User profile for user: ant
ant Author
User level: Level 2
230 points

FCS 3. Is it worth the upgrade?

Hi,

I know from another thread on this forum it's more-or-less given that I can't use the new FCS on my G5. At present, I work only with SD projects, so have no need to make use the 'extended ProRes family'. What I'm trying to work out then, is whether for us SD people (TV news in the UK is still nearly all 16:9 SD) is there much to warrant parting with £250 for the FCS upgrade?

First on Final Cut 7. The blurb on the website talks of 'dramatic filters and effects'. How many of these are new? The alpha transitions look neat but can you not achieve pretty similar results with the current version by just flicking between FCP6 and Motion 3?

In Motion 4, I like the idea of a decent easy to use title scroll (hardly cutting edge) but that aside, my use of Motion is always pretty straight forward - titles and bullet point graphics in documentaries. I find Livetype so easy to use, I think it's a shame that isn't included in the new FCS. So what's great about Motion 4? Again the blurb talks about 'easy-to-use titling tools and intuitive interface in Motion 4' - I might be missing something, but the interface and tools don't look that much different form Motion 3. Again, 'breathtaking filters and effects'... are there heaps of new ones that are 'must haves'? (The master templates demo on the web pages promoting the new application, uses a template from Motion 3). Do the new templates cut it for those of us who just want to grab a well designed title sequence, tweak it a bit and go?

And.. does anybody know whether Soundtrack Pro 3 ships with new music beds and audio loops - i.e. added since the last version? I can't see anything on Apple.com and a post on the Soundtrack Pro forum remains unanswered.

Cheers,

Ant

Mac OS X (10.5.6)

Posted on Aug 6, 2009 5:20 AM

Reply
16 replies
User profile for user: TitanTankNate
TitanTankNate
User level: Level 1
35 points

Aug 6, 2009 10:34 AM in response to mattcrane

I think that FCS3 is a gimmick. Let me be the first to say that FCS has some brilliant upgrades that are well worth shelling out some dough for, but those would be reserved for the privileged few who have the time and money to spend on it.

As for differences between the two, you were correct. FCP and Motion can both work together to create a huge variety of alpha effects, as well as motion graphics and 3D capability. Not to mention, there are thousands of third-party filters, behaviors, and much more for Motion and Final Cut Pro 6. I would wait for a while, yes, for the patch updates, but also for some geniuses to get some new third-party software behind FCS3. Once there are enough to at least be manageable (though we always strive for more, right?) I would consider the upgrade. But you're right about one thing. If you're using SD, all of the HD upgrades and ProRes family updates will mean nothing to you. If you are not willing or able to work in HD, then FCS3 is NOT for you.

Hope this helps!
Titan
Reply
User profile for user: sunrise9510
sunrise9510
User level: Level 1
0 points

Aug 6, 2009 11:26 AM in response to ant

The most exciting update I think is background exporting with Compressor. I have been waiting for this for years!! However does this mean all rendering is done now in the background?

Ever since I started editing I always thought that would be the most useful feature, to be able to continue working while a clip is rendering.

I am however extremely disappointed I will not be able to run this upgrade on my G5. I know it's just how technology goes, but still the G5 was an amazing solid product from Apple, and I bought it as an investment knowing it would be outdated in 6 months, but be able to perform just as well for years to come.
Reply
User profile for user: Zebulun
Zebulun
User level: Level 5
6,749 points

Aug 6, 2009 11:40 AM in response to ant

Contrary to what has been offered up so far, this update isn't just about video formats and hd over sd. We all have opinions and I'm curious why you'd think ours are valid as we know nothing about your business model. I'll not even offer my opinion here.

It's been stated here many many times that if your business model supports the capital expenditure and you need it, then get it. If your business does not and you don't need it, then don't.
Reply
User profile for user: ant
ant Author
User level: Level 2
230 points

Aug 7, 2009 2:34 AM in response to Zebulun

Thanks for this, and all the responses.

I can see your point about a business model, but this query is purely about the technical aspects of FCS3: ie seeking reaction from those people who may have upgraded to the new software and might have something else to offer, or have done a bit more research than I have had time to do this week, and have something useful to say. As always with these forums, it's been helpful to read responses from FCP users at all levels.

