Wait a second! I'm getting caught up in the emotions and sympathizing with a few pro colleagues here!
Q: What the hell is Apple doing developing and installing ThunderBolt ports on everything, if not meant for fast accessible offline storage? Thunderbolt is MADE for FCP... isn't it?
There's got to be more to this story.... and yes, I think Apple owes the pros out there an explanation and a future road map. Something isn't adding up here.
Wait a second! I'm getting caught up in the emotions and sympathizing with a few pro colleagues here!
Q: What the hell is Apple doing developing and installing ThunderBolt ports on everything, if not meant for fast accessible offline storage? Thunderbolt is MADE for FCP... isn't it?
There's got to be more to this story.... and yes, I think Apple owes the pros out there an explanation and a future road map. Something isn't adding up here.
You can store media on an external drive. They at least thought of that. But instead of actually working with all flavors of footage natively like Apple promised, the program transcodes it all in the background into a single format; those transcoded files (essentially all-out duplicates of the footage) go to the boot drive, and there is no way to tell them otherwise. That is what I have heard at least, and perhaps the person who said it misspoke. Either way, creating duplicates of all your media in the background and hiding them from the user is a terrible workflow. When working with hundreds of gigabytes of footage, the last thing you need is for your edit software to be secretly duplicating it all in the background.
Fair point, but to be fair to Aperture, it wasn't 4 years that the competition had localised editing when Aperture 2 did not was it?
True, but Aperture suffered with its slow response times and sometime unpredictable behavior, which LR didn't, but I've never truly sat down with LR, only read what people say.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonamac
How do you find Aperture 3? I love it but find it very unstable.
I have a love/hate relationship with it. I like the way one works with it more than I would LR, and it's generally better than it was (remember the aspect ratio crop default? : ) , but I have a real hard time with the way you have to wait so long to see results update. I wish I could A/B changes like bing, bing instead of waiting 4 or 10 seconds. Lately it's begun to corrupt a file per project, which is really pi##ing me off : (
I'm not having much stability issues, but when I'm doing photos in PS I feel like it's at least responding to me snappily enough that I don't feel hindered by it. Aperture keeps me organized but it feels like it still breaks my flow with the beach balls.
But one thing I almost never do, unless a company goes under, is switch major programs that require a huge financial commitment and reharvesting of old files. It's like a girlfriend or wife after a few years. You get used to the good and bad, used to knowing about greener grass that's not necessarily in the cards, used to the workflow. I think that's one thing Apple is doing in a very interesting way, by having top tier programs being far below the cost of the alternative (Aperture for $80, FCPX for $300). If I was on LR I might even consider spending the $80 just to learn it and have it around for what it does better. Same as an AVID user would for FCPX. But the reverse doesn't have the same impulse buy potential.
I think the whole thing boils down to how I've defended Apple in other areas like ports, processors, market slant, etc: They're doing what they want to do as a company to be a strong company. If that means selling a crapload of $300 software and not servicing the highest tier as well as they could, well, they'll probably make more money doing it their way : )
I don't want to come across as an Apple apologist nor to minimize the needs of the pros who depend on specific features or capabilities to do their job.
Rather, I am making this post to correct some incorrect "limitations" of FCPX.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lucasway89
The number of comments of people so religiously defending Apple on these comments is hilarious, people who have no concept of a professional edit and saying things about how editors need to adapt and change their workflow when they have no idea of the difficulties and intricacies of a NLE workflow.
Other people have already covered things they left out like EDLs, OMFs etc... so I'll throw a few more into the pile.
My company is fairly small, we don't hand off projects to Protools, we don't use EDL's.. but there is still A LOT missing from this. We need total control over our media and FCPX does not provide that. I am an example that it is not just the people working in huge production houses that find this version unusable.
Example. We work off external storage like everyone else, we have a series of drives we use on a per-project basis.
With FCP7, when i first ingest footage I set up ALL my associated media, scratch disks, render files, autosaves, waveform cache etc to all go onto that one external drive, the project is 100% portable. Take the drive to another machine, boom, you're working.
FCPX, you can set where the duplicated media goes (note, you have to duplicate media from most formats or manually move the original native files to a location of your choice in the finder.
It supports less native files, we wrk with Canon XF and Sony XDCAM formats a lot and no support there, we would now have to convert to prores, prores is great, but the 270% increase in file size is not always worth it and takes time to re-encode.
EVEN WORSE
Not all of the associated media now lies where I want..externally. The 'Events' and 'Projects' libraries sit on the /Movies drive of the BOOT drive. this is terrible practice and there is no way to change it.
The location of the Final Cut Projects and Final Cut Events folders can be on any drive you want -- I just created a project on an external drive and imported events (clips) from an 8GB AVCHD card (actually a HD backup of the AVCHD card on another drive).
The AVCHD import is no small accomplishment, as I never had to decompress the 8 BG AVCHD card into a 57 GB file -- taking storage and about 20 minutes. Rather, FCPX took about 20 seconds to decompress clip thumbnails. I could scrub/play through these and select only the clips (or partial clips) I wanted.
When you start FCPX it will look for folders named "Final Cut Projects" and "Final Cut Events":
-- in the Movies folder of the Boot drive
-- at the root level of every attached drive
You get a list of all the drives in the both the projects and events windows
Quote:
So... there is literally no ay to move a project without copying those libraries and manually placing them in aid location on the new macine...then redoing when returning to the first machine.
THIS IS NOT A SMALL PROBLEM. This literally 100% knocks out my current workflow and the workflow of pretty much all Mid-High end FCP users.
So Media Management - Broken
If you unmount the external HDD, FCPX will work fine without access to projects or events on that drive.
