Because professionals are quite often asked to draw on projects that were created a long time ago.
With FCP7 dead in the water, you need a viable migration path. When you suddenly can't add seats, can't get support, then can only get seats by calling Apple for some vague window of time when FCP7 will be made available again... you have to move on.
Why did Apple feel the need to add features? Afer all, we were told repeatedly on this site and others that editors who wanted things like XML were just troglodytes and luddites who were afraid of change. Is Apple catering to neanderthals now?
FCP X is not lacking, it is a complete re-write, and they left stuff out that was not ready. Nothing wrong with that. As many times before, they simply failed at communication. They told editors about all the great new stuff (which is definitely there, and definitely amazing - the time we save with X must be measured in days, not hours). But we rarely need multi-cam editing, we do not use Pro Tools, and we do not exchange data with other NLEs - of course there are editors who do need that. And to them, a detailed list of initially unavailable features should have been made available before they buy.
I think what you meant to say was
FCP X IS lacking, it is a complete re-write, and they left stuff out that was not ready.
Wow. Apple almost NEVER pre-announces upcoming features like this (WWDC announcements notwithstanding). They're definitely getting out of their comfort zone trying to win over some of the Final Cut Pro users they've riled up over the .0 release.
With a product like this professionals need some features and not others.
The whingers are very short sighted and moronic in their dealings with this product. Apple released this product to Prosumers in order to give them and update as they hadn't had one in four years. In the meantime however they were listening to the pros to get the features they need.
Instead of seeing this as an opportunity to make Final Cut Pro X the best app out there they railed on it in forums like this. All they had to do was POLITELY go through the proper channels and let Apple know what features they need and Apple will decide if it's viable.
Some features needed will go such as importing old workflows but that's because the old format was a mess. Is it going to annoy a lot of people? Yes but that's the nature of change. Was Apple going to return some features like multiple-cam? Yes but they hVe to do it in a way to fit in with the new way of doing things.
Apple DID release a perfect product. They released a product perfect for the Prosumers while leaving the way open for the pros to make it a perfect product for them.
Stop whinging about what isn't there, go through the proper channels, and nicely tell Apple what you need and why you need it.
Apple's not going to be motivated by a bunch of whiny pricks who can't see the future just to shut you up. They will be more inclined to make changes when people ask them nicely.
Because professionals are quite often asked to draw on projects that were created a long time ago.
With FCP7 dead in the water, you need a viable migration path. When you suddenly can't add seats, can't get support, then can only get seats by calling Apple for some vague window of time when FCP7 will be made available again... you have to move on.
Do you agree that a "best effort" approach similar to what Premiere uses would satisfy most uses:
1) Export XML from FCP 7
2) Import XML into FCPX
3) Log things it could't handle that need manual attention (e.g. incompatible effects)
I have proven to myself that you can move a project manually -- tedious, but acceptable!
If Apple isn't going to provide a FCP 7 Import, a 3rd-party could provide a tool to automate the conversion process.
At some point in time FCP 7 isn't going to be supported on the latest hardware and OS -- so you would have to:
1) maintain a legacy OS X, Legacy Hardware, and a Legacy FCP7 system to provide access to legacy systems.
or
2) at a leisurely pace, have an assistant editor (or hire a service) to convert your legacy FCP 7 projects to FCPX using a conversion tool.
The user has to decide, for himself, whether FCPX and the benefits of this revolutionary NLE, offers enough advantage to offset the effort to retrain oneself -- or just migrate to another familiar NLE.
I think a conversion tool might help in this decision.
Why did Apple feel the need to add features? Afer all, we were told repeatedly on this site and others that editors who wanted things like XML were just troglodytes and luddites who were afraid of change. Is Apple catering to neanderthals now?
+5
Everything 'professional' related on this site gets the same treatment.
Most of the forum are investors. Thus the attitude of 'Shut up and watch the stock grow'.
Faced with growing complaints, Apple resumed sales of the previous, $999 version of Final Cut Studio earlier this month. Orders have only been taken over the phone, and Apple has said it has a "limited quantity" of the end-of-life product. The company has also provided refunds to some dissatisfied customers.
