Alex4D: Future Final Cut Pro X hidden in iMovie 10.0.3

[Brian Mulligan]

Is imovie the Tail or the Dog? Who’s wagging who?

Brian Mulligan
Senior Editor – Autodesk Smoke
WTHR-TV Indianapolis,IN, USA
Twitter: @bkmeditor

[Marcus Moore]

It appears versions of FCP X are the engine at the core of iMovie, with essentially a walled-off UI and limited/alternate feature set.

Alex found a version of 10.1 at the core of iMovie 10 released last October- a full 2 months before the FCP X update was released to the public. That pretty much told us about the new combined Library structure.

So it’s clear that FCP X is in the driver seat, with pre-release builds being integrated into iMovie updates.

There’s not as much new stuff here, but who’s to say how far along the next FCP X update was when this code was ported to iMovie.

Interesting stuff though.

The two highlights for from his article are the LUT support and possible XML import/export improvements.

[David Mathis]

Last year I purchased the LUT Utility from Color Grading Central, so now wondering in the event there is LUT support in the next update (feature not maintenance variety type) what this means going forward. Will one still need the LUT Utility or not? The article was an interesting read and going forward things look to get interesting.

[Marcus Moore]

While I think some built in LUT controls are nice, the depth and breadth of LUTs provided by Denver’s LUT Utility is pretty hard to match- All the different film stock emulations and variables… It’s probably still a good investment.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[David Mathis] