Final Cut Pro and iMovie to be replaced with new Movies app!
LOL! I don't think so.
One issue I keep hearing about FCP X is that it is less suited to production teams than available alternatives and it's better designed for small productions with a single editor.
Any editors care to comment?
They already have:
Directors John Requa and Glenn Ficarra believed that to make a compelling film about a con man, they’d need to lie at least as persuasively as he did. “Any movie is a series of lies,” says Requa. “But you have to make sure the lies work so you don’t alienate the audience.” For their new feature film, Focus, that meant creating intricate, tightly edited scenes that convincingly sell the schemes of grifter protagonist Nicky Spurgeon (Will Smith).
Sustaining complex misdirection required an editing tool that was just the opposite — clear, straightforward, and accessible enough that the directors could edit footage along with lead editor Jan Kovac. It needed to be fast so they could experiment with scores of alternate takes. It had to be flexible so they could easily move between cutting on Mac Pro in the edit suite and working with MacBook Pro on location. And it had to be robust enough to reliably organize and process 2K Apple ProRes 4444 footage from production through multiple stages of post.
After researching several workflows, Requa and Ficarra decided to cut their major studio feature entirely in Final Cut Pro X. The results were even better than they’d expected. The movie came in on time and under budget, and it played and looked just as they’d envisioned it. “We got exactly the film we set out to make,” says Requa. “What I love about Final Cut Pro X is that it allowed me to be involved with, and in control of, every aspect of making our film.”
“I’ve cut on all the other systems, and I can easily say I’m three times faster on Final Cut Pro X.”
- Glenn Ficarra
One issue I keep hearing about FCP X is that it is less suited to production teams than available alternatives and it's better designed for small productions with a single editor.
Any editors care to comment?
I'm not an editor so I can't offer anything from that perspective. However I did watch the reactions of many so called professional when FCPX came out and frankly with a group like that I wouldn't put much value in their comments. More importantly it appears that many professionals that jumped ship or threatened to do so, are once again using FCPX.
The reaction to FCPX was especially perplexing when Apple was very upfront about it being a complete rewrite to modernize the code base and make better use of GPUs and the like. That right there should have informed users that not everything would be the same.
This is his official site which has up to date photos and videos of his life and travels. Nice to see that he passionately edited videos himself. Also noticed that he's a trance music fan too! Epic!
And with it, Apple's Pro market altogether, as Apple becomes a fashion company (Jesus, never thought I would be saying that.. It hurts).
Time to start learning other editing applications.
Your condolences for FCPX are misplaced.
In just the last 14 months we've had:
New Mac Pro
iMac 5K
2 feature releases an one bug fix release of FCPX, Motion and Compressor
Focus -- A major movie edited entirely in FCPX
My review of this addition? hmmm... I guess it's "Holy Sh*t!" It's the real deal, not some faked extrusion. Seriously, this is simply amazing 3D text. It looks as good as anything you could do in a dedicated 3D program, and basic titles will play back in real-time, unrendered.** I've exported some 5k titles and it's really crisp, no aliasing on the edges during moves, just gorgeous. You can also convert any 2D titles you've made to 3D with a click or two.
FinalCut can of course survive without him, so could Aperture. But Aperture is dead now, and he is gone...
But given how small a part of Apple's business is the Mac, and how small a sliver thereof is the Pro segment, his departure could signal changes he wasn't willing to be part of.
I have the feeling there are too many MBAs at Apple now, not enough engineers; it's all bucks now, no longer about any mission.
A platform needs a way for people to grow, and the space for growth and thus loyalty building is the pro segment; and it's been more and more dismantled and castrated, starting with the XServe RAID, XServe, OS X Server which is but a shadow of its former self... ...then the audio editor part of FCP was killed... ...and now even the MacMini is no longer suitable as server, Aperture is dead.
All Apple needs to kill now is Logic and FCX.
They'd better open-source these products than just abandoning them...
I'm not an editor so I can't offer anything from that perspective. However I did watch the reactions of many so called professional when FCPX came out and frankly with a group like that I wouldn't put much value in their comments. More importantly it appears that many professionals that jumped ship or threatened to do so, are once again using FCPX.
