What did you want to see in FCS3? at DVinfo.net

Thomas Smet · July 27th, 2009, 08:46 AM

I noticed some people on here just were not all that impressed with the new FCS3. I personally think that there is a lot of great stuff in this upgrade and well worth the $299.00 upgrade price. I tend to like my tools to be updated with productivity features and not so much flashy cool toys. To me this update really expanded FCP as a solid production tool which it already was. At some point you sort of reach a point with a program that you have done most of the main core of stuff and all that is left is little productivity updates to make what the program does just a little bit better.

So for those who think this is a weak update what exactly did you want to see? What would have made you excited about this update. I would just like to know since I was pretty impressed with the update.

Steve Benner · July 27th, 2009, 09:00 AM

(1) Native AVCHD editing
(2) New Interface and look for Final Cut Pro & Color (which desperately needs it!)
(3) Blu-Ray support in DVD Studio Pro (can't believe this didn't happen since it's in Compressor)
(4) Rewrittten in 64 bit and Cocoa - shocked this didn't happen either

I'm happy with the improvements though.

Chuck Spaulding · July 27th, 2009, 04:25 PM

One thing I would love to see, and it might already be possible-I have not upgraded yet, it might be great to be able to convert the XDCAM EX BPAV files directly to ProRes LT.

I have not seen the output from ProRes LT, but if its as clean as regular "old" ProRes then it should be worth working with. It takes about five to seven hours to render a two and a half hour XDCAM EX movie from FCP6 and three hours (or less) to render a similar ProRes project but the file is almost five time larger.

There's always a trade-off.

Or it would be nice if the render performance of XDCAM EX projects were comparable to ProRes projects. I am impressed with the quality of the XDCAM output from FCS.

Mike Peter Reed · July 27th, 2009, 04:46 PM

(1) full access to AU interfaces
(2) native AVC/H.264 editing
(3) 64-bit cocoa
(4) superior caching of visible audio waveforms
(5) superior ergonomics on rubber bands
(6) something above 8pt text or whatever the GUI currently uses

as it is, it's not a bad upgrade. it's cheaper, but then we've also lost LiveType?

Christopher Drews · July 27th, 2009, 06:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Peter Reed

...but then we've also lost LiveType?

LiveType is completely integrated into Motion 4 now. Obviously the interface isn't the same but everything you can do LiveType can be done in Motion 4.

-C

Michael Wisniewski · July 27th, 2009, 08:52 PM

(1) I wish they had incorporated a more modern approach to the the editing interface & timeline. Steal ideas from Vegas, iMovie etc., or even better use good old Apple creativity to leapfrog the competition.

(2) I wish FCS would move away from the "suite" approach, and focus on more efficient interface design so we don't have to constantly "round-trip" to another program to get our jobs done. To me the "suite" approach is just an excuse for the interface design laziness that creates software bloat. But I do appreciate Apple pruning & consolidating features into other programs, which I think shows that they are heading in the direction of an updated/modern interface. In the end I'm hoping they are able to consolidate everything into 2-3 programs that are very efficient and powerful.

(3) And I wish they had included better media management features along the lines of Lightroom. Or at least I wish someone would create something similar to Lightroom media management but for video.

(4) Having said that ... I will be upgrading to FCS3 because the new ProRes formats are very useful for me.

David Knaggs · July 27th, 2009, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Michael Wisniewski

In the end I'm hoping they are able to consolidate everything into 2-3 programs that are very efficient and powerful.

Yes. I, for one, would love to see Soundtrack Pro incorporated into Final Cut Pro.

I think that one would be the easiest to do and would make the most sense to combine (for starters).

Michael Wisniewski · July 28th, 2009, 01:27 PM

(1) I wish Apple would stop forcing us to re-wrap/transcode our video into Quicktime. I appreciate that the Quicktime architecture has some advantages, but Quicktime should be a choice for the user not a requirement.

Christopher Drews · July 28th, 2009, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Knaggs

Yes. I, for one, would love to see Soundtrack Pro incorporated into Final Cut Pro.

I think that one would be the easiest to do and would make the most sense to combine (for starters).

I don't think this would be easy nor would it be recommended. This would add a whole slew instability issues. For instance, when you use VSTi / DX / audio plugins, they already make soundtrack crash at almost every instance. Also, "save as collected" would be muddled - collect what, video or audio? That is like trying to combined Motion into Final Cut.

I think this is a tough sell.
-C

Liam Hall · July 28th, 2009, 02:02 PM

You boys wont have long to wait. The real FCS3 is set for release late September.

Thomas Smet · July 28th, 2009, 02:24 PM

Yes be careful what you wish for in terms of integrating software. This is how programs get bloated and it can happen very fast. It also has nothing to do with lazy coding. If you take a program that is X big and another one that is X big you will then have a program that is 2X big. That is just a rule of math. Not everybody may want the same sort of things integrated. Some people prefer FCP to be lean at editing only. If the products were integrated then those people would complain. The is true of a fancy GUI. The fancier the GUI the more system resources get used. I'm sure nobody wants FCP to become like Vista aero. Good gui design isn't just about fancy flash style looks but effective and quick.

Dana Rice · July 28th, 2009, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liam Hall

You boys wont have long to wait. The real FCS3 is set for release late September.

Where did you hear this? Any links to the story?

Jiri Fiala · July 29th, 2009, 12:41 AM

I just wish I don`t have to press Q every frikkin time I make an edit to switch back to Viewer.

Floris van Eck · July 29th, 2009, 04:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Liam Hall

You boys wont have long to wait. The real FCS3 is set for release late September.

