Macworld Forums: First Look: Final Cut Pro X 10.0.3 restores professional features; adds notable new ones - Macworld Forums

Post your comments for First Look: Final Cut Pro X 10.0.3 restores professional features; adds notable new ones here

Is it still slow in Lion or have they sped it up? I've regretted upgrading to Lion for this reason.

Kudos. Sounds more like a 10.1 upgrade than an update.

 tony_d, on 31 January 2012 - 09:59 AM, said:

Well, yeah; and I think that's the point. Enormous complaints heralded the original FCPX with "this isn't complete". And by releasing these changes, focused on replacing and improving missing FCP5 capabilities, as a "10.0.3" rather than a "10.1", Apple is indeed confirming that 10.0 was incomplete... and not only are they committed to finishing the 10.0 release but that we can look forward to a lot more once that's happened.

...But it still can't output to tape, right? As much as everyone likes to live in the fantasy that tape is passe, it still is the BEST format for any broadcast medium.
And FCP has NEVER been able to do it.

3 hours to cut a simple network billboard and 6 hours to try and get it to tape.
That's not stupid, it's unprofessional.

You all can keep your FCP. It's for YouTubers.

 CharlieEisenhardt, on 31 January 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

I've never used the options, because I've never had a need to, however, there is Print to Video and Edit to Tape in FCP 7.
http://fduarts.org/V...ls/finalcut.pdf - Whole section in there about it even.

Cool

This may mean nothing, or it might be significant, but Apple was demonstrating the new software on an iMac. I hope that's not foreshadowing the fate of the Mac Pro.

Or, they wanted to show Thunderbolt support and the current MacPro does not have it?

 Lenjc1957, on 31 January 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

I've switched to Premier Pro with Encore, which does everything I need, including Blu-ray. For the small production houses who do "event" video in 1080p, there is no rational option to Blu-ray for delivery. Even though I loved FCP, I don't think I'll be looking back!

 CharlieEisenhardt, on 31 January 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

FCP has never really been a professional application. It managed through stellar marketing to attract those in the professional community but has been severely lacking in stable professional features. It has never really been frame accurate, yes I'm talking about digitizing and laying off to tape. ALL features films and the vast majority of broadcast materials are on tape and sometimes you have to digitize those tapes. High end post houses here in Hollywood always comment on the tedious workarounds they have to do to actually make FCP work properly and professionally.

I edit every day and sometimes HAVE to use FCP because of a client who started the project there. I always cringe at the prospect and cross my fingers all the way through. When I have to use FCP I use 7.0.3.
Things like:
Media management (Files can easily get scattered all over the place)
Re-linking and consolidating, very poor (sometimes when you've only used 10 seconds of a clip it will consolidate the whole 2 hours of the clip)
Teeny tiny controls, everything is so small.
Not frame accurate when digitizing or laying off
Can't color code a clip (I mean actually color the whole clip on the timeline so you can see all the green clips) FCP just tints the frame grab so it looks like you've got a filter on the clip.
Copying material from a 23.98 sequence to a 29.97 sequence. (don't get me stated on this one, one frame gaps, audio keyframes all screwed up, clips resized wrong)
3:2 pulldown is bad
Uprezing on an HD sequence, SD source material is just scaled up to HD (horrible).
Converting an SD sequence to an HD sequence, this is probably the biggest nightmare.
When you zoom in it zooms in on the selected clip NOT the playhead, one of the most maddening things. You have to click off the clip so nothing is selected and then zoom in. Why would you ever not zoom in on the playhead?
When you have the audio waveforms draw out they're BEHIND the clip text! and very poorly drawn, mostly unusable and not accurate as the clip is playing. Yes you can turn off the clip name but why should I have to do that?
Nesting is a joke and gets very confusing. When you make a nested clip it does not necessarily make a new sequence in the bin, it refers to a 'hidden' sequence that is only accessible by double clicking the nested clip. that one is psycho.
The fact that you can't apply an over all filter over the whole sequence, yes that's what nesting is for, please refer to the above rant. I prefer having everything one timeline and to not have 'hidden' sequences floating around.
Laying off is ridiculous. While you're actually laying off to tape you have no idea if anything is actually working or not, no indication of timecode rolling, no audio meters moving, you have no idea where in the sequence you are, you have to manually type in the insert timecode, then drag the correct sequence to the window. All these things are very very prone to error and you have to be very very careful. Also the layoff settings are hidden in another tab so you can't see what's been set, you have to be very very careful every time you lay something off.
There's no way to save your export settings when exporting QuickTimes. I don't want to have to use compressor every time I want to render something quick from the timeline.

These are just the problems off the top of my head which all equal a very unprofessional application which has an extraordinary marketing team.

I've been editing professionally for 14 years and LOVE Apple and everything they stand for and will always be a Mac guy but this one slipped through the cracks.

 CharlieEisenhardt, on 31 January 2012 - 11:00 AM, said:

That would not be my experiance, and I was able to play to a deck this am with the IoXT release software.


FYI I am not on Youtube

gary

 Lenjc1957, on 31 January 2012 - 12:04 PM, said:

I do not disagree,
People have been cutting spots on iMacs for 2 couple of years. I live my life on a laptop, and that is not any different than working on an imac is it?

 JackEdits, on 31 January 2012 - 12:45 PM, said:

Avid and Premier have their own issues, but those have not been my experiance, I have done as highlevel a workflow as can be done in FCP (feature project as 2048x1556 DPX frames) and I can tell you after fighting the DPX workflow in MC and Avid DS I went back to cutting materail like that in FCP.

You pointed out every flaw in FCP that could be handled by 3rd Partys and Hardware like it has been in Avid all these years, actually the same hardware in Avid DS for the 5 years or so.

Not every tool is for every purpose, but having them all in the tool box, so you can grab the right one is not a bad thing.