TOPIC:

OK, I think FCPX is pretty great as it is, but here are a few things that need love:

1) Image Sequences support (like After Effects) instead of the rigmarole you have to do in order to make an image sequence work in a timeline. (You can export Image Sequences, but FCPX doesn't know what to do on import/interpretation). Essential for VFX workflows.

2) Audio:
- Busses and Submixes for audio;
- Faders/Mixing Board
- LKW Metering
- Auto Crossfade between clips on collision (like in Soundtrack Pro) (could be handled with a shift drag)

3) Stills:
- More intuitive handling of Still Frame duration preferences (still not working as far as I know)
- Raw image support (from Aperture engine)

4) Project Library: ability to view in a tighter, text-only form instead of the wasteful, unadjustable film strip mode

5) Better support for Canon DSLR footage including TOD timecode (this may be up to Canon)

6) Raw Support: Native support for Black Magic raw DNG sequences

Mac Pro Supplies Tightening as WWDC Approaches - MacRumors
www.macrumors.com/2013/05/31/mac-pro-sup...-as-wwdc-approaches/

Good things must be coming soon!

It's a good sign. It happened last year before WWDC as well, and we did get an update [of sorts] then too.

I'm still a bit lost as to how to reconcile the timing of a MacPro launching at WWDC with Intel's Xeon roadmap, which doesn't have those chips launch until the fall. Again, unless Apple is happy to announce this thing with a launch date a few months later.

Or, maybe they'll get them before anyone else...
www.businessinsider.com/apple-supply-chain-2011-7

an older article, but still relevant:

When new component technologies (touchscreens, chips, LED displays) first come out, they are very expensive to produce, and building a factory that can produce them in mass quantities is even more expensive. Oftentimes, the upfront capital expenditure can be so huge and the margins are small enough (and shrink over time as the component is rapidly commoditized) that the companies who would build these factories cannot raise sufficient investment capital to cover the costs.

What Apple does is use its cash hoard to pay for the construction cost (or a significant fraction of it) of the factory in exchange for exclusive rights to the output production of the factory for a set period of time (maybe 6 - 36 months), and then for a discounted rate afterwards. This yields two advantages...

Checking online to see if they're in stock in Apple Retail stores I'm finding that
NYC Soho store shows ship to store for both off the shelf 4 core and 12 core models.
NYC 5th Ave Store (the flagship) shows ship store for 12 core model.
In other words not in stock at these Apple Stores.
NYC Union Square and Grand Central still show them available for pickup
But it's clear constraints are hitting Apple's own stores at this point.
Online still shows 24 hours for both so it's not completely tight.

My guess that would mean the new models aren't ready to go but will probably be announced with a ship date a few weeks away. Not something Apple would normally do given they don't want to drop sales but I think they may do that in this case.

Remember that most announcements at WWDC are for things that will ship in the future, not things that ship right away. I expect a pro level Mac announcement, clarification, but no shipping model until later in the year. Just my guess.

One thing I forgot to mention. It was explained to me that almost 80% of what we paid for Final Cut Studio was strictly to cover packaging costs. Think about it. Engineers have to code the installer, licensing codes, the DVD data layouts; designers had to design the boxing, the graphics and layouts; copy writers had to write, design, layout the printed manuals; more people to design and code the online manuals; etc, etc, etc. A LOT of the time it took to deliver new major updates were strictly all of that packaging and support creation, not coding. Time manufacturing those boxes, books, disks, assymbally, shipping, whew...

Thus, at only $299, Apple is making a ton of profit doing App Store delivery. I was told don't worry about if FCPX is financially successful, it is. Higher profit margin than FCP 7, and TONS MORE copies sold in 1/3 of the time. Do the math. That's just common sense, I didn't need to be told that.

Now, take this one step further, apply it to Adobe. They justify the subscription model, which is the same online delivery method, they tout the price based on the boxed packaging prices. I say bullhockey! Those apps now cost much less, make Adobe higher profit margin, exactly like Apple. So online delivered Photoshop in reality should retail a flat out purchase for only about $50, period. So now explain how it saves anyone money? Total rip off scam, IMHO.

Now, to fuel the speculation parade even more:


www.macrumors.com/2013/05/31/more-detail...o-gpu-design-center/

www.macrumors.com/2013/05/31/mac-pro-sup...-as-wwdc-approaches/

That is all, resume your normal thread posts.
Thank you.

More on the tightening of MacPro stock. Focuses on basic model checking various retail stores.
www.mactrast.com/2013/05/mac-pro-seeing-...kouts-ahead-of-wwdc/

I don't think Apple announces new hardware models that far in advance of shipment in most cases. Sales of current models would slow otherwise during that period. Given the lack of MacPro in EU and the dwindling availability I can't imagine we're that far away from a shipping computer. Of course this could be one of those rare cases given there's not much sales to "dwindle," I'd personally guess we're not going to be waiting until September although I'd certainly imagine initial availability will be limited.

I agree. Normally they wouldn't poison the well by announcing a new machine, and risk a drop off in sales of the one they're still selling.