The reaction to FCPX was especially perplexing when Apple was very upfront about it being a complete rewrite to modernize the code base and make better use of GPUs and the like. That right there should have informed users that not everything would be the same.
I'm an editor and co-owner of a production company. I think I can shed some light on this...
First, it's important to realize that Apple reacted to the pro-users who were complaining. Some reactions were instant (communication), while some took a short time (re-releasing the old version of FCP), and others staggered in over long periods of time (we're still missing some features). But had the pro community not reacted so strongly, I seriously doubt Apple would've reacted the way it did. Those I've talked to at Apple all mentioned that "they heard us".
Our production company had over 10,000 projects in FCP, and suddenly FCPX was released with no ability to migrate old projects into FCPX. This was a huge problem for us since we archived our projects and often went back to them for updates or to use for other new projects. "Just keep using FCP" wasn't an option since we had no way of knowing how long it would be supported in OS X, and since we could no longer purchase FCP. We hire and transition through freelance and temp editors fairly rapidly, and many of them work in remote locations, so this was a pretty significant burden on us.
For many people, it was an issue of "I've been doing this just fine for many years, and now I have to relearn how to do something", and this was a significant issue for some since FCPX is so incredibly different from FCP, Premiere, Avid, and many other systems many of us had used through our careers. Many editors I've worked with continue to use FCP, while others have transitioned to other products, and some have quit video editing altogether.
About 40% that I work with have transitioned to FCPX, but nobody I know was happy with the process. Most find it easier to use, but not worth the pain to get there (as well as the significant pain of having to go into archive projects).
In retrospect what I think Apple should've done was release it as a separate product that was a replacement for Final Cut Express and iMovie. From there, they could've built a product that was pro, and eventually when enough FCP users migrated, they could've ended FCP.
TL;DR: FCPX is a great product and many pros saw this from day 1, but the process was initially handled very poorly. Apple reacted and things became much better, but definitely damage was done due to the initial process.
No iMovie version has been as well designed as the first version. It wasn't Final Cut Express nor Final Cut Pro. Yet it had features and capabilities never found again with the future releases. I absolutely hate todays program. I only continue to use it because it's just there. Too bad he didn't leave his mark on the subsequent overhauls of FCP and lame iMovie. I think this realm of Apple glory has long been in decay.
FinalCut can of course survive without him, so could Aperture. But Aperture is dead now, and he is gone...
But given how small a part of Apple's business is the Mac, and how small a sliver thereof is the Pro segment, his departure could signal changes he wasn't willing to be part of.
I have the feeling there are too many MBAs at Apple now, not enough engineers; it's all bucks now, no longer about any mission.
A platform needs a way for people to grow, and the space for growth and thus loyalty building is the pro segment; and it's been more and more dismantled and castrated, starting with the XServe RAID, XServe, OS X Server which is but a shadow of its former self...
...then the audio editor part of FCP was killed...
...and now even the MacMini is no longer suitable as server, Aperture is dead.
All Apple needs to kill now is Logic and FCX.
They'd better open-source these products than just abandoning them...
Hyperbolic much?
The way I would look at it is that Apple is developing to the market's needs and their strengths.
FCPX, Motion & Logic have recently received solid feature additions and constant bug fixes. They are under active development. Aperture probably wasn't gaining enough traction even from the onset to warrant the large amount of resources required to develop it. I think Photos for average users and Lightroom for pros is a perfect scenario for everyone. Apple doesn't need to make every pro app for the Mac. Adobe has been doing well. Heck, they even make some of the more advanced iOS creative apps.
When I had my post house, we ran Xserves and Xserve RAIDs. They were awesome but the server market is not in Apple's wheelhouse. It is hyper competitive. Heck, even IBM sold off their server business. It is a commodity business. Big tech companies buy custom order components and put them into their own internally developed boxes.
The Mac just came off of its biggest quarter ever. They might have made a Mac Mini server, but that wasn't the reason it was initially conceived. It was an entry level desktop Mac. It's back to basics.
