I'd like to change the conversation to Apples business direction on FCP.
But first of all, I would like to say that I feel bad for the Pro Editors who have/will lose time, money and faith in a Brand that they respected.
Apple for tarnishing their image of finally becoming a World Wide Tec Leader after all these years of being second to Microsoft.
This should have not happened.
Why did Apple make these dramatic change without consulting with the pro's? Financial or a False Sense of futuristic Leadership?
OR
Do they feel that the amount of people who are professionals who invest in FCP does not pay for the creation of such a product? How many pro's buy FCP? How many Pro-sumers buy this product?
Why has Avid and Premier not invested in their products? Maybe the market size does not make financial sense? ( see my comment below )
If Apple determined it's not worth investing in a Pro-line of FCP Software, then why build Pro Mac's or move towards a fast line such as Thunderbolt?
Now my feelings...
Even if a brand has small minority of Pro's worldwide using their products, it only makes sense to invest in them because the publicity for their brand gets the highness level of PR.
i.e. Why does Firestone make special tires for race cars?
So Apple, wake up... this is a good place to invest some of those Billions in the bank.
Keep a Pro Product like FCP alive and have another for majority of us dummies.
They don't do full render on Macs, they have dedicated hardware for that. The artists do use Macs for animating.
I've heard the rendering, even on incredible, dedicated hardware, takes a long time for each frame. It's amazing. The new Cars supposedly has even more detail, so either longer render times or a bigger render farm... or two..
Stop panicking. You're fine - rumours about a redesigned MP have been circulating for several months. Don't forget that Steve Jobs also owns a little company called Pixar whose artists need 128 GB of RAM to render their projects. Great as they are, a MPB will never do that.
Its too bad that posters don't bother to get their facts straight. Jobs sold Pixar to Disney. He no longer owns it.
As far as Pixar render farms, "There were few contacts on Pixar's site, which isn't surprising, being a Steve Jobs-founded company now owned by another fairly secretive corporation, Disney. And information on the Web was hard, at least for me, to initially find, though I was able to confirm that Pixar and most other major animation studios had moved from Unix-based render farms to Linux ones about 5 years ago. (Check out Linuxmovies.org for even more information on this topic.)"
Has any rumor surfaced yet as to the future of the MacPro? I had a thought last night, maybe this all foreshadows Apple dropping the high end hardware while making MacBook Pros ever more powerful and migrating pro apps to the prosumer variety. It make sense looking at the sales numbers, and look at XServe!
As a Mac Desk top owner since they first existed it is a scary thought personally but as a share holder I could see the logic. I admit I now use a MacBook Pro i7 and iPad 2 a hell of a lot of the time though. Apple could abandon the high end altogether, leaving that small market to PCs and Adobe.
Tell me I am just having nightmares.
Interesting point - I haven't seen one in a mac store for a very long time. I totally sympathise with all the video editors out there, this kind of stuff would drive me mad in audio. Oh wait it did but it was tc electronic not apple. They should offer full support for the old one and the possibility to buy more licenses until they can make the new one acceptable. What a cock up...
As far as the lack of full tape support, who cares? This is Apple making a shot across the bow to all of the outfits out there that are stuck in 1999. Most people are shooting tapeless, or will be in the near future. Why should we have to worry about having to go back out to tape because some TV station still likes a Betacam tape? Maybe the stations should upgrade instead of the myriad producers of small content have to keep unreliable mechanical crap around just for them? Tape died four or five years ago, some people just refused to read the obituary.
What about the millions of miles of videotape on the shelves that need to be migrated to digital files? Suppose these need to be color corrected, audio mixed, edited and upconverted? Do you tell your client that you will not output to a tape protection copy because you no longer want to "keep unreliable mechanical crap around just for them?"
I'd like to change the conversation to Apples business direction on FCP.
But first of all, I would like to say that I feel bad for the Pro Editors who have/will lose time, money and faith in a Brand that they respected.
Apple for tarnishing their image of finally becoming a World Wide Tec Leader after all these years of being second to Microsoft.
This should have not happened.
Why did Apple make these dramatic change without consulting with the pro's? Financial or a False Sense of futuristic Leadership?
OR
Do they feel that the amount of people who are professionals who invest in FCP does not pay for the creation of such a product? How many pro's buy FCP? How many Pro-sumers buy this product?
