-
FCS 3 upgrade NOT worth $299…
Now I realize everyone has different uses for FCS 3 and some prefer feature X over feature Y. However, I must say that QMaster and Compressor and FCP are still as worky and flakey as they were 4+ years ago, nothing has changed.
I read Jan Ozer’s article that clearly points out some issues “…significant to fans of Qmaster who are working on multiple-core system … you can’t send them to a cluster that comprises multiple cores on the same computer.” Since I’ve yet again run into this wall/problem hoping Apple would have fixed the problem by now, which they haven’t. I mean come on folks, does any currently working with FCS NOT have multi-core CPUs?
What I find baffling is that Jan asked Apple and the response was “…reps explained that Qmaster works by opening up multiple instances of the encoding program and assigning cores to each instance. However, Final Cut Pro, which actually performs the encoding when you choose the share command, doesn’t support multiple instances on the same computer, while obviously compressor does.” — this is NOT explaining anything, it’s just stating a known existing limitation with FCP that apparently has NOT been addressed in FCP 7.
So basically my workflow is unchanged, create a QuickTime reference Movie and setup a Compressor job manually. For H.264 encoding on even relatively small HD projects only 10-15 minutes long, this is the difference between 2 hrs (normal batch) or 30 minutes (4 core segmented batch). Given that final end results are rarely final (clients will always change their minds), this starts to add up in wasted time.
I’m also very surprised why FCS 3 was release just before Leopard Snow that will have proper 64bit application support. FCS is a prime candidate for 64bit support — why not wait a few months and release with Snow? I would find it hard to believe that the Snow dev teams doesn’t talk to the Pro Apps dev team — in fact, FCS would be a great “test” for 64bit on Snow – help sort out any issues during the course of development of both FCS and Snow…
The BD support leaves MUCH to be desired, like it or not, BD won, so pay Sony and move along with it. Single depth menu, no support for multiple audio tracks, no preview, no pop-up menus, etc…
I’m sorry but for the type of work I do, FCS 3 is definitely NOT worth $299 and I think that’s why Apple have dropped it’s upgrade price.
Sorry for the negative post, but I really feel cheated with this upgrade, and very disappointed.
Rob
-
24 Replies
-
i kinda feel cheated that keyframing hasn’t improved since version 1.
it would also be nice to darken and lighten the interface to fit with different room lighting conditions.
this update definitely falls in line with what we’ve grown to expect out of .5 upgrades, not new versions.
george manzanilla
rundfunk media
http://www.rundfunk.com
myspace.com/rundfunkmedia -
I’m also very surprised why FCS 3 was release just before Leopard Snow that will have proper 64bit application support. FCS is a prime candidate for 64bit support — why not wait a few months and release with Snow?
There’s no logic to this argument Rob. Whether its was released now or later it doesn’t change the release itself. It is what it is … and at present that “is” is a 32 bit non cocoa native application. If they had released it after Snow Leopard was released would you have been any happier? or would you have been even more annoyed that it wasn’t more SL native? I’m betting the latter, and as such the decision to release earlier was well advised.
Sorry for the negative post, but I really feel cheated with this upgrade
So don’t buy it Rob! For goodness sakes, upgrades are not obligatory. If there is something in an upgrade that one likes, that would make a positive impact on ones work and workflow and offer an increase in productivity ie something that makes an upgrade worth the price then one goes ahead and upgrades. But don’t upgrade just because. We all might be a bit disappointed overall by the latest FCS release, but no one is being “cheated”. FCS2 works every bit as well as it did before the upgrade was released.
On a side issue, if you are doing a lot of H264 compression, you might want to consider investing the FCS upgrade price in an H264 encoding accelerator. There are a couple on the market right now and they may well offer you a significantly greater advantage than FCS (2009). have a look at the Matrox CompressHD and the Elgato Turbo .264 HD. The former is more expensive but seems to offer a slight speed/quality advantage, the latter is a very strong contender tho and is very reasonably priced.
Best
Andy -
Very sage wisdom on all fronts Andy.