I don't see that as too much to complain about what was missing and what was not. For $300, you test a new project in FCPX to see if it does what you want/need and let Apple know what you think is missing - all the while you work on your actual production material in FCP7 (which you paid three times as much for).
Then when FCPX is up to your expectations, you start a new production piece in it.
As for opening FCP7 projects in FCPX, why? Besides the fact that X is a complete rewrite, you never *ever* open existing projects in new versions of the software. EVER. I'm not even close to a pro, but I know that much.
Not sure where all the wildly exaggerated Studio prices came from. All the people who bitched and moaned about Studio's price have essentially made the apps more expensive now. Instead of $999 for full suite/$299 for upgrades (FCP, Color, SoundTrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Motion, Compressor, LiveType, etc.), you now pay $449 for FCP, Compressor, Motion, every time. You will spend more money in the long run and get less content. It's a shame that so many people are too cheap and miserly to appreciate what a great value FCS was.
With a product like this professionals need some features and not others.
The whingers are very short sighted and moronic in their dealings with this product
..... going to annoy a lot of people? Yes but that's the nature of change. Was Apple going to return some features like multiple-cam? Yes but they hVe to do it in a way to fit in with the new way of doing things.
Apple DID release a perfect product. They released a product perfect for the Prosumers while leaving the way open for the pros to make it a perfect product for them.
Stop whinging about what isn't there, go through the proper channels, and nicely tell Apple what you need and why you need it.
Apple's not going to be motivated by a bunch of whiny pricks who can't see the future just to shut you up. They will be more inclined to make changes when people ask them nicely.
You don't know what you are talking about. And since it has all been explained many times factually, without whining, I guess you will never get it.
But Apple NEVER releases a product until it is as perfect as then possible. Look at cut and paste. They could have released a half-assed version on the first iPhone. But it took them YEARS to figure out how to do it, so they refused to release anything for several years.
Now they release a product which is lacking?
Is this a new strategy? Release an incomplete beta and add stuff if, as and when customers scream?
Isn't that a very Google-like way of going about things?
Except Lion server where they actually went backward - they dropped functionality and half of the things are broken and do not work well at all.
Hopefully Apple has learned something from this experience. They have to listen more and they have to be less rash with professional products. Consumers may want a 'faster horse', but professionals know their industries. I applaud Apple shaking off the cobwebs of legacy from NLE but they had to do it more sensitively.
A free trial of Final Cut Pro X at launch would have taken much of the sting out of what happened. Telling everyone prior to launch that there was a lot missing, it was coming, and that professionals would be better off sticking with Final Cut Pro 7 for the time being and treating Final Cut Pro X as a training tool for future projects would have taken almost all the sting out.
That, of course, required not declaring the industry standard NLE suite end of life.
Apple's Achilles heal is a lack of listening. It's what makes them great sometimes, they go their own way, but when taken too far it gets them into sticky situations like this.
That said, the reaction to FCPX was absurd and hopefully adding in some of this functionality will help recover some of the software's reputation.
PLEASE, PLEASE - what is going to happen to video out support - it is written all over the walls that FCP does not have this option and no one has addressed it.
Note that despite supposedly vast feedback, they have done nothing about the importing of previous FCP projects. If they really are caving to feedback that should have been first on the list.
The XML import/export is enough for this. XML is plain text and you can export an XML file from FCP7 so even if it needs reworked by an intermediate process, it will be possible to transfer the edit list over. Creating corresponding events for the timeline clips will be the trickiest part but they just seem to be Quicktime reference clips so you could even do this automatically with Python or Applescript.
This one update covers the most important missing elements. The import SDK allows high-end camera formats like XDCam to be imported and the XML features allow integration with colour correction software and professional audio software.
3rd parties are going to have to pull up some of the slack but it's a good development and good that they didn't wait until next year for this one.
fcp x is lacking, it is a complete re-write, and they left stuff out that was not ready.
agreed
Quote:
Originally Posted by RegurgitatedCoprolite
Yeah, but Apple didn't make it perfect and exactly like FCP 7, so it's time for the bitchers to start bit chin'.