Later, when you remount (reattach the drive) FCPX will find any projects and events.
Quote:
Format support - Seriously weakened ("oh but we now support h.264"...great, anyone who edits in h.264 needs to have their FCP licence revoked)
Multi cam - This is huge, it is huge, I don't need to explain.
I don't use multicam, but I read where one FCPX user was able to approximate the FCP7 capability using FCPX collections.
I still don't understand all I know about FCPX collections, tagging, metadata, etc. -- but there is some fantastic capability to analyze clips and create collections.
For example FCPX can identify shots with:
-- no people
-- i person
-- a group of people (more than 1)
-- close up
-- far away
Quote:
Single monitor display, lack of being able to arrange the workspace to fit the project...awful.
Trackless workflow. Now this is an interesting concept. but it makes doing serious sound mixes a lot more difficult and since they killed Soundtrack..what are we to do?
The list goes on.....
Don't get me wrong, there are some great new ideas in FCPX, it is very fast, it looks great the UI have some nice ways of working. but they have destroyed so much of the bread and butter that a professional editor needs that it is not an option.
"So just use FCP" A lot of you are saying...
Well, yes, that is exactly what I am having to do for the time being, but FCP7 is not 64bit, it doesn't support OpenGL or Grand central, it is sluggish and the reason people wanted an upgrade was for things like 64bit.
Also, with them now killing FCP7 and no longer selling it, how are we supposed to add edit stations and how long will FCP7 survive and we are forced to use FCPX (not possible..) or go elsewhere.
Those saying "people who bought on day 1 are not pros"... this is literally the stupidest thing I've ever heard, it is us pros who were so excited by this new FCP and want to try it out, I installed it alongside FCP7 on my personal machine, why would I not try it out?
For now I will continue to chug along with FCP7, fiddle around on FCPX and wait and see what Apple do but I can't see them listening to the outcries, they may add EDLs or OMF's and multicams they are the loudest cries, but there is a lot more missing that I just don't se them every doing.
I am mentally preparing for Premiere or Avid to potentially be starting to be used a lot more, but i hope not, I've used FCP for years and it is a great product...until now.
I hope you and others will take this post in the spirit it was written.
FCPX is missing many things that people need.
But, the initial impression that FCPX is missing this, or can't do that is often wrong -- because someone didn't know where to look, or that some things are done differently (maybe even better) than in FCP7.
Also, I believe that people will find that FCPX does a lot of things that they didn't know they needed, but can't live without -- the categorizing of clips with people, and the ability to change the color of 1 clip to match another, come to mind.
This ranting reminds me of that release. "OMG I can't believe it doesn't do this" "OMG I can't believe it doesn't do that". Like many others have said: It's V 1.0 Calm down and keep using what you're using until they get FCX right.
The flood of rants about notifications, cut and paste, antennagate etc over the years I've ignored. It's nonsense that happens on friggen phones, the stuff of mega-nerds that actually never bothers me, or anyone I know in "real life"...
Though in this case, here at work, people are a little dumbfounded by this FCP release. And I'd say many of us have legitimate, career based, reasons for "bitching and moaning" .
So, again, just use the old version until they add in those features you need 6 months from now. Dude, I'm an editor for my career as well. There's no way I would ever upgrade to some new software no matter who it's from for at least 6 months and more likely a year. Even if it had ALL the little features you wanted it still would be buggy and not work right. They gotta work that stuff out.
If update after update Apple says it will add things that then never seem to materialize than you have a case to moan, otherwise just relax people!
If you were truly working professionals you probably wound't even have time to bitch about all this stuff as you'd likely be working and not wasting time, like I am, on these stupid forums anyways...
This ranting reminds me of that release. "OMG I can't believe it doesn't do this" "OMG I can't believe it doesn't do that". Like many others have said: It's V 1.0 Calm down and keep using what you're using until they get FCX right.
A terrible analogy. No one depended upon Aperture before version 1.0. It's not like Final Cut Pro didn't exist at all before Tuesday. It's a decade-old application that many an editor depend upon to make their living. As of Monday, they were all led to believe that Apple had been working on an "awesome" upgrade for them that would bring Final Cut Pro up to speed with the competition. On Tuesday morning, Apple eliminated Final Cut Studio from it's product line-up and replaced it with a program that is unusable by nearly anyone who currently depends upon Final Cut Pro. Apple has not publicly committed to adding anything back into Final Cut Pro X that was available in previous versions. Will the next version add the ability to open Final Cut Pro projects, or will it instead add the ability to import your GarageBand jams? We have know way of knowing, but based on what they released this week it's far more likely the latter.
Professionals have waited four years for a real upgrade to Final Cut Pro; they cannot wait another four years for Apple to fix Final Cut Pro X, especially since they have made no indication that they intend to do so.
This ranting reminds me of that release. "OMG I can't believe it doesn't do this" "OMG I can't believe it doesn't do that". Like many others have said: It's V 1.0 Calm down and keep using what you're using until they get FCX right.
I would not have dropped $300 right now had I known Apple considered this a v1.0 product. Again, there was no reason to even conceive that they would have SO MANY features missing. I really wish I waited a day or two - but I generally don't read forums anymore - I only came here after running into my OWN issues in FCPX and seeing this story on AppleInsider's features page - and realized I was not alone in my disappointment.
This isn't a "Calm down & hold your horses" situation... this is a "Pro" application that was "Updated" and has an incredible amount of issues - it's NOT just unfamiliarity or hating "change"... IT DOESN'T WORK as expected... especially for a "Pro" app.
They need to better communicate these things. Period.