Why has Avid and Premier not invested in their products? Maybe the market size does not make financial sense? ( see my comment below )
If Apple determined it's not worth investing in a Pro-line of FCP Software, then why build Pro Mac's or move towards a fast line such as Thunderbolt?
Now my feelings...
Even if a brand has small minority of Pro's worldwide using their products, it only makes sense to invest in them because the publicity for their brand gets the highness level of PR.
i.e. Why does Firestone make special tires for race cars?
So Apple, wake up... this is a good place to invest some of those Billions in the bank.
Keep a Pro Product like FCP alive and have another for majority of us dummies.
A Pro-sumer... Old retired Mac Guy
I have a horrible feeling the pro market isn't big enough for apple's interest anymore and they are prepared to lose a significant proportion to gain loads of prosumers. Pretty sad state of affairs really but sound business sense to me... Hope this isn't true, pretty shocked but the import thing myself...
Over the past week since this all this started, the news has made me one of the unhappy video editors, however, I don't really think it is a miscalculation on Apple's part. They knew what was going to happen, which is why they wanted to conceal the known issues until the last minute. They didn't want to have it dragged through the mud for months. They wanted all the bitching and complaining to be over and done with in a week's time and then we all move on.
Maybe it is a good thing to have a powerful yet stripped down editing app. If you look at any Apple produced video or commercial, you don't see many fancy special effects, except some of those older iTunes animated ads. Their stuff is clean straight cuts, simple titling and conservative audio mixing. Should that be the new direction for video? Less is more, you know?
Perhaps next Google will come out with Viddy? for Chrome. Then we can edit our movies over the Internet. That should make FCP X look totally professional by comparison.
The problem with Apple software, pro and home, is that it now has a confirmed reputation of becoming obsolete in a relatively sort time and without warning. The same goes for its pro hardware like the Mac Servers and the Apple RAID.
Professionals will now need even more ammunition to why their employer should spend the extra dough to purchase Mac Pros and use software that can become obsolete overnight.
Can I import projects from Final Cut Pro 7 into Final Cut Pro X?
Final Cut Pro X includes an all-new project architecture structured around a trackless timeline and connected clips. In addition, Final Cut Pro X features new and redesigned audio effects, video effects, and color grading tools. Because of these changes, there is no way to “translate” or bring in old projects without changing or losing data. But if you’re already working with Final Cut Pro 7, you can continue to do so after installing Final Cut Pro X, and Final Cut Pro 7 will work with Mac OS X Lion. You can also import your media files from previous versions into Final Cut Pro X.
Based on limited FCPX experience and tutorials the highlighted text is true... as far as it goes.
But I think that with a "best effort" attempt Apple could provide a separate migration tool that took an FCP7 project and created a corresponding FCPX project:
-- The media from FCP7 could be copied (or optionally pointed to) and used to create equivalent events
-- Missing FCP7 organizational constructs such as bins and multi-sequence-projects could be handled with FCPX collections and naming conventions: ProjA,Seq1,Seq2 become ProjA-Seq1, ProjA-Seq2...
-- I believe the FCPX storyline construct could provide a reasonable approximation of the multiple track construct of an FCP7 sequence (FCPX doesn't have multiple tracks, but clips can be positioned above and below the storyline)
-- The clips in FCPX would maintain the same length and juxtaposition as the original FCP7 sequence.
-- Clips without equivalent FCPX effects could be tagged with an FCPX "To Do" marker to indicate what has been abandoned and what needs to be done done, e.g. "Missing XYZfx Karaoke Bouncing Ball effect".
With a migration tool, as described above, Apple could do the necessary grunt work/heavy lifting to move a legacy FCP7 project to FCPX.
As the robustness of FCPX grows the migration tool could be expanded to accomplish a more complete migration -- New 3rd-party FCPX effects could be applied with the same parameters as their FCP7 equivalents.
I assume that Apple must provide this tool, because I don't believe Apple has supplied a programmatic way for 3rd-parties to generate FCPX projects and position clips in the storyline (and other positions above and below).
Done properly, I believe that this would provide a level of comfort to pros with many legacy FCP7/FCS projects -- it gives them a path forward migrate legacy projects to the new technology as and when needed.
Simple question, because you post in a reasoned fashion and appear to be a pro in post.