However, the sales on the MacPro are already low, and with the rumoured refresh known by just about everyone who plans to buy one at this point- I think the sales they'd loose in a preannouncement would be minimal vs the goodwill having details and a ship date would garner.

I suspect that the next MacPro will be such a game changer that they will need to give developers some time to get their software up to date. So it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if we see a bid shift in the MacPro to be released around September or October.

Seanus wrote:

I suspect that the next MacPro will be such a game changer that they will need to give developers some time to get their software up to date. ...

What does this mean? Could you elaborate...

Here are my current wish lists: (this is all too much for a 10.0.9 update, so I'm hopeful that these might be on the horizon for 10.1)

www.bascombproductions.com/blog/2013/4/1...-final-cut-pro-x-101
and
www.bascombproductions.com/blog/2013/5/1...-final-cut-pro-x-101

The quick list from these are:
- A new Motion/FCPX interaction or integration (maybe round-tripping, but maybe there's a better way?)
- Better Archiving/Restoring
- Guides/Grids
- Put all of Compressor into FCPX
- Batch sharing of projects
- Better information on what's Sharing in the Background Rendering screen
- Manual White Balance
- Ability to create simple charts and graphs
- Motion Blur on/off for animation within FCPX
- Automated Dictation for Search, Transcription and Subtitling
- iCloud integration of smaller features (destinations, roles, keyboard groups)
- Project versioning
- Timecode Reader Effect
- Custom Shape Mask
- Setups for Windows Layouts

Chris wrote:

Seanus wrote:

I suspect that the next MacPro will be such a game changer that they will need to give developers some time to get their software up to date. ...

What does this mean? Could you elaborate...

New architecture perhaps modular?, and hopefully touch interface.

Depending what you consider modular that would go against Apple's business model. They comoditize not compartmentalize. They'll be one model with a few BTO options.

On the hardware size there may be a radical redesign on the case but it's still Thunderbolt and, maybe, 16x PCIe3.

Touch interface on a MacPro???? This is hardware and unless there's a tablet monitor (Wacom Cintiq style) that would be separate from a MacPro.

The only things software developers will have to deal with are new computers with the potential for two GPUs IMHO.

"- Project versioning"

Not singling you out, but I hear this all the time and I really don't get it. If I'm cutting something, and I get to a point where it's either a V-1, or I want to branch off, I duplicate it and start cutting from the duplicate preserving the original version. What else could you possibly need?

Yep, that's what I do now too. It works, but I'm wondering if there's a way to be better organized rather than have lots of other projects around. My thought is that if it's tied in to the OS versioning, like how Numbers, Pages, etc. are, that it could save some duplication efforts and still give one view into a project.

So, just like how one could go back to an older version in Pages, one could do the same with a FCPX project... and let it be one "file".

bascomb wrote:

So, just like how one could go back to an older version in Pages, one could do the same with a FCPX project... and let it be one "file".

Gotcha. Might be nice if you only have a couple versions I guess, it's essentially like "undo" non destructively. For my workflow it would be way more confusing. I may have 5 or more different spots, all with multiple versions, and going through multiple versions to get to each version. And I often need to go back to an old version and branch off from there. Having them all in some virtual database would be unnerving at the least. Much easier for me to have them organized in folders in the PL. It would be nice to have tighter list view mode in the library though, maybe the filmstrip only loads if you select a project. I guess we'll see what's up fairly soon though...

Recently I've taken to skipping the Project Library and cut using Compound Clips in the Event Library. It is faster to duplicate cuts and version up.

The other advantage is at you can add metadata like notes that are searchable that describe the version you're creating and can be searched if you have a lot of different edit versions. You can also keyword the Compund Clips and have them in multiple folders, smart collections, etc.

I reserve Projects for different master versions (sizes, mixes, etc.)

Can anyone see a downside to working this way?

PaulG wrote:

Can anyone see a downside to working this way?

For me the main one is personal preference, I actually like having sequences separate from my media. That said, lots of people do work this way. The downsides would be that CC's make events very large (file size) and there have been reports of people having horrible relinking issues with CC's. There's a good description abut them here:

digitalfilms.wordpress.com/2013/06/01/ma...work-for-you-part-2/

Not to say don't do it, as I said, a lot of people do. Personally, I don't though. YMMV

PaulG wrote:

Recently I've taken to skipping the Project Library and cut using Compound Clips in the Event Library. It is faster to duplicate cuts and version up.

The other advantage is at you can add metadata like notes that are searchable that describe the version you're creating and can be searched if you have a lot of different edit versions. You can also keyword the Compund Clips and have them in multiple folders, smart collections, etc.

I reserve Projects for different master versions (sizes, mixes, etc.)

Can anyone see a downside to working this way?

I, too, prefer this method of "versioning" because FCPX doesn't get bogged down when loading multiple projects in the Project Library and with the addition of metadata notes that is searchable is helpful. I also run Backups for FCPX from the App Store which take snapshots similar to how TimeMachine works but the GUI is not intuitive, IMO.

Would you elaborate more on how you edit with CC in the Event Library?