UPDATE: Philip Hodgetts was the first to point out that Apple updated FCP X to version 10.0.8 this morning. The release notes indicate that it is mostly a bug fix release, with new support for Sony’s XAVC codec. The update is free and available via the Mac App Store.
There is an article in this morning’s Los Angeles Times. It was about Apple, which isn’t unusual. However, it was about Final Cut Pro X, which IS unusual.
Is there something in the wind?
The article, entitled “Apple aims to win over video editors,” takes a look back at the stormy reaction to the birth of Final Cut Pro X where the launch, and the highly-charged negative reactions to it, completely over-shadowed the program itself.
Chris O’Brien, the article’s author, does a solid job of capturing the anguish of FCP editors over the new software. (Though, as a quibble, in the thousands of emails I’ve gotten on this subject, I’ve never had one person complain about the new, lower price.) I won’t rehash the article here, it is well-written and deserves to be read on its own.
The question I want to reflect on is “Why this article now?” Is this simply a reporter covering an industry leader, or, did Apple plant a seed?
As someone who has had many interactions with Apple executives over the years, I’ve learned that Apple does not do anything spontaneously. They are strategic, with time-scales often measured in years. This strategic focus doesn’t make them perfect, but it does prevent them from being impulsive.
Why now?
The answer, I think, lies in the calendar. Tennyson may have written: “In the spring, a young man’s fancy lightly turns to thoughts of love.” But in the media industry, spring means the NAB Show – that massive industry event that heralds the release of new versions of just about everything related to media. Every company on the planet is trying to think up ways to get their voice heard and their products considered.
Our entire industry is focused on the NAB Show, which starts in a little more than a week in Las Vegas. Apple hasn’t exhibited at NAB for more than five years, but it’s presence is palpable across the trade show floor. It’s the 800-pound gorilla that few talk about, but can’t live without.
Many companies like to think they play the role of disruptor in the industry. But no one causes chaos quite like Apple.
Consider that while the Times article is crammed with a solid look back at the history of the program, the news hook is the posting of three new customer stories showcasing high-end customers successfully using Final Cut Pro X. The rest of the article rehashes past events.
No new products. No new hardware. Just Apple’s announcement about posting customer success stories.
NOTE It is interesting to me that, while the article references Richard Townhill, who was the face of Final Cut Pro X at the launch, no Apple executives were actually quoted in the article.
What Could This Mean?
Unlike when FCP X was announced, I am not privy to any inside Apple information, so these are just informed guesses.
Does this presage a return to an “updated” version of Final Cut Pro 7? Absolutely not. That program is dead and gone.
Does this indicate that Apple is getting ready to release an entirely new version of Final Cut Pro X – such as FCP 11? No. Apple has bet the ranch on continuing to evolve this edition of FCP X for the next several years.
Apple could release a new update to FCP X in the days leading up to NAB. This would dominate the news when every other company in our industry is scrambling to be heard. But I don’t think this is likely. It would make more sense to appear to be doing something, but to wait until after NAB to actually do it.
I expect the next update to Final Cut Pro X to contain major new features, but be built on the same foundation as the current FCP X. I also think it is likely that a new, supporting application will be released at the same time. Logic is the application that comes first to mind, as audio is still a major hole in FCP X.
I think the purpose of this article is to acknowledge that Apple is aware of the damage it caused at the launch, to point out the things that it is doing to repair the damage, and to clearly state that Apple feels Final Cut Pro X is ready for professional use, as illustrated by the customers that are using it today.
The LA Times article ends by quoting Harry Miller, head of the American Cinema Editor’s technology committee: “We are in a precarious business…”
Precarious indeed. Perhaps Apple is trying to reassure us that it better understands that.
As always, I’m interested in your thoughts.
Larry
48 Responses to Is There Something In The Wind?
← Older Comments Newer Comments →-
Leo Hans says:
March 29, 2013 at 9:26 pm
-
Butch says:
March 30, 2013 at 12:52 am
-
Craig Seeman says:
March 30, 2013 at 2:14 pm
-
Marcus Moore says:
March 30, 2013 at 2:18 pm
-
george manzanilla says:
March 30, 2013 at 6:36 pm
-
nickeditor says:
March 30, 2013 at 6:58 pm
-
Chris Sanderson says:
March 30, 2013 at 7:53 pm
-
Leo Hans says:
March 30, 2013 at 11:09 pm
-
nickeditor says:
March 31, 2013 at 9:02 am
-
Leo Hans says:
March 31, 2013 at 11:27 am
← Older Comments Newer Comments →@nickeditor
I have to tell you, I am an editor cutting TV commercials for living and I can’t find a reason not to use FCPX but the myth around it.
Unless it’s networked “Final Cut Studio X” and maybe includes an application to author DVDs/BluRay media the damage is done. You already have some idea that digital distribution for independent features is quite murky for many indie filmmakers as far as what kinds of returns they may or may not receive. Large studios are not killing off mastering to physical media any time soon if at all.