Do any competitive products have the capability to:
1) Open an FCP7/FCS * project
* I include FCS so that the FCP projects that round-trip to other FCS components are covered.
or
2) Provide a migration tool to move an FCP7/FCS project to their product(s) -- realizing that there may be differences that require a "best effort" migration.
Or, does migration of an FCP7/FCS project to a competitive system involve manual re-creation (not recreation of the project in the new system on a "best effort" basis?
I'm pretty much retired now so keep up out of academic interest. I maintain a FCP7 edit suite for local HD projects I shoot myself these day but gone are the days I was editing freelance for ESPN shows etc. ... TG!
I am actually playing with X too and love it but I do consultancy for companies still with many seats editing in FCPro 7 so I feel their anguish at the dilemma they are in.
As to migration. Yes, Premiere Pro can for the most part. Many edit houses also have Avid and Premiere Pro stations too, it is an industry which embraces high end technologies and they want to keep their fingers in as many options as possible. So many I suspect could move over to Premiere Pro (on PCs sadly in my experience) for example and use EDLs and XML to convert but the truth is most love their Macs and OS X and really want to see this worked out I am sure. Some migration info here ...
I think this will all work out if Apple maintain the ability to add a seat with 7 when needed for a while longer and bring the pros in to give feed back on brining X up to speed. Once X is up to speed I am sure it will be faster and better.
I also suspect some bright spark will figure out a way to convert projects.
I'm pretty much retired now so keep up out of academic interest. I maintain a FCP7 edit suite for local HD projects I shoot myself these day but gone are the days I was editing freelance for ESPN shows etc. ... TG!
I am actually playing with X too and love it but I do consultancy for companies still with many seats editing in FCPro 7 so I feel their anguish at the dilemma they are in.
As to migration. Yes, Premiere Pro can for the most part. Many edit houses also have Avid and Premiere Pro stations too, it is an industry which embraces high end technologies and they want to keep their fingers in as many options as possible. So many I suspect could move over to Premiere Pro (on PCs sadly in my experience) for example and use EDLs and XML to convert but the truth is most love their Macs and OS X and really want to see this worked out I am sure.
I think this will all work out if Apple maintain the ability to add a seat with 7 when needed for a while longer and bring the pros in to give feed back on brining X up to speed. Once X is up to speed I am sure it will be faster and better.
I also suspect some bright spark will figure out a way to convert projects.
OK! There is a path forward for FCP7/FCS users -- Use Premiere Pro.
This doesn't make me very happy as an Apple fan and shareholder.
I have some stuff to do today, but this weekend I will try and assess if there is any published programmatic way to create an FCPX project.
If there is, then anyone could write a migration tool. If not, Apple will have to write one or publish an SDK.
Its too bad that posters don't bother to get their facts straight. Jobs sold Pixar to Disney. He no longer owns it.
Yep Jobs doesn't own Pixar anymore because he sold it to Disney for shares in Disney stock. So now he's the biggest single shareholder of Disney and sits in Disney's board. Does that mean that he does/doesn't give a sh*t anymore about what goes on in Pixar?
As far as the lack of full tape support, who cares? This is Apple making a shot across the bow to all of the outfits out there that are stuck in 1999. Most people are shooting tapeless, or will be in the near future. Why should we have to worry about having to go back out to tape because some TV station still likes a Betacam tape? Maybe the stations should upgrade instead of the myriad producers of small content have to keep unreliable mechanical crap around just for them? Tape died four or five years ago, some people just refused to read the obituary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Park Seward
What about the millions of miles of videotape on the shelves that need to be migrated to digital files? Suppose these need to be color corrected, audio mixed, edited and upconverted? Do you tell your client that you will not output to a tape protection copy because you no longer want to "keep unreliable mechanical crap around just for them?"
I'd love to have the OP as a competitor.
Everyone I know in the industry is aware tape is dying. teejaysplace24 must not run a business or he would know that things don't change overnight or over years. The funny thing is, it's your customers who decide how you are going to work. If an agency wants to do a $200k job with you and demands tape at every stage of the process - you say yes. So Teejay you go ahead keep making bombastic statements about people being stuck in 1999 or or not reading the obituary. People will stop listening to you, if they haven't already.
BTW we have not purchased a new tape deck in many, many years. In fact I have sold a number of them on Ebay. A guy in Canada bought our pro Hi8 deck
I just updated the link about migration to a better page.
