In Defense of Final Cut Pro X
Monday, June 27, 2011 at 3:22AM 
Since Final Cut Pro X's release last week, the editing community has been largely divided by those who love it, and those who absolutely hate it. Take a look at the current ratings for it on the App Store, and you'll see it earns a 2.5, with most people going with either one or five stars: there isn't much middle ground on this one. Let me try to put this whole thing into a bit of perspective that could bring both sides together.
First, it is inaccurate to refer to this as an update, or even really a new release of Final Cut Pro. While it made sense for Apple to keep the name for marketing purposes, had this software launched with a different name, the reaction could have been a bit different...
Let's pretend that the app had another name. Let's call it SuperVidEdit for the purposes of this discussion. Now imagine it was released by a small startup programmer or two. SuperVidEdit hits the App Store at a third of the price of Final Cut Pro 7, and offers lightning-fast rendering, tremendous utilization of available processing power, and does it all with a radical new interface. Some brave editors might tinker with the program while most watch from the sidelines.
"Fresh interface!" some would proclaim. "Yeah, but it's not ready for real work; I can't even import my projects into it, or lay projects back to tape." However those who found it fitting into their workflow, would experience tremendous efficiency and get projects done in a fraction of the time compared to Final Cut Pro 7. Over time, the developers of SuperVidEdit would add more and more features, bringing greater feature parity, until almost a year goes by. Suddenly, the excuses for not using SuperVidEdit have faded away, while the logic behind holding onto the old way of doing things look like a sure way to lose business to faster, more nimble competitors.
So let's start to mend the divide by thinking of Final Cut Pro X as a completely new editing application, that just happens to share the same name as one of the most popular editing programs in history. An app by any other name would not be facing the backlash seen by Final Cut Pro X.
Next, I have to think that the ratings are largely based on knee-jerk reactions. When you open Final Cut Pro X, frankly very little of it operates the same way as Final Cut in terms of being able to jump in right away and start on a project. This is new software. That means things are different. (David Pogue has already debunked most of those initial issues, so I won't duplicate that effort here.) I absolutely hate the most recent version of iMovie, so when I first saw the interface, I was more than a little leery. If you had asked me to write a review in that first five minutes, or even an hour later as I tried to simply get two clips into the timeline and apply a transition, I would have been firmly in the one-star camp.
It was then that I realized I needed to think of this as all new software, and make the assumption that I had no idea how to do anything, despite ten years of using Final Cut Pro. The best thing I did was to purchase some training videos (in my case from Larry Jordan's $99 training, which should be part of the official FCP X download, and that is not a paid endorsement) and start from square one.
Soon, I started to see how to do 95% of what I was used to doing in FCP. In most cases, the new technique saved time, and simplified editing in a good way. Over the weekend I had to work on a project in FCP 7, and already I was thinking of the ways I could more effectively complete the project in FCP X.
With that said, Apple shipped this software with some real head scratchers for those working in high-end editing environments. The fact that all projects are visible in the project library pane is one major issue. Essentially this means that if you open the project library in front of a client, they could get a glimpse at the projects you might be working on for competing companies. It could be a real issue for those who work government editing, or if you'd rather not have all of your clients see some of your more unseemly projects, depending on your clientele.
Again though, I can't say it enough: If this was an all-new piece of software, the people that issue affects would write feedback, and wait to see if the software would eventually work for them. I agree with Larry Jordan that in 18 months, nearly all of us who use FCP will have made the transition to FCP X. It was no accident that FCP X does not overwrite your existing version of Final Cut. This is a piece of software that has a lot of growing to do to reach the saturation level that Final Cut Pro 6/7 has found in the market. I have sneaky feeling that the quiet Cupertino startup behind this software has the resources to make that happen.
Reader Comments (12)
So Apple has made a completely new app for video editing then?
Great.
In that case they just discontinued FCP with zero advanced warning.
They will capture the 'prosumer' market but pros who rely on mature and full featured apps like FCP will move in droves away from Apple.
I'm confident in this prediction because similar scenarios have being played out before.
I'm a pro photographer. Apple produces Aperture while Adobe has Lightroom, and while Aperture looked all nice and shiny, it was (and still is) a dog.
Apple treats pros like consumers, and as a result Aperture is languishing at about a 5% share in a market it should outright own.