David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los AngelesPOST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™
A forum host of Creative COW’s Apple Final Cut Pro, Business & Marketing, and Indie Film & Documentary forums.
-
Yeah,
I have to agree ANdy.
No one is forcing anyone to buy an upgrade.
Does anyone remember when an AVID system was, I don’t know, $100K????
I do.
299 is actually FREE-99 if you get my point. 🙂
Peace,
DavidPeace
Check out my new web series.
https://www.ripperhockey.com -
Ha! Remember when a 9GB AVID scsi drive was….
$5000
Yeah.
$5000.
-
i think there’s a variety of improvements, its no doubt better than FCP6… after all its an upgrade for a reason.
i think some people have felt frustrated because of the long interval between fcp6 and 7. i myself thought that with so much time, surely there would be more improvements. however, i do think its well worth 299.
i don’t notice improved “render management” though, am i missing something, could someone clue me into what is new and improved here?
thanks!george manzanilla
rundfunk media
http://www.rundfunk.com
myspace.com/rundfunkmedia -
[george manzanilla] “i think some people have felt frustrated because of the long interval between fcp6 and 7. i myself thought that with so much time, surely there would be more improvements. however, i do think its well worth 299. “
Well said.
[george manzanilla] “i don’t notice improved “render management” though, am i missing something, could someone clue me into what is new and improved here? “
Oh I have motion projects and templates render much faster then they did in FCP6.
There are no “technical solutions” to your “artistic problems”.
Don’t let technology get in the way of your creativity! -
Hi Guys
All I can say is – I love the upgrade to bits – along with the Episode plugin I am able to ‘share’ direct from FCP and keep on editing – Perfect for our busy workflow – I personally am happy with this update – along with the Hyperthreading on the new processors I believe Apple are putting their soldiers in line for SL – Also the killing of SHAKE makes me wonder what is going down between NUKE and Apple – a buyout of that amazing product …. makes me wonder – NUKE on Iphone – MAN ALIVE that would be the day ! ha
-
Andy,
So I take it when FCS does finally get converted to 64bit and we all can start using more than about 2GB of RAM, you’ll not think this is a high priority benefit? I’ve worked with 64bit apps (Vegas Pro 9) on Windows environments, they work extremely well with enough RAM tossed at them — in the order of about 5X-10X faster than the current file I/O single instance segment method used in FCP.
I don’t know what Apple might decide on future upgrade policy, do you?? I got this upgrade more for insurance for when FSC 4 comes out. But if FSC 4 is not SL native then I will stop the upgrade maddness with FSC until it joins the 21st century. 😉 I know Adobe’s suite is only 64bit “optimized” (except photoshop which is true 64bit) but even with that it’s A LOT faster than FCS 3.
As far as FSC 3 not taking anything away, well currently I can’t get QuickClusters (on same machine) to work at all — even the old tried and true method I used FSC 2 no longer works. So yes, they did seem to screw up a VERY important feature for me.
As for H264, Elgato Turbo HD is restricted in resolution (800 x 600) and results are not that good but considering the price it’s not bad. As I understand it SL will also have better H.264 hardware acceleration support which AGAIN begs the question why didn’t Apple wait a few months and release FCS 3 as a native SL app??
As it stands now, we’ll have another 2 year (or more) wait while the rest of competition (as this same price level) has long since embraced 64bit and is work on average 5X faster than FCS 3. I don’t see how it was “good advice” for Apple to release FCS 3 so feature weak before SL? Apple will now be so far behind the curve (in this market price range) that catchup will be impossible.
Sorry folks, but I stand by my opinion, this is a pretty weak upgrade that took a long time and it certainly isn’t worthy of a version 2 to version 3 — as has been pointed out, at best case is FCS 2.5.
Rob
-
There are many things in this upgrade that would improve my workflow. The problem is that many of them do not work as advertised. Such as: AVC-I is not actually native, markers do not stay in place if clips are “moved” around the timeline it only works if you edit clips to the timeline.
These are the types of things that many users find frustrating. Apple over promises and under delivers and that is not a good business practice.
cheers,
Greg NosatyCinemontage Productions Inc
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up