Yes I too would hate to see this go that way, especially to Adobe LOL. You could be rich if you create a utility from 7 to X
That's a pretty good list!
Well... Shit, Oh Dear...
I just watched the video that demonstrates conversion from FCP to Premiere and back.
As I posted earlier I believe Apple could provide a similar migration tool.
With what I know about FCPX it could handle the import of an FCP7 sequence equally as well as Premiere.
For now, some of the effects in FCPX may be missing -- but that should change quickly (there is quite a bit of activity on the <[email protected]> mailing lists).
If that's all it takes then Apple will be remiss [crazy] if they don't supply (or let a 3rd-party supply) a migration tool -- "all-new project architecture structured around a trackless timeline"... shmimeline, Indeed!
I think that people are wasting their time signing any petition. Apple knows fully well what it is doing and I'm sure they were aware of some backlash coming. They made their strategic decision and I doubt that they will budge.
Nature, the free market and capitalism will solve any problems. Those people who don't like the new Final Cut Pro X or find it unusable will migrate towards something else and those people who like the new Final Cut Pro X will use it.
I'm don't really do video, I'm more into music. If Apple comes out with a new Logic that is completely different, I will simply have to choose if I will continue using it or if I will move to something else. If a new Logic version ends up looking more like Garageband and it is targeted more towards talentless people uploading their crappy, amateurish music on youtube, then I will probably move to something else.
Comments
But first of all, I would like to say that I feel bad for the Pro Editors who have/will lose time, money and faith in a Brand that they respected.
Apple for tarnishing their image of finally becoming a World Wide Tec Leader after all these years of being second to Microsoft.
This should have not happened.
Why did Apple make these dramatic change without consulting with the pro's? Financial or a False Sense of futuristic Leadership?
OR
Do they feel that the amount of people who are professionals who invest in FCP does not pay for the creation of such a product? How many pro's buy FCP? How many Pro-sumers buy this product?
Why has Avid and Premier not invested in their products? Maybe the market size does not make financial sense? ( see my comment below )
If Apple determined it's not worth investing in a Pro-line of FCP Software, then why build Pro Mac's or move towards a fast line such as Thunderbolt?
Now my feelings...
Even if a brand has small minority of Pro's worldwide using their products, it only makes sense to invest in them because the publicity for their brand gets the highness level of PR.
i.e. Why does Firestone make special tires for race cars?
So Apple, wake up... this is a good place to invest some of those Billions in the bank.
Keep a Pro Product like FCP alive and have another for majority of us dummies.
A Pro-sumer... Old retired Mac Guy
They don't do full render on Macs, they have dedicated hardware for that. The artists do use Macs for animating.
I've heard the rendering, even on incredible, dedicated hardware, takes a long time for each frame. It's amazing. The new Cars supposedly has even more detail, so either longer render times or a bigger render farm... or two..
Stop panicking. You're fine - rumours about a redesigned MP have been circulating for several months. Don't forget that Steve Jobs also owns a little company called Pixar whose artists need 128 GB of RAM to render their projects. Great as they are, a MPB will never do that.
Its too bad that posters don't bother to get their facts straight. Jobs sold Pixar to Disney. He no longer owns it.
As far as Pixar render farms, "There were few contacts on Pixar's site, which isn't surprising, being a Steve Jobs-founded company now owned by another fairly secretive corporation, Disney. And information on the Web was hard, at least for me, to initially find, though I was able to confirm that Pixar and most other major animation studios had moved from Unix-based render farms to Linux ones about 5 years ago. (Check out Linuxmovies.org for even more information on this topic.)"
http://blogs.computerworld.com/pixar...ervers_not_mac
Well, here's my take on things.
Apple has been systematically dismantling everything "pro" for several years now. No more Xserve.
Xserve was a solution looking for a problem. It never found one.
Horrible thoughts ...
Has any rumor surfaced yet as to the future of the MacPro? I had a thought last night, maybe this all foreshadows Apple dropping the high end hardware while making MacBook Pros ever more powerful and migrating pro apps to the prosumer variety. It make sense looking at the sales numbers, and look at XServe!
As a Mac Desk top owner since they first existed it is a scary thought personally but as a share holder I could see the logic. I admit I now use a MacBook Pro i7 and iPad 2 a hell of a lot of the time though. Apple could abandon the high end altogether, leaving that small market to PCs and Adobe.