I'm also amazed at the persistence of some to consider this "whining" just because THEY are not upset about the current omissions and problems.
I totally understand that we can all go work in FCP7 (and I will) and that the app will improve over time... that's a given. I'm not worried that it will NEVER get there... I just didn't realize before clicking the BUY button that it had regressed so far back.
Instead of negating the frustration of us users that truly need/miss those (currently) missing features or functionality - how about being more sympathetic and understanding that just because YOU don't have issues w/ FCPX... others don't have the right to feel slighted.
It's not whining... it's not Apple-bashing... and it's not a personal attack on YOU just because you aren't as upset. It's real users with legitimate feedback.
Could anyone write a fair review of a new version of Photoshop after only one day of use?
I think if you launched Photoshop CS6 and within minutes realized they omitted the marquis tool or Levels/Curves... you wouldn't NEED to spend more than a day to realize you're using a regressed product that is not ready for prime-time, PRO usage. That's all.
Not saying it would never get there... but if features you've grown to depend on suddenly go missing during an "Upgrade"... you might feel a bit put-off.
Yes - I will still be using FCP7 until FCPX gets more features.
Secondly, if a program can't do basic functionality like open its own documents or output its content, whether you spend one hour or one year with the program isn't going to make it any more usable. I've seen this "people just need to use it more" defense several times now, and its rubbish.
FCP X uses an entirely different file and management system than the original FCP. That is the reason it cannot open XML files. Apple has stated that they will provide a bridge between XML and FCP X files.
I would safely wager at some point Apple is going enable some type of file export system in FCP X.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightwaver67
As an Apple "fan-boy" (admittedly), I must also chime-in that this FCPX app is a RADICAL step backwards for FCP.
It is in the sense that FCP X is version 1 software and not a continuation of FCP from 1999.
Quote:
I was in FCPX for a couple hours last night and I am AMAZED at the most BASIC omissions from this app. My ASSUMPTION was that this was an evolution of FCP... but it's not... not at ALL.
No its not an evolution of FCP its an entirely new application that stands on its own.
Quote:
I do NOT agree that this is being marketed as a Version 1.0 app... it is X (10)... they need to be BETTER communicators regarding feature drop-off.
FCP X has be rewritten from the ground up. That's what makes it a version 1.0. That is a fact it doesn't matter what they call it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightwaver67
For those of you defending this release due to it being a "rewrite/recode"... you are being far-too lenient. (IMHO)
If Apple's focus was to rearchitect the core subsystem to build on, that's GREAT - but KEEP BUILDING and push the release out until it AT LEAST matches the current functionality of FCP7.
That's not generally how version 1.0 software works.
Quote:
Take a moment (please).. clear your mind... browse this thread again and OTHERS all over the web and look at ALL the MASSIVE AMOUNT of both basic and complex features that are missing. There is nothing "PRO" about this Final Cut "Pro" offering. It's a slick new UI built on a new (supposedly) code-base. But just because you can do some basic edits, this is FAR from the FCP7 we all know.
People's complaints aren't directly connected to the reality of what can be done. If any of these complainers could explain how you go about building a complex software application like FCP and include all of those features in version one I'd be open to hearing it.
The location of the Final Cut Projects and Final Cut Events folders can be on any drive you want -- I just created a project on an external drive and imported events (clips) from an 8GB AVCHD card (actually a HD backup of the AVCHD card on another drive).
When you start FCPX it will look for folders named "Final Cut Projects" and "Final Cut Events":
-- in the Movies folder of the Boot drive
-- at the root level of every attached drive
You get a list of all the drives in the both the projects and events windows
If you unmount the external HDD, FCPX will work fine without access to projects or events on that drive.
Later, when you remount (reattach the drive) FCPX will find any projects and events.
I didn't actually know that, so a project can in fact be portable? Every file and piece of associated media can be external?
That is good, that is my most major issue dealt with. Because that was 100% a deal breaker.
...thought I would still prefer to be able to not use the FCP events folder and just have 1 'event' in a folder of my choosing, I currently create one big folder "example#1" and keep all media, render files, music, scratch disks, project file etc... in that 1 folder. So to move a project you just move that entire folder.
And all metadata, like clip keywords & analysis is stored in the FCP Events folder right? (I'd rather it was with the clips).
You didn't address the format support, I don't want to always have to create prores versions, i sometimes want to work in XDCAM etc..
If Adobe totally rewrote Photoshop from the ground up with an entirely new file structure and user interface. I guarantee it would not be as featured as it is now. Something would be missing that people would complain about.
As we know Adobe would never be brave enough to even do anything like this. So this whole example is pretty academic at best.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lightwaver67
I think if you launched Photoshop CS6 and within minutes realized they omitted the marquis tool or Levels/Curves... you wouldn't NEED to spend more than a day to realize you're using a regressed product that is not ready for prime-time, PRO usage. That's all.
Not saying it would never get there... but if features you've grown to depend on suddenly go missing during an "Upgrade"... you might feel a bit put-off.
Yes - I will still be using FCP7 until FCPX gets more features.
It is a rewrite, but they haven't just forgotten all of the things FCP has done and people have liked over the years.
If this is a .1 of a new product is should NOT be called Final Cut and should be a new and separate product and FCS should still be on sale (and kept updated until 'FCP'X is usable)
FCP X uses an entirely different file and management system than the original FCP. That is the reason it cannot open XML files. Apple has stated that they will provide a bridge between XML and FCP X files.
I would safely wager at some point Apple is going enable some type of file export system in FCP X.
It is in the sense that FCP X is version 1 software and not a continuation of FCP from 1999.
