TS: Final Cut Pro HD 5

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Final Cut Pro HD 5 is gonna be a BEAST!



Quote:

Reliable sources report that Final Cut Pro 5 will require Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger and will take advantage of the new Core Video technology, which functions as a bridge between QuickTime and a supported video card to deliver hardware-accelerated video processing. All real-time filters are being moved to Core Video support to deliver increased performance, for example, and Core Video should enable new real-time filters to be delivered, such as real-time HD color correction on moving footage.



Final Cut Pro 5 is also being built completely around the QuickTime 7 architecture. Final Cut Pro 5's dependence on Tiger means the software likely will not ship for up to two months after its introduction. There is always a small chance Tiger will be introduced alongside Final Cut Pro 5, as well.



Other features of Final Cut Pro 5 will include support for more than two tracks of audio, as well as multicam support. Also given is compatibility with HD video, like iMovie HD and Final Cut Express HD support.



Also rumored to be introduced with Final Cut Pro 5 is distributed rendering, although sources said this may not arrive until a later date. Originally slated for Final Cut Pro 4.5, distributed rendering would allow multiple systems to work together to render video. Technologies like Xsan, which started shipping in January, make this a far more realistic feature to build support for. Xsan was announced at NAB in 2004.



Upgrades to Apple's other Pro Video applications are also in development, according to internal Apple documents that reveal one or two all-new video applications may debut at NAB, as well.



A new version of Motion, packing Core Video support among other features, is expected, while revisions to DVD Studio Pro and Shake are also expected.



Think Secret has learned of various code names for Apple's forthcoming Pro Video upgrades, including Happy Meal (presumably the new Production Suite), Stagecoach (possibly Final Cut Pro 5), Tuvalu (possibly Motion), Perfect Storm, Oahu, and Arizona. A new application, code-named Fantasia, is also in development.





«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 23
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,166member
    Yeah baby!!!



    Multicam (eat your hearts out Wedding Videographers)

    Multitrack Audio In

    Quicktime 7 as the core.

    Core Video/Core Image

    Distributed Rendering.



    We need a G5 mini with Gigabit now!!
  • Reply 2 of 23
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    Yep, all good stuff.



    Just to be Pedantic Pete about it there are two errors in the report (I don't think 'Nick' is a video guy), a/ there is already full HD functionality in FCP, what will be new is native HDV codec editing and b/ XSAN has nothing to do with distributed processing, its a storage thing, XGRID would be more relevant.
  • Reply 3 of 23
    "...as well as multicam support."



    murch, could you or someone else elaborate on this please? What do they mean by multicam support?
  • Reply 4 of 23
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,166member
    Opus



    Multicam- I guess the best way to describe it is being able to take the video from two cameras running simultaneously and keep them in sync on the timeline.



    Wedding Videographers love Multicam because they will routinely setup 2 or 3 cameras and then they edit so that the cameras are switched like a live tv. Great for capturing the face of the newlyweds as they recite their vows. But of course the sky is the limit as to what you want to do creatively with multiple cameras.
  • Reply 5 of 23
    Quote:

    Originally posted by vinney57

    b/ XSAN has nothing to do with distributed processing, its a storage thing, XGRID would be more relevant.



    While Xsan isn't directly about distributed processing, I'm sure it'd play a big role here since it would allow multiple Xgrid agents to efficiently access media across shared storage. That way, Final Cut Pro (the client) would only need to submit a small job request to an Xgrid controller without sending hundreds of gigabytes of media along with it.
  • Reply 6 of 23
    Xsan has everything to do with distributed rendering. Lord of the Rings was scanned into several petabytes of drives. If you work with a Pixlet quality film edit on your machine, send out a job, and all the video over dozens of drives is all parsed and sent out to the cluster over FiberChannel and Gigabit Ethernet. Xsan allows for the multiple read and locking that would be required for such a massive undertaking as distributed video rendering.
  • Reply 7 of 23
    I can't wait. Might be going to NAB too.



    I do hope they did some serious work on the Media Manager though, and overall stability with larger projects.
  • Reply 8 of 23
    Quote:

    Originally posted by - J B 7 2 -

    I can't wait. Might be going to NAB too.



    I do hope they did some serious work on the Media Manager though, and overall stability with larger projects.




    just out of curiosity--how large are your projects? i finished one last fall that had 9 hours of source footage and 3 camera angles and had zero crashes or glitches. i dont even wanna begin to guess how many edits i had. thats awesome youre going to NAB though.
  • Reply 9 of 23
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ipodandimac

    just out of curiosity--how large are your projects? i finished one last fall that had 9 hours of source footage and 3 camera angles and had zero crashes or glitches. i dont even wanna begin to guess how many edits i had. thats awesome youre going to NAB though.



    I'm dealing with longer-form projects that are typically around in hour in length, final cut, and accessing at least 20 hours of media. It gets more complicated, however, as pro projects (not to says yours aren't) are keeping track of dozens of complex act versions, comp reels, etc. Add in various graphic and sound elements, complex filters, and time effects and FCP tends to get very buggy. To say nothing of feature doc projects with maybe 150-200 hours of footage. At one point we are nearly forced to go to the Media Manager, which almost inevitably creates a disaster in itself. Basically, it folds too many times when the pressure gets tough. It starts losing track of where media is truly supposed to be in sequences.