PLEASE, PLEASE - what is going to happen to video out support - it is written all over the walls that FCP does not have this option and no one has addressed it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sportytoes
Faced with growing complaints, Apple resumed sales of the previous, $999 version of Final Cut Studio earlier this month. Orders have only been taken over the phone, and Apple has said it has a "limited quantity" of the end-of-life product. The company has also provided refunds to some dissatisfied customers.
Apple's not going to be motivated by a bunch of whiny pricks who can't see the future just to shut you up. They will be more inclined to make changes when people ask them nicely.
It was Adobe with fierce competition laying waste to FCPX that forced Apple to even think about addressing the issues.
When over half of your market gets up from the table and says no thanks - that seems to be the magical number before Apple starts to listen.
In a professional environment, it's trust that keeps relations good. Having a road map and some transparency in regards to future development. FCPX came out of nowhere and they killed FCP licenses. Didn't exactly instill trust with professionals now did it.
The biggest complaint which still goes unaddressed is the inability to open previous projects. That is something that every professional needed.
No it is not. It is a worthless consumer request. Professional studios dont't switch apps during a project and have no need to open old projects in fcpx at all.
It is a stupid request really, I mean, final cut studio 3 does not suddenly invalidate. It's not an OS upgrade either, replacing an old version. It's just a set of apps you can install on the same machine, for crying out loud! Just not run at the same time.
Anyway technically wise it's not possible to open old projects because it's so different: fcpx uses tags and stores files in a database.
It was Adobe with fierce competition laying waste to FCPX that forced Apple to even think about addressing the issues.
What evidence is there of this? Adobe reported they've sold 45% more copies of Premiere than last year. Notice they didn't give any real numbers, likely because it's 45% more of hardly anything.
Quote:
When over half of your market gets up from the table and says no thanks - that seems to be the magical number before Apple starts to listen.
Just to let you know, this statement makes it difficult to take anything you say seriously.
I've been using FCP since 2001. I was warned off FCPX by a disgruntled user who described the update as follows:
"It was like walking into my familiar living room, expecting some spanking new shiny comfortable furniture, no squeaks in the doors, a nice new carpet, the walls repainted, the windows properly insulated and a few cosmetic improvements, such as some nice new pictures and ornaments.
What did I find? All the comfortable old solid furniture had been dumped and replaced with cheap IKEA imports, there was a large hole in the floor, the couch had been sawn in half, the TV was missing, there was a pile of sand and cement where the bar used to be, and the whole room was littered with dog turds".
No it is not. It is a worthless consumer request. Professional studios dont't switch apps during a project and have no need to open old projects in fcpx at all.
It is a stupid request really, I mean, final cut studio 3 does not suddenly invalidate. It's not an OS upgrade either, replacing an old version. It's just a set of apps you can install on the same machine, for crying out loud! Just not run at the same time.
Anyway technically wise it's not possible to open old projects because it's so different: fcpx uses tags and stores files in a database.
At some point, FCP 7 will not be able to run on the latest Mac hardware and Latest Mac OS -- probably 2-3 years from now.
If editors want to be able to open FCP 7 projects they will need to maintain FCP 7 seats with people trained on ever more obsolescent, FCP7/FCS apps, OS X version and hardware.
Many editors have a need to go back and perform minor updates on legacy projects such as educational material.
Over time, it will become more difficult and costly to do so. Realizing this, most editors are looking for a path forward from FCP 7/FCS.
So far, no path forward exists for FCP 7 to FCPX. There are "best effort" paths forward for Adobe and Avid.
It is technically possible to move FCP 7 projects manually to FCPX. I've done it.
You can't open FCP 7 projects with FCPX, * that is true. But it has nothing to do with tags or the database.
* nor can you open FCP 7 projects with Adobe or Avid.
FCPX stores tags, data and metadata (from the clips, user tagging and from clip analysis) in the database. The actual media files are not stored in the database -- only referenced by it. The media can be copied into FCPX specified locations or it can remain where it currently exists -- and be accessible by both FCPX and FCP 7.
Event Database information is created as media is ingested into FCPX (whether the media is copied or stays in place).
Similarily, Project Database information is created as events, effects, etc. are edited into the Storyline.
The source media doesn't move and remains unchanged.
Much of the speed gain in FCPX is because it can get all the info from the database -- as opposed to continuously going out to the clips to access the data. On a large FCP 7 project this can result in a significant amount of BeachBalling.
