[ Updated April 18, 2012, to clarify some wording after a second conversation with Apple. ]
I had an on-the-record meeting with Apple this morning in Las Vegas, the day before the start of the 2012 NAB Show — along with a preview of future FCP X features, which I’ll talk about at the end of this blog.
NOTE: We also covered some amazing third-party announcements coming at NAB this year. I’ll have more on that later this week, after the NDA expire at a variety of press conferences later today and tomorrow.
SOME BACKGROUND
When Apple was preparing to launch FCP X, they told me that the new architecture of the software, combined with the flexibility of the Mac App Store would allow for much more rapid updates to the program. However, while the releases were planned well in advance, there is no significance to the alternation of feature (10.0.1 and 10.0.3) with, essentially, bug fix (10.0.2 and 10.0.4) releases. In other words, don’t read too much into this alternating pattern of features and bug fixes. However, do keep in mind that Apple has updated FCP X four times in less than a year since its initial release.
Apple stressed that FCP X is a long-term project and that they are fully committed to it. (In other words, because I asked, there is not a Final Cut Pro 8 waiting in the wings.) Apple views Final Cut X as the future of video editing.
Also, if you look at the features Apple has added since FCP X first released, Apple has almost exclusively focused on adding features for the professional market: Roles, Multicam, broadcast monitoring, etc.
I asked what the benefits were to using the Mac App Store for distribution of updates, and was told that the biggest benefit was that the Mac App Store license allows Apple to deliver both bug fixes and feature updates, unlike Software Update.
NOTE: The benefits of using the Mac App Store for updates to video editors are something I want to learn more about in a future conversation with Apple. I’ll have more to share with you then.
Apple also highlighted the workflow at Leverage which uses FCP X.
* The show shoots on RED in Portland, Oregon.
* Ships hard disks down to LA for editing.
* RED files are transcoded to ProRes Proxy for editing.
* The show is edited in FCP X
* X2Pro (from Marquis Broadcast) converts the files to ProTools for audio sweetening.
* XML exports from FCP X are sent to DaVinci Resolve for color grading
* Final conforming of audio and video is done in FCP X
* Final delivery is a ProRes file.
Apple also said the 10.0.4 update significantly improved broadcast monitoring performance, so they have removed the term “beta” when describing it. I specifically asked if 10.0.4 now has sufficient performance to support multicam monitoring and Apple said “Yes.”
THE GOOD STUFF
Then, Apple shared their plans for Final Cut Pro X features coming later this year (2012). Apple began providing “advanced looks” as part of the roll-out to the launch of FCP X and wanted to continue letting us know what’s coming. (I think this is a great idea, because it helps us plan.)
Here are the bullet points (none of this was demoed):
Audio mixing in FCP X is still weak. I’m looking forward to seeing what the new tools provide.
Dual Viewers is analogous to Source and Record monitors; though Apple stressed that when they implement a feature they try to do it better than it has been done before. A good example of this is their recent multicam addition. This feature would allow us to easily compare two clips.
FCP X has been able to read MXF files (think XDCAM EX), but not the native MXF wrapper that contains them. In the past, it needed to convert MXF to QuickTime. In the future, FCP X won’t need to make this conversion. Apple was quick to stress that this was not a move away from QuickTime, instead it was adding support for a common video format.
While Apple did not provide any details, I interpret “RED camera support” to mean that we would be able to edit R3D files natively, as opposed to editing R3D files as QuickTime proxies.
I asked when Apple would support retaining In and Out (Start / End) markers in clips in the Event Browser. They refused to comment, but stressed that while these were the four features they were announcing, these four would not be the only features released. Retaining Ins and Outs on clips is SO useful, I will continue to bang the drum for Apple to add these.
I asked if Apple would commit to WHEN these features would be available? They politely declined to speculate. (Sigh…)
SUMMARY
It was an interesting meeting. Apple clearly wants it known that FCP X should be considered a professional application, that development is on-going, and that they are listening to comments from users.
