Apple Updates Final Cut Pro X with 2013 Mac Pro Compatibility, 4K Content

Now Aperture PPLLEEAASSEE

That ground-up rewrite not looking like such a bad idea now...

Why bother trying to fix something that's junk? and imovie has more.

Look back at FCP7 and see why people liked it and still use it, unless you have switched to sony V or Prem.

Put all the features that are in FCP7 and I might consider moving to X.
Ow and however came up with the idea that out can't open old projects
needs to come in to the real world, it shouldn't have to be left to third party software.

FCP was once a great product

Dude, it's not June 2011 anymore.

Generally on a project of any decent scale you'll edit with"offline" lower res/lower bitrate material and then when finished relink to the higher quality material ---usually in a different program designed for finishing.

Most feature films you see in theaters and nearly all TV Shows are still edited with Avid's Media Composer with the occasional one being edited with FCP7. And they'll be dragged away from it only if necessary and kicking and screaming all the way. Only smaller independent filmmakers are really using premiere or FCPX at the moment - and there's not that many of them. In the commercial/corporate/educational/broadcast sector you would be closer to right as premiere and fcpx have been picking up a lot of steam there. However the need to work with 4K industry wide has really been nonexistent (other than needing a way to convert camera originals to "offline" - res---usually just plain HD and color grading/finishing software used in the relink process. Although now every major NLE supports 4K in some fashion we're still a few years out before it'll really be all that useful considering the lack of ways to see it - and even then most professionals will still elect to use an offline workflow to save on hard drive space and system overhead.

Hope that answers your question.

EDIT: seems like there's a bit of confusion on the other apps out there

For Visual Effects and compositing you'd see both after effects and Nuke being used at the professional level - though nuke is definitely more advanced. While theoretically possible in practical terms you'd never actual edit with them. There's also a few other applications used for this purpose such as Autodesk's Flame. 3d Modeling for VFX would likely be done in Maya though there's others as well

While were at it I mentioned software you use for the final relink or "conform" and color grading/finishing. The most commonly used ones are Da Vinci Resolve, Scratch, Lustre, and Baselight with Apple Color (RIP) and Adobe's Speedgrade being used here and there.

As far as "editing" goes, which most of you are referring to in the sense of just cutting the footage, you'd be surprised to find out that many motion pictures are still cut on Avid. With the power of the new Mac Pro and FCPX though, television shows, and motion pictures are slowly adopting the new work flow.

It's just like the film vs digital debate. Who's is going to be willing to be different than the past for the sake of saving time and money while still producing a great product.

People who say FCPX isn't for pro's, haven't actually used FCPX, and aren't willing to adapt their workflow.

----------

Why bother trying to fix something that's junk? and imovie has more.

Look back at FCP7 and see why people liked it and still use it, unless you have switched to sony V or Prem.

Put all the features that are in FCP7 and I might consider moving to X.
Ow and however came up with the idea that out can't open old projects
needs to come in to the real world, it shouldn't have to be left to third party software.

FCP was once a great product

Tell me what what features you use on a regular basis in FCP7 that aren't in FCPX???

I sort of understand what you're trying to say, but the point of my response was the misgivings of the newer version are largely dealt with outside of the traditional timeline vs magnetic approach.

The other poster was giving the same kind of response that's a stereotype shorthand for what is now a borderline ignorant viewpoint. (It's frustrating that people still think of X as iMovie Pro because the interface has some GUI similarities.)

I second this notion. I am glad to see people approaching FCPX with a clear and level mindset. I use FCPX every day (and have been since the day it came out) and I absolutely love it. I realize that it works great for my workflow, and that maybe that isn't the case with every "professional" but, I certainly consider myself a pro and FCPX is feature-rich and very capable imo.

I have a project fully edited in FCPX that nationally aired during this past Super Bowl, and another project for a major label artist that is on the front page of iTunes today, and plenty more professional level projects, all done in X. I constantly have to liaise with other post facilities for my work and using FCPX hasn't been an issue for me once.

The main reason people haven't switched away from FCP7 is because they're lazy or unwilling to learn something new. Period. Many people don't like slowing down their workflow to learn something new, and understandably so, but it's really a sign of stubbornness on behalf of the editor versus the software being incomplete imo. I have two roommates who also work in post and all but swear by Premiere, and will bash FCPX anytime they get the chance. But I can tell you that they have never taken the time to put FCPX through the paces long enough to learn what it does and how it works. Premiere is close enough to FCP7 in how it works, so they just went that route. They never read a manual or used an tutorial, or even looked over my shoulder while I'm working with FCPX and are clueless to probably 90% of what its capable of doing. This I have found to be common among anyone who truly bashes FCPX now days (it was a different story back when it first launched in 2011). They have simply mentally written it off because of what they've heard about it.

Let me be clear that I am not bashing Premiere, I do like it... just not better than FCPX. I could go on and on about what I like about it (including the magnetic timeline which I simply fill with a slug for my editing and edit solely from secondary timeline, which gives you much more freedom and alieviates most of people's main gripe with it) ... but I'll just leave it at that.

I'm very eager to see how well this new Library system simplifies my workflow. I just wish apple would add one tiny feature i really want... color labeling of clips on the timeline :/

Now Aperture PPLLEEAASSEE

Copy that!