You can make a difference in the Apple Support Community!

When you sign up with your Apple Account, you can provide valuable feedback to other community members by upvoting helpful replies and User Tips.

Looks like no one’s replied in a while. To start the conversation again, simply ask a new question.

Final Cut Pro X

I guess that as Apple has told the world about FCP 10 then (basic) questions can be asked....

1) Do you still need to (officially) transcode into Quicktime? or will it handle say DVCPro HD natively?
2) Is there upgrade pricing or does everyone pay $299 regardless
3) A video I saw had the presenter refer to FCP 10... if I'm using the latest which is 7 where did 8 & 9 go?
Cheers

HVXser

Message was edited by: hvxuser

17" i7 MacBookPro 8GB, Mac OS X (10.6.4), 7200 Hard Disk

Posted on Apr 13, 2011 3:28 AM

Reply
1,741 replies

Jul 7, 2011 9:13 PM in response to Maxplanar

I wonder if Lightworks will become the new Final Cut Pro. Here's what I mean by that speculative statement. Based on what I've read, the comparatively low price of Final Cut Pro in its early days is what initially attracted professional editors to FCP. And then, after fully investigating its robust features and awakening to the realization that basic editing functionality does not need to be an expensive luxury (Avid) now that a cheaper alternative solution (FCP) has suddenly emerged as the new kid on the block, well...the rest is history and I'm not a historian. But with Lightworks being totally free and even offering a roadmap of where they'd soon like to be (especially that part about releasing a public beta version for Mac's this year), I see Lightworks as being optimally positioned in the coming years to capture a significant portion of the market targeting professional film and broadcast TV editors (and in a way similar to FCP's path where the perception of price is paramount). Avid and Adobe will become the dominant players, of course, but Lightworks is the horse I am betting on to come in third. "FREE" is just too good of a price to ignore.


The only thing that puzzles me is how Lightworks went from having revenues of $26 million in 1994 before being purchased by Tektronix Inc. in 1995 in a stock deal valued at about $747 million (according to an article published in the New York Times on 4-11-95) to being offered as a free download in 2011 to anyone who wants to install and run the same editing software skillfully mastered by Martin Scorsese's editor, Thelma Schoonmaker! It sounds like they always bundled their app with expensive hardware and that might have been their biggest problem. Or maybe having additional layers of icing on the cake (offered by their competition) became more important than having a cake that didn't cost a small fortune to bake.


I just want the cake. Give me the cake and I'll cut it.

Jul 7, 2011 11:48 PM in response to mark133

I liked William's video, "Jellyfish". And I was as sober as Bill W. and Dr. Bob when I watched it. I liked that there was no bad dialogue and no bad acting and no quick dissolves to the kind of lingering bright white light that always hurts my eyes and reminds me how things must look from the Sun's point of view. But I especially like the fact that at the age of five, he is already learning the basics of efficiently blending audio and video together to create something unique that people will click on a button to watch today...and perhaps in 20 years or so, they will also watch and pay.


Just wait until he starts adding a directory commentary track where he enthusiastically delves into details about how much fun it was to do all of this really cool stuff.


No Power in Heaven or on Earth (or anywhere else, for that matter) can ever fully capture with only words the exuberant spirit of a child's evolving creativity.

Jul 8, 2011 12:59 AM in response to Patrick Sheffield

The cake I was referring to is also the horse that I am betting on = LIGHTWORKS (yeah, I know...too many metaphors). So far, it doesn't appear to be a lie. I just registered. I paid them nothing. I answered a few simple questions. An e-mail confirmation was sent. The link was clicked. I downloaded the 41.9 MB file. So far, I don't see anything that looks like a lie. I checked the WHOIS directory for their website. Nothing looked suspicious there. The file is an executable. I wanted to check the HASH file but hash is illegal where I live so I skipped that security protocol. *COUGHING* But I did interview a few lines of the binary code. One line kept asking me if I was a one or a zero. I told him I was a three just to mess with him. He just stared into space for a few terraflops. Then he told me this program cannot be run in DOS mode. I told him that I think dinosaurs disappeared around the same time that DOS mode lost its popularity. He asked me sumtin' about my dusty Windoze and then tried to sneak a sneeze in there to mess with my CPU's delicate sensitivities but I clicked him back to sleep before he even had a chance to blink again. But he did leave me a note. Apparently, the current version of my OS is not supported. So until I address that, there will be no cakes to bake...no horses to bet on...no HASH files to process with Autodesk's Smoke...etc!


But if I see any other cakes lying around, I'll let you know.

Jul 8, 2011 3:44 AM in response to The Knight Poet

Thanks for your comments. Posting the video was indeed meant to illustrate a principle, that even the coldest corporate strategist would not dream of taking paintbrushes from the hands of a five-year old, or to require a university degree or license before they can afford to purchase oil paints. Every human being would agree that a child should not be prevented from developing, expressing themselves with paint or words or, as I and any decent human being would say, with media of any kind. And the tools, though new, are like magic, cutting through the toil of work that, not long ago, was required to achieve what can now be done with a click (and I mean simply basic fundamental operations like copy and paste. Not long ago, oil paint pigments had to be found in the mountains, ground by hand and mixed with carefully pressed and slightly oxidized oils.)


But the paying jobs in any industry, and the competition that keeps the goods coming to market, will always be a demanding environment of work, dedication, and discipline. Often there's a disconnect between popular conception, and even paying market, and the ground force that actually gets things done. How many students have paid large sums to chef schools under the dream of achieving some sort of high-class status, only to discover that the actual job is more about simply getting all the vegetables cut in time and keeping them from changing color before they get to the customer's table. A true Italian kitchen is a grueling environment. But they won't tell you that at chef school, while you're busy paying your inheritance out for tuition.


Now there's a new industry being built around a generation of aspiring film-makers. They can't be stopped, so how can they be harnessed? If they can't be harnessed, how can they be stopped? I'm a tea-totaller, apart from a little wine from my own vineyard, but I've seen enough to know that creativity is given more power than discipline, if the two should meet head-to-head. I'm also a veteran of foreign wars and I recognize that the best course is mutually respected development and cooperation between the creative and the disciplined forms of being. In truth and in trust.

Jul 8, 2011 7:05 AM in response to hvxuser

Hey guys,

I decided to buy Canon T2i and I now I have Final Cut Express 4. But I want to have some more, with Motion or After Effects. Bundle from Adobe for students costs $450 for After Effects, Premiere Pro, Photoshop and few more. From Apple I can get FCPX for $300 and Motion for $50, so $350. If somebody could answer on my questions:

how would you do very quick on FCPX cinematic look with footage from Canon T2i? When Apple throw out some features it would be easy to get film look for my footage and adjust this how I want? (I didn't test FCPX because they don't have any trials)

here http://help.apple.com/finalcutpro/cameras/en/ I don't see support for T2i to don't convert footage. But there is T3i which is exactly the same camera. So my camera should work too, yes?

where Apple wants to go with this FCPX? They still want to be the "biggest fish" on Pro Video Market? Or rather it will be like some people are laughing and call it "iMovie Pro X". So do you guys think Apple will go for Pro people, or for Youtube users?


Thanks for answers.

SH

Final Cut Pro X

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