For example, the point about alpha effects. I accept that Apple are going to want to give their newly upgraded suite the hard sell. However, it is clear that the alpha effects that come with FCP7 (that warrant a whole section in the 'what's new in FCP7 page', that these can be created using the existing FCS 2.

I agree being able to render movies in the background is useful, however I usually just open a quickly exported movie in Quicktime and then export with the compression I need for preview copies for clients from that. Is the time saved through exporting directly worth £250? Maybe. That's when it comes back to your business model query.

The G5 question is really the clincher though. I have a great G5 and a Macbook Pro. I don't want to be working full time on my MCP and so won't upgrade, because if I update, I won't be able to switch projects between the two. There's no way I can afford to upgrade my G5 right now (again back to your business model query).. but it's nothing to do with processing speed or needing to work with HD. By the way, I do have a willingness to work with HD.. there's just no need to. As I hinted, I work mainly in news in the UK.. it's all in SD so what's the point?

I think there's often a feeling with upgrades that - I'd better do this, or I'll be left behind somehow.. that if you're not with the latest and greatest then you're living in the dark ages.

I think from what I've read above, I'll be giving this upgrade a miss.

Thanks again!

Ant
Reply
User profile for user: David S.
David S.
User level: Level 7
20,636 points

Aug 7, 2009 8:47 AM in response to TitanTankNate

*I think that FCS3 is a gimmick. Let me be the first to say that FCS has some brilliant upgrades that are well worth shelling out some dough for, but those would be reserved for the privileged few who have the time and money to spend on it*

Well your first sentence contradicts the first part of your second sentence.

Your second sentence ignores the $29.00 upgrade price.

What "privileged few" do you have a demographic on to support this statement?
Reply
User profile for user: cnolan0111
cnolan0111
User level: Level 1
0 points

Aug 7, 2009 9:42 AM in response to TitanTankNate

the price of the upgrade is dirt cheap, . . . if you go to school or work at an educational institution the the price is cheap ($899 at most, @ cmu $299 - dirt cheap), . . . and buying it brand new, what's $1000?
they are all so cheap, . . . i purchased FCS-2 in Nov, works great on my late model '08 15" MBP, yesterday I picked up FCS-3 on campus, cause I am employed by cmu, for $299, havent installed it yet, but I liked the sound of the new export feature in FCP and the upgrade to compressor, so i bought it, ****, i would have paid the $899 that some other schools are charging too, . . .
does that make me privileged? I hardly belong in that income category.
Reply
User profile for user: Jon Chappell
Jon Chappell
User level: Level 5
4,010 points

Aug 9, 2009 11:52 PM in response to ant

The biggest problem I have is that FCS 3 is a series of new features tacked and hacked onto the old codebase, without really addressing the underlying problems.

Compressor is STILL causing problems, FCP STILL has poor media management, Color STILL needs a complete rewrite. They had 2 whole years (perhaps more - I hear rumors that they started on this 6 months before FCS 2 came out) and none of this was addressed?
Reply
User profile for user: Zak Ray
Zak Ray
User level: Level 4
3,469 points

Aug 10, 2009 5:20 AM in response to ant

I completely agree with you both, however,

I'd prefer a new version of Final Cut Studio which stated simply: no new features - we've just fixed all the bugs.


The problem with this is that, unless you make it incredibly cheap, it won't sell to those people who don't know the difference. Look at Snow Leopard.

Color STILL needs a complete rewrite.


I'm still yet to get into it extensively, but what about it needs work besides the GUI?
Reply
User profile for user: Zebulun
Zebulun
User level: Level 5
6,749 points

Aug 10, 2009 5:29 AM in response to Zak Ray

Yeah, I'd like to know why that statement about Color was made as well. It works very well as it is. So what if the GUI is rigid, yeah, I'd like the Auto - Pop feature from da Vinci where I can customize every room but quite honestly, it works and it works well.

Other than that, I stand with my original statement, if the business model demands getting the upgrade, then get it, other wise, move on.
Reply

This thread has been closed by the system or the community team. You may vote for any posts you find helpful, or search the Community for additional answers.

FCS 3. Is it worth the upgrade?

Welcome to Apple Support Community
A forum where Apple customers help each other with their products. Get started with your Apple Account.
Learn more Sign up