Randy retiring has more to do with the fact that he's been in the business a long time and at Apple for 20 years. He's had an awesome career and now he can just enjoy the fruits of his labor, no pun intended.
I'm an editor and co-owner of a production company. I think I can shed some light on this...
This post gets it right. I'd add that originally, FCP was seen as a toy among editors, but a strong sales push from Apple and a VERY low price compared to Avid made some post departments take notice. FCP did improve, although it was largely still disliked for having a clumsy workflow and sketchy network abilities. Still, it reached point a few years ago when it almost seemed like FCP was ready to compete with Avid... and then... FCPX. FCPX was a disaster. In the first place, it was a major step backwards for user interface, and in the second it had staggering incompatibility issues as mentioned above.
FCP never recovered. Avid had long since adjusted their price structure to compete with Apple, and frankly, I think a lot of post departments felt burned. Apple's attitude has always been "here's the new way we're doing this, end of conversation." The public adapts, but in the industry, everyone was dumbfounded. Apple tried to salvage the situation but the damage was done.
Interestingly, Primiere is making headway among the cheaper options, but Avid has rebuilt its dominance.
Personally, I welcome Ubillos' departure since I think he botched one of the greatest underdog upsets in tech history. I salute him for giving Avid something to worry about, but right when the game got interesting he blew it.
I don't think FCP will regain its foothold anytime soon. Feelings are still pretty hot about FCPX. But perhaps with enough money and time, Apple's video department can learn how to access this audience again. But frankly, the corporate culture at Apple tends to be better suited toward consumer needs than corporate. You can't force innovation on the barrel of a gun, and you need backward compatibility.
And with it, Apple's Pro market altogether, as Apple becomes a fashion company (Jesus, never thought I would be saying that.. It hurts).
Time to start learning other editing applications.
LOL...yes, it was just him, alone, at a desk, toiling away on a Mac Plus, under a dim bare bulb light...he shared the development with no one, shunned any assistance at all, and kept the code locked away on his vintage Newton. Further, this was not viewed as a liability at all by Apple...
People don't "retire" (especially at such a young age) if they are truly happy and inspired by their work. It's clear that Apple has made the decision not to create for the professional market and they are leaving that to companies like Adobe. Randy most likely will find new challenges in a different and more innovative environment. I'm sure working in the 1998-2010 era at Apple was much different than the culture there now.
LOL...yes, it was just him, alone, at a desk, toiling away on a Mac
Actually that is sort of what happened. He first wrote Adobe Premiere then moved to Macromedia where he wrote Final Cut Pro, then moved to Apple where he wrote iMovie and then FCP X. All pretty much solo efforts on his part. iMove was even introduced as such in a keynote by Tim Cook who explained that one of their engineers was on vacation and got the inspiration to write the new video editor. We called it iMovie and here is the result...Randy walks on stage to demo it. He was most definitely singularly responsible for all those V1 editors. Sure, any large company has all kinds of code documentation but Randy was the lead on all those projects. I met him once while he was at Macromedia while attending Mac World SF when FCP was still under development.
For those of you who think Apple actually IS a religion or cult the hits just keep coming. You refuse to believe the desktop PC is dead, you refuse to believe Apple is morphing into a consumer electronics behemoth, you cling to the old Apple in desperation. Some of you are still waiting for that mid-priced headless Mac tower with expansion slots. Hell, some of you are still running System 7.5.5 on your Mac SE or Classic. Welcome to Apple in the 21st century. I’m having fun just watching it play out.
One issue I keep hearing about FCP X is that it is less suited to production teams than available alternatives and it's better designed for small productions with a single editor.
Any editors care to comment?
Most of the negative comments come from editors who've either never used FCPX or have tried it and don't get it. FCPX radically changes the known and established metaphors of video editing.
Avid, Premiere, FCP (classic) were designed when acquisition using physical media were the norm (video tape and film). There were certain metaphors that made sense in that workflow and that system. Today tape is acquisition is all but dead and film isn't far behind.
Today the far majority of acquisition is on digital media and delivered with digital files. FCPX is the only NLE that is designed exclusively for this workflow.
The editors you hear criticizing this workflow and the ones who are going to get left behind.