I tried to get them to provide hints on upcoming hardware, but no hints were provided.
I also got a sense they are working on another application to join FCP X, Motion, and Compressor. (There are several that would be very useful, we shall have to see what develops. I don’t expect anything announced immediately.)
All-in-all, it is always fun to meet the FCP X team and get a sense of what’s coming. And I wanted to share what I learned with you.
Larry
P.S. For the latest in Final Cut Pro X news, please sign up for my weekly, free newsletter: www.larryjordan.biz/newsletter/
108 Responses to Future Features in Final Cut Pro X
← Older Comments Newer Comments →-
Peter Hitchcock says:
April 17, 2012 at 9:07 am
-
Craig Koller says:
April 17, 2012 at 12:56 pm
-
hank says:
April 17, 2012 at 2:10 pm
-
Darcy Fitzpatrick says:
April 17, 2012 at 3:33 pm
-
Mike says:
April 17, 2012 at 6:43 pm
-
Jason King says:
April 18, 2012 at 3:03 am
-
Gerry Loew says:
April 18, 2012 at 2:55 pm
-
Allynn says:
April 18, 2012 at 3:37 pm
-
Craig Seeman says:
April 18, 2012 at 4:41 pm
-
Alex says:
April 18, 2012 at 5:28 pm
← Older Comments Newer Comments →Ive been wondering why they skipped 8 & 9 and why they called iMovie FCP?
How would you feel if Apple had announced FCP 8 yesterday?
Thanks for the update Larry
I appreciate Apple’s overhauling the FC engine where the performance gains (e.g. less rendering lockouts) speed workflow. But going to market with a less-than FC7 feature set, orphaning FC Server and Apple server hardware, along with a paradigm-shifting UI, has been a tough sell especially to video vets.
Going from a 100% hardware/software suite solution with FCP flanked by decent tools (although there were stronger options than Motion, Compressor, Soundtrack Pro and Color) worked for many. But as FCP7 got long in the tooth, Avid and Adobe caught up and passed Apple in several ways.
So when FCPX arrived, it was like Apple and Apple users had to start from scratch. Hopefully, when the dust settles, Apple will regain full functionality and benefit from an advanced architecture. But right now, it’s still a recovery process as Apple shovels features back into the new product.
Disruption is a good thing generally, and Apple is famous for it. But pro users have obligations and need to be treated differently than consumers. Transitioning new tech is never easy, so I give Apple the benefit of the doubt, and we still use FCPX in our corporate video environment (primarily with good results).
But I’d like this to be a one-time bump in the road. Adobe is our backup solution (and we use AE/Audition a lot) so we’re covered. I’d love to get back to that feeling five years ago when we felt Apple fully understood and supported our entire workflow.
They’re not quite back there now.
@Braden: wow, the apple HOME PAGE found 3 examples of people who are mercifully trying to incorporate FCPX into a professional environment. Not impressed. Back here in the real world, we are mastering to HDCAM and HDCAM SR for our deliverables. Deck capture/layoff was something Apple never got correct in 7 previous versions of FCP so it’s no surprise they took it away altogether.
A lot of great discussion going on here on top of the informative post from Larry. Awesome stuff.
I gave FCP X a month-long trial on an actual project, and while I did like a lot of the new features and certain implementations of old ones, the thing I had the hardest time with?
The Magnetic Timeline.
I found myself having to think too much about how it would behave based on how I was editing, which was really distracting. The main storyline (I think that was what it was called) and the way other clips attached to it rather than just having normal tracks was weird. I really didn’t get how that was meant to be an improvement and it often got in the way of my creative choices. And having to step in and out of clips to work with audio all the time was cumbersome.
I wanted to like FCP X but that timeline was too much work. I know people harp on about editors being afraid of change, but really the idea of introducing this to the rest of the editors at this company and them having to take considerable time to learn it is just totally unfeasible. We just don’t have the luxury of that much downtime.
