Reading mode: Light Dark

Final Cut X a big let down

Go to last post
vdubreeze said:
John Deerfield said:
From a single user upgrading from iMovie, FCP X is cool. For a professional, it's worthless.
Click to expand...
For a professional who requires broadcast output, it is useless. For an audio house needing mixes of discrete stems it is useless. For the editor who works with others as part of a larger team working on other elements it is useless. For the editor who does multicam edits, useless (Try Pogue's workaround with an eight camera 90 minute concert shoot.)
Click to expand...
But remember that Apple was going to add back in multi camera support, and it was a top priority...

It may appear useless now, but what really it's a shift in foundation that is useless to you now, but usable to many many other people immediately... and it can either grow back into doing the things people like you need it to, or plugins will provide extra features.

It's not like FCP7 has stopped working, it just means it's a year or so before you can migrate away from it.
vdubreeze said:
It doesn't matter how earth shatteringly new and out of the box it is. It was designed by people who have never set foot in a post house.
Click to expand...
From reading the Pogue article I do not get that impression.
vdubreeze said:
I have no problem with Apple making their most money with the best niche market, if the pro market isn't worth pursuing. Power to them. They will sell a lot of these to pro editors who will use them at home for their little projects. This won't get in the door of any big league workflow, especially since it can no longer export to rigs that do have these functions.
Click to expand...
Not now, no... but later. And in the meantime they have a better foundation for editing already built.

--
---> Kendall
http://InsideAperture.com
http://www.pbase.com/kgelner
http://www.pbase.com/sigmadslr/user_home
 
If you look in the App Store you will see a link to redeem coupons/tokens. Companies purchase these to make corporate buys. There is no need for separate credit cards or personal purchases.

Once again people leaping to the wrong conclusions based on little to no information.
--
Ian Eisenberg
President/Owner
Digit Training
Offering classes in animation, game design, vfx, photography, videography, web
design and all things digital.
 
What does it not do, that you currentlly are using your "FCS" software to do? As, even "professional editing" and related industry concepts/practices that require or benefit from such, change and are becoming simpler and more streamline to do. For example, bulky/out-dated software is no longer relevant, and this is another reason I generally tend to select an Apple product (they're far more modern/streamlined and "state-of-the art", for me) such as Final Cut over a product, such as "Premier". ;)
--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)

 
BRJR said:
What does it not do, that you currentlly are using your "FCS" software to do? As, even "professional editing" and related industry concepts/practices that require or benefit from such, change and are becoming simpler and more streamline to do. For example, bulky/out-dated software is no longer relevant, and this is another reason I generally tend to select an Apple product (they're far more modern/streamlined and "state-of-the art", for me) such as Final Cut over a product, such as "Premier". ;)
--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)
Click to expand...
BRJR, a great deal of what the pro community requires is the ability to hand off the project to another creative person who handles a different layer of the project. Visual effects, audio sweetening and mixing, another editor who combines your work with others. That's a major thing. Most of the "dealbreakers" involve a monkey wrench thrown into this very necessary aspect of production. To get some good specifics on these (without boring everyone here by listing them : ) ) I would drop in any video production forum where this is quite the topic. There's also currently a lively discussion among the responses in David Pogue's NY Times blog, where he reviews it after editing some videos and while he (as usual) isn't blind to the issues he's straightforward about why he's downplaying what some of the shortcomings are. However, by reading the pages of responses from professional editors you'll get a sense of some of the dealkilling missing functions and why various segments of the pro community can't do without them. The responses are really where the information is.

T
 
Apple should have kept FCP 7 while relasing FCP X at least gives people an option of being able to do there work.
 
Taikonaut said:
Apple should have kept FCP 7 while relasing FCP X at least gives people an option of being able to do there work.
Click to expand...
Well, people can still continue working as they had, their copies of FCP7 won't evaporate. But that won't last as long as they'll want it too, given inevitable system changes, and the big picture is Apple's lack of support for a segment who were, it turns out, overconfident about where they fit in Apple's plans. They will keep doing their work on their current rigs while making some decisions about which direction they'll commit to by the end of the year.
 
vdubreeze said:
Taikonaut said:
Apple should have kept FCP 7 while relasing FCP X at least gives people an option of being able to do there work.
Click to expand...
Well, people can still continue working as they had, their copies of FCP7 won't evaporate. But that won't last as long as they'll want it too, given inevitable system changes, and the big picture is Apple's lack of support for a segment who were, it turns out, overconfident about where they fit in Apple's plans. They will keep doing their work on their current rigs while making some decisions about which direction they'll commit to by the end of the year.
Click to expand...
It does not help those who don't have a copy of FCP 7.
 
Did you hear there's new version of Lightroom out today? It's called Lightroom Pro X. This is what Adobe says:

"
To improve our great product we've made a few important changes:
  • We took out RAW processing - why take RAW and go to all that trouble when your camera produces great JPEGs?
  • You don't need both exposure and brightness - they do the same thing really
  • We took away Clarity - nobody really understands what it does
  • Sharpening has gone as a user control, instead, we do all the sharpening for you
  • To save on processing we took away grey scale - how silly to take great colour pix and turn them into muddy B&W!
  • We've automated noise reduction because you, the user, could never understand how best to use it
  • NIK and other plugin manufacturers are, (we hope), working hard on replacements for their filters, because with Lightroom Pro X's new architecture the old versions no longer work
  • The installer for LR Pro X will secure your old library because it's in the wrong format for Pro X. Developers are working on a old to new wizard - expect it in 2013
We won't, of course, continue to develop, support or sell the original Lightroom because, hey, who needs all that old stuff? You might be able to pick up a copy on eBay if you're so old-fashioned.

For strange confidential reasons there is no trial version of LR Pro X - you'll just have to buy it and hope for the best.
"

This is all nonsense of course, but this is how things would be if Adobe did to photographers what Apple have just done to we videographers/editors/colourists etc.

Great job Apple.
 
Kendall Helmstetter Gelner said:
It's not like FCP7 has stopped working, it just means it's a year or so before you can migrate away from it.
Click to expand...
Which means everything FCP users were waiting for...64bit, no rendering, etc...they must continue waiting for, while those features are present in the competition right now with all other features. Staying with FCP 7 means you stay behind while the rest of the world advances.

As for those offices that want to add FCP 7 seats, you can't. Apple not only stopped selling it, but it is said that they also asked dealers to send back unsold boxes.

These excuses of "Just keep using FCP 7" are not as simple to do as they seem at first.
 
Halibut said:
Did you hear there's new version of Lightroom out today? It's called Lightroom Pro X. This is what Adobe says:

"
To improve our great product we've made a few important changes:
  • We took out RAW processing - why take RAW and go to all that trouble when your camera produces great JPEGs?
  • You don't need both exposure and brightness - they do the same thing really
  • We took away Clarity - nobody really understands what it does
  • Sharpening has gone as a user control, instead, we do all the sharpening for you
  • To save on processing we took away grey scale - how silly to take great colour pix and turn them into muddy B&W!
  • We've automated noise reduction because you, the user, could never understand how best to use it
  • NIK and other plugin manufacturers are, (we hope), working hard on replacements for their filters, because with Lightroom Pro X's new architecture the old versions no longer work
  • The installer for LR Pro X will secure your old library because it's in the wrong format for Pro X. Developers are working on a old to new wizard - expect it in 2013
We won't, of course, continue to develop, support or sell the original Lightroom because, hey, who needs all that old stuff? You might be able to pick up a copy on eBay if you're so old-fashioned.

For strange confidential reasons there is no trial version of LR Pro X - you'll just have to buy it and hope for the best.
"

This is all nonsense of course, but this is how things would be if Adobe did to photographers what Apple have just done to we videographers/editors/colourists etc.

Great job Apple.
Click to expand...
It is to coincide with the release of "X Men First Class" :)
 
Either way, the sales figures and how well this Apple software continues to do or not do in it's marketplace, and with new purchasers/users is what I tend to look at in determining a product's overall success, and in Apple's foresight to have yet again "gotten it right", as most of us know and have consistently seen, they usually do. ;) ;)
--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)

 
You know I shouldn't post this but Apple certainly has got things right. It has developed a following of such loyal customers that even when it produces a dog there are pages and pages of people defending the program.

Man I should have bought those shares years ago when I had the chance. I personally would never lock myself into such a rigid product and buy an Apple computer but would love the returns on the shares.
--
http://www.pbase.com/reelate2
http://www.pbase.com/relate2
What flying means to me.
http://vimeo.com/2598837
Flying highlights
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lRu3P15BaY
My Youtube Channel http://www.youtube.com/user/relate2#p/u

 
Exactly, and this is a no-brainer. And, before long we will see more of this software's positive affects and Apple's increased influence on professional videography everywhere. Frankly, having reviewed it on the Apple web site, and having used both FCP and Apple's Final Cut Studio Suite of programs, as well, I just don't understand all the fuss being generated by such a minority of users , and non-users over Final Cut Pro X. ;)
--
BRJR ....(LOL, some of us are quite satisfied as Hobbyists ..)

 
The joke is that on the one hand, Apple and everyone else in the industry is promoting the use of fast, super broadband communications, wireless and whatnot (here in Australia, the government is spending $40 billion to optical cable the whole nation -- and the Oz$ is currently worth US$1.08 so you can work out your own figure), and suddenly Apple takes their premier (for want of a better word) the other way completely! It doesn't want people to be able to share!

Plain stupid.

Apple's solutions are usually better? They have turned out some good programs over the years, but they have killed them off. I've been waiting 26 years now for Apple to produce a decent font management program built into the system. individual developers -- yes, one person -- have done this in Classic and OSX. Apple apparently can't see the need for it. Instead they've spent untold millions developing stupid animation for interfaces, now a "cloud" which mimics the Windows cloud but offers inferior performance, and having promoted sharing, they are pulling the rug out from under the feet of an industry built on their software and on sharing functions.