TL;DR: FCPX is a great product and many pros saw this from day 1, but the process was initially handled very poorly. Apple reacted and things became much better, but definitely damage was done due to the initial process.
Also, don't get me started on Aperture.
This is largely true. I'd add Apple's continued lack of communication about FCPX and its future plans hinder the ability to boost confidence in its adoption.
I'd add that originally, FCP was seen as a toy among editors,
I disagree, FCPX was seen as foreign among editors. Most did not take the time to learn it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by manfrommars
Still, it reached point a few years ago when it almost seemed like FCP was ready to compete with Avid...
This isn't true. The vast majority of FCP users were unable to afford a comparable Avid suite. For the most part FCP and Avid did not compete in the same markets. Avid has always held the high end feature film and broadcast television markets. FCP never made significant inroads into that world.
Comments
They already have:
https://www.apple.com/final-cut-pro/in-action/focus/
I'm not an editor so I can't offer anything from that perspective. However I did watch the reactions of many so called professional when FCPX came out and frankly with a group like that I wouldn't put much value in their comments. More importantly it appears that many professionals that jumped ship or threatened to do so, are once again using FCPX.
The reaction to FCPX was especially perplexing when Apple was very upfront about it being a complete rewrite to modernize the code base and make better use of GPUs and the like. That right there should have informed users that not everything would be the same.
This is his official site which has up to date photos and videos of his life and travels. Nice to see that he passionately edited videos himself. Also noticed that he's a trance music fan too! Epic!
http://rickandrandy.com
Your condolences for FCPX are misplaced.
In just the last 14 months we've had:
https://library.creativecow.net/austin_charlie/FCPX-10point2/1
And:
[VIDEO]
http://www.fcp.co/final-cut-pro/tutorials/1651-looking-at-the-new-3d-text-and-making-masks-in-final-cut-pro-10-2
And:
[VIDEO]http://www.bbalser.com/video/FCPXguruFiles/3DtextDemo.mov[/VIDEO]
http://www.finalcutprox.guru/FinalCutProX.guru/Blog/Entries/2015/4/13_FCPX_10.2.0_Update_Released.html
RIP Final Cut Pro.
And with it, Apple's Pro market altogether, as Apple becomes a fashion company (Jesus, never thought I would be saying that.. It hurts).
Time to start learning other editing applications.
Well commented. I loved Final Cut 6/7 Pro, but for NLE Apple has lost the thread. Don't know of one large pro shop using X.
But given how small a part of Apple's business is the Mac, and how small a sliver thereof is the Pro segment, his departure could signal changes he wasn't willing to be part of.
I have the feeling there are too many MBAs at Apple now, not enough engineers; it's all bucks now, no longer about any mission.
A platform needs a way for people to grow, and the space for growth and thus loyalty building is the pro segment; and it's been more and more dismantled and castrated, starting with the XServe RAID, XServe, OS X Server which is but a shadow of its former self...
...then the audio editor part of FCP was killed...
...and now even the MacMini is no longer suitable as server, Aperture is dead.
All Apple needs to kill now is Logic and FCX.
They'd better open-source these products than just abandoning them...
Is it my imagination or has Apple released another product recently called iQuit?
What in the hell are you trying to say here?
I'm not an editor so I can't offer anything from that perspective. However I did watch the reactions of many so called professional when FCPX came out and frankly with a group like that I wouldn't put much value in their comments. More importantly it appears that many professionals that jumped ship or threatened to do so, are once again using FCPX.
The reaction to FCPX was especially perplexing when Apple was very upfront about it being a complete rewrite to modernize the code base and make better use of GPUs and the like. That right there should have informed users that not everything would be the same.
I'm an editor and co-owner of a production company. I think I can shed some light on this...
First, it's important to realize that Apple reacted to the pro-users who were complaining. Some reactions were instant (communication), while some took a short time (re-releasing the old version of FCP), and others staggered in over long periods of time (we're still missing some features). But had the pro community not reacted so strongly, I seriously doubt Apple would've reacted the way it did. Those I've talked to at Apple all mentioned that "they heard us".
