Dumb Apple question

[Neil Vitale]

Someone told me that in the future, it might be wise to learn Final Cut Pro. Unfortunately, I cannot afford a mac at the moment, so a quick question. If I am used to Vegas, how easy is it to pick up on editing stuff quickly in Pro?

Also, How do people create hackintoshes? I don't think the OS is available seperately, is it?

Thanks!

[Edward Carlson]

I haven't used Vegas, but I can help you with the second question.

The OS is available separately (how else would you upgrade?) but installing it on a non-Apple piece of hardware is a copyright violation. There are plenty of websites dedicated to building a hackintosh. If you can build a PC, then it's not that much of a leap to build a hackintosh.

[William Hohauser]

Hackintosh? Not a good idea. Get a used Mac, there are plenty of reputable places selling them, and learn Final Cut Express, it has all the important basics of Final Cut Pro. A used Mac costs the same as a hack but has none of the problems. And there are problems. All Macs from the past 5 years can run Final Cut. If you are wondering about a certain model of used Mac you can ask about it here.

[Dave Partington]

*Almost true*.

If you are buying a used mac make sure it's an Intel version rather than a PowerPC/G4 or G5. While all versions up to FCP 6 will run on older CPUs you won't be able to upgrade to version 7 without Intel.

Also, realise that not all Macs will allow you to install Final Cut Suite due to either Graphics card limitations or memory limitations. Some of these things you can get around by editing the config file on the DVD - and this allows you to install on Mac Minis that are otherwise blocked - but even then there are some parts of the suite that still don't run - e.g. Color.

Final Cut Express should give you a very good grounding - but it IS is subset of FCP.

[Neil Vitale]

hmm, so much for that idea....more money to spend that I don't have...guess it could be a christmas present to myself...

thanks for the info :)

[Michael Wisniewski]

On the surface Vegas and Final Cut Pro look very similar, but many Vegas users go through a "gnashing of the teeth" period when picking up Final Cut Pro. Treat FCP as a different way to approach editing and I think you'll find it easier to pickup. And yes I know that's easier said than done.

If you can't get a hold of a Mac, try Premiere Pro, the interface is very, very similar to FCP.

[William Hohauser]

Originally Posted by Dave Partington

*Almost true*.

If you are buying a used mac make sure it's an Intel version rather than a PowerPC/G4 or G5. While all versions up to FCP 6 will run on older CPUs you won't be able to upgrade to version 7 without Intel.

Also, realise that not all Macs will allow you to install Final Cut Suite due to either Graphics card limitations or memory limitations. Some of these things you can get around by editing the config file on the DVD - and this allows you to install on Mac Minis that are otherwise blocked - but even then there are some parts of the suite that still don't run - e.g. Color.

Final Cut Express should give you a very good grounding - but it IS is subset of FCP.

Yes indeed, it was 2006 when the last of the G5s were discontinued. Final Cut itself will run on all models of Intel including the Mini. Some of the suite will not, as you said, due to graphic card issues. Final Cut Express is not Intel only. Probably the rumored update will be.

[Geoffrey Cox]

Never used Vegas but I learnt the basics of FCP in a week using a decent tutor book and that was coming from iMovie. I would say it is mostly very intuitive and though the programme is deep it isn't cluttered and the basic functions are generally very clear. I still learn new things virtually every time I use it though!

Have used FCE but found it very limited but then that was after learning FCP.

[Dave Partington]

If you want to learn FCP (or even FCE) in the shortest time - subscribe to Lynda.com for one month at a cost of only $25.

[Robert Lane]

Neil,

Many people have been and are in your same situation: They're PC-based and have bought into the hype about Final Cut Studio being the end-all-be-all to the NLE world.

While the FCS suite is one of the best and certainly the most cost-effective *Mac*-based tools it is by far not the fastest nor the best at what it does, not by a long shot.

If you're PC-based then there is currently no compelling reason for you to jump ship, spend extra money you don't have and waste a lot of time teaching yourself a totally new interface/workflow. Right now - ESPECIALLY in this economy - it will not be a wise choice.