Apple also discontinued the Xserve with only 3 months notice. All the companies that relied on Apple's hardware were left high and dry and IT guys that talked their bosses into getting Xserves had egg on their faces.
Apple is no longer interested in the pro. The sooner we realize this the better.
Let's pretend that the app had another name. Let's call it SuperVidEdit for the purposes of this discussion. Now imagine it was released by a small startup programmer or two. SuperVidEdit hits the App Store at a third of the price of Final Cut Pro 7, and offers lightning-fast rendering, tremendous utilization of available processing power, and does it all with a radical new interface. Some brave editors might tinker with the program while most watch from the sidelines.
Ok, in many ways this is the way I've been looking at it from day one (as a long time apple user I also updated to FCS 3 a month ago just in case, and boy am I glad I did!). Then suddenly, with no warning, Apple pulls FCS off their store, asks retailers to return their copies, redirects a lot of links for FCS or FCP 7 to "SuperVidEdit". No comment on why they ended those products. No direction for the many people, shops, etc., using those products to earn a living, or whatever. What should we pretend now?
One solution to the "all projects visible" is to put your projects on different partitions or different drives. If you're using a NAS or whatever, you should be able to easily segment things. When a drive isn't mounted, then the projects don't show up in the projects folder. This would hide them from prying eyes.
I also expect Apple will provide a folder system so you can collapse folders to hide projects.
I have read a bunch of negative reviews, and they seem to be the standard kind of apple bashing we've seen from anti-apple people for the past several decades. This time around it is just fans of adobe. (I will never understand why people like paying over and over each year for the same product every time adobe marketing decides to increase the version number.)
I've not gotten to spend much time with FCPX, and yet I already knew that most of these "pro" complaints were simply ignorant at best, and dishonest at worst. Many times they've complained that you can't do something simply because the way you used to do it doesn't make sense anymore... but they couldn't be bothered to learn the new way?
I'm glad Apple is the kind of company that ignores this kind of BS.
Typical nonsense from someone who's never had to cut a show in their life.
Fact is, Apple had heavily promoted FCP as a "pro" app and had offered feature in it that allowed a professional video editor to edit TV shows and movies. Features such as ability to select and output certain audio tracks, ability to have deck control for ingesting and output of media etc were added to attract pros to this app. Apple had intentionally positioned itself as an alternative to Avid and other professional level editing software. And that was not just marketing; features such as ability to view numerous levels of time code, or modify time code, or media management, or generate cut lists are features that almost all professional level editors use.
Suddenly, there's FCPX, which has none of those features. FCPX does not even read FCP project files, Oh, wait, that is coming. Well then why release an unfinished piece of software? It's as if Microsoft released a new version of Word that does not read any older Word docs. What's "BS" is nonsense like this that you write, without the slightest idea of what you are talking about. Oh, wow! You bought Larry Jordan's training video! Come over to our editing facility, with 200 FCP workstations and spend one night wrangling with having to output a broadcast quality TV show. Then I will hand you FCPX and ask you to do the same, and then you tell me who is right.
Larry Jordan, Steve Martin and all these amateur trainers and "educators" do nothing but make consumer and prosumer-level training DVDs. For them FCPX is a Godsend! More training DVDs to sell! Ask any of these "educators" or trainers if they can tell you the difference between drop frame vs non-drop, or if they can explain the reasoning behind 23.98 frames per second versus 24 frames per second, or if they can read a vectorscope or a waveform monitor. Without knowing that and without the professional level features that Apple has seen so fit to eliminate, no professional editing facility can now get their work done. It's not just about not wanting to learn a new piece of software. It's about Apple gutting a key piece of software, millions of people use to make a living, just so they can get it ready for the ipad.
In the meantime, ignorant schmucks like you write this nonsense to appear so smart and sophisticated. You are neither.
Let's face it. Apple is targeting a different demographic with this release. This product is not pitched at professional editors. Pros don't need to be protected from themselves - I don't know any pro that has problems with gaps in the timeline or audio staying in sync. Pros don't need to be corralled into one way of doing things. Flexibility is key. Apple has been disingenuous with this release by calling it Final Cut Pro X. If they'd called it something else it wouldn't have been shitcanned by the pro community, but then again, it's doubtful it would have been purchased by so many without trading on the goodwill of the existing Final Cut userbase.
Apple is targeting consumers, not pros. It's not personal - even though it feels like it. It's just business.