No its not an evolution of FCP its an entirely new application that stands on its own.
FCP X has be rewritten from the ground up. That's what makes it a version 1.0. That is a fact it doesn't matter what they call it.
That's not generally how version 1.0 software works.
People's complaints aren't directly connected to the reality of what can be done. If any of these complainers could explain how you go about building a complex software application like FCP and include all of those features in version one I'd be open to hearing it.
13123213
I can absolutely understand ALL of those points when adopting the mindset of a v1.0 product... and I think THAT is the sticking-point that is gumming-up this discussion. The expectations of WHAT FCPX is. As I said... I don't CARE if it's a rewrite from the ground-up... if that's the case, it needs to be BETTER COMMUNICATED to the public what that means. That's all.
When I clicked the BUY NOW button, I was not in the mindset that I was buying into a v1 app... I was in the mindset of "The next evolution of FCP".
Hindsight being 20/20... I am not sure I would have purchased yet. It shows LOTS OF POTENTIAL... and I hold out a lot of hope for what it WILL be. But for right now, you're right - it *IS* just an initial release v.1 app that is not ready - and I am a sucker for thinking it wasn't.
Quite honestly, I wasn't in it long enough to know what ELSE isn't there.
I mean, I seriously cannot believe I could not add a simple DROP SHADOW to a graphic element I added as an overlay. IT'S NOT IN THERE! That's BASIC stuff! I had to go back into Photoshop and ADD the drop shadow and reimport the graphic. That is rediculous. Again - that is BEYOND basic.
I love Apple most of the time, but this release stinks to high-heaven.
Are you talking about a drop shadow on a title? If so, you can do that in the Inspector.
If not, I think you can probably find what you want in the new Motion.
AFAIK, much of the titling/effects stuff that was spread among various FCS apps is now in Motion.
1) There, likely, isn't an HDD big enough to store all the media for all your clients and all your projects
2) so, it is likely that you store projects and events on several drives
3) you can keep all the media for a client on a separate drive, if desired.
4) if a drive is not online, its contained media and projects are not shown
5) if a drive is online, but not opened (just like a closed folder) its projects and contents are not shown
-- the event thumbnails are not even loaded/parsed/opened/displayed -- unless the drive is opened
It may do what you want, the way you want -- but is it a show-stopper?
I suspect that if enough people complain, Apple will fix this!
Dick, are you saying that professionals should ditch their massive SAN and network storage that allows them to have all of their projects saved in one location, and start keeping each project on it's own individual and unreliable hard disk? Because I think that's what you just suggested. And if that's the case, someone should tell the Thunderbolt backers to not bother bringing those massive storage devices to market.
The fact that all of your projects and media show up all the time in Final Cut Pro X is not a show-stopper, but it shows a complete lack of understanding of the professional video world on Apple's part. Everyone has a multitude of clients. Even the wedding video-ographer. No one needs or wants to see all of their clients' projects in the same window at the same time. There's no instance where that would be of benefit, and its impossible to do it any other way apart from your unrealistic workaround.
I just came back and read some more of this most interesting thread, and would like to apologize to the "pros" out there. You're right. Apple has went to far.
The kicker for me was reading that you have to have all of your files on the system disk. As a pro in print production, this is a definite no-go for me in my work. My collection of servers and TB Firewire drives for print and photo work is astounding, so I can only imagine the TB's that film pros have offline. The first thing I recommend to all of my clients is to move everything out of the documents and home folders, and set up a second disk, that's cloned, RAID, whatever. Best pro practice as far as I'm concerned, is to ALWAYS separate the operating system and apps, from actual data.
Except, "you have to have all of your files on the system disk" is not true!
I posted the following in a post after yours:
I don't want to come across as an Apple apologist nor to minimize the needs of the pros who depend on specific features or capabilities to do their job.
Rather, I am making this post to correct some incorrect "limitations" of FCPX.
The location of the Final Cut Projects and Final Cut Events folders can be on any drive you want -- I just created a project on an external drive and imported events (clips) from an 8GB AVCHD card (actually a HD backup of the AVCHD card on another drive).
The AVCHD import is no small accomplishment, as I never had to decompress the 8 BG AVCHD card into a 57 GB file -- taking storage and about 20 minutes. Rather, FCPX took about 20 seconds to decompress clip thumbnails. I could scrub/play through these and select only the clips (or partial clips) I wanted.
When you start FCPX it will look for folders named "Final Cut Projects" and "Final Cut Events":
-- in the Movies folder of the Boot drive
-- at the root level of every attached drive
You get a list of all the drives in the both the projects and events windows
If you unmount the external HDD, FCPX will work fine without access to projects or events on that drive.
Later, when you remount (reattach the drive) FCPX will find any projects and events.
Quote:
It does appear that Apple is leaving us pro users, in all aspects of it's future business model, and focusing on the consumer.
Lion. iOS. Xserve canceled. There's even been rumors that there won't be any MacPro after the upcoming next release.
Sad that the pros that kept Apple afloat, and tooted the Apple Horn for them in the past, will be shunted for the mass attack that iOS has become. Capitalism at work I suppose, as with everything else. Go to where the money is.
PS. The post that likened FCPX's missing features to Adobe making only JPEGs editable.... PLEASE DO NOT GIVE THEM ANY IDEAS!!!!! I wouldn't put it past them.
Its 64bit and uses a completely different UI and file structure. Underneath the hood FCP X has virtually no relation at all to classic FCP. That is why it is a version 1 software.
It is a rewrite, but they haven't just forgotten all of the things FCP has done and people have liked over the years.
