10.4 Release

$300 for Color Finale? Wow. Really like Chromatic, and the price is better.

Apple did say in the presentation, at the end, "all of this and more!" and they are not releasing until "later this year". Obviously that means what folks played with today wasn't the full release version, but only the features they wanted to reveal today. One would think.

At least Chromatic has the tracking to keep it alive.

FCPX.guru wrote: … what folks played with today wasn't the full release version,… At least Chromatic has the tracking to keep it alive.

Watch what Vision.framework does do to 'tracking':
developer.apple.com/videos/play/wwdc2017/506/?time=233
(fwd to Frank Döpkes presentation…)

I called it in some older post 'smart tracking'…
Lots to do for Denver, but for Roger too…

Timing? When a fixed HighSierra comes out…actually beta5 of version .1 is out.-

FCPX.guru wrote: Apple did say in the presentation, at the end, "all of this and more!" and they are not releasing until "later this year". Obviously that means what folks played with today wasn't the full release version, but only the features they wanted to reveal today. One would think.

At least Chromatic has the tracking to keep it alive.

They said that already when they demoed FCPX 1.0 in 2011 :dry: I really hoped to see a Roles Mixer, Tracking (manual or Vision) and Multi-User-Collaboration. Don't think we will see this "later this year" cause if I had demoed FCPX 10.4 yesterday, I would not have leave THAT out!!!

Not overly excited by what's been released though I'll hold off judgment till I see the full thing.. I use Color Finale so I have colour wheels - though having them default is probably easier. 360 video (not VR) I couldn't really care much about - I'm an editor and I work with cuts and juxtapositions of shots to create stories.

I'd have liked to have seen lanes for videos in the same way we have them for audio, especially to expand compound clips, a second selected clip monitor (rather than event clip monitor) for grading. Built in rulers and guides in the viewer window, 3D space imported from motion (and some of the plugins I use), better key framing and lane mixing.

360 VR seems about as useful to me as the gimmicky 3D text I hardly use.

It'll still beat Premiere, though, which I'm forced to use by clients on occasion.

Tom Wolsky wrote: $300 for Color Finale? Wow. Really like Chromatic, and the price is better.

Not sure how the price is better since they both cost 99.00

I'm glad to see the color wheels but it badly needed several other items. Some of these are pure bug fixes, so maybe they'll be in the final 10.4 release. However others are new features which have been long needed. These include:

- AVCHD excessive I/O problem if content is imported "in place" (bug)
- Spurious duplicate clips created if loading event XML where original filenames aren't unique (bug)
- Inability to import "in place" any tree-based media from hard disk
- No good workflow for external proxies (e.g, managing FCPX proxies outside the library)
- Relinking external proxies is unreliable
- Relink on large libraries (proxies or not) can unpredictably be extremely slow. The entire algorithm needs reworking.
- Multicam inconsistencies: with no rhyme or reason, requires diving into the MC and blading the parent clip for some effects (e.g, stabilization) but not others.
- Improved key framing needed
- Multi-user collaboration needed, and not just for LAN workgroups, and not just for timeline work but also rating/keywording. Currently the only way to coordinate this is by phone or email. Adobe just added this to Premiere; I personally think there's a greater need for this than VR.

joema wrote: - AVCHD excessive I/O problem if content is imported "in place" (bug)
[...]
- Inability to import "in place" any tree-based media from hard disk

I think these aren't bugs. For the first problem, you can compare with Premiere. Instead of *indexing* every clip every time it gets loaded to the player (and usually a subclip is loaded, with I-frames outside the used selection), Premiere permanently attaches a description in form of a text file, I think it ends ".XMP". FCP instead wraps AVCHD in a QT container. But only if it finds it in the clip's proprietary file path. It's not meant to read naked mpeg4-clips. The second point is directly connected to this. You can edit directly from he card, but you are forced to make copies in the background. Not sensible? I find this very sensible indeed.

There imo is a gross misunderstanding that by these rules you are forced to make redundant copies. On the contrary. You can pre-select footage and copy only the clips you need to your harddrive.