Comments
As for opening FCP7 projects in FCPX, why?
Because professionals are quite often asked to draw on projects that were created a long time ago.
With FCP7 dead in the water, you need a viable migration path. When you suddenly can't add seats, can't get support, then can only get seats by calling Apple for some vague window of time when FCP7 will be made available again... you have to move on.
FCP X is not lacking, it is a complete re-write, and they left stuff out that was not ready. Nothing wrong with that. As many times before, they simply failed at communication. They told editors about all the great new stuff (which is definitely there, and definitely amazing - the time we save with X must be measured in days, not hours). But we rarely need multi-cam editing, we do not use Pro Tools, and we do not exchange data with other NLEs - of course there are editors who do need that. And to them, a detailed list of initially unavailable features should have been made available before they buy.
I think what you meant to say was
FCP X IS lacking, it is a complete re-write, and they left stuff out that was not ready.
Wow. Apple almost NEVER pre-announces upcoming features like this (WWDC announcements notwithstanding). They're definitely getting out of their comfort zone trying to win over some of the Final Cut Pro users they've riled up over the .0 release.
With a product like this professionals need some features and not others.
The whingers are very short sighted and moronic in their dealings with this product. Apple released this product to Prosumers in order to give them and update as they hadn't had one in four years. In the meantime however they were listening to the pros to get the features they need.
Instead of seeing this as an opportunity to make Final Cut Pro X the best app out there they railed on it in forums like this. All they had to do was POLITELY go through the proper channels and let Apple know what features they need and Apple will decide if it's viable.
Some features needed will go such as importing old workflows but that's because the old format was a mess. Is it going to annoy a lot of people? Yes but that's the nature of change. Was Apple going to return some features like multiple-cam? Yes but they hVe to do it in a way to fit in with the new way of doing things.
Apple DID release a perfect product. They released a product perfect for the Prosumers while leaving the way open for the pros to make it a perfect product for them.
Stop whinging about what isn't there, go through the proper channels, and nicely tell Apple what you need and why you need it.
Apple's not going to be motivated by a bunch of whiny pricks who can't see the future just to shut you up. They will be more inclined to make changes when people ask them nicely.
Because professionals are quite often asked to draw on projects that were created a long time ago.
With FCP7 dead in the water, you need a viable migration path. When you suddenly can't add seats, can't get support, then can only get seats by calling Apple for some vague window of time when FCP7 will be made available again... you have to move on.
Do you agree that a "best effort" approach similar to what Premiere uses would satisfy most uses:
1) Export XML from FCP 7
2) Import XML into FCPX
3) Log things it could't handle that need manual attention (e.g. incompatible effects)
I have proven to myself that you can move a project manually -- tedious, but acceptable!
If Apple isn't going to provide a FCP 7 Import, a 3rd-party could provide a tool to automate the conversion process.
At some point in time FCP 7 isn't going to be supported on the latest hardware and OS -- so you would have to:
1) maintain a legacy OS X, Legacy Hardware, and a Legacy FCP7 system to provide access to legacy systems.
or
2) at a leisurely pace, have an assistant editor (or hire a service) to convert your legacy FCP 7 projects to FCPX using a conversion tool.
The user has to decide, for himself, whether FCPX and the benefits of this revolutionary NLE, offers enough advantage to offset the effort to retrain oneself -- or just migrate to another familiar NLE.
I think a conversion tool might help in this decision.
Why did Apple feel the need to add features? Afer all, we were told repeatedly on this site and others that editors who wanted things like XML were just troglodytes and luddites who were afraid of change. Is Apple catering to neanderthals now?
+5
Everything 'professional' related on this site gets the same treatment.
Most of the forum are investors. Thus the attitude of 'Shut up and watch the stock grow'.
"Limited quantities"?????
It's software, not hardware.
FCP7 was what? A couple grand?
FCPX was $300?
I don't see that as too much to complain about what was missing and what was not. For $300, you test a new project in FCPX to see if it does what you want/need and let Apple know what you think is missing - all the while you work on your actual production material in FCP7 (which you paid three times as much for).
Then when FCPX is up to your expectations, you start a new production piece in it.
