FCP X Now available to buy and download from App Store

[Richard Alvarez]

I cut on AVID, have a tiny bit of FCP experience, and a little bit on VEGAS. But I'm in the market for a new laptop and was thinking about Macbook - and picking up a copy of the 'new' version of FCP - running both it and AVID on the laptop.

So I'm reading these reviews with interest. I't does sound like a 'more powerful' version of I-movie. And it has a kind of 'vegas' feel to it too - odd that. I'm less inclined to go Macbook at this point, and even less inclined to add FCP to my chops.

So, I'll agree with David in his assesment that AVID is smiling - and the professional houses are scratching their heads.

[Heath McKnight]

Larry Jordan has some interesting things:

Ain’t Nothing Like It In the World – Larry’s Blog

"DISTRIBUTION VIA THE APP STORE

This is a real biggie, as Apple explained it to me. Because no physical media is involved (think packages in an Apple Store), Apple can push out updates faster and at much lower cost because they are using the App Store.

In the past, Apple used a 18 month, or so, cycle between updates. Now, Apple is telling me they are hoping to do an update once or twice a year.

This ability to respond faster to the market and deliver economical updates has already born fruit with the new low prices for Final Cut, Motion, and Compressor.

This gives me lots of hope for the future."

and

"Apple tells me they are committed to quickly improving this version and building on it. They tell me they are committed to making changes quickly and bringing them to market. They tell me they are interested in hearing our reactions to the software.

I believe them and look forward to them fulfilling their promises."

Sorry to pull huge quotes like that, but it's worth reading and noting. I have a feeling a quick free update comes out shortly. I'd love to see bigger $49 updates once a year, too!

heath

[Barry Gribble]

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti

The reality is you can't run 32 bit files in the new 64 bit world.

The 32-64 bit transition has nothing to do with the fact that you can't read old FCP files. Zero. That was a choice that was about their editing paradigm shift, not a CPU change.

The bottom line for me is this: If they are putting out a system that doesn't let you export your audio to be mixed properly (and doesn't let you mix it properly in the app) and that doesn't let you run an external production monitor and more, then they are saying WE ARE NOT MAKING A PROFESSIONAL PRODUCT.

They are now making a very fancy hobbyist product.

Again it's a shame, because I was really looking forward to a reinvention of the paradigm within a professional arena.

[Barry Gribble]

Originally Posted by Heath McKnight

Larry Jordan has some interesting things:

I like his post. He points out a lot of things that don't work in it. He also says that it's great and everyone will be using it. BUT... he certainly has a large business interest in everyone porting to FCPX because he's spent months making training for it that he wants to sell you... so you have to take that gung-ho part with some grain of salt.

[Heath McKnight]

I agree with you, but I also believe that Apple has told him they're listening and watching. I bet we see an update soon.

heath

[Louis Maddalena]

Ok, so I played with it all day... and its looking like I might be calling up apple tomorrow asking for my money back.. Fine, $300 for FCP, is cheap, and thats why I was willing to be an early adopter, but after using this product for a few hours testing it out... its not about the money... its about the fact that they are calling this piece of garbage product "Final Cut Pro" this software is totally, 100% iMovie Pro and if you are a professional in the video production field, I recommend buying anything but fcpx.

[Barry Gribble]

Originally Posted by Heath McKnight

I bet we see an update soon.

It's possible. But it's not like they left out one feature that they couldn't have guessed professionals would want. They left out nearly all of them, and they knew it.

I look at the 60 Avid suites at Discovery, where I've done some work. FCP 7 could work in that environment... where they always mix separately... where there is always a production monitor... where they lay out to tape. FCP X could not come close. It would be a joke there.

And they knew that, and still made those choices. I think it's a question of what market they want to serve, and they are making that known loudly and clearly.

[Michael Wisniewski]

I no longer think Apple is abandoning the Pro market, they are just changing the architecture of their software to more elegantly accommodate the needs of the market. With the release of Motion and Compressor, it looks like professional functions that not everybody needs will be offered as separate external programs. For example, audio mastering & multi-cam - these don't really need to be part of the core application. When looking at the big picture, only a few users actually use them. But it looks like it would be easy to offer them as separate US$50 additions? Plus it's much easier to update a separate module instead of constantly rewriting the core editing application. Not only is that smart, but it lets Apple be so much more responsive to the separate consumer, prosumer & professional markets. In the long run, I think it will make everyone happy. And my theory may also be the reason we don't see the "lite" version of FCP. The core application itself is the "lite" version, with professional "heavy" features being introduced as separate programs.

Personally I'm definitely getting good vibes. While FCP X isn't going to be able to currently handle a lot of current professional workflows, it is going to fulfill a huge part of the needs of the video editing market - and in the process that will spur and fund the development of more "professional" features in the future.

I love seeing a plan come together.

