mission critical software...

    In other words: Apple is the opposite of "nobody got fired for choosing IBM": you will get fired for choosing Apple, because regardless of how superior an Apple technology may be, Apple will not provide you with a road map and will yank a product you're relying on as a professional at a moments notice.
    It's impossible to work like this and therefore to trust Apple with anything but disposable consumer technology.
    It hurts having to say this, being on this platform since NeXTstep version 0.8
  • Reply 15 of 31
    mechanicmechanic Posts: 805member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

     

    Thunderbolt and USB-C both have theoretical 10 Gbps, both have DisplayPort, both have 100 watts of power. Seems like a fair amount of overlap. Sure the Mac Pro should have several both, but if you are using Thunderbolt to convert to other formats like I am, you can't daisy chain them. Two TB ports is not enough. I have need for at least one more right now on my iMac.




    The 2013 and all new macs except for the new macbook have thunderbolt 2 ports with 20 Gbit/s thunderbolt.  That is a huge difference when dealing with 4k.  USB-C will never handle that.  Thunderbolt 3 will be released this year (Alpine Ridge) with PCIe 3.0 with backwards compatability to thunderbolt 2 and 1 and will offer 40Gbit/s  (5GBs). And the ability to drive two external 4k displays at 60hz or 1 5k. Intel is on track to release Skylake architecture chips this year. 

  • Reply 16 of 31
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post

     



    The 2013 and all new macs except for the new macbook have thunderbolt 2 ports with 20Gbps thunderbolt.  That is a huge difference when dealing with 4k.  USB-C will never handle that.


    Are you kidding me? 4K video requires only a fraction of the theoretical 10 Gbps bandwidth available for USB-C even if you are not streaming, streaming would be even less. The 20 Gbps is for 2 way.  A 4K signal to a monitor is only one way. 10 Gbps, more than enough.

  • Reply 17 of 31
    mechanicmechanic Posts: 805member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post

     

    Are you kidding me? 4K video requires only a fraction of the theoretical 10 Gbps bandwidth available for USB-C even if you are not streaming, streaming would be even less. The 20 Gbps is for 2 way.  A 4K signal to a monitor is only one way. 10 Gbps, more than enough.




    Real world on usb is much lower. Uncompressed 4k requires 9.2Gb/s nominal. Of course compressed requires much less but I deal with uncompressed and USB C would not handle that at all.

  • Reply 18 of 31
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post

     



    real world on usb is much lower.


    As is TB 

  • Reply 19 of 31
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Mechanic View Post

     

     Uncompressed 4k requires 9.2Gb/s


    That is correct at 30fps but in what scenario would you need to move full uncompressed video across a network in real time?

  • Reply 20 of 31
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post





    The funny thing here is that professionals have returned to the app after realizing that some of the concerns where over blown.



    I got the impression that Apple eventually put back a lot of the things the pros needed, like specific plug-ins and support for more esoteric pro formats. The other thing I've heard from pros is that any freelance editor should be able to use any editor, FCP7, FCPX, Avid, Premiere. They can't just not use FCP, unless they like having a hole in their resume.

     

    I'm an amateur, but I chose FCPX after doing serious homework. It met all of my workflow needs, it was affordable, and it runs great on my MacBook Pro, ingesting UHD resolution H.264 files natively (no transcoding to ProRES needed). The use of GPU for effects, plus background rendering is spectacular. It screams on the MBP.

Sign In or Register to comment.