New FCP X is really Not So New
Wednesday, April 13, 2011 at 2:56PMI am, like so many others, very pleased Apple finally revamped FCP - its a good solid, detailed release; more substantial than the last three versions put together - BUT…. please let us not delude ourselves that this release is anything other than Apple playing catch up after having been very off the ball for the past 4 years. The only people who will find FCP X ‘revolutionary’ are those who have not used other editing systems and do not know what else is out there.
The facts speak for themselves. Below are a list of the so called ‘new’ features in FCPX and next to each I have put the names of some of the major competing software-based NLE’s who already have this feature and who, moreover, have had this feature for quite some time, in some cases for the past 5 and 6 years….
- 64 bit (Vegas, premiere, avid)
- Uses Open CLI (in other words GPU acceleration; vegas, premiere, avid)
- Color management (CS5, vegas, avid)
- Resolution independent playback system up to 4K (vegas, premiere)
- Mix & match all content in timeline without transcoding - ie Resolution and Codec independent working space (vegas, premiere)
- Background rendering (the old Pinnalce and then Avid Liquid did it 8 years ago)
- Range based keywording - metadata attached to part of a clip (premiere, vegas)
- Smart collections/smart folders (vegas)
- Magnetic timeline -moves audio out of the way to avoid collisions. (vegas, premiere)
- Filmstrip timeline view (vegas, premiere)
- Automatic control of number of tracks - add and go when needed (vegas)
- Pitch corrected audio skimming (vegas)
- Waveforms show level adjustments in realtime (premiere, vegas)
- Advanced color correction in the NLE (premiere, avid)
- Improved keyframing, bezier paths and curve display in the timeline (premiere, vegas)
- Soundtrack now in FCPX + surround panning - ie proper DAW functionality (premiere, vegas)
- Clip connections, primary and secondary media locking together as take layers (vegas)
None of these features above are new. They are all pre-existing in other competing systems.
That’s not to say there wasn’t any ‘new’ things in FCPX; meaning specifically features or functions that don’t otherwise exist elsewhere. For example:
- Editing whilst ingesting
- Colour, clean, stabilization processing on ingest
- People and shot detection
- Compound clips - collapse clips into a single clip
- Auditioning - sampling of different versions of edits
- Timeline Index- an index of all the clips in the timeline
- One click to match color between clips
In truth these things - that truly are NEW - are the things i find very exciting and useful but by the same token they do not represent the big overhauling cake; they are just the tasty icing. Which leaves us with the bulk of the big ‘new’ stuff in FCPX really being not in the slightest bit ‘new’ at all. These features are only new to FCP and FCP users who’ve never bothered to stray outside of the cloistered land of Apple. Of course there will be rightly arguments that Apple have done these ‘new’ features ‘better’ and this may be true, we wait and see, but the penchant for Apple to espouse words like Revolutionary and New clearly cannot be justified here. Not even by the fanboys.
Thank you Apple for finally catching up and giving me a reason not to ditch Final Cut into the out-dated box it has been staring at for the past 3 years.
The real killer component of the FCPX announcement is the price. $299 makes the Avid $999 limited time cross-grade seem like a cruel and sad joke (much like Final Draft offering a student price of $200 bucks when you can just use the more powerful and functional Celtx for free)
Adobe, Sony and Avid will not really be worried about the feature set of FCP - there is very little to envy - but I suspect they will be terrified by the pricing now that FCP users aren’t feeling compelled to jump ship.
What remains then is the fate of the FC Studio suite? Blu Ray support? The scraping of DVD Studio Pro in favour of something even remotely close to Encore. Motion? Give up or continue the futile effort to compete with After Effects?
Time will tell. I’m pleased Apple have put FCP back in the game. But I am once again dismayed by the Apple rhetoric and the ignorance of the Apple fanboys.
Reader Comments (60)
The new lower pricing is interesting but I wonder if FCP is cutting out some of the functionality. When I hear "auto color correction" or "auto audio cleanup" I immediately think consumer software...
"Revolutionary"? -- Hardly.
And to address @Roger's comment above - to each his own. I, for one, personally find Premiere, and it's much more flexible customization easier, and fun to use. The only reason features won't get edited on Vegas or Premiere is because far too many people are set in their ways, and rarely give other NLE's a fair chance.
Auditionning seems similar to a function of another editor...
Cross-pollinisation is inevitable.
I like to add that Premiere has the mercury engine which makes the import or "ingest" stage obsolete. And Premiere doesn't need background rendering because it comes with the media encoder, which leaves premiere's resources for editing and moves the rendering elsewhere.
But comparing the FCPX price to Adobe's pricing, especially in euro's ...
The reality in the professional (film/TV) end of town (here in Oz) is overwhelmingly Avid and a substantial amount of FCP.
I've been aware of Premier Pro's power strokes for a while now but given that I only need to use Avid or FCP have not put the effort into fully learning yet another editing system.
