Apple's release of Final Cut Pro X earlier this week was hit by negative reviews and complaints from professional video editors, many calling it nothing more than iMovie Pro. New York Times's technology columnist, David Pogue, has fed back on Apple's answers to these complaints in a post.
Pogue, who explains that he recently reviewed Final Cut Pro X from the perspective of an advanced amateur as he is not a professional editor, said: "I found FCP X infinitely more powerful than iMovie, yet infinitely less intimidating than the old Final Cut."
After a consultation with Final Cut Pro X's product managers at Apple, Pogue addressed the concerns of the professional video editors in a question and answer style post.
"The "missing features" generally fall into three categories" Pogue explains: "Features that are actually there and have just been moved around, features that Apple intends to restore and features that require a third-party (non-Apple) add-on or plug-in." He provides answers for 17 professional video editors complaints about Final Cut Pro X, including the concern that there is no multicamera editing, sharing with other editors, organizational problems, custom frame rates and frame sizes, and RED camera support. A few of these concerns are answered below. Pogue's detailed article can be found here.
Multicamera editing - Apple apparently intends to restore this feature in an update, calling it "a top priority." Until it does, there is a workaround outlined by Pogue.
Project sharing - Pogue claims it is not true that you can't share a project with other editors in FCPX.
Customised organization of media files - "You can customize the organization freely if you're willing to understand the new keyword tagging system," claims Pogue.
Specifying import locations - It's not true that FCPX will only put files in your User > Movies folder. In the Import dialog box, there's an option called "Copy files to Final Cut Events folder." If you turn it off, Final Cut leaves the imported files where they are, explains Pogue.
Assigning audio tracks - Currently FCP X's 'trackless' design makes it impossible to assign audio tracks. Pogue claims Apple says it will restore this feature to FCP X and that in the meantime you can use a utility called Automatic Duck Pro Export 5.0.
RED digital cameras - Apple is working with RED to create a plug-in that will give native RED support to FCP X.
Some of the issues, detailed in our earlier story about criticisms of Final Cut Pro X, including the fact that there is no export to tape feature; the fact that FCP X users can't import their current Final Cut Pro 7 projects; and the fact that some critics are claiming that FCPX is no longer a professional product but rather "an upgrade of iMovie" are not addressed.
Pogue concludes that Apple has followed the typical Apple sequence of throwing out something that's popular but old and replacing it with something modern but incomplete, which it will then spend time finishing off. He advises professional editors that they should be "willing to consider that a radical new design may be unfamiliar, but may, in the long term, actually be better."
Contact Us
Digg
It's easy and free to get the latest news headlines, reviews and opinions straight to your email inbox. Sign up NOW to make sure you receive the latest Mac news, reviews and tutorials on your favourite topics.
Comments received
grumpygiraffe said on Fri, 24 Jun 2011
I have to say that iMovie, frankly, sucks. I know it, you know it, Apple knows it - or at least they should by now as those who bought it have made their feelings perfectly clear!
So, why then, would Apple take what is considered, by many of the worlds best video editors, to be the absolute pinnacle of video editing and turn it into the mind sludging iMove based abomination that appears to be a good year two of development away from being ready for its target audience to actually use?
None of this makes any sense and with the debacle that was iMovie, the latest iPhoto and now this Apple appear to be trying to build a reputation for releasing crap software that nobody can use until they get around to fixing it via dozens of updates over significant amounts of time! Why would any business think that this is the way to go..?
Dragonfly said on Sun, 26 Jun 2011
In the pro market, Apple shouldn't replace something unless it is a full replacement. They should learn from Adobe when they introduced InDesign to replace Pagemaker, it was a phased process and they didn't stop updating Pagemaker until InDesign was a full replacement. A bit like Quicktime X (is that X or 10 ?) , it's new, but not a replacement to Quicktime 7 Pro by any stretch.
Dragonfly said on Sun, 26 Jun 2011
In the pro market, Apple shouldn't replace something unless it is a full replacement. They should learn from Adobe when they introduced InDesign to replace Pagemaker, it was a phased process and they didn't stop updating Pagemaker until InDesign was a full replacement. A bit like Quicktime X (is that X or 10 ?) , it's new, but not a replacement to Quicktime 7 Pro by any stretch.
Crystal-lite said on Tue, 28 Jun 2011
With all the negative comments regarding FCPX, especially on Apple discussions FCPX.
Everything that Apple comes out with whether it's software, hardware, for example, iPhones, iPad's, new operating systems, just to name a few.
many come out of the wood to complain, or new posters want to milk it to what's it's worth.
Many of the complainers didn't even complete a project or even start it, but simply jumping on the bandwagon with many others to complain, which for many it's their lot in life.
Some professional editors have also complained and even naming it iMovie Pro, why, because there is no export to XML, no multicam, no previous projects can be imported, no exporting to tape, etc.
This product by apple is not iMovie pro, it's much more than this, but it's Final cut Pro X. Period.
But this software is a welcoming refreshment to the sluggish 32 bit that FCP is.
As Apple states, they need to take time out to find out what a beauty this software is.
Disclaimer
Opinions expressed here are those of the writers and do not reflect those of Macworld. Macworld accepts no responsibility legal or otherwise for their accuracy of content.
Click here to read the house rules.
Click here for the latest reader comments