As for opening FCP7 projects in FCPX, why? Besides the fact that X is a complete rewrite, you never *ever* open existing projects in new versions of the software. EVER. I'm not even close to a pro, but I know that much.
Not sure where all the wildly exaggerated Studio prices came from. All the people who bitched and moaned about Studio's price have essentially made the apps more expensive now. Instead of $999 for full suite/$299 for upgrades (FCP, Color, SoundTrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Motion, Compressor, LiveType, etc.), you now pay $449 for FCP, Compressor, Motion, every time. You will spend more money in the long run and get less content. It's a shame that so many people are too cheap and miserly to appreciate what a great value FCS was.
With a product like this professionals need some features and not others.
The whingers are very short sighted and moronic in their dealings with this product
..... going to annoy a lot of people? Yes but that's the nature of change. Was Apple going to return some features like multiple-cam? Yes but they hVe to do it in a way to fit in with the new way of doing things.
Apple DID release a perfect product. They released a product perfect for the Prosumers while leaving the way open for the pros to make it a perfect product for them.
Stop whinging about what isn't there, go through the proper channels, and nicely tell Apple what you need and why you need it.
Apple's not going to be motivated by a bunch of whiny pricks who can't see the future just to shut you up. They will be more inclined to make changes when people ask them nicely.
You don't know what you are talking about. And since it has all been explained many times factually, without whining, I guess you will never get it.
But Apple NEVER releases a product until it is as perfect as then possible. Look at cut and paste. They could have released a half-assed version on the first iPhone. But it took them YEARS to figure out how to do it, so they refused to release anything for several years.
Now they release a product which is lacking?
Is this a new strategy? Release an incomplete beta and add stuff if, as and when customers scream?
Isn't that a very Google-like way of going about things?
Except Lion server where they actually went backward - they dropped functionality and half of the things are broken and do not work well at all.
You don't know what you are talking about. And since it has all been explained many times factually, without whining, I guess you will never get it.
Apple knows why we need it
Hopefully Apple has learned something from this experience. They have to listen more and they have to be less rash with professional products. Consumers may want a 'faster horse', but professionals know their industries. I applaud Apple shaking off the cobwebs of legacy from NLE but they had to do it more sensitively.
A free trial of Final Cut Pro X at launch would have taken much of the sting out of what happened. Telling everyone prior to launch that there was a lot missing, it was coming, and that professionals would be better off sticking with Final Cut Pro 7 for the time being and treating Final Cut Pro X as a training tool for future projects would have taken almost all the sting out.
That, of course, required not declaring the industry standard NLE suite end of life.
Apple's Achilles heal is a lack of listening. It's what makes them great sometimes, they go their own way, but when taken too far it gets them into sticky situations like this.
That said, the reaction to FCPX was absurd and hopefully adding in some of this functionality will help recover some of the software's reputation.
PLEASE, PLEASE - what is going to happen to video out support - it is written all over the walls that FCP does not have this option and no one has addressed it.
Note that despite supposedly vast feedback, they have done nothing about the importing of previous FCP projects. If they really are caving to feedback that should have been first on the list.
The XML import/export is enough for this. XML is plain text and you can export an XML file from FCP7 so even if it needs reworked by an intermediate process, it will be possible to transfer the edit list over. Creating corresponding events for the timeline clips will be the trickiest part but they just seem to be Quicktime reference clips so you could even do this automatically with Python or Applescript.
This one update covers the most important missing elements. The import SDK allows high-end camera formats like XDCam to be imported and the XML features allow integration with colour correction software and professional audio software.
3rd parties are going to have to pull up some of the slack but it's a good development and good that they didn't wait until next year for this one.
i think what you meant to say was
fcp x is lacking, it is a complete re-write, and they left stuff out that was not ready.
agreed
Yeah, but Apple didn't make it perfect and exactly like FCP 7, so it's time for the bitchers to start bit chin'.
PLEASE, PLEASE - what is going to happen to video out support - it is written all over the walls that FCP does not have this option and no one has addressed it.
Faced with growing complaints, Apple resumed sales of the previous, $999 version of Final Cut Studio earlier this month. Orders have only been taken over the phone, and Apple has said it has a "limited quantity" of the end-of-life product. The company has also provided refunds to some dissatisfied customers.