[Heath McKnight]

I guess I can say that this version of FCP is probably ideal for me... I am a one-man-band who is getting paid to edit content shot on cameras like the EX1, and the content is going to both the web and to broadcast (via Compressor and tapeless delivery). I can't open my last couple of films (started editing with FCP 5, finished in FCP 6, made some minor fixes in FCP 7) in FCP X, but that's okay. I'm moving onto the next project.

I don't own FCP X, nor have I used it yet, but I will soon.

heath

[Jim Giberti]

Originally Posted by Barry Gribble

The 32-64 bit transition has nothing to do with the fact that you can't read old FCP files. Zero. That was a choice that was about their editing paradigm shift, not a CPU change.

The bottom line for me is this: If they are putting out a system that doesn't let you export your audio to be mixed properly (and doesn't let you mix it properly in the app) and that doesn't let you run an external production monitor and more, then they are saying WE ARE NOT MAKING A PROFESSIONAL PRODUCT.

They are now making a very fancy hobbyist product.

Again it's a shame, because I was really looking forward to a reinvention of the paradigm within a professional arena.

OK maybe I wasn't clear with my point.
The new 64 bit editing paradigm won't allow for the import of the 32 bit editing paradigm because the timeline alone is completely different.
It would be like trying to import FCP files into Avid or Premiere.
This, like Avid is a completely different program so it can;t be expected to accept a radically different format.

The things you are frustrated with do not translate into the all cps statement you made.
That's just an assumption.
My assumption is that Apple will address those issues quickly and this new program will move forward the way we've experienced with other new but well supported apps.

I think Apple has thought this through a lot more than they're being credited by some. I'd bet on seeing a fully integrated pro system in less than a year.

For $300 bucks it's a great way to move into the future now and evolve with it.
Or not.

[Jim Giberti]

By the way, the plusses of X and Motion are pretty amazing so far at my studio.
It's not like this is some blunder.

[Nigel Barker]

Originally Posted by Josh Bass

Will this work on Leopard (NOT snow Leopard, still on Leopard), or do I have to upgrade to SL, necessitating adding another $99 to the cost?

Snow Leopard costs just $29 & you really should have upgraded long ago Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard - Apple Store (U.S.)

[Joe Batt]

Went to download it and the reviews were so bad it scared me off. Think I might wait on the sidelines and see what happens with updates. FCP7 is working just fine! Maybe we should just ask for 64bit FCP7. What's wrong with that?

[Greg Penetrante]

Originally Posted by Louis Maddalena

Ok, so I played with it all day... and its looking like I might be calling up apple tomorrow asking for my money back.. Fine, $300 for FCP, is cheap, and thats why I was willing to be an early adopter, but after using this product for a few hours testing it out... its not about the money... its about the fact that they are calling this piece of garbage product "Final Cut Pro" this software is totally, 100% iMovie Pro and if you are a professional in the video production field, I recommend buying anything but fcpx.

I don't believe that FCPX should be called a piece of garbage just because version 1.0 no longer meets certain needs yet.

For all we know, in a few months Thunderbolt I/O devices, a 32-bit float OPENCL/GCD rendering engine, 64-bit support, multi-CPU rendering and a powerful metadata engine that FCPX already has will make the next version of FCPX a more powerful tool for professionals. One forum poster on another board found FCP X hooks for XML Import/Export and Python references.

FCPX is starting to look better now that I have steadfastly worked through its editing paradigm, tried compound clips (which behave more intuitively then nesting), audio repair features, logic-sourced audio filters and multiple secondaries in the Color-sourced color correction panel.

Once I learned to use the Q,W,E,D,T and Position tool, my editing speed went way up.

I've already cut together one paying job (a dance video) today. I used the in-built vimeo sharing function to let my client evaluate the job.

It's easy to lose sight of the impressive technical execution of what's there already in FCPX when everyone's crying about features that aren't there yet. I realise the pain of those (including me) who miss Multicam and OMF/XML I/O. I've been there. I use Logic to sweeten my audio mixes. Hope Apple will fix it in the next revisions. That's why FCP7 is still in my Applications folder...

Best,
-Greg

p.s. I don't believe Avid is 64-bit yet, nor does it officially work with 10.6.7 yet.

[John Wiley]

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti

OK maybe I wasn't clear with my point.
The new 64 bit editing paradigm won't allow for the import of the 32 bit editing paradigm because the timeline alone is completely different.
It would be like trying to import FCP files into Avid or Premiere.
This, like Avid is a completely different program so it can;t be expected to accept a radically different format.
Or not.

Yes, but in your example you could at least export an EDL and bring that into Avid. Now that option has been taken away as well apparently.

A couple of things I'd like to know:

There's no sequences... what about having multiple instances of FCPX running simultaneously? And can you still use nesting? What happens if you double click on a nested sequence? Does it open a new window or open that project in the current window?