Tell me I am just having nightmares.
Interesting point - I haven't seen one in a mac store for a very long time. I totally sympathise with all the video editors out there, this kind of stuff would drive me mad in audio. Oh wait it did but it was tc electronic not apple. They should offer full support for the old one and the possibility to buy more licenses until they can make the new one acceptable. What a cock up...
As far as the lack of full tape support, who cares? This is Apple making a shot across the bow to all of the outfits out there that are stuck in 1999. Most people are shooting tapeless, or will be in the near future. Why should we have to worry about having to go back out to tape because some TV station still likes a Betacam tape? Maybe the stations should upgrade instead of the myriad producers of small content have to keep unreliable mechanical crap around just for them? Tape died four or five years ago, some people just refused to read the obituary.
What about the millions of miles of videotape on the shelves that need to be migrated to digital files? Suppose these need to be color corrected, audio mixed, edited and upconverted? Do you tell your client that you will not output to a tape protection copy because you no longer want to "keep unreliable mechanical crap around just for them?"
I'd love to have the OP as a competitor.
I'd like to change the conversation to Apples business direction on FCP.
But first of all, I would like to say that I feel bad for the Pro Editors who have/will lose time, money and faith in a Brand that they respected.
Apple for tarnishing their image of finally becoming a World Wide Tec Leader after all these years of being second to Microsoft.
This should have not happened.
Why did Apple make these dramatic change without consulting with the pro's? Financial or a False Sense of futuristic Leadership?
OR
Do they feel that the amount of people who are professionals who invest in FCP does not pay for the creation of such a product? How many pro's buy FCP? How many Pro-sumers buy this product?
Why has Avid and Premier not invested in their products? Maybe the market size does not make financial sense? ( see my comment below )
If Apple determined it's not worth investing in a Pro-line of FCP Software, then why build Pro Mac's or move towards a fast line such as Thunderbolt?
Now my feelings...
Even if a brand has small minority of Pro's worldwide using their products, it only makes sense to invest in them because the publicity for their brand gets the highness level of PR.
i.e. Why does Firestone make special tires for race cars?
So Apple, wake up... this is a good place to invest some of those Billions in the bank.
Keep a Pro Product like FCP alive and have another for majority of us dummies.
A Pro-sumer... Old retired Mac Guy
I have a horrible feeling the pro market isn't big enough for apple's interest anymore and they are prepared to lose a significant proportion to gain loads of prosumers. Pretty sad state of affairs really but sound business sense to me... Hope this isn't true, pretty shocked but the import thing myself...
Over the past week since this all this started, the news has made me one of the unhappy video editors, however, I don't really think it is a miscalculation on Apple's part. They knew what was going to happen, which is why they wanted to conceal the known issues until the last minute. They didn't want to have it dragged through the mud for months. They wanted all the bitching and complaining to be over and done with in a week's time and then we all move on.
Maybe it is a good thing to have a powerful yet stripped down editing app. If you look at any Apple produced video or commercial, you don't see many fancy special effects, except some of those older iTunes animated ads. Their stuff is clean straight cuts, simple titling and conservative audio mixing. Should that be the new direction for video? Less is more, you know?
Perhaps next Google will come out with Viddy? for Chrome. Then we can edit our movies over the Internet. That should make FCP X look totally professional by comparison.
The problem with Apple software, pro and home, is that it now has a confirmed reputation of becoming obsolete in a relatively sort time and without warning. The same goes for its pro hardware like the Mac Servers and the Apple RAID.
Professionals will now need even more ammunition to why their employer should spend the extra dough to purchase Mac Pros and use software that can become obsolete overnight.
Interesting point - I haven't seen [a Mac Pro] in a mac store for a very long time.
Out here, the mini stores don't have any on display, the full-size stores all do.
Import
Can I import projects from Final Cut Pro 7 into Final Cut Pro X?
Final Cut Pro X includes an all-new project architecture structured around a trackless timeline and connected clips. In addition, Final Cut Pro X features new and redesigned audio effects, video effects, and color grading tools. Because of these changes, there is no way to “translate” or bring in old projects without changing or losing data. But if you’re already working with Final Cut Pro 7, you can continue to do so after installing Final Cut Pro X, and Final Cut Pro 7 will work with Mac OS X Lion. You can also import your media files from previous versions into Final Cut Pro X.