If you think you need to step up from Vegas Pro (which is itself an extremely capable editor) then you should be looking at Edius 5 from Grass Valley. It's extremely fast, faster than Premiere Pro, Avid or even Vegas with renders and has almost limitless drag-and-drop to the timeline format capabilities. I have yet to run across ANY camera master, be it professional or consumer, that Edius can't just drop to the timeline and start cutting. No other NLE currently available today, not PP, Avid and certainly not FCP can make that claim.

If the economy makes a heathy and sustained swing back to the positive and you start making more money in the next 6-12 months, and by that time FCS "4" / FCP 8 will have been released (good god, we all hope) and if that new iteration becomes this unimaginable powerhouse offering then, and only then would be it be a good idea to think about becoming a "switcher". But for now, stay on your PC platform, save money and get Edius.

Coming soon I've got a serious head-to-head review of all the current NLE's and how they stack up against the FCS suite. Give it a few weeks and read that posting, then you'll understand my advice.

And if you do choose Edius there are tons of experts who use it here on DVinfo who can help you - myself included.

[Jason Sovey]

I'm in the process of learning FCP at a new job. I run Edius on a PC at home.

It seems most employers want FCP whizzes. But why has FCP become an industry standard?

Don't get me wrong, I am learning FCP. The basic principles of editing are still the same. But there is so much about FCP that seems obtuse.

Besides increasing my marketability, is there some big advantage FCP has that makes it stand out over everything else?

[Shaun Roemich]

Originally Posted by Jason Sovey

The basic principles of editing are still the same. But there is so much about FCP that seems obtuse.

Besides increasing my marketability, is there some big advantage FCP has that makes it stand out over everything else?

The things that seem "obtuse" to you are probably the items that MAKE FCP (along with AVID) the media standards. Don't get me wrong, I'm not bashing Premiere, Edius, Vegas et al BUT the two edit software suites that emulate the professional standard of doing things that evolved from the very earliest days of NLE editing (after the first computer AIDED editing) are FCP and Media Composer.

If you want to edit your own stuff IN your own edit bay AND don't ever need to share project files back and forth, edit with WHATEVER works. In an environment where integration with other creative professionals of ALL walks is important, FCP, AVID and to a degree Premiere/After Effects are king. This may well change but I would be lying if I didn't say that there are TWO edit systems that are used in the MAJORITY of high end video production (with After Effects being used in a LOT of them to complement).

In fact, AVID is the originator and FCP was designed to BLEND between AVID and Premiere workflows (back when Premiere was pretty much just a multimedia editor). FCP came into it's own when third party developers started making Input/Output devices and accelerators that worked with FCP as it was MUCH cheaper to buy into an FCP suite than an AVID suite. This is in the days when AVID was a hardware only solution; the software only AVID solutions came later, and I would argue, in RESPONSE to FCP's success.

[Jason Sovey]

Again, I'm still learning FCP. The biggest issue I have is the constant need to render, and re-render. With Edius it's not an issue. Maybe I'm doing something wrong.

Not being able to view audio waveforms in the timeline is cumbersome. I can only get them to appear in the preview window. Again it's probably just a matter of personalizing the layout.

[Edward Carlson]

You shouldn't need to render if you are using the correct timeline format (ie HD will need to be rendered in an SD timeline.)

To enable waveforms, click in the timeline window, then push Command 0. Under the Timeline Options tab check Show Audio Waveforms.

[Shaun Roemich]

Originally Posted by Jason Sovey

Not being able to view audio waveforms in the timeline is cumbersome. I can only get them to appear in the preview window. Again it's probably just a matter of personalizing the layout.

Originally Posted by Edward Carlson

To enable waveforms, click in the timeline window, then push Command 0. Under the Timeline Options tab check Show Audio Waveforms.

Waveforms being turned off as default is LIKELY due to the sheer length of time it takes to generate waveforms on long audio clips. I never use waveforms in my clips, although I recall I quite liked having them when I was learning to edit. These days I prefer an uncluttered approach.

Stay with it - nothing worth knowing comes easy...