Explain yourself.

Andy Mees · July 29th, 2009, 08:53 AM

Its just more speculative nonsense aka rubbish posted as fact ... just like all those who posted all over the net oh so definitively that FCS would not be updated until SL shipped because it was completely rewritten and tied to the forthcoming OS release. Complete tosh ... but hey, if you want to pin your expectations on the ravings of uniformed spectulators then go right ahead.

July 27th, 2009, 08:46 AM	#1
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	What did you want to see in FCS3? I noticed some people on here just were not all that impressed with the new FCS3. I personally think that there is a lot of great stuff in this upgrade and well worth the $299.00 upgrade price. I tend to like my tools to be updated with productivity features and not so much flashy cool toys. To me this update really expanded FCP as a solid production tool which it already was. At some point you sort of reach a point with a program that you have done most of the main core of stuff and all that is left is little productivity updates to make what the program does just a little bit better. So for those who think this is a weak update what exactly did you want to see? What would have made you excited about this update. I would just like to know since I was pretty impressed with the update.

July 27th, 2009, 04:46 PM	#4
Mike Peter Reed Regular Crew Join Date: May 2007 Location: Hants, UK Posts: 185	(1) full access to AU interfaces (2) native AVC/H.264 editing (3) 64-bit cocoa (4) superior caching of visible audio waveforms (5) superior ergonomics on rubber bands (6) something above 8pt text or whatever the GUI currently uses as it is, it's not a bad upgrade. it's cheaper, but then we've also lost LiveType? __________________ ---8<---

July 27th, 2009, 08:52 PM	#6
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	(1) I wish they had incorporated a more modern approach to the the editing interface & timeline. Steal ideas from Vegas, iMovie etc., or even better use good old Apple creativity to leapfrog the competition. (2) I wish FCS would move away from the "suite" approach, and focus on more efficient interface design so we don't have to constantly "round-trip" to another program to get our jobs done. To me the "suite" approach is just an excuse for the interface design laziness that creates software bloat. But I do appreciate Apple pruning & consolidating features into other programs, which I think shows that they are heading in the direction of an updated/modern interface. In the end I'm hoping they are able to consolidate everything into 2-3 programs that are very efficient and powerful. (3) And I wish they had included better media management features along the lines of Lightroom. Or at least I wish someone would create something similar to Lightroom media management but for video. (4) Having said that ... I will be upgrading to FCS3 because the new ProRes formats are very useful for me. __________________ "Ultimately, the most extraordinary thing, in a frame, is a human being." - Martin Scorsese

July 28th, 2009, 01:27 PM	#8
Michael Wisniewski Wrangler Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Makati, Metro Manila Posts: 2,706 Images: 32	(1) I wish Apple would stop forcing us to re-wrap/transcode our video into Quicktime. I appreciate that the Quicktime architecture has some advantages, but Quicktime should be a choice for the user not a requirement. __________________ "Ultimately, the most extraordinary thing, in a frame, is a human being." - Martin Scorsese

July 28th, 2009, 02:02 PM	#10
Liam Hall Major Player Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: London, England Posts: 969	You boys wont have long to wait. The real FCS3 is set for release late September. __________________ Writer-Director-DOP www.liamhall.net

July 27th, 2009, 09:00 AM	#2
Steve Benner Major Player Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: United States Posts: 590	(1) Native AVCHD editing (2) New Interface and look for Final Cut Pro & Color (which desperately needs it!) (3) Blu-Ray support in DVD Studio Pro (can't believe this didn't happen since it's in Compressor) (4) Rewrittten in 64 bit and Cocoa - shocked this didn't happen either I'm happy with the improvements though.

July 27th, 2009, 04:25 PM	#3
Chuck Spaulding Trustee Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Thousand Oaks Posts: 1,104	One thing I would love to see, and it might already be possible-I have not upgraded yet, it might be great to be able to convert the XDCAM EX BPAV files directly to ProRes LT. I have not seen the output from ProRes LT, but if its as clean as regular "old" ProRes then it should be worth working with. It takes about five to seven hours to render a two and a half hour XDCAM EX movie from FCP6 and three hours (or less) to render a similar ProRes project but the file is almost five time larger. There's always a trade-off. Or it would be nice if the render performance of XDCAM EX projects were comparable to ProRes projects. I am impressed with the quality of the XDCAM output from FCS.

July 28th, 2009, 02:24 PM	#11
Thomas Smet Trustee Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Milwaukee, WI Posts: 1,719	Yes be careful what you wish for in terms of integrating software. This is how programs get bloated and it can happen very fast. It also has nothing to do with lazy coding. If you take a program that is X big and another one that is X big you will then have a program that is 2X big. That is just a rule of math. Not everybody may want the same sort of things integrated. Some people prefer FCP to be lean at editing only. If the products were integrated then those people would complain. The is true of a fancy GUI. The fancier the GUI the more system resources get used. I'm sure nobody wants FCP to become like Vista aero. Good gui design isn't just about fancy flash style looks but effective and quick.

July 29th, 2009, 12:41 AM	#13
Jiri Fiala Major Player Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Brno Czech Republic Posts: 453	I just wish I don`t have to press Q every frikkin time I make an edit to switch back to Viewer.

July 29th, 2009, 08:53 AM	#15
Andy Mees Major Player Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia Posts: 645	Its just more speculative nonsense aka rubbish posted as fact ... just like all those who posted all over the net oh so definitively that FCS would not be updated until SL shipped because it was completely rewritten and tied to the forthcoming OS release. Complete tosh ... but hey, if you want to pin your expectations on the ravings of uniformed spectulators then go right ahead.