New FCP coming soon~ ??

[Steve Nunez]

Hey guys, Apple has stated a new version of FCP is going to be released alongside their new MacPro Desktop........does anyone know if it will continue along the lines of FCP X or revert to more of a FCP 7 style?
It's no secret many editors were unhappy with FCP X as it was quickly touted "iMovie Pro"........I too disliked it and still use FCP 7.........anyone know anything?

[Nate Haustein]

I very much doubt that they will ever revert the entire way the program works back to the "old ways." No one is still complaining - they're either accepted the benefits of FCPX, or moved on to Adobe or Avid. I for one love the "new way" of editing with Final Cut.

I think we're talking FCP 10.1.0 for the next update, which will add features to make editing smoother, faster and more convenient - whatever those features may be. We'll see if that announcement comes tomorrow during the Apple event, or if the MacPro will have to wait until later in the year.

[William Hohauser]

Aside from the addition of simple discreet audio tracks for exporting purposes, I do not want a return to FCP7 or anything resembling the old style NLE programs. This is a much better way to edit.

[Steve Nunez]

Thank you guys for the replies.
Is it safe to assume if I were to purchase FCP X now, I'd get future updates or revisions free?
I'd hate to purchase it now only to find out I'm not eligible for this upcoming revision.

(Are there any improvements in working with ProRes footage with the current FCP X as to the FCP 7 version?)

[David Dixon]

I think there is absolutely zero chance Apple will revert to an FCP7 style. Like it or not, (and I REALLY like it) Apple is committed to the paradigm change of FCPX. I read that Apple is actively soliciting input in LA among editors on what they would like to see added, and that they are consulting with some major studios to assist in film production workflow.

And, not only has the original dislike of the new interface been fading rapidly over the past 2+ years as people discover it really is powerful and fast, Apple has already sold more copies of X than of all previous versions of Final Cut combined.

I used the original Final Cut from 2003 - 2011, but I would not go back for anything.

[David Dixon]

The general consensus seems to be that the 10.1 update (which we all hope will be at least announced tomorrow but may not release until next month) may finally be the first paid update. And, the assumption is that, just as with 10.0.x, all future 10.1.x updates would be free.

As far as working with ProRes, the immediate difference is that when rendering FCPX will use every processor core on your Mac. X will also work with many more formats natively than 7, if that's your wish.

[Mark Kenfield]

I just wish they'd include the ability to switch to track-based editing. The magnetic timeline is a dream for straightforward edits (where you know what you want), massively faster than anything else out there. But some sequences are constructed entirely in the edit, montages made from all sorts of disparate clips - and trying to wrangle them on the magnetic timeline is a nightmare - track-based editing is the only way to clearly layout complicated edits like that.

I don't want to get rid of the magnetic timeline, I just want a better alternative to it for projects that require an alternative (without having to learn an entirely different piece of software just for those edits).

[Bill Davis]

Anyone who wants to stay stuck in track based editing should move to Premier or AVID. Those programs are both excellent at that.

For those of us who've learned to edit with X, there's absolutely NO WAY I think many will ever go back to the slow, inflexible and frustrating paradigm of traditional track based editing.

During my edit of content for last weeks Rocky Mountain Emmy Awards. X let me chew through the 140 plus "winners clips" submitted on all sorts of weird broadcast and webcast formats - and cut the show content together in a snap.I estimate that the database in X and the ability to search, sort and find assets via it's internal database saved me about 20 full hours of drudgery over the 10 day deadline heavy edit.

The magnetic timeline and the ability to create vertical scene blocks that stay cohesive during subsequent moves, probably saved me another 10 hours.

The cutting edge tools in X made the process so insanely easy that the producer and I spent a significant part of the week allotted for editing - showing each other cools stuff on the internet and trading family stories.

The traditional tools like Premier and AVID are well established and robust and completely worthy of any editors attention.

I'll just stick with X thank you. Apple was brilliant with the programs re-design for a modern file-based and data centric editing world. And some of us who have invested the last two years learning it fully are now reaping big benefits for all our hard work.

But if you want to stay with traditional tools, feel free to perpetually hook your credit card to Adobe or pay the AVID or Vegas folks and dive right in. They both have truly superb tools for more traditional video editing.