    So they say, the programmers, that FCP has a very weak, and outdated, object oriented database at it's core. Whatever that means. They say it's a "hack on top of a hack."



    Having said all that, I'm still an FCP fanboy. I've said nothing of all it's pros, which are many. I'm just wanting it to be better for pros who's shows don't end at or before the thirty minute mark.
  • Reply 10 of 23
    Quote:

    support for more than two tracks of audio



    Um... didn't Final Cut Pro 1.0 have this?



    Quote:

    Originally posted by - J B 7 2 -

    It starts losing track of where media is truly supposed to be in sequences.



    I ran into this problem too...or a really similar one at least. I think it has something to do with audo and video not being linked in embedded sequences. If you double click a sub-sequence to edit it, you'll often edit a weird copy of the sequence sometimes that doesn't appear in the bin, and only audio or video propogates down, not both.



    That feature wasn't very well tested/thought out, and there's lots of weird stuff that pretty much ruined my life during finals a few years back (I didn't really sleep for about two weeks straight).
  • Reply 11 of 23
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by gregmightdothat

    Um... didn't Final Cut Pro 1.0 have this?





    They mean the simultaneous input and/or output of more than two tracks of audio. It a major problem at the moment.
  • Reply 12 of 23
    vinney57vinney57 Posts: 1,162member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by macserverX

    Xsan has everything to do with distributed rendering. Lord of the Rings was scanned into several petabytes of drives. If you work with a Pixlet quality film edit on your machine, send out a job, and all the video over dozens of drives is all parsed and sent out to the cluster over FiberChannel and Gigabit Ethernet. Xsan allows for the multiple read and locking that would be required for such a massive undertaking as distributed video rendering.



    Oh for goodness sake... in the context of the article and FCP the invoking of the XSAN buzzword was incorrect.
  • Reply 13 of 23
    Quote:

    Originally posted by - J B 7 2 -

    I'm dealing with longer-form projects that are typically around in hour in length, final cut, and accessing at least 20 hours of media. It gets more complicated, however, as pro projects (not to says yours aren't) are keeping track of dozens of complex act versions, comp reels, etc. Add in various graphic and sound elements, complex filters, and time effects and FCP tends to get very buggy. To say nothing of feature doc projects with maybe 150-200 hours of footage. At one point we are nearly forced to go to the Media Manager, which almost inevitably creates a disaster in itself. Basically, it folds too many times when the pressure gets tough. It starts losing track of where media is truly supposed to be in sequences.



    So they say, the programmers, that FCP has a very weak, and outdated, object oriented database at it's core. Whatever that means. They say it's a "hack on top of a hack."



    Having said all that, I'm still an FCP fanboy. I've said nothing of all it's pros, which are many. I'm just wanting it to be better for pros who's shows don't end at or before the thirty minute mark.




    oh i see. thanks.
  • Reply 14 of 23
    rokrok Posts: 3,519member
    I've got MONEY says Fantasia is the Flash-competitor animation assembler have been waiting for (hell, Keynote 2 is almost Flash Lite... get it? Flash Lite? FlashLight? Ha HA! Anyway...).
  • Reply 15 of 23
    Quote:

    Originally posted by rok

    I've got MONEY says Fantasia is the Flash-competitor animation assembler have been waiting for (hell, Keynote 2 is almost Flash Lite... get it? Flash Lite? FlashLight? Ha HA! Anyway...).



    well apple can either go after photoshop or macromedia with this new app. either way its absolutely stupid because photoshop is and always will be THE standard, and flash is really over-used and doesnt need another app to help crappy web developers add it to their sites.
  • Reply 16 of 23
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,166member
    Ok I could see a photoshop like application from Apple that is only bundled with Final Cut Pro. That way it doesn't directly compete with PS and would keep Adobe at bay.
  • Reply 17 of 23
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Ok I could see a photoshop like application from Apple that is only bundled with Final Cut Pro. That way it doesn't directly compete with PS and would keep Adobe at bay.



    but nobody would use it. even Motion is laughable in terms of "real world" use right now.
  • Reply 18 of 23
    Quote:

    Originally posted by hmurchison

    Ok I could see a photoshop like application from Apple that is only bundled with Final Cut Pro. That way it doesn't directly compete with PS and would keep Adobe at bay.



    I'm surprised nobody has mentioned 3D animation for "the masses." That's the real hole in the Pro lineup too. And it's one of those really intimidating things that I'm sure Jobs would be just burning to make simpler (like video editing, and DVD and music creation.)
  • Reply 19 of 23
    Think about it if they came out with a Flash-creation app that that already gave the user starter templates (like Motion and DVD Studio Pro).... eh?
  • Reply 20 of 23
    Quote:

    Originally posted by ipodandimac

    but nobody would use it. even Motion is laughable in terms of "real world" use right now.



    "laughable" isn't quite the term that I'd use but I view Motion as a decent initial release. The framework will allow Apple to get it dialed in by ver 3.0



    An Apple image manipulation program would likely be a tad easier to develop.
Sign In or Register to comment.