Final Cut Pro X Review



+ Add a Comment


I'm a relative "noob" to professional broadcast editing; only five years in primarily DRTV editing. I agree that overall FCPX is not ready for primetime work, but I still don't understand why people are jumping ship so early.

As has been stated here and elsewhere, there are features coming, but we don't know what and when they are, and in the mean time FCP7 works and will continue to work in the future (at least through OSX Lion). All these people so eager to call foul so early on is precisely why the "old farts" idea exists. I'm still using FCP7 myself on 16 spots that I'm working on now, and won't use FCPX for professional work until separate audio tracks and OMF support is added. But to not even give Apple a chance to add the features we need, and see where the software is in a year or two is a little silly.

The release of FCPX didn't suddenly make everything we know outdated, so to say it's the death nell of professional editing with Apple products is silly, as well.

Frankly, I think a lot of this griping is coming from people who want to be able to say "I told you so," if FCPX really does flunk out in the years to come.



I'm curious, how do you think the FCPX problem can be fixed? I'm a editor (and writer/director, perks of being a film major grad), and I've been following this fiasco pretty closely. Do you think Apple will adjust their product to us editors, or push to their own future of editing, which is OMF, EDL, XML, etc. free? (I know they said some of the features are coming, it's just for an example)



Your use of the terms "legacy" and "veteran" editors indicates your - and many others - total misunderstanding of what it actually takes to make a feature movie and a failure to comprehend the implications of the severe lack features in FCPX. This attempt to view the 'Hollywood' workflow as "for old farts who won't move with the times" is simply lazy journalism in the extreme.

All of us who are professional filmmakers acknowledge that features like OMF, EDL, XML etc may come in time - sure, there will be improvements, and we have no need to jump into version 1.0 of anything - in fact, you'll find most pro houses tend to work one rev behind what works for consumers in OS and app revisions, as it's safer that way - better the devil you know, etc. What has caused all the fuss is instead the fact that FCPX completely dispenses with industry paradigms that have evolved over 90 years for a reason - concepts like multiple, individually addressable audio tracks, for just one.

It's been the most common fault of all reviews of FCPX that there is an attempt to dismiss the often wickedly complex workflows that have been established in professional filmmaking. Yet these are there for a reason, much as professional skyscraper architecture needs more than the plans, a hammer and a saw that you need to build your tree house. That professional movies look, feel, and sound far, far 'bigger' than home movies is because perhaps hundreds of people work on the post-production of such things, across perhaps twenty or thirty software applications and hardware platforms. Interchangeability of workflows across multiple vendors is utterly essential and is what makes this system work so well. Apple reinventing the wheel is not going to make any of these tasks change, because their evolved complexity is exactly what is required for the tasks at hand. You think ProTools is going to stop using multiple audio tracks simply because Apple has decided you don't need them?

The simple truth is that in one fell swoop, Apple has taken an app that is currently being used to make Hollywood blockbusters, killed it, and released in its place an app that absolutely cannot do the same task. The end result is very predictable - people are walking away in droves from FCP and will continue to do so until FCPX is simply left with those from the iMovie user base who thought they might do better with an app with 'Pro' in the name. Apple is no longer in the filmmaking business. And that's a very sad day for many.



Had you bothered to research my credentials or even Google my name, you'd find out that I have quite an extensive IMDb resumé as a filmmaker (producer/director/editor/et al) whose work has been sold internationally on both home video and television. It ain't Academy Award winning stuff, but it's an extensive body of professional work just the same. (I only started sharpening my "lazy journalism" skills in the last few years, thankyouverymuch.)

I've used Final Cut Pro for years (and a combination of Media 100, Avid, Premiere and plenty of linear editing prior to that)... and I stand by my opinion that FCPX will be the future. I'm currently in the midst of cutting a feature with FCP7 as part of my own freelance work -- because I ultimately have to deliver M&E tracks and tape masters, FCPX is not a viable option for this work right now. But someday, it will be, and I'll be more than happy to leave the past behind.

But thanks for sharing, just the same...



Log in to Mac|Life directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.