Got some news on Final Cut Pro '3'!!!!! :)

in Mac Software edited January 2014

I just knew a guy who used to work in the FCP team for version 1 and 2. He got a chance to see the next version of FCP.

He couldn't say to much to me even though he's not in the team anymore....but anyhow Apple is asking him to go back to work for them...

Okay back to topic....according to what he said. FCP is 'supposed' (70% sure, can be change in the last minute) to be vesion 3 other IS a paid upgrade. The person said Apple has spend a tremendous amount of time and resource to develop the next version of this app. As you know....FCP is so tightly linked to the hardware,blah,blah.....

I guess people who just bought vesion 2 and thought Apple would release the free updater would be really pissed off

Matrox's RTMac will NOT (or never will be) compatible with OSX so......

For software based realtime effects you will need to have a dual processor machine....but don't know what speed...hopefully not dual 800 or higher...but prepare for this

Even though real-time effects can be achieved in the editor environment....the effects still need to be rendered when outputting to firewire devices.

Seems like this version is for OSX only. OSX is the requirement because the multithreading is required for software RT

Minumum RAM requirement should be around 256MB to 320MB!

That's what I know for now.....hope I can hear more from this guy soon


  • Reply 1 of 5
    [quote]Originally posted by Leonis:

    <strong>Even though real-time effects can be achieved in the editor environment....the effects still need to be rendered when outputting to firewire devices.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    This is also the case with the RTMac.

    [quote]<strong>Minumum RAM requirement should be around 256MB to 320MB!</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Same thing with the RTMac.

    Anyhow, it's certainly encouraging to see realtime effects in software only! I'm definetely looking forward to an OS X native version of FCP!
  • Reply 2 of 5
    leonisleonis Posts: 3,427member
    seems nobody is interested about my info...are they too generic?
  • Reply 3 of 5
    [quote]Originally posted by Leonis:

    <strong>seems nobody is interested about my info...are they too generic? </strong><hr></blockquote>

    Maybe they've already read it from the rumour mill... Anyway, FCP '3' is going to piss people off! I'm glad I put off my purchase of most OS 9 apps, including FCP.
  • Reply 4 of 5
    [quote]Originally posted by Leonis:

    <strong>seems nobody is interested about my info...are they too generic? </strong><hr></blockquote>

    I'm very interested (although I wish I had more details on what the new version will do).

    I bought FCP 2 in July (I think version 2 came out around May), and have been happy, but not ecstatic, about its performance on my Dual 800. Some form of real-time effects display would be great, and smarter background performance is good too (it always puzzled me that iMovie seems much smarter from a background rendering perspective than Final Cut Pro). The ability to do stuff while capturing is nice, but not major -- I easily spend 10-20 hours editing for each 30 minutes of video I bring in. The batch capture time just isn't that bad.

    I wouldn't expect there to be a mega-dollar upgrade 6-7 months after the release of the last one. I think Apple is going to have a very hard time justifying charging more than $100 to people who just dropped $500-$1000 just a few months ago. Even Adobe, on the Production Bundle version of After Effects (a $1500 or so program), usually only tries to get $299 from people every 18 months or so. The last upgrade to Final Cut Pro cost $249 and was 2 years after the initial release.

    My best guess, based solely on the price point of FCP and the time from the last update, is that the upgrade (if a paid upgrade) will cost around $40-$75.

    My major wish for Final Cut Pro 3 is for it to handle moves much more smoothly than FCP 2 does and for there to be some serious work on its effects render quality. I bought FCP because of the integrated compositing, but was disappointed in how far short of After Effects those tools fell. I wanted to do a video with a lot of pans and zooms on still images and needed to export a big chunk of the stills for work in After Effects. FCP is brain dead about things like:

    * Motion blur (the default is set to 400% which means 4 frames are smeared together when the only realistic (as opposed to excessively stylized) values for motion blur are less than 100% and the function is prone to generating "echo" images unless you set resampling to a very high value);

    * Anchor points (zooms don't properly take place around the anchor point);

    * Antialiasing the edges of a clip that has had a rotation filter applied; and

    * Ease-in and ease-out functionality (compare with After Effects' influence handles).

    It would be really nice to be able to stay inside FCP for those ordinary, run-of-the-mill motion graphics things that don't need many stacked layers with complicated alpha channels and moving masks.
  • Reply 5 of 5
    Hmm, just thinking. Would Apple create its own After Effects like program as a seperate add-on like premiere and AE compliment each other?

    it would be nice to either have an integrated editing and compositing suite that work as smooth as possible together. its the same issue with getting some adobe products to compliment your macromedia products.
Sign In or Register to comment.