If this is a .1 of a new product is should NOT be called Final Cut and should be a new and separate product and FCS should still be on sale (and kept updated until 'FCP'X is usable)
Comments
Q: What the hell is Apple doing developing and installing ThunderBolt ports on everything, if not meant for fast accessible offline storage? Thunderbolt is MADE for FCP... isn't it?
There's got to be more to this story.... and yes, I think Apple owes the pros out there an explanation and a future road map. Something isn't adding up here.
Wait a second! I'm getting caught up in the emotions and sympathizing with a few pro colleagues here!
Q: What the hell is Apple doing developing and installing ThunderBolt ports on everything, if not meant for fast accessible offline storage? Thunderbolt is MADE for FCP... isn't it?
There's got to be more to this story.... and yes, I think Apple owes the pros out there an explanation and a future road map. Something isn't adding up here.
You can store media on an external drive. They at least thought of that. But instead of actually working with all flavors of footage natively like Apple promised, the program transcodes it all in the background into a single format; those transcoded files (essentially all-out duplicates of the footage) go to the boot drive, and there is no way to tell them otherwise. That is what I have heard at least, and perhaps the person who said it misspoke. Either way, creating duplicates of all your media in the background and hiding them from the user is a terrible workflow. When working with hundreds of gigabytes of footage, the last thing you need is for your edit software to be secretly duplicating it all in the background.
Fair point, but to be fair to Aperture, it wasn't 4 years that the competition had localised editing when Aperture 2 did not was it?
True, but Aperture suffered with its slow response times and sometime unpredictable behavior, which LR didn't, but I've never truly sat down with LR, only read what people say.
How do you find Aperture 3? I love it but find it very unstable.
I have a love/hate relationship with it. I like the way one works with it more than I would LR, and it's generally better than it was (remember the aspect ratio crop default? : ) , but I have a real hard time with the way you have to wait so long to see results update. I wish I could A/B changes like bing, bing instead of waiting 4 or 10 seconds. Lately it's begun to corrupt a file per project, which is really pi##ing me off : (
I'm not having much stability issues, but when I'm doing photos in PS I feel like it's at least responding to me snappily enough that I don't feel hindered by it. Aperture keeps me organized but it feels like it still breaks my flow with the beach balls.
But one thing I almost never do, unless a company goes under, is switch major programs that require a huge financial commitment and reharvesting of old files. It's like a girlfriend or wife after a few years. You get used to the good and bad, used to knowing about greener grass that's not necessarily in the cards, used to the workflow. I think that's one thing Apple is doing in a very interesting way, by having top tier programs being far below the cost of the alternative (Aperture for $80, FCPX for $300). If I was on LR I might even consider spending the $80 just to learn it and have it around for what it does better. Same as an AVID user would for FCPX. But the reverse doesn't have the same impulse buy potential.
I think the whole thing boils down to how I've defended Apple in other areas like ports, processors, market slant, etc: They're doing what they want to do as a company to be a strong company. If that means selling a crapload of $300 software and not servicing the highest tier as well as they could, well, they'll probably make more money doing it their way : )
Rather, I am making this post to correct some incorrect "limitations" of FCPX.
The number of comments of people so religiously defending Apple on these comments is hilarious, people who have no concept of a professional edit and saying things about how editors need to adapt and change their workflow when they have no idea of the difficulties and intricacies of a NLE workflow.
Other people have already covered things they left out like EDLs, OMFs etc... so I'll throw a few more into the pile.
My company is fairly small, we don't hand off projects to Protools, we don't use EDL's.. but there is still A LOT missing from this. We need total control over our media and FCPX does not provide that. I am an example that it is not just the people working in huge production houses that find this version unusable.
Example. We work off external storage like everyone else, we have a series of drives we use on a per-project basis.
With FCP7, when i first ingest footage I set up ALL my associated media, scratch disks, render files, autosaves, waveform cache etc to all go onto that one external drive, the project is 100% portable. Take the drive to another machine, boom, you're working.
FCPX, you can set where the duplicated media goes (note, you have to duplicate media from most formats or manually move the original native files to a location of your choice in the finder.
It supports less native files, we wrk with Canon XF and Sony XDCAM formats a lot and no support there, we would now have to convert to prores, prores is great, but the 270% increase in file size is not always worth it and takes time to re-encode.
EVEN WORSE
Not all of the associated media now lies where I want..externally. The 'Events' and 'Projects' libraries sit on the /Movies drive of the BOOT drive. this is terrible practice and there is no way to change it.
The location of the Final Cut Projects and Final Cut Events folders can be on any drive you want -- I just created a project on an external drive and imported events (clips) from an 8GB AVCHD card (actually a HD backup of the AVCHD card on another drive).
The AVCHD import is no small accomplishment, as I never had to decompress the 8 BG AVCHD card into a 57 GB file -- taking storage and about 20 minutes. Rather, FCPX took about 20 seconds to decompress clip thumbnails. I could scrub/play through these and select only the clips (or partial clips) I wanted.
When you start FCPX it will look for folders named "Final Cut Projects" and "Final Cut Events":
-- in the Movies folder of the Boot drive
-- at the root level of every attached drive
You get a list of all the drives in the both the projects and events windows
So... there is literally no ay to move a project without copying those libraries and manually placing them in aid location on the new macine...then redoing when returning to the first machine.
THIS IS NOT A SMALL PROBLEM. This literally 100% knocks out my current workflow and the workflow of pretty much all Mid-High end FCP users.
So Media Management - Broken
If you unmount the external HDD, FCPX will work fine without access to projects or events on that drive.
Later, when you remount (reattach the drive) FCPX will find any projects and events.