Both "issues", however, can be bypassed by using Kyno, which browses the card and can either wrap or transcode subclip selections (or whole clips, of course) which can subsequently be sent to FCP X with "files left in place" as part of the XML-saving-dialog. Whether you additionally save a backup of he card is totally up to you.

joema wrote: - No good workflow for external proxies...

No very smart proxy workflow at all, I'd say. The only good thing about it is that it's comparatively fast. Having used the workflow in Resolve and having seen it in Premiere 2017, there are some shortcomings in FCP:

1- we know that if we trigger the transcoding for Optimized, FCP will continue working as usual. Not so with Proxy. Once toggled in the Viewer menu, all clips not yet finished will show the offline-warning. Why? It's beyond me.

Resolve plays back Optimized "if available"- which are proxies rather than intermediates, since they never get used for the final export. But it's not a background process, and depending on the codec specified in preferences, it can take quite a while. No advantage there in FCP X though. Premiere has AME making proxy copies in the background and switches to them automatically once they exist for the clip you're currently playing. You can force Original by a toggle-button, but having it set to Proxy just means they're used once they're ready.

2- Nobody ever wants to online anything using the inferior proxy files. So why can you even accidentally do that by forgetting to switch back to Original? I don't get it. That's worse than a bug, imo.

Sorry but we are sure fcpx 10.4 will also work with Sierra OS?
or will it only work with OS High Sierra?
would be a problem otherwise for those who do not want to go to High Sierra

:huh:

FCP X 10.4 only works with High Sierra.

Who told you that? Is that what was said at the Apple presentation in Cupertino? Previously upgrades have worked with the latest OS and the previous OS. You will need HS if you’re using HEVC that’s for sure.

Oh, sorry.

You're right Tom.

"These versions of Apple Pro Apps are compatible with macOS High Sierra:
Final Cut Pro X 10.3.4 or later"
Source: support.apple.com/en-us/HT207888

Sorry my bad answer.

then then fcpx 10.4 will also work on Sierra?
thank you

:lol:

@zoombee

Your link to Apple support did not say that 10.4 was supported on Sierra. Only the other way around: that 10.3.4 is supported by High Sierra, which we knew anyway.

We’ve don’t know. Won’t know until it’s released. We know what’s hapoened in the past; we don’t know the future. From what I’ve read in Peter Wiggins report nothing was said about the OS. If they had said it was HS only I’m sure Peter would have mentioned that.

I was there at the demo and nothing was mentioned about the requirements for the OS. If you are wanting to use the HDR tools with 8K video you might need a newer iMac or MacBook Pro. The demos were on newer iMacs and one of the 8K/HDR demos was running on a 10 core iMac Pro.

Well, call me jaded but 10.4 seems pretty meh.

While the 360/VR is cool for what I imagine to be a tiny niche market, it reminds me of the 3D titles update. Cool, but--way, way down on the list.

The more sophisticated/standardized color controls are welcome but again, with Color Finale and Chromatic out there, not high on the list. Moreover, those two plug-in developers are among the most ardent proponents of FCPX, and now Apple has just punched them in the gut.

So: kinda disappointing. And I'm sure most folks would agree that enhanced audio mixing or send to Logic are at the top of the list. Nowhere to be seen.

I've been an X supporter since day one but 10.4 seems unimpressive at first glance.

Apple did not show us everything that is new in 10.4. There are going to other stuff that will be added before the app is released.

TonyBSyr wrote: Is someone saying you can't burn blu-rays with High Sierra? Am running HS and just tried to burn a blu-ry with Toast Titanium 15 and it work. Notice they have a newer version 16, but not sure why I need it.

I'm saying AUTHOR a Blu-ray, not simply burn it. And the only way to author a Blu-ray on the Mac is with Adobe Encore which has sadly been discontinued. I really wish I could have two internal drives on my Mac Pro and I don't wanna partition my teeny-weeny li'l ol 500GB SSD drive that's in there.

bobmax48 wrote: Apple did not show us everything that is new in 10.4. There are going to other stuff that will be added before the app is released.

You sure?