Our production company had over 10,000 projects in FCP, and suddenly FCPX was released with no ability to migrate old projects into FCPX. This was a huge problem for us since we archived our projects and often went back to them for updates or to use for other new projects. "Just keep using FCP" wasn't an option since we had no way of knowing how long it would be supported in OS X, and since we could no longer purchase FCP. We hire and transition through freelance and temp editors fairly rapidly, and many of them work in remote locations, so this was a pretty significant burden on us.
For many people, it was an issue of "I've been doing this just fine for many years, and now I have to relearn how to do something", and this was a significant issue for some since FCPX is so incredibly different from FCP, Premiere, Avid, and many other systems many of us had used through our careers. Many editors I've worked with continue to use FCP, while others have transitioned to other products, and some have quit video editing altogether.
About 40% that I work with have transitioned to FCPX, but nobody I know was happy with the process. Most find it easier to use, but not worth the pain to get there (as well as the significant pain of having to go into archive projects).
In retrospect what I think Apple should've done was release it as a separate product that was a replacement for Final Cut Express and iMovie. From there, they could've built a product that was pro, and eventually when enough FCP users migrated, they could've ended FCP.
TL;DR: FCPX is a great product and many pros saw this from day 1, but the process was initially handled very poorly. Apple reacted and things became much better, but definitely damage was done due to the initial process.
Also, don't get me started on Aperture.
FinalCut can of course survive without him, so could Aperture. But Aperture is dead now, and he is gone...
But given how small a part of Apple's business is the Mac, and how small a sliver thereof is the Pro segment, his departure could signal changes he wasn't willing to be part of.
I have the feeling there are too many MBAs at Apple now, not enough engineers; it's all bucks now, no longer about any mission.
A platform needs a way for people to grow, and the space for growth and thus loyalty building is the pro segment; and it's been more and more dismantled and castrated, starting with the XServe RAID, XServe, OS X Server which is but a shadow of its former self...
...then the audio editor part of FCP was killed...
...and now even the MacMini is no longer suitable as server, Aperture is dead.
All Apple needs to kill now is Logic and FCX.
They'd better open-source these products than just abandoning them...
Hyperbolic much?
The way I would look at it is that Apple is developing to the market's needs and their strengths.
FCPX, Motion & Logic have recently received solid feature additions and constant bug fixes. They are under active development. Aperture probably wasn't gaining enough traction even from the onset to warrant the large amount of resources required to develop it. I think Photos for average users and Lightroom for pros is a perfect scenario for everyone. Apple doesn't need to make every pro app for the Mac. Adobe has been doing well. Heck, they even make some of the more advanced iOS creative apps.
When I had my post house, we ran Xserves and Xserve RAIDs. They were awesome but the server market is not in Apple's wheelhouse. It is hyper competitive. Heck, even IBM sold off their server business. It is a commodity business. Big tech companies buy custom order components and put them into their own internally developed boxes.
The Mac just came off of its biggest quarter ever. They might have made a Mac Mini server, but that wasn't the reason it was initially conceived. It was an entry level desktop Mac. It's back to basics.
Randy retiring has more to do with the fact that he's been in the business a long time and at Apple for 20 years. He's had an awesome career and now he can just enjoy the fruits of his labor, no pun intended.
I'm an editor and co-owner of a production company. I think I can shed some light on this...
This post gets it right. I'd add that originally, FCP was seen as a toy among editors, but a strong sales push from Apple and a VERY low price compared to Avid made some post departments take notice. FCP did improve, although it was largely still disliked for having a clumsy workflow and sketchy network abilities. Still, it reached point a few years ago when it almost seemed like FCP was ready to compete with Avid... and then... FCPX. FCPX was a disaster. In the first place, it was a major step backwards for user interface, and in the second it had staggering incompatibility issues as mentioned above.
FCP never recovered. Avid had long since adjusted their price structure to compete with Apple, and frankly, I think a lot of post departments felt burned. Apple's attitude has always been "here's the new way we're doing this, end of conversation." The public adapts, but in the industry, everyone was dumbfounded. Apple tried to salvage the situation but the damage was done.