Format support - Seriously weakened ("oh but we now support h.264"...great, anyone who edits in h.264 needs to have their FCP licence revoked)
Multi cam - This is huge, it is huge, I don't need to explain.
I don't use multicam, but I read where one FCPX user was able to approximate the FCP7 capability using FCPX collections.
I still don't understand all I know about FCPX collections, tagging, metadata, etc. -- but there is some fantastic capability to analyze clips and create collections.
For example FCPX can identify shots with:
-- no people
-- i person
-- a group of people (more than 1)
-- close up
-- far away
Single monitor display, lack of being able to arrange the workspace to fit the project...awful.
Trackless workflow. Now this is an interesting concept. but it makes doing serious sound mixes a lot more difficult and since they killed Soundtrack..what are we to do?
The list goes on.....
Don't get me wrong, there are some great new ideas in FCPX, it is very fast, it looks great the UI have some nice ways of working. but they have destroyed so much of the bread and butter that a professional editor needs that it is not an option.
"So just use FCP" A lot of you are saying...
Well, yes, that is exactly what I am having to do for the time being, but FCP7 is not 64bit, it doesn't support OpenGL or Grand central, it is sluggish and the reason people wanted an upgrade was for things like 64bit.
Also, with them now killing FCP7 and no longer selling it, how are we supposed to add edit stations and how long will FCP7 survive and we are forced to use FCPX (not possible..) or go elsewhere.
Those saying "people who bought on day 1 are not pros"... this is literally the stupidest thing I've ever heard, it is us pros who were so excited by this new FCP and want to try it out, I installed it alongside FCP7 on my personal machine, why would I not try it out?
For now I will continue to chug along with FCP7, fiddle around on FCPX and wait and see what Apple do but I can't see them listening to the outcries, they may add EDLs or OMF's and multicams they are the loudest cries, but there is a lot more missing that I just don't se them every doing.
I am mentally preparing for Premiere or Avid to potentially be starting to be used a lot more, but i hope not, I've used FCP for years and it is a great product...until now.
I hope you and others will take this post in the spirit it was written.
FCPX is missing many things that people need.
But, the initial impression that FCPX is missing this, or can't do that is often wrong -- because someone didn't know where to look, or that some things are done differently (maybe even better) than in FCP7.
Also, I believe that people will find that FCPX does a lot of things that they didn't know they needed, but can't live without -- the categorizing of clips with people, and the ability to change the color of 1 clip to match another, come to mind.
Give it a fair shot!
The flood of rants about notifications, cut and paste, antennagate etc over the years I've ignored. It's nonsense that happens on friggen phones, the stuff of mega-nerds that actually never bothers me, or anyone I know in "real life"...
Though in this case, here at work, people are a little dumbfounded by this FCP release. And I'd say many of us have legitimate, career based, reasons for "bitching and moaning" .
So, again, just use the old version until they add in those features you need 6 months from now. Dude, I'm an editor for my career as well. There's no way I would ever upgrade to some new software no matter who it's from for at least 6 months and more likely a year. Even if it had ALL the little features you wanted it still would be buggy and not work right. They gotta work that stuff out.
If update after update Apple says it will add things that then never seem to materialize than you have a case to moan, otherwise just relax people!
If you were truly working professionals you probably wound't even have time to bitch about all this stuff as you'd likely be working and not wasting time, like I am, on these stupid forums anyways...
This ranting reminds me of that release. "OMG I can't believe it doesn't do this" "OMG I can't believe it doesn't do that". Like many others have said: It's V 1.0 Calm down and keep using what you're using until they get FCX right.
A terrible analogy. No one depended upon Aperture before version 1.0. It's not like Final Cut Pro didn't exist at all before Tuesday. It's a decade-old application that many an editor depend upon to make their living. As of Monday, they were all led to believe that Apple had been working on an "awesome" upgrade for them that would bring Final Cut Pro up to speed with the competition. On Tuesday morning, Apple eliminated Final Cut Studio from it's product line-up and replaced it with a program that is unusable by nearly anyone who currently depends upon Final Cut Pro. Apple has not publicly committed to adding anything back into Final Cut Pro X that was available in previous versions. Will the next version add the ability to open Final Cut Pro projects, or will it instead add the ability to import your GarageBand jams? We have know way of knowing, but based on what they released this week it's far more likely the latter.
Professionals have waited four years for a real upgrade to Final Cut Pro; they cannot wait another four years for Apple to fix Final Cut Pro X, especially since they have made no indication that they intend to do so.
This ranting reminds me of that release. "OMG I can't believe it doesn't do this" "OMG I can't believe it doesn't do that". Like many others have said: It's V 1.0 Calm down and keep using what you're using until they get FCX right.
I would not have dropped $300 right now had I known Apple considered this a v1.0 product. Again, there was no reason to even conceive that they would have SO MANY features missing. I really wish I waited a day or two - but I generally don't read forums anymore - I only came here after running into my OWN issues in FCPX and seeing this story on AppleInsider's features page - and realized I was not alone in my disappointment.
This isn't a "Calm down & hold your horses" situation... this is a "Pro" application that was "Updated" and has an incredible amount of issues - it's NOT just unfamiliarity or hating "change"... IT DOESN'T WORK as expected... especially for a "Pro" app.
They need to better communicate these things. Period.
The "Event Library" shows all of the media for all of your clients and projects all at once.
Think about this for a minute!
1) There, likely, isn't an HDD big enough to store all the media for all your clients and all your projects
2) so, it is likely that you store projects and events on several drives
3) you can keep all the media for a client on a separate drive, if desired.