Say what you want about AVID or Premiere Pro, they are different in certain ways, but they at least follow the same basic paradigm as one another, as did FCP 7. I’m all for trying new things, but when something works so well, why mess with it?
I would love to see many of the new features in FCP X added to the basic skeleton of FCP 7. I know that’s a pipe dream and will never happen, but I just wish that had been the case.
I struggled for weeks with several projects in FCPX.
My biggest hang up is the magnetic timeline.
I went back to FCP7 and it was like a breath
of fresh air…..
I need to be able to put clips where I want them
without the program trying to make it “easier”.
I do many layer builds and FCPX made it very difficult
to do.
Just add an FCP7 button in FCPX and I might use it again…..
I’m intrigued by MXF support and I have not made the jump yet to Final Cut X because of how my workflow is setup. I shoot XDCam EX, and right now am using Vegas Video (my longtime editor of choice) under bootcamp on my Mac Pro.
Vegas is great because it supports the .mp4 files from the BPAV folders natively, no re-wrapping required. Because of the sheer volume of material I have to deal with, I really don’t want to have to re-wrap the XCCam footage essentially doubling the hard drive space I have so if FCP will gain the ability to natively work with XDCAM EX files, I’d be really happy to make the switch, at least I think so.
I know I can re-jig my workflow and make FCP work, but I’d rather not have to. I already have far too many terabytes of internal and external storage 🙂
J
It seems to me that a couple of basic changes would be: A) Bring back assignable tracks and B) Add the ability to turn on and turn off the magnetic timeline (although the “position” tool overrides this to a degree). The “roles” function is interesting, but it doesn’t visually help me when looking at the timeline and being comfortable that my audio is organized.
Cool that Leverage has finally been able to make the switch to X. I’ve been pestering John Rogers (http://www.kfmonkey.blogspot.com/) about this on blog since the second half of last season!
Keep on ’em about persistent I/O’s, Larry! That is the one thing about X that bothers me every time I use it (other things only bother me sometimes!)
Jason, we’ll have to see what Sony’s plugin does in practice as per the announcement below.
http://fcp.co/final-cut-pro/news/800-sony-launch-their-pdzk-lt2-xdcam-import-plugin-for-fcpx-and-upgrade-xdcam-browser
I understand it is a rewrap but if it works the same way as it does for AVCHD (if you check in the Events folder you’ll find it shows as .mov) it would be seamless. In other words it would just import and work. We’ll have to see. Maybe Larry can post if he’s tested.
@ Floris,
I was an FCP editor exclusively for 6 years in LA. FCP never lead anything. It was the only real other NLE after Avid. But Avid has always been the only real player in town.
Wether Avid is better or not is irrelevant. It’s the industry standard and if you really want to make a leaving here you gotta have Avid in your toolbox. I always new Avid, but preferred FCP. After years of supporting FCP (more than Apple has ever supported me I should say), my income has certainly gone up since I was forced to switch back.
FCPX has come a long way. And I’m glad they’re bringing back the dual monitoring. Ill give it a spin eventually. But as with the Imovie X debacle (which was also designed by Randy Ubilos), Apple is bringing back some of the feature they took back. I’m pretty sure they will eventually bring back the numbered tracks as a preference.
Apple got ride of it because they wanted people to mix sound in FCPX. But the fact the Apple is now showcasing a workflow using X2Pro to Protools prove that they got that wrong. Maybe it will lead them to reconsider getting ride of Soundtrack and Color as well.
The one big thing that FCPX is still missing to really be considered by big post house is a good server solution and the possibility to share media and projects over a network.
I’m sure they’re working on it, but until then, you wont see major shows done on FCPX. And the problem is that while that issue is not being addressed, the few big post houses that were FCP based are now investing in other NLE and other server solutions (BMP), and because of the size of those investments, they won’t switch back for another 10 years.
Tom is right, It’s a little too late.