Interestingly, Primiere is making headway among the cheaper options, but Avid has rebuilt its dominance.
Personally, I welcome Ubillos' departure since I think he botched one of the greatest underdog upsets in tech history. I salute him for giving Avid something to worry about, but right when the game got interesting he blew it.
I don't think FCP will regain its foothold anytime soon. Feelings are still pretty hot about FCPX. But perhaps with enough money and time, Apple's video department can learn how to access this audience again. But frankly, the corporate culture at Apple tends to be better suited toward consumer needs than corporate. You can't force innovation on the barrel of a gun, and you need backward compatibility.
I don't think it's out of line to say that Tim Cook would never have allowed this to happen.
/s, sort of.
RIP Final Cut Pro.
And with it, Apple's Pro market altogether, as Apple becomes a fashion company (Jesus, never thought I would be saying that.. It hurts).
Time to start learning other editing applications.
LOL...yes, it was just him, alone, at a desk, toiling away on a Mac Plus, under a dim bare bulb light...he shared the development with no one, shunned any assistance at all, and kept the code locked away on his vintage Newton. Further, this was not viewed as a liability at all by Apple...
jesus is right...
People don't "retire" (especially at such a young age) if they are truly happy and inspired by their work. It's clear that Apple has made the decision not to create for the professional market and they are leaving that to companies like Adobe. Randy most likely will find new challenges in a different and more innovative environment. I'm sure working in the 1998-2010 era at Apple was much different than the culture there now.
LOL...yes, it was just him, alone, at a desk, toiling away on a Mac
Actually that is sort of what happened. He first wrote Adobe Premiere then moved to Macromedia where he wrote Final Cut Pro, then moved to Apple where he wrote iMovie and then FCP X. All pretty much solo efforts on his part. iMove was even introduced as such in a keynote by Tim Cook who explained that one of their engineers was on vacation and got the inspiration to write the new video editor. We called it iMovie and here is the result...Randy walks on stage to demo it. He was most definitely singularly responsible for all those V1 editors. Sure, any large company has all kinds of code documentation but Randy was the lead on all those projects. I met him once while he was at Macromedia while attending Mac World SF when FCP was still under development.
For those of you who think Apple actually IS a religion or cult the hits just keep coming. You refuse to believe the desktop PC is dead, you refuse to believe Apple is morphing into a consumer electronics behemoth, you cling to the old Apple in desperation. Some of you are still waiting for that mid-priced headless Mac tower with expansion slots. Hell, some of you are still running System 7.5.5 on your Mac SE or Classic. Welcome to Apple in the 21st century. I’m having fun just watching it play out.
LOL! I don't think so.
One issue I keep hearing about FCP X is that it is less suited to production teams than available alternatives and it's better designed for small productions with a single editor.
Any editors care to comment?
Most of the negative comments come from editors who've either never used FCPX or have tried it and don't get it. FCPX radically changes the known and established metaphors of video editing.
Avid, Premiere, FCP (classic) were designed when acquisition using physical media were the norm (video tape and film). There were certain metaphors that made sense in that workflow and that system. Today tape is acquisition is all but dead and film isn't far behind.
Today the far majority of acquisition is on digital media and delivered with digital files. FCPX is the only NLE that is designed exclusively for this workflow.
The editors you hear criticizing this workflow and the ones who are going to get left behind.
TL;DR: FCPX is a great product and many pros saw this from day 1, but the process was initially handled very poorly. Apple reacted and things became much better, but definitely damage was done due to the initial process.
Also, don't get me started on Aperture.
This is largely true. I'd add Apple's continued lack of communication about FCPX and its future plans hinder the ability to boost confidence in its adoption.
I'd add that originally, FCP was seen as a toy among editors,
I disagree, FCPX was seen as foreign among editors. Most did not take the time to learn it.
Still, it reached point a few years ago when it almost seemed like FCP was ready to compete with Avid...
This isn't true. The vast majority of FCP users were unable to afford a comparable Avid suite. For the most part FCP and Avid did not compete in the same markets. Avid has always held the high end feature film and broadcast television markets. FCP never made significant inroads into that world.