Thank goodness Apple have finally caught up, let's hope it is as stable as it needs to be.
"Adobe, Sony and Avid will not really be worried about the feature set of FCP - there is very little to envy - but I suspect they will be terrified by the pricing now that FCP users aren’t feeling compelled to jump ship."
Adobe and Avid's offerings weren't compelling enough to make FCP users jump ship. As I've been saying for months, Adobe and Avid have been using their 2010/2011 window of opportunity. They both knew damn well that a rewritten FCP was on the cards in 2011.
Until we see the full program in action I wouldn't call "Editing while Ingesting" a positive thing and here's why...
It seems like it may be smoke and mirrors to cover up the fact that FCP-X doesn't really edit native footage. We don't "ingest" footage in the other apps you mentioned. We import them and there is no wait time, so no need to "edit while we import". Now, if FCP-X is having to background transcode to QT to edit them, and is bragging that you can edit while this is taking place due to it being 64bit and handling more ram, then this isn't really a bragging point is it? If FCP-X isn't editing native footage, but is instead background transcoding, then that's just sad.
Yes, Apple needed to catch up.
No, Final Cut Pro is far from bad.
Many of the features you list (i.e. audio in Premiere Pro) or advanced color editing (in Premiere Pro) are really bad. So if Apple does it well, I do think they are revolutionary. Most color editing is done in color apps or with plug-ins nowadays.
I have been using all major NLE's the past years: I started with Final Cut Pro, moved to Vegas, moved to Premiere Pro CS2, went back to Mac with Final Cut Pro and now use both Final Cut Pro and Adobe Premiere Pro, depending on the job. I have also tried out Avid on numerous ocassions. I think the Avid UI is horrible... it feels like the stone age. I am sure the program is great, it just doesn't think the way I think. It is getting better though, with the Pro Tools influences (Smart Tools). Adobe Premiere Pro (not AE) has been very unstable, only the last version, CS5, is rock solid and doesn't crash. I still think the interface design, icons and keyboard shortcuts (read: usability) is way behind Final Cut Pro. They did make huge improvements in workflow however, for which I applaud them. I am also very fond of Dynamic Link. I am not so fond of both the pricing for Avid and Adobe products. Overpriced! The upgrade price to CS 5.5 is 40% higher then the new Final Cut Pro X. And Avid is 8x as expensive. I really cannot see both of them holding their pricing much longer, also because of the rise of the app store. You simply don't buy $2,500 apps in an app tore.
I also do think that there is much to come with Apple. The iPad will be a control interface, other programs and/or features will be shown later on (otherwise there would be a press release on their website by now).
64 bit (Vegas, premiere, avid)
Not true, Avid remains a 32-bit Carbon application
Uses Open CLI (vegas, premiere, avid)
Again, not true of Avid (at least not to any full potential)
Background rendering (the old Pinnalce and then Avid Liquid did it 8 years ago)
Who cares what Pinnacle and Liquid did? The point is nobody does it now.
And to be honest, comparing FCPX to Vegas is a bit pointless. Vegas may have a lot going for it, but in terms of usage in the pro market, it's practically nonexistent.
Who cares what Pinnacle and Liquid did? The point is nobody does it now."
Um... Adobe does this now. That's why you can export to adobe media encoder and continue working in Premiere.
How about a comment on working while "ingesting".. sounds like native isn't really native if it needs to be "ingested" and possibly background rendered to QT for editing.
That kinda of makes me depressed... That i cant generate this traffic with ideas around cinema, creativity and storytelling, but can around something as banal as a new software tool for an over grown fruit company.
Allow me to be clear for those who seem to have missed the point...
1 - i think this is the best release of FCP in many years.
2 - i am making no comment at all about whether FCP's features are good, better or best compared to any other NLE.
3 - i am not making any argument for any existing NLE version being better or worse than FCPX.
What i have done is very simply list the 'new' FCP features and indicate which of these already exist in competeing software. Not whether they are better or worse, nothing about market share or worthiness. Just the facts of what is actually 'new' by pure defintion of what the word 'new' means. Pointing out the fact that NEW to FCP does not mean NEW to the industry. In doing so i have stated facts Not opinions.
My purpose actually has nothing at all to do with FCP as a product, it is purely to point out the silliness of Apple marketing which in insists on words like 'new' and 'revolutionary' which have, by defintion, no real legitimate claim to be used to describe this version of FCP.
If they were saying FCPX is 'Great', 'Best', 'Does it Better', 'is best in class' then i would have nothing at all to say except this is a great improvement on the old FCP.
So unless you are an actual Apple employee why the hell would any of you want to defend Apple's hyperbole? It's just sad really.
I agree... they all do it though. Adobe was touting native AVCHD and DSLR editing as revolutionary while Edius was doing it for at least a year before CS5, and Edius can do it on a $650 Gateway off the shelf i5 laptop with no special hardware.