"Limited quantities"?????
It's software, not hardware.
Software has to be made too
Apple's not going to be motivated by a bunch of whiny pricks who can't see the future just to shut you up. They will be more inclined to make changes when people ask them nicely.
It was Adobe with fierce competition laying waste to FCPX that forced Apple to even think about addressing the issues.
When over half of your market gets up from the table and says no thanks - that seems to be the magical number before Apple starts to listen.
In a professional environment, it's trust that keeps relations good. Having a road map and some transparency in regards to future development. FCPX came out of nowhere and they killed FCP licenses. Didn't exactly instill trust with professionals now did it.
The biggest complaint which still goes unaddressed is the inability to open previous projects. That is something that every professional needed.
No it is not. It is a worthless consumer request. Professional studios dont't switch apps during a project and have no need to open old projects in fcpx at all.
It is a stupid request really, I mean, final cut studio 3 does not suddenly invalidate. It's not an OS upgrade either, replacing an old version. It's just a set of apps you can install on the same machine, for crying out loud! Just not run at the same time.
Anyway technically wise it's not possible to open old projects because it's so different: fcpx uses tags and stores files in a database.
It was Adobe with fierce competition laying waste to FCPX that forced Apple to even think about addressing the issues.
What evidence is there of this? Adobe reported they've sold 45% more copies of Premiere than last year. Notice they didn't give any real numbers, likely because it's 45% more of hardly anything.
When over half of your market gets up from the table and says no thanks - that seems to be the magical number before Apple starts to listen.
Just to let you know, this statement makes it difficult to take anything you say seriously.
The biggest complaint which still goes unaddressed is the inability to open previous projects. That is something that every professional needed.
Not just every *professional* but *ANYBODY* whose content was created in prior versions of FCP.
"It was like walking into my familiar living room, expecting some spanking new shiny comfortable furniture, no squeaks in the doors, a nice new carpet, the walls repainted, the windows properly insulated and a few cosmetic improvements, such as some nice new pictures and ornaments.
What did I find? All the comfortable old solid furniture had been dumped and replaced with cheap IKEA imports, there was a large hole in the floor, the couch had been sawn in half, the TV was missing, there was a pile of sand and cement where the bar used to be, and the whole room was littered with dog turds".
No it is not. It is a worthless consumer request. Professional studios dont't switch apps during a project and have no need to open old projects in fcpx at all.
It is a stupid request really, I mean, final cut studio 3 does not suddenly invalidate. It's not an OS upgrade either, replacing an old version. It's just a set of apps you can install on the same machine, for crying out loud! Just not run at the same time.
Anyway technically wise it's not possible to open old projects because it's so different: fcpx uses tags and stores files in a database.
At some point, FCP 7 will not be able to run on the latest Mac hardware and Latest Mac OS -- probably 2-3 years from now.
If editors want to be able to open FCP 7 projects they will need to maintain FCP 7 seats with people trained on ever more obsolescent, FCP7/FCS apps, OS X version and hardware.
Many editors have a need to go back and perform minor updates on legacy projects such as educational material.
Over time, it will become more difficult and costly to do so. Realizing this, most editors are looking for a path forward from FCP 7/FCS.
So far, no path forward exists for FCP 7 to FCPX. There are "best effort" paths forward for Adobe and Avid.
It is technically possible to move FCP 7 projects manually to FCPX. I've done it.
You can't open FCP 7 projects with FCPX, * that is true. But it has nothing to do with tags or the database.
* nor can you open FCP 7 projects with Adobe or Avid.
FCPX stores tags, data and metadata (from the clips, user tagging and from clip analysis) in the database. The actual media files are not stored in the database -- only referenced by it. The media can be copied into FCPX specified locations or it can remain where it currently exists -- and be accessible by both FCPX and FCP 7.
Event Database information is created as media is ingested into FCPX (whether the media is copied or stays in place).
Similarily, Project Database information is created as events, effects, etc. are edited into the Storyline.
The source media doesn't move and remains unchanged.
Much of the speed gain in FCPX is because it can get all the info from the database -- as opposed to continuously going out to the clips to access the data. On a large FCP 7 project this can result in a significant amount of BeachBalling.