FCPX 10.0.6 Pre Release Discussion Thread

Great we have now Myspace spam!

I think this extra long time between updates is fascinating. Though it's thrown my predictions off completely and completely blown my rep on relese dates. But no one cares about that (including me).

Truth is it would have been maddening for me to be away with a new release out and me not able to download it. So if it launches next Tuesday, that will be swell for me. My corporat/commercial schedule for the fall is busy, so the audio mixing will be a big plus. AND I'm shooting some test footage on RED for a feature in October, so RED it will be interesting to see what form RED support takes.

I think it's going to be an exciting fall...

I still say late Oct. now that the iPhone 5 is out (with all new iMovie) the team get back to professional software again.

it could be anytime, to go from FCP 7.0.4 to FCP X 10.0.0 didn't it take at least a year,
I wouldn't be surprised if apple split FCP X up into an express version that is basically 10.0.5. All these people doing weddings and events don't need the advanced features. The new features that they plan on bringing out seem like the real pro features that one would definitely benefit from if they were doing feature films and the like.

I'm sure some where down the road there will be a split.

You've obviously never spent any time doing professional weddings and events, eh?

No reason to split it. We have iMovie already. Apple has no plans to branch off new apps any time soon.

I agree with Ben. There's been a rumour of Apple splitting FCP into two Pro versions since the days of Phenomenon chatter. It's really not their approach. Plus it's a mistake to think expensive kit/software = pro. It actually undermines the skills of the operators and enables clients to think there's some expensive magic button that does all the tricks. Shame that's not the case or there'd be lucrative market in selling really expensive hammers in the carpentry market.

Also, below/above the line thinking is equally erroneous. I've done high end work (broadcast, big name brands) and low end work (private businesses, internet delivery) and I prefer low end work because I have more creative control. Doing high end work means a large number of account managers, producers, creative teams and brand managers standing over your shoulder telling you what to do. I remember when I started in a commercials post house, one of the 3D artists was leaving to go and work on a Harry Potter film. A lot of people were envious as that would make him a real artist in their eyes. I saw him a year later and asked how it was going. He hated it. He'd spent a year working on PART of the Whomping Willow with dozens of others and lots of people forcing their input on him.

I imagine we have one big update this year. My hope is it addresses audio mixing (and import/export), RED and paste selective attributes. If I'm being cheeky, I'd LOVE there to be some kind of Siri transcription so I can keyword search the audio tracks of video for interviews (and I can use my own code words for good takes ).

Good responses. I haven't done professional weddings, I was thinking of the hobbyist wedding/family videos.

Thank you Wildgiles for qualifying your response. I know i use many of the "Pro" features found in FCPX...and would like either more or revised versions of what it has...but I also learn to work with what it has and I do absolutely love FCPX and this community as well!!!

Just my .02 is a FCPX round tripping feature such as Prem Pro/AE for Motion and some more right click functionality.

There are guys out there making an absolute killing doing higher end wedding videography. $3,000-$5,000 per job and 2-3 weddings a week in the spring/summer. And what they're producing isn't crap. It might be a bit repetitive, but then again so is most commercial work.

And I agree with Ben as well. If the last year has pointed to anything, it's a streamlining of their video production software lineup. I see FCPX as being modular enough to ultimately serve across many workflows. Whether its thru it's own updates or via 3rd party plugins.

But I think ultimately there will be no need for mid-tier products like SoundtrackPro. FCPX will contain the ability for good audio editing/mixing. And if your needs extend beyond that, you should be going to ProTools or Logic.

Agreed. It's one of the features I actually really like about FCPX. For $300 you can get started video editing and you have a TON of pro features at your disposal. Need to work with a pro audio guy who has a ProTools rig (not everybody does or realizes about much a pro sound mixer will add to your post budget) - pick up X2Pro for $99. Compressor/Motion? $50 each. Need crazy MXF support? Well there is an add on there too.

A MAJORITY of people, IMO, don't need these things to get started. Thus, the barrier of entry is lower, while offering the tools to the people who need them.

I'd personally much rather have the $300 software and buy only the components I need, rather than pay $999 for several apps/features I wouldn't use.


... but back on topic - I am eagerly awaiting those new audio mix tools! (please please PLEASE a spectral waveform viewer like STP used to have - essential for certain noise removal stuff)

"Multichannel Audio Editing Tools"

No one said anything about "audio mixing tools".

This is one set of wording that has me a tad concerned. Just like "Dual Viewers". What exactly does that literally mean?