And as relate22 sez, amazingly so many just go along with it. They know it's awesome because Jobs said so.

The awesome thing is that he is happy to get up in front of people and call electronic garbage awesome.

Cheers, geoff
--
Geoffrey Heard

http://pngtimetraveller.blogspot.com/2010/12/what-does-standard-of-living-mean-in.html
 
Apple is a 90/90 company.

What will 90% of the people like and use, 90% of the time?

The other 10% like you guys don't count, I'm afraid.

Final Cut X will live, and iMovie users will rejoice!
--
Terry W.
 
Hen3ry said:
The joke is that on the one hand, Apple and everyone else in the industry is promoting the use of fast, super broadband communications, wireless and whatnot (here in Australia, the government is spending $40 billion to optical cable the whole nation -- and the Oz$ is currently worth US$1.08 so you can work out your own figure), and suddenly Apple takes their premier (for want of a better word) the other way completely! It doesn't want people to be able to share!
Click to expand...
The 'whatnot' you have down-under may or may not be an issue for you, but I don't follow that Apple is dumbing down Applications per se, in fact you could argue they are making the programs easier to use—that's a good thing it lowers the barrier. Once the 'missing things' have been addressed I think the new Final cut will be a fine program at a fraction of the price.

I do agree its a shame but typical of Apple to get a program out, say how wonderful it is then slowly increase the features—remember Aperture v1? It was terrible, slow buggy and expensive-now its pretty good and cheaper.
Hen3ry said:
Plain stupid.
Click to expand...
That's a very elitist (and poor attitude)
Hen3ry said:
Apple's solutions are usually better? They have turned out some good programs over the years, but they have killed them off.
Click to expand...
Which ones are you talking about? You make it sound like they have been doing this wholesale.
Hen3ry said:
I've been waiting 26 years now for Apple to produce a decent font management program built into the system. individual developers -- yes, one person -- have done this in Classic and OSX.
Click to expand...
Relax you could be using Windows :-)

But hey that's the free market for you, a tiny niche that spawns font management and creation tools is available for the Mac, many more than the 'one' you quote (you may be thinking of Suitcase) In fact there a several available ones including Linotype Font Explorer, FontAgent Pro— just because you're unaware of the plethora of options doesn't mean they don't exist (that's armchair experts for you)
Hen3ry said:
Apple apparently can't see the need for it. Instead they've spent untold millions developing stupid animation for interfaces, now a "cloud" which mimics the Windows cloud but offers inferior performance,
Click to expand...
Can you post a link to this 'Windows cloud' which is so feature rich and high performance?
Hen3ry said:
and having promoted sharing, they are pulling the rug out from under the feet of an industry built on their software and on sharing functions.
Click to expand...
LOL
Hen3ry said:
And as relate22 sez, amazingly so many just go along with it. They know it's awesome because Jobs said so.
Click to expand...
Or they may have used it? unlike you who don't seem to have a clue what you're talking about.
Hen3ry said:
The awesome thing is that he is happy to get up in front of people and call electronic garbage awesome.
Click to expand...
Electronic garbage to you, to some of us they're just tools—pretty good ones. But hey you use whatever you wish— you can spare us all the stupid false angst born of Steve Jobs hatred.

BTW your sick 'what medication is Jobs on' well it's called 'Somatostatin' I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt that you not aware he has cancer, and are not just another of the I hate Jobs crowd confusing personality and products.
 
Hen3ry said:
The joke is that on the one hand, Apple and everyone else in the industry is promoting the use of fast, super broadband communications, wireless and whatnot (here in Australia, the government is spending $40 billion to optical cable the whole nation -- and the Oz$ is currently worth US$1.08 so you can work out your own figure), and suddenly Apple takes their premier (for want of a better word) the other way completely! It doesn't want people to be able to share!

Plain stupid.

Apple's solutions are usually better? They have turned out some good programs over the years, but they have killed them off. I've been waiting 26 years now for Apple to produce a decent font management program built into the system. individual developers -- yes, one person -- have done this in Classic and OSX. Apple apparently can't see the need for it. Instead they've spent untold millions developing stupid animation for interfaces, now a "cloud" which mimics the Windows cloud but offers inferior performance, and having promoted sharing, they are pulling the rug out from under the feet of an industry built on their software and on sharing functions.

And as relate22 sez, amazingly so many just go along with it. They know it's awesome because Jobs said so.

The awesome thing is that he is happy to get up in front of people and call electronic garbage awesome.
Click to expand...
This type of electronic garbage has made Apple the largest tech company in the world when a decade ago it was on it's last legs.

You seem very out of touch with reality. As the old phrase goes, the world is a tuxedo and you're a pair of brown shoes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top