I get no sense that Apple has any interest in developing a full pipeline suite that does a fraction of what FCS did and many, many editors aren’t willing to accept anything less. Now Apple is going to go Microsoft on us and try to market their way to success with ultimately a good to decent product. The timing of all of this is to build up hype for the release of the Mac Pro I suspect. Like many other people I think Apple has lost it’s way in Pro app development, even though the blueprint ahead was clear as day from FCS. I’m not counting on a barn buster announcement, at least not an announcement that anyone other than Apple will believe is a barn buster.
Adobe has pretty much filled the gaping hole that was left by FCS, not nearly as well, but significantly better than FCPX alone and in time it may surpass the level of functionality editors and other creative professionals enjoyed with FCS. Adobe is more interested in listening to prospective customers then convincing them that a “new way” is better which is not new and not better.
I leave the door slightly ajar for the possibility of Apple shocking me, but I don’t expect it.
A “networked” Final Cut Studio X is something many of us want and I’d hope Apple is heading in that direction. That would be both a better integrated multiuser workflow as well as round trip functions. I have a strong hunch this will all happen. The big question is when… and also how. I suspect round tripping may not happen in Logic X happens and it may involve and update to Motion as well.
I’m not sure about the importance of DVD or Blu-Ray authoring in the indie film market. I don’t see the chain stores that carry DVD and Blu-ray carrying indie films. Distribution for indie films is much better served by files. It’s not murky at all, just very complex as each service may have different specifications.
Granted some festivals may want Blu-ray or even DVD delivery but they’re probably not looking for complex authoring. FCPX and Compressor support Blu-ray and DVD burning. I really don’t see that much call for complex authoring other than in the higher end feature film (not indie film) facilities.
I think there’s a lot of misconceptions about Apple and the MacPro. When Apple moved to Thunderbolt in 2011 they probably intended it for their entire ecosystem. This would allow any peripheral to move between any Mac. Keep in mind the strategic decisions to move to Thunderbolt happened long before 2011. So 2010 was the last significant MacPro update. Thunderbolt must be on the motherboard and, to date, so must the GPU. Remember, Thunderbolt is used for display as well. To date, there is no motherboard that supports Xeon (or even 6 core i7) and Thunderbolt. The next MacPro will likely be a technological breakthrough in that regard. Please don’t underestimate that importance or the challenge in developing that technology.
Some might ask then why not release something in the interim with Sandy Bridge or now Ivy Bridge Xeons. The problem for Apple would be that, given the longevity of the typical MacPro, any such MacPro may well be in service for 3 to 6 years or more. That would certainly slow the move to Thunderbolt for the third party developers. It would be part of the market most likely to be high end peripherals with no interest in Thunderbolt for years. In effect, lower ROI for the developers. In addition, such developers would have to consider continuing to make PCIe cards. That’s just not good for third party hardware developers.
So given the small MacPro market which also may be the most motivated for high end peripherals, Apple decided to live with “pent up demand” as a business strategy. It means when the new MacPro is finally released, companies like Promise (Pegasus RAIDs) and AJA (IO XT) and their users will be able to invest thousands knowing that their peripherals will work whether you need to move from MacBookPro to iMac to MacPro.
So I believe that an interim MacPro would have really hurt Thunderbolt developers. A new MacPro can’t (couldn’t) happen until Intel and/or Apple could develop a Xeon processor based motherboard that included Thunderbolt as well as the GPU integration to use Thunderbolt in such motherboard design.
@Butch. Not better for you. Better for me though. So are you right and I’m wrong?
I’m thrilled that apple is offering editor a choice in the methodology of editing. No one platform is going to be for everyone, nor should it be.
Smoke proposes a single app for editing and post. Adobe has tightly integrated but separate apps or each task. Which is better? That’s very personal to workflow of each user.
Apple isn’t interested in changing how every editor works, but offering an option for editors to work a different way. You can disagree and choose a different tool, but please don’t claim that the way I’ve been working and making money professionally for over a year (faster and more profitably, mind you) is wrong or unprofessional.
i love fcpx. great tool for cutting. not excellent for keyframing, color, or sound… but for straight cuts… there really isn’t anything better.
editorslog.tumblr.com
@Leo Hans
What kind of commercials? Shot reverse shot? Do it yourself?
I would like the people use Final Cut X would say if they works alone or with an assistant, if they works with a colorist, a sound mixer, a VFX compositor, etc and how.
Regards.
Also QT Pro Codecs are updated – something’s in the wind.
A new MacPro can’t be too soon IMO.
Apart from bug fixes and Sound, FCP X biggest problem fo me is lack of fast hardware but the app is now quite usable and faster workflow than FCP 7 and PP.
@nickeditor
You can take a look to my work here:
http://www.leohans.com
And here:
http://www.vimeo.com/leohans
That does not answer my questions… but I get an idea 😀
More details about work with a colorist, a sound mixer, a VFX compositor, etc?
Regards.
@nickeditor
If I can’t get what’s your point?
FCPX can export full-res media, XML compatible with Da Vinci and OMF through a plugin.
You have even a free FCPX to AE exporter.
Perhaps you are not up to date about what changed since FCPX launch.