Channel editing, IMHO, sounds slightly different from "audio mixing". But it's just my paranoia. Cause in pro audio, "mixing" and "editing" are very different processes.

There are noise removal tools on the market that blow away using a spectral analyzer manually. Not something I care much about. And why isn't everyone making the effort to record better audio, rather than demand a better "fix my laziness" tool?

Let the arguing begin...

BenB wrote:
There are noise removal tools on the market that blow away using a spectral analyzer manually. Not something I care much about. And why isn't everyone making the effort to record better audio, rather than demand a better "fix my laziness" tool?

Let the arguing begin...

BenB please Post These Tools that will automaticlly find the One Tone you dont whish to have in live Audio Recording? Not Talking about some hum remover.
That is saying why want color wheels make the effort to record your video correctly rather then demand a better "fix my laziness" tool? For creative grading there are tools on the market that will blow away using FCPX! It's called DaVinci Resolve. lol

Argue? I shoot oftentimes in situations where I can't repeat a shot. The spectral analyzer in STP was a lifesaver for me sometimes to isolate and remove a sound.

You should know better BenB! Even the highest budget, most professional shoots often have some thing come up that needs a specific tool to fix the job. In my case, the talent smacked his lips a lot and even though the first few, I'd remind him and ask to do another take, it was just a tick he had. Not a problem to remove, but when there is a sustained guitar note underneath (these were music lesson videos) a spectrum analyzer is the PERFECT tool for this job and something I miss from STP that should have made it over to X.

Frankly, most of my work right now is a one man band type stuff. Industrial videos. Budgets are being slashed. Competition is high. I go for the easiest solution that sounds great and doesn't break the bank. Audio, even though I consider myself fairly decent at it, is a tricky thing. Read this article

I appreciate all the effort the FCPX team does in making my job easier and faster.

BenB, I am also curious as to what tools you prefer to remove audio with. It's something I battle constantly with, (too much hiss, too much room, etc.) especially from footage shot by others who may not have had the best audio setup.

Just to clarify, you are speaking about the Frequency Spectrum View in STP right:





Not the spectrum analyzer in a plugin like this:





Frequency Spectrum View is bacon saving for sure!

tpayton wrote: Just to clarify, you are speaking about the Frequency Spectrum View in STP right:

Yup

Great onset sound is always the goal, but as with anything, it's prone to the same limitations of time, budget, and skill that all aspects of production are. Needlessly shitty sound irks me to no end- only "goldfish mentality" cameramen (term I came up with, meaning they can't keep concentrated on anything long enough to give you a decent shot) bug me more.

But it's good to know that the tools are there when you need them.

Well, back home after 2 weeks and I never would have believed we'd still be waiting for 10.0.6. We'll be at a 99 day update interval come this Tuesday. I think every Tuesday is potentially release day now, and I still think we'll see 2 more updates this year: the feature-laiden 10.0.6, with a final 10.0.7 maintenance release in November at some point. But that's just a hunch based on how 10.0.1 and 10.0.2 came out this time last year. 10.0.2 came out less than 2 months after 10.0.1.

STP is not the only audio noise repair option around. If you do like it, it's still for sale in the Logic Studio boxed suite. When I taught STP pretty often, and in my FCP users group, and the folks I've consulted with around the country, only a very small minority even knew there was a spectral analyzer in STP, and even fewer actually used it. It's nice, but not the only solution around. I never needed it for anything, myself, and the rare time I used it, I wasn't impressed with the results. But that's just me.

In fact, I find in many cases Audacity's noise removal to be as good or slightly better than STP. We now have Sound Forge on the Mac, plus Amadeus Pro, Pro Tools, and others.

If you want to bring up high end productions, STP is not the tool for that, a high end production will use more professional level tools such as iZotope RX.
www.izotope.com/products/audio/rx/

BenB wrote: When I taught STP pretty often, and in my FCP users group, and the folks I've consulted with around the country, only a very small minority even knew there was a spectral analyzer in STP, and even fewer actually used it. It's nice, but not the only solution around. I never needed it for anything, myself, and the rare time I used it, I wasn't impressed with the results.

That's what everybody says about Motion with After Effect.
Still doesn't change reason why Apple takes useful things away... Hint track record.
Yeah you would need iZotope since there is no spectrum viewer in FCPX! lol
True if your not a audio guy won't need it.

robertdee wrote: My hope is it addresses audio mixing (and import/export), RED and paste selective attributes.

Precisely what I'm waiting for....