Based on limited FCPX experience and tutorials the highlighted text is true... as far as it goes.
But I think that with a "best effort" attempt Apple could provide a separate migration tool that took an FCP7 project and created a corresponding FCPX project:
-- The media from FCP7 could be copied (or optionally pointed to) and used to create equivalent events
-- Missing FCP7 organizational constructs such as bins and multi-sequence-projects could be handled with FCPX collections and naming conventions: ProjA,Seq1,Seq2 become ProjA-Seq1, ProjA-Seq2...
-- I believe the FCPX storyline construct could provide a reasonable approximation of the multiple track construct of an FCP7 sequence (FCPX doesn't have multiple tracks, but clips can be positioned above and below the storyline)
-- The clips in FCPX would maintain the same length and juxtaposition as the original FCP7 sequence.
-- Clips without equivalent FCPX effects could be tagged with an FCPX "To Do" marker to indicate what has been abandoned and what needs to be done done, e.g. "Missing XYZfx Karaoke Bouncing Ball effect".
With a migration tool, as described above, Apple could do the necessary grunt work/heavy lifting to move a legacy FCP7 project to FCPX.
As the robustness of FCPX grows the migration tool could be expanded to accomplish a more complete migration -- New 3rd-party FCPX effects could be applied with the same parameters as their FCP7 equivalents.
I assume that Apple must provide this tool, because I don't believe Apple has supplied a programmatic way for 3rd-parties to generate FCPX projects and position clips in the storyline (and other positions above and below).
Done properly, I believe that this would provide a level of comfort to pros with many legacy FCP7/FCS projects -- it gives them a path forward migrate legacy projects to the new technology as and when needed.
Continuity of data!
Simple question, because you post in a reasoned fashion and appear to be a pro in post.
Do any competitive products have the capability to:
1) Open an FCP7/FCS * project
* I include FCS so that the FCP projects that round-trip to other FCS components are covered.
or
2) Provide a migration tool to move an FCP7/FCS project to their product(s) -- realizing that there may be differences that require a "best effort" migration.
Or, does migration of an FCP7/FCS project to a competitive system involve manual re-creation (not recreation
I'm pretty much retired now so keep up out of academic interest. I maintain a FCP7 edit suite for local HD projects I shoot myself these day but gone are the days I was editing freelance for ESPN shows etc. ... TG!
I am actually playing with X too and love it but I do consultancy for companies still with many seats editing in FCPro 7 so I feel their anguish at the dilemma they are in.
As to migration. Yes, Premiere Pro can for the most part. Many edit houses also have Avid and Premiere Pro stations too, it is an industry which embraces high end technologies and they want to keep their fingers in as many options as possible. So many I suspect could move over to Premiere Pro (on PCs sadly in my experience) for example and use EDLs and XML to convert but the truth is most love their Macs and OS X and really want to see this worked out I am sure. Some migration info here ...
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/premiere...47be-8000.html
I think this will all work out if Apple maintain the ability to add a seat with 7 when needed for a while longer and bring the pros in to give feed back on brining X up to speed. Once X is up to speed I am sure it will be faster and better.
I also suspect some bright spark will figure out a way to convert projects.
I'm pretty much retired now so keep up out of academic interest. I maintain a FCP7 edit suite for local HD projects I shoot myself these day but gone are the days I was editing freelance for ESPN shows etc. ... TG!
I am actually playing with X too and love it but I do consultancy for companies still with many seats editing in FCPro 7 so I feel their anguish at the dilemma they are in.
As to migration. Yes, Premiere Pro can for the most part. Many edit houses also have Avid and Premiere Pro stations too, it is an industry which embraces high end technologies and they want to keep their fingers in as many options as possible. So many I suspect could move over to Premiere Pro (on PCs sadly in my experience) for example and use EDLs and XML to convert but the truth is most love their Macs and OS X and really want to see this worked out I am sure.
I think this will all work out if Apple maintain the ability to add a seat with 7 when needed for a while longer and bring the pros in to give feed back on brining X up to speed. Once X is up to speed I am sure it will be faster and better.
I also suspect some bright spark will figure out a way to convert projects.
OK! There is a path forward for FCP7/FCS users -- Use Premiere Pro.
This doesn't make me very happy as an Apple fan and shareholder.