I'm just happy not to still be stuck in "traditional" editing. Apple saw a better way - and now I for one feel like I'm fully reaping the benefits of their vision.

FWIW.

[David Dixon]

Wow, Bill - great post!!

Could I ask what hardware you were using for this big project you describe? Which Mac, and did you have an external Thunderbolt box?

[Dmitri Zigany]

Originally Posted by Steve Nunez

Hey guys, Apple has stated a new version of FCP is going to be released alongside their new MacPro Desktop........does anyone know if it will continue along the lines of FCP X or revert to more of a FCP 7 style?
It's no secret many editors were unhappy with FCP X as it was quickly touted "iMovie Pro"........I too disliked it and still use FCP 7.........anyone know anything?

Sure hope it won't revert back to the bad old days! I never liked the way old NLEs worked but just love FCPX, it feels so much more natural to work in... To me it feels that the people that don't like it are those that are unwilling to relearn. I think they will just evolve FCPX and keep adding functionality just like they have done continuously since the release...
And besides, I heard somewhere that FCPX has sold more copies than all other versions of FCP combined so I don't think the motivation to revert is there either ;)

[John Nantz]

Just finished doing some editing this morning and I have to say that FCPX is really nice to work with. Wound up buying it shortly after it came out in spite of numerous moaning and griping posts about it. Fortunately I didn't have to come from some other major editing application and relearn how to use it so that made it easier I suppose. I feel I really lucked out making the decision to get it.

Even though I've used databases I don't think that was that much of an advantage to learning how to use it. Just set up the file system and stick with it - don't move the files after they've been used otherwise the application can't find them.

FCPX isn't a simple application like TextEdit so one can't expect to just jump in and run with it. Looking back there was some learning pains but isn't there always with a new application?

This morning I was importing clips into the Event Library then dragging them, or part of them, into the Project timeline. Several of the clips were dragged into the timeline between existing clips and the timeline just moves ahead to let them be inserted, or replaced as the case may be. If there is a question there is a little window that pops up asking if it is to be inserted or replace the existing. This process goes faster than one can even talk about it.

Stabilization: The monopod isn't exactly the worlds most stable platform because there is often some small amount of movement. No problem. Select the clip and then select "Stabilization" then any movement is taken out. The Stabilization works well even with handheld shots as long as there is something that it can fix on that isn't moving. For example, if people are walking beside a building it will fixate on the building.

Color correction: I'm certainly no "colorist" - that's a whole new area that I have to learn; however, the color correction options are pretty good but I'm still learning. Tried messing with one underexposed clip that also had a bad color balance by adjusting things and gave up. Decided to try "Balance" and Bingo! Close enough for Government work. The "Match Color" option often works too but in the case above I didn't have a clip handy to color match.

Titles, Transitions, editing audio, ... oh, there is an Audio Enhancements section where one can select a "Voice Enhancement" option - used this several times recently and I was impressed. This video was taken using a camera mounted Rode Stereo Videomic from probably 30 to 40 feet away.

RVYC Jr Sailing Program (Beta) on Vimeo

I used the Voice Enhancement option and it did a really good job of picking of the peoples voices that were previously just buried in the background noise.

These are just a few thoughts that come to mind. Needless to say, I'm very pleased with the application. That doesn't mean to say that there isn't something that can't be improved or added but bang-for-the-buck I'm happy.

Will I upgrade to 10.1.0? That depends on how much they want for it. This version, 10.0.9 has enough bells and whistles to keep me occupied for quite awhile. Just in case they're listening, I'm not in the business of paying big bucks just because it's an Apple product and I don't have to have the latest and greatest, but I'd be willing to pay a proportionate amount for value added so lets see what they come up with.

[Bill Davis]

Originally Posted by David Dixon

Wow, Bill - great post!!

Could I ask what hardware you were using for this big project you describe? Which Mac, and did you have an external Thunderbolt box?

Sit down, cuz this might make you woozy... ; )

I did the entire Emmy show edit on my MacBook Pro (model just prior to the release of Thunderbolt.)

That's it. Nothing else.

I had an external Firewire 800 drive attached sometimes for project backup - but I did all the editing on the stock machine without anything extra.

[David Knaggs]

Originally Posted by Bill Davis

The magnetic timeline and the ability to create vertical scene blocks that stay cohesive during subsequent moves, probably saved me another 10 hours.

