It's good to be elated and disappointed together as a group. Very bonding.
Very nicely phrased, and so true...
@Karsten: Hawaiki is a great tool. Just get it
Bringing back tracks, even as an option, is not going to happen. The metadata-driven workflow and the trackless magnetic timeline with Roles are exactly what make FCP X unique and without any competition. Apple would be foolish to give in on this position, and I think that most people who have gotten familiar with trackless editing would not want to go back to working with tracks anyway. What is indeed needed in this respect is a more efficient timeline organization. Marcus has given a perfect example of how this can be achieved using Roles, but I think it will take another few releases before we start seeing anything like this.
I do agree with you that stability and reliability are imperative for an NLE, far more important than bells and whistles when you work for broadcast. So I hope the coming 10.1.2 update will focus on this. Once the 10.1/Mavericks bugs have been cleared and a solid foundation has been established they can add as many new features as they wish in the following updates. But first things first.
I also have great hopes for Resolve as a perfect companion to FCP X, certainly in the future. These apps really seem to have been made for each-other. Most editing jobs can be finished in FCP X from ingest to delivery, but the combination with Resolve can also provide a seamless finishing workflow for more demanding productions. It would be great if Motion and Logic X could hook into this workflow as well. The signs for a new FCP X-Studio are on the wall, but I don't think this is going to happen today or next week either
"Track base timeline for existing track base NLE user."
Not gonna happen. If you want "tracks" just use secondaries...
The future is trackless.
Track-based NLEs like Avid or Premiere make managing audio so much difficult.
Both Avid and Premiere have three different type of tracks: Mono, Stereo and Surround. You cannot have Mono audio in a Stereo track (or vice versa), you can't have Surround audio in a Stereo track (or vice versa), and so forth...
This is something that the editor has to manage throughout the entire edit process, from beginning to end in a track-based NLE: for every edit operation, the editor has to consider what kind of audio the source clip has, and then create a track (or choose a track) in the timeline that matches the source audio. A very restrictive, tiring and time consuming approach, even when you just have to manage Mono and Stereo tracks... Imagine when Surround 5.1 clips become more normal.
Apple's approach of audio components is so much simpler and smoother, thanks to the trackless timeline. The audio components are contained within the clip. So it doesn't matter how many audio channels a clip has, since every clip reside in a single lane. The application manages all the different types of audio for the editor automatically. Of course, for more control, the editor can configure the audio channels upfront (before the edit even begins) and then forget about this during the actual edit and focus on the actual cut.
A much more elegant and efficient approach that allows the editor to work more freely. Also, timelines are neater in FCPX because you don't need to use up more than one layer for any kind of audio.
Most/all? 'Best Movies Of All Time' were edited trackless too ...
Ever saw a Steenbeck/Mooviola/.. with tracks?
In fact I did! Noticed my profile picture? That's me playing around with a flatbed back in my film school days.
Nevertheless, I disagree. Moviolas (or flatbeds like Steenbeck) actually used tracks. Normally, you could play one video track (35mm reel) and two mono audio tracks (35mm magnetic reel) at once. Certain models with "dual viewers" allowed the editor to "gang" a second video track as well.
Actually, the classic NLE paradigm introduced by Avid in 1989 is based on a mixture of metaphors... The actual timeline tracks are inspired in film tracks as much as in tape tracks from the linear editing systems.
This metaphors were necessary for professionals coming from either one of these systems (flatbeds or linear editing suites) in order to smooth their way into to the new non-linear editing systems.
Precisely, what FCPX is doing is to question this very first incarnation of non-linear editing metaphors, and try to develop a new paradigm less dependent on "legacy" systems. So far, so good. That's why FCPX updates are so much more exciting than the ones other NLEs have to offer.
My money is on next Tuesday to correspond with the WWDC. I would sure like it to be sooner.
(BTW. Thanks for starting and keeping up this thread. It's good to be elated and disappointed together as a group. Very bonding.)
What makes you think there would be any correlation with WWDC, tpayton? FCP X never features into what goes on there in any real capacity. And the only time it's made any appearance at all was to do with hardware announcements- and I can't imagine anything on that front for this year. The only Mac-related announcement I could image would be of interest to Pros would be a 4K ACD, and FCP X is already Retina ready.
I'll actually take back what I said though, if we don't see it today, we could see it next week as well. I don't think the release would be held up for WWDC if next Tuesday is when it's ready.
One thing I keep wondering is the whole 10.1 release. When iMovie 10 was released it was clear by some sleuthing that iMovie 10 was really a stripped down FCPX 10.1. It had the Library model, projects, join clips, and a super speedy browser. But in addition it had a new timeline and UI. I fully expected FCPX 10.1 to look like iMovie 10, but found that only part of it made it over. The new browser was there, library model, join clips, etc. but no new UI, and no new timeline.
I initially though iMovie presented a UI change as well- but looking at it now, I don't think there's very much to bring over. There's a slightly lighter tone to the interface- but I'm happy to keep things dark as they are.
Looking back at the responses here I'm curious why some of you continue to think that only a "featureless" release can get the bug fixes we're all looking for.
With whatever size team is actively coding on X, a team that must contain programers of varying disciplines and jobs, isn't it a bit simplistic to think that if ANY time is spent on new features then that's taking away from maintenance and performance improvements? I have to imagine those are different tasks handled by different people. So you can have 100% of your bug fix team working on fixes while a particular feature is being implemented by an entirely other group of people.
There would be some crossover I'm sure, but I don't see the either/or situation some of you present.
But I'm not a programer so maybe my vision of things is insane.
I have to imagine those are different tasks handled by different people. So you can have 100% of your bug fix team working on fixes while a particular feature is being implemented by an entirely other group of people.
A buddy of mine at church is a programmer, ie. software engineer, and he tells me that development is very different when a group is working opposed to an individual. He was telling me about many of the details and it was crazy complicated. I don't think we can really speculate with any bit of certainty. (Well that is an understatement!)
I think we feel that from our perspective there is a delay, but from what we have seen in the past, the Apple folk are working diligently, and probably had a delivery date determined months ago.
I have this feeling that we will all have to wait forever for the next update of FCPX. Yeah, it might be a 10.2 update instead of 10.1.2 and we really don't know when they'll gonna release it. It might take about few more months or about a year.
That because, while we all waiting for that, the API Programmers will make more stuff for FCPX (not only effects,transitions,titles & generators). Perhaps, they will get some ideas from Richard Taylor website FCPX Requests list.
And the FCPX users will buy those 3rd party plugins if they really need them. Then when the FCPX 10.2 release, the new features will be more different and way much better than the last update of FCPX. Because the strategy is, the Apple want to surprise the Avid and Premiere Pro users and even us will be more surprise! IMHO.
So, my suggestion,we'll have to stop guessing that next update will release next Tuesday, next tuesday ....again next Tuesday or Thursday. And then, oh where's the update? Still no update. So let's just wait.
I'd really like some updates to motion, apart from round tripping with FCPX, I'd specifically like some real 3D with ray trace rendering. Getting tired of having to drop back to After Effects for relatively simple stuff that we still can't do in Motion.
@Scrubelicious . Yeah, I was really hoping we'd see something with Motion5.1, though many of the things I think many people are looking for may left to 3rd parties. I just hope that the FXplug3 support makes that easier.