I have some stuff to do today, but this weekend I will try and assess if there is any published programmatic way to create an FCPX project.
If there is, then anyone could write a migration tool. If not, Apple will have to write one or publish an SDK.
OK! There is a path forward for FCP7/FCS users -- Use Premiere Pro.
This doesn't make me very happy as an Apple fan and shareholder.
I have some stuff to do today, but this weekend I will try and assess if there is any published programmatic way to create an FCPX project.
If there is, then anyone could write a migration tool. If not, Apple will have to write one or publish an SDK.
I just updated the link about migration to a better page.
Yes I too would hate to see this go that way, especially to Adobe LOL. You could be rich if you create a utility from 7 to X
Its too bad that posters don't bother to get their facts straight. Jobs sold Pixar to Disney. He no longer owns it.
Yep Jobs doesn't own Pixar anymore because he sold it to Disney for shares in Disney stock. So now he's the biggest single shareholder of Disney and sits in Disney's board. Does that mean that he does/doesn't give a sh*t anymore about what goes on in Pixar?
Originally Posted by teejaysplace24
As far as the lack of full tape support, who cares? This is Apple making a shot across the bow to all of the outfits out there that are stuck in 1999. Most people are shooting tapeless, or will be in the near future. Why should we have to worry about having to go back out to tape because some TV station still likes a Betacam tape? Maybe the stations should upgrade instead of the myriad producers of small content have to keep unreliable mechanical crap around just for them? Tape died four or five years ago, some people just refused to read the obituary.
What about the millions of miles of videotape on the shelves that need to be migrated to digital files? Suppose these need to be color corrected, audio mixed, edited and upconverted? Do you tell your client that you will not output to a tape protection copy because you no longer want to "keep unreliable mechanical crap around just for them?"
I'd love to have the OP as a competitor.
Everyone I know in the industry is aware tape is dying. teejaysplace24 must not run a business or he would know that things don't change overnight or over years. The funny thing is, it's your customers who decide how you are going to work. If an agency wants to do a $200k job with you and demands tape at every stage of the process - you say yes. So Teejay you go ahead keep making bombastic statements about people being stuck in 1999 or or not reading the obituary. People will stop listening to you, if they haven't already.
BTW we have not purchased a new tape deck in many, many years. In fact I have sold a number of them on Ebay. A guy in Canada bought our pro Hi8 deck
BTW we have not purchased a new tape deck in many, many years. In fact I have sold a number of them on Ebay. A guy in Canada bought our pro Hi8 deck
mmm a guy in Canada bought a Mac Pro work station and a Betacam SP off me from ebay ... what are these Canadians up to?
This is escalating fast now isn't it?
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/06/...nal-cut-pro-x/
http://news.cnet.com/8301-27076_3-20...final-cut-pro/
I'm no pro when it comes to video editing, but I'd say 600 filmmakers is a pretty nice crowd.
I would say 600 complainers signing an internet petition isn't that many.
I would say 600 complainers signing an internet petition isn't that many.
"600"? That's old news. The petition now reads: "5513".
Oops, "5513" is old too...
I just updated the link about migration to a better page.
Yes I too would hate to see this go that way, especially to Adobe LOL. You could be rich if you create a utility from 7 to X
That's a pretty good list!
Well... Shit, Oh Dear...
I just watched the video that demonstrates conversion from FCP to Premiere and back.
As I posted earlier I believe Apple could provide a similar migration tool.
With what I know about FCPX it could handle the import of an FCP7 sequence equally as well as Premiere.
For now, some of the effects in FCPX may be missing -- but that should change quickly (there is quite a bit of activity on the <[email protected]> mailing lists).
If that's all it takes then Apple will be remiss [crazy] if they don't supply (or let a 3rd-party supply) a migration tool -- "all-new project architecture structured around a trackless timeline"... shmimeline, Indeed!
Nature, the free market and capitalism will solve any problems. Those people who don't like the new Final Cut Pro X or find it unusable will migrate towards something else and those people who like the new Final Cut Pro X will use it.
I'm don't really do video, I'm more into music. If Apple comes out with a new Logic that is completely different, I will simply have to choose if I will continue using it or if I will move to something else. If a new Logic version ends up looking more like Garageband and it is targeted more towards talentless people uploading their crappy, amateurish music on youtube, then I will probably move to something else.