See my video here: http://www.vimeo.com/10586163 and this one on a gateway $650 laptop:
http://www.vimeo.com/10145562
Now, had Apple called FCP-X "Epic"..that'd be different!
It's too true that we all get into hotter debates about the tools than the content; for what it's worth, I think most people who subscribe to your blog do find your "creative" posts to be just as interesting (I certainly do).
In our defense, this post is pretty controversial topic. :) I'm only pointing out that not all of the facts you're listing are entirely fair.
also, AVID is 64bit on Windows. It will soon be on Mac.
Apple is simply following it's long standing policy of "steal the best, leave the rest". Then adding it's own features.
With FCPX, Apple has clearly stated that it sees it's future lies in the prosumer market, not the professional broadcast or high end feature market. This will save them on support costs.
btw, Sony Vegas also supports 3D editing and burning 3D blu-ray from the timeline as of the latest version.No indication of 3D anything in the new FCPX.
I'm sure the Apple sycophants will say it doesn't matter until Job's gives you permission to use it.
Pricing vs plug-ins is a double edged sword. Something we've been dealing with in Vegas.
But, now that Vegas plug-in architecture is based on open standards, hopefully that will change (OpenFX, OpenCL). And to those thinking of gloating, we just got this stuff very recently, so no berating Apple for "just" getting OpenCL.
I predict Avid will sell a lot of crossgrades to the existing Pro FCP market.
I think Apple has ceded the pro broadcast and high end feature market to it's competitors. And is completely alright with that. :-)
the only real question remains is how stable FCPX will be. Good luck with that.
My concern is Apple is going to let FCP X flounder for another 4 years.... like the previous version.
Big files are a way of life, nothing new there. Hard drives are cheap.
"For those saying Vegas is not used in the Pro market, well, neither will fcpx. Current FCP will continue for awhile, but the pro market is built on standards and collaboration."
There's no indication yet that FCPX doesn't support XML and other professional standards as it has in the past.
"also, AVID is 64bit on Windows. It will soon be on Mac."
Avid is not 64 bit on any platform, nor will it be until MC6.
Not for other editors. Premiere, Edius, Vegas.. all edit the native files keeping file sizes down.
Depends on where you're working I think. On smaller videography projects, that's very true. On larger productions, you're going to need a lot of space no matter which way you cut it.
When studios hire someone that knows FCP or AVID, they have an expectation on skill set and knowledge. AVID's collaborative tools are the industry standard too. Maybe Apple will come out with some new interesting media server/management system. Until then? Not pro.
As for the professional market, there are only two NLEs, Avid and FCP. And only FCP is growing in that market. I've replaced dozens of Avid systems with FCP, but have never replaced on FCP system with Avid. Avid has done a great job of reacting the past two years and updating the system to slow the bleed.
I've managed and built numerous post facilities in NYC and no one has ever asked for Vegas, Premiere or any of the others. Where the others do have a market is for the one-man band operations, where the director is also the editor, the mo-graph artist and the colorist. It's often considerably cheaper for these operations to operate on Windows with either Adobe or Vegas.
Is the new FCPX going to revolutionize post? No, that was done with the orignal FCP, but only because the market was ready for it with the onslaught of cheap DV cameras; it was purely a matter of timing. But the new FCPX is exciting and looks to add the features critics and users of Premiere have been gloating about as well as a great interface, which will make any decisions to move away from FCP for current users a tougher decision.
Personally I hope the market for Vegas, Adobe and Avid grows as that will push Apple to continually innovate.
FCP has been plagued with FUNDAMENTAL problems since it's creation. And initial peaks seems to suggest that instead of building on it's basis and creating a stronger, leaner, more professional tool Apple has once again decided to ditch it's professional (and there must be a distinction) users for the prosumer crowd.
We aren't talking about those video hobbyists making montage reels of Johnny's 2011 soccer season, we are talking about those of us cutting high-profile commercials and films you see on television and in theaters. And this update has us worried that we've WASTED the last decade at the lunch table arguing with the Avid dinosaurs, "Oh I know FCP could be better in this respect and that respect, but, but, but just wait for FCP8 it's going to be SO much better." Now skip to FCPX. I wanted to see them release FCP8 for GOD'S SAKE! You can see where this is going, Shake anyone?
Many questions remain and yet it seems they have obviously sold their pro users down stream:
What of better TRIM? SOURCE RECORD TIMELINE EDITING? What about a COLLABORATIVE PROJECT ENVIRONMENT? SERVER BASED TECHNOLOGY? And MEDIA MANAGEMENT? Weakest parts of FCP I can tell you first hand, the lack of media management. It's an assistant’s nightmare. We deal with it on a daily basis.
Oh but it will sync the sound for you. Have you seen what it can do with iChat?
@john vito "My concern is Apple is going to let FCP X flounder for another 4 years.... like the previous version. "
Come on...there needs to be some context here. The apparent lack of development was a clear indication that Apple were doing a ground up rewrite. You don't keep pouring resources into a platform that is going to be superceded.