The cutting edge tools in X made the process so insanely easy ...

I couldn't agree more, Bill. And I find that the more I work with the magnetic timeline, the more I understand it.

In fact, here's a simple workaround I just thought of if you need a "track-based" approach for an FCP X project (without any need for the Apple people to change or redesign the software):

1/ Put your first clip on the Primary Storyline. (Press"W")

2/ Right click on the clip and select "Lift from Storyline". (Or use shortcut "Alt-Cmd-Up Arrow")

3/ That leaves you with a dark-grey "dummy" clip on your Primary Storyline, with your original clip now attached to that as a Secondary Storyline.

4/ Click on the right-hand edge of the dummy and stretch it to 5 minutes, 10 minutes or whatever length you might need.

5/ Assemble your complex project by adding every other clip to the Secondary Storyline (always press the shortcut "Q" from hereon and never press "W").

Because everything is connected to your stable dummy track (which won't move around) you can shuffle clips about and construct your story on the Secondary Storyline. The "track-based" editing should be achieved by the stable dummy track.

That should work, I reckon.

And it would take less than 5 seconds to set it all up in FCP X. Then you should be good to go.

[Bill Davis]

While David's process will work just fine, I think the larger problem is that what you're doing is simply trying to defeat the nature of the X editing system rather than just learning it.

Horizontal magnetism on the primary ROCKS. And workng magnetically -vertically- rocks even more! Since you can create video groupings that maintain their relationship relative to the time of the group - rather than to the entire project. It's freeking brilliant. It opens up whole new ways to think about program construction.

You can learn to work in these new ways - or you can spend twice the effort trying to make a modern editing system like FCP-X work more like all the other editing systems that were originally spawned to make the editors coming from the A/B roll tape systems of the 1960s and 1970s not feel too uncomfortable.

If you don't believe me, look at the head stack on a 1970s multi-track audio recorder. It's a STACK just exactly like 8 or 16 video tracks in FCP-Legacy. But today the tape is gone. The "head stacks" are gone. And amazingly, the requirement that you put a piece of content into a "channel" and subsequently LEAVE it there so the machinery doesn't get confused - should ALSO be long gone.

That's what X does. "Tracks" are virtual and fluid and automated. If something gets moved down a track, rather than destroying what it runs into, the software just moves it dynamically out of the way and create another virtual track. Simple. And smart. Instead of making you put video UP on those stripes and Audio DOWN on those stripes - X lets you put them anywhere. Why NOT add another video clip below the audio? It it serves your need, go ahead - at least in X.

Look at the screen cap below. Music video I did a couple of months ago. Where's the audio? It's embedded in the primary clips which were cut in mutli-cam. It's a recorded final song, so there' NO need to edit it further. So in X, everything you see is video. Above AND below the storyline. Why? Because with multi-layered composites floating above and below each other - it worked better that way.

Instead of having to "see" everything in terms of horizontal stripes - you can "tag" your clips with roles and keywords and find them instantly, anywhere they need to be, regardless of their physical arrangement on any timeline. So you're freed from having to manually futz with the possible destruction of the current arrangements, simply because you need to move something a little.

X is smarter editing. It's faster editing. Because it reflects the actual video world we're in today rather than the one we're moving away from every single month. Tape is gone. Today is downloadable content from everywhere - in all sorts of formats - that need to be mixed together in a stew that the creator will likely need to sift and sort and re-arranged over time - that's what X is all about.

Please, please don't try to make X work more like every other NLE tool. Learn to *think* in it's new ways.

Believe me, it's so, so much better in the long run.

[Kevin Langdon]

I too am interested in FCP X.

I work in a news and features environment where we still use several audio tracks. I'm Avid trained and am used to having a minimum of 3 audio tracks - A1 for interviews & pieces to camera, A2 for natural sound & A3 for voiceover and maybe A4 if there's any music, etc.

Can FCP X deal with this is in a manner that works effectively in the real world for people like me or does it work best for those that only have 1 audio track on the magnetic timeline.

I've spoken to people who've used both and from what they say FCP X isn't suitable for those of use in a news and features environment. Is this true??? FCP 7 has been and is still used by Sky BBC, etc but it's no longer supported by Apple. So I'm wondering whether FCP X is worth considering or not.