4) if a drive is not online, its contained media and projects are not shown
5) if a drive is online, but not opened (just like a closed folder) its projects and contents are not shown
-- the event thumbnails are not even loaded/parsed/opened/displayed -- unless the drive is opened
It may do what you want, the way you want -- but is it a show-stopper?
I suspect that if enough people complain, Apple will fix this!
I totally understand that we can all go work in FCP7 (and I will) and that the app will improve over time... that's a given. I'm not worried that it will NEVER get there... I just didn't realize before clicking the BUY button that it had regressed so far back.
Instead of negating the frustration of us users that truly need/miss those (currently) missing features or functionality - how about being more sympathetic and understanding that just because YOU don't have issues w/ FCPX... others don't have the right to feel slighted.
It's not whining... it's not Apple-bashing... and it's not a personal attack on YOU just because you aren't as upset. It's real users with legitimate feedback.
Could anyone write a fair review of a new version of Photoshop after only one day of use?
I think if you launched Photoshop CS6 and within minutes realized they omitted the marquis tool or Levels/Curves... you wouldn't NEED to spend more than a day to realize you're using a regressed product that is not ready for prime-time, PRO usage. That's all.
Not saying it would never get there... but if features you've grown to depend on suddenly go missing during an "Upgrade"... you might feel a bit put-off.
Yes - I will still be using FCP7 until FCPX gets more features.
Secondly, if a program can't do basic functionality like open its own documents or output its content, whether you spend one hour or one year with the program isn't going to make it any more usable. I've seen this "people just need to use it more" defense several times now, and its rubbish.
FCP X uses an entirely different file and management system than the original FCP. That is the reason it cannot open XML files. Apple has stated that they will provide a bridge between XML and FCP X files.
I would safely wager at some point Apple is going enable some type of file export system in FCP X.
As an Apple "fan-boy" (admittedly), I must also chime-in that this FCPX app is a RADICAL step backwards for FCP.
It is in the sense that FCP X is version 1 software and not a continuation of FCP from 1999.
I was in FCPX for a couple hours last night and I am AMAZED at the most BASIC omissions from this app. My ASSUMPTION was that this was an evolution of FCP... but it's not... not at ALL.
No its not an evolution of FCP its an entirely new application that stands on its own.
I do NOT agree that this is being marketed as a Version 1.0 app... it is X (10)... they need to be BETTER communicators regarding feature drop-off.
FCP X has be rewritten from the ground up. That's what makes it a version 1.0. That is a fact it doesn't matter what they call it.
For those of you defending this release due to it being a "rewrite/recode"... you are being far-too lenient. (IMHO)
If Apple's focus was to rearchitect the core subsystem to build on, that's GREAT - but KEEP BUILDING and push the release out until it AT LEAST matches the current functionality of FCP7.
That's not generally how version 1.0 software works.
Take a moment (please).. clear your mind... browse this thread again and OTHERS all over the web and look at ALL the MASSIVE AMOUNT of both basic and complex features that are missing. There is nothing "PRO" about this Final Cut "Pro" offering. It's a slick new UI built on a new (supposedly) code-base. But just because you can do some basic edits, this is FAR from the FCP7 we all know.
People's complaints aren't directly connected to the reality of what can be done. If any of these complainers could explain how you go about building a complex software application like FCP and include all of those features in version one I'd be open to hearing it.
13123213
The location of the Final Cut Projects and Final Cut Events folders can be on any drive you want -- I just created a project on an external drive and imported events (clips) from an 8GB AVCHD card (actually a HD backup of the AVCHD card on another drive).
When you start FCPX it will look for folders named "Final Cut Projects" and "Final Cut Events":
-- in the Movies folder of the Boot drive
-- at the root level of every attached drive
You get a list of all the drives in the both the projects and events windows
If you unmount the external HDD, FCPX will work fine without access to projects or events on that drive.
Later, when you remount (reattach the drive) FCPX will find any projects and events.
I didn't actually know that, so a project can in fact be portable? Every file and piece of associated media can be external?
That is good, that is my most major issue dealt with. Because that was 100% a deal breaker.
...thought I would still prefer to be able to not use the FCP events folder and just have 1 'event' in a folder of my choosing, I currently create one big folder "example#1" and keep all media, render files, music, scratch disks, project file etc... in that 1 folder. So to move a project you just move that entire folder.
And all metadata, like clip keywords & analysis is stored in the FCP Events folder right? (I'd rather it was with the clips).
You didn't address the format support, I don't want to always have to create prores versions, i sometimes want to work in XDCAM etc..
As we know Adobe would never be brave enough to even do anything like this. So this whole example is pretty academic at best.
I think if you launched Photoshop CS6 and within minutes realized they omitted the marquis tool or Levels/Curves... you wouldn't NEED to spend more than a day to realize you're using a regressed product that is not ready for prime-time, PRO usage. That's all.
Not saying it would never get there... but if features you've grown to depend on suddenly go missing during an "Upgrade"... you might feel a bit put-off.
Yes - I will still be using FCP7 until FCPX gets more features.
This is NOT version 1 software.
This is version 8 software.
It is a rewrite, but they haven't just forgotten all of the things FCP has done and people have liked over the years.
If this is a .1 of a new product is should NOT be called Final Cut and should be a new and separate product and FCS should still be on sale (and kept updated until 'FCP'X is usable)
FCP X uses an entirely different file and management system than the original FCP. That is the reason it cannot open XML files. Apple has stated that they will provide a bridge between XML and FCP X files.
I would safely wager at some point Apple is going enable some type of file export system in FCP X.
It is in the sense that FCP X is version 1 software and not a continuation of FCP from 1999.
No its not an evolution of FCP its an entirely new application that stands on its own.
FCP X has be rewritten from the ground up. That's what makes it a version 1.0. That is a fact it doesn't matter what they call it.
That's not generally how version 1.0 software works.
People's complaints aren't directly connected to the reality of what can be done. If any of these complainers could explain how you go about building a complex software application like FCP and include all of those features in version one I'd be open to hearing it.
13123213
I can absolutely understand ALL of those points when adopting the mindset of a v1.0 product... and I think THAT is the sticking-point that is gumming-up this discussion. The expectations of WHAT FCPX is. As I said... I don't CARE if it's a rewrite from the ground-up... if that's the case, it needs to be BETTER COMMUNICATED to the public what that means. That's all.
When I clicked the BUY NOW button, I was not in the mindset that I was buying into a v1 app... I was in the mindset of "The next evolution of FCP".
Hindsight being 20/20... I am not sure I would have purchased yet. It shows LOTS OF POTENTIAL... and I hold out a lot of hope for what it WILL be. But for right now, you're right - it *IS* just an initial release v.1 app that is not ready - and I am a sucker for thinking it wasn't.
Maybe... dunno...
Quite honestly, I wasn't in it long enough to know what ELSE isn't there.
I mean, I seriously cannot believe I could not add a simple DROP SHADOW to a graphic element I added as an overlay. IT'S NOT IN THERE! That's BASIC stuff! I had to go back into Photoshop and ADD the drop shadow and reimport the graphic. That is rediculous. Again - that is BEYOND basic.
I love Apple most of the time, but this release stinks to high-heaven.
Are you talking about a drop shadow on a title? If so, you can do that in the Inspector.
If not, I think you can probably find what you want in the new Motion.
AFAIK, much of the titling/effects stuff that was spread among various FCS apps is now in Motion.
Think about this for a minute!
1) There, likely, isn't an HDD big enough to store all the media for all your clients and all your projects
2) so, it is likely that you store projects and events on several drives
3) you can keep all the media for a client on a separate drive, if desired.
4) if a drive is not online, its contained media and projects are not shown
5) if a drive is online, but not opened (just like a closed folder) its projects and contents are not shown
-- the event thumbnails are not even loaded/parsed/opened/displayed -- unless the drive is opened
It may do what you want, the way you want -- but is it a show-stopper?
I suspect that if enough people complain, Apple will fix this!
Dick, are you saying that professionals should ditch their massive SAN and network storage that allows them to have all of their projects saved in one location, and start keeping each project on it's own individual and unreliable hard disk? Because I think that's what you just suggested. And if that's the case, someone should tell the Thunderbolt backers to not bother bringing those massive storage devices to market.
The fact that all of your projects and media show up all the time in Final Cut Pro X is not a show-stopper, but it shows a complete lack of understanding of the professional video world on Apple's part. Everyone has a multitude of clients. Even the wedding video-ographer. No one needs or wants to see all of their clients' projects in the same window at the same time. There's no instance where that would be of benefit, and its impossible to do it any other way apart from your unrealistic workaround.
Hmmm.
I just came back and read some more of this most interesting thread, and would like to apologize to the "pros" out there. You're right. Apple has went to far.
The kicker for me was reading that you have to have all of your files on the system disk. As a pro in print production, this is a definite no-go for me in my work. My collection of servers and TB Firewire drives for print and photo work is astounding, so I can only imagine the TB's that film pros have offline. The first thing I recommend to all of my clients is to move everything out of the documents and home folders, and set up a second disk, that's cloned, RAID, whatever. Best pro practice as far as I'm concerned, is to ALWAYS separate the operating system and apps, from actual data.
Except, "you have to have all of your files on the system disk" is not true!
I posted the following in a post after yours:
I don't want to come across as an Apple apologist nor to minimize the needs of the pros who depend on specific features or capabilities to do their job.
Rather, I am making this post to correct some incorrect "limitations" of FCPX.
The location of the Final Cut Projects and Final Cut Events folders can be on any drive you want -- I just created a project on an external drive and imported events (clips) from an 8GB AVCHD card (actually a HD backup of the AVCHD card on another drive).
The AVCHD import is no small accomplishment, as I never had to decompress the 8 BG AVCHD card into a 57 GB file -- taking storage and about 20 minutes. Rather, FCPX took about 20 seconds to decompress clip thumbnails. I could scrub/play through these and select only the clips (or partial clips) I wanted.
When you start FCPX it will look for folders named "Final Cut Projects" and "Final Cut Events":
-- in the Movies folder of the Boot drive
-- at the root level of every attached drive
You get a list of all the drives in the both the projects and events windows
If you unmount the external HDD, FCPX will work fine without access to projects or events on that drive.
Later, when you remount (reattach the drive) FCPX will find any projects and events.
It does appear that Apple is leaving us pro users, in all aspects of it's future business model, and focusing on the consumer.
Lion. iOS. Xserve canceled. There's even been rumors that there won't be any MacPro after the upcoming next release.
Sad that the pros that kept Apple afloat, and tooted the Apple Horn for them in the past, will be shunted for the mass attack that iOS has become. Capitalism at work I suppose, as with everything else. Go to where the money is.
PS. The post that likened FCPX's missing features to Adobe making only JPEGs editable.... PLEASE DO NOT GIVE THEM ANY IDEAS!!!!! I wouldn't put it past them.
@TenoBell
This is NOT version 1 software.
This is version 8 software.
It is a rewrite, but they haven't just forgotten all of the things FCP has done and people have liked over the years.
If this is a .1 of a new product is should NOT be called Final Cut and should be a new and separate product and FCS should still be on sale (and kept updated until 'FCP'X is usable)