To be fair to the pro editors many of them are indeed justified. I'm not going to go into detail here as this has already been discussed before ad infinitum in other discussions. However, ignoring FCPX's limitation the app holds a lot of promise and I hope that you are right that Apple gradually adds the functionality pros need to integrate it to their professional workflow.
Hi Homeyz,
You may have been too busy with those 200 edit bays to read the entire post, but the point is that it is NOT final cut as we know it, it is NOT ready as of today for broadcast use, and therefore, should've been released under a different name, as a different project.
@ homeyz
Did you really download 200 copies of FCPX to all your systems and replace your current set up? Because if you didn't, I don't understand why you are so angry. Final Cut Pro 7 still exists on all machines that you install FCPX on (it is moved to the system applications folder), so it's not like you lose any productivity or money.
At worst, you just spent $300 to start learning how to use an app that, while not suitable to replace your setup right now, will surely eventually get there. When it does, you'll already be knowledgeable on how to use it if you mess around with it while you're waiting for the features you need..
They had to release the app at some point, and Apple felt their 1.0 had enough features to justify its release.
You seem personally offended when you say that Apple has "eliminated" features, but if you followed the development of this software even a little bit, you'd know that this edition of FCP is a complete rewrite of the code from scratch. So, by very definition, they've eliminated nothing. They simply haven't yet written the features you desire.
You claim to be a pro, but any pro knows that you don't jump aboard a 1.0 release without extensively testing it within your current level of productivity. How many 1.0's are actually ready for major adoption and are ready to replace existing systems? As a software company, you can't know what features to include until you release the damn thing and get feedback.
One thing that always baffles me in situations like this. Does the "old" software, camera, computer or whatever suddenly stop working? Since Apple released FCP X has FCP dissappeared off of the hard drives of the TrueBlue FCP editors? Does the Apple Gestapo show up at these FCP users studio and take them off to FCP X torture camps?
NO !!!! So stop the knee-jerk whining and get back into your studios, fire up your (still working) copy of THE FCP and get to work!
I'm not even a real fan of FCP 7 because I think Premeire Pro CS5 works faster, cleaner, has the sames toys and bells as FCP7 (maybe a few less) and more easily exports to formats I need. However, I do find it necessary because of "industry standards" set by FCP users that I need to have the system to work in as well. My problem is I wanted to quickly upgrade from FCP 5 to FCP 7 when I saw what they "didn't do" to FCP X. However, they pulled ALL the upgrade versions and full FCStudo versions off the shelf, so now I'm stuck with FCP 5.
From where I sit, it would appear that Apple no longer wanted to try and fix or improve a product that has become the leader in the industry. It has no doubt done it's homework, weighed out the cost of upgrading FCP7 and the amount of return they would get, versus a new product geared for lighter weight pro-sumer, consumer markets. In other words they are banking on making a ton-0-money instead of worrying about one of their products that got them there.
On the other hand Adobe who is offering 50% off to any FCP users is no doubt seeing this as a huge opportunity.
To me, it would appear FCP (Professionals) are going to be sitting on a great product that will be totally unsupported in the future. What a mess.
Apple does NOT make money from Pros. Need proof???
Track record:
MacBook = HUGE (with consumers)
iPod = HUGE (with consumers)
iPad = HUGE (with consumers)
iMac = HUGE (mostly consumers)
Mac Pro = Lowest selling #'s of all cpu's by Apple for years now = EHH (pros)
NOW, question:
(You) As a business owner, where would you invest? I'm a pro user and yes this sucks. I would follow the $$$ too, wouldn't you?
Dave
This is why Avid IS and will remain the gorilla in professional film and TV editing suites. They cater to professionals while Apple caters to... well, Apple. This isn't a complaint, it's just what it is, a fact. I love Apple products, but they are notorious for dropping products. It didn't bother me that Apple released this as FCP, I took a look and said, "Not what I want", and I could see that it was a completely different product. The fact that Apple did not release this with a different name tells me all I need to know, they will be dropping the real FCP soon, as is evident by removing FCP 7 and Studio from the shelves.
No big deal for me, I'm going back to Avid, in fact there are great deals out there where Avid is offering FCP users as much as 60% off of Composer. I'll keep 7 around for my older projects and make the switch to Avid, and maybe give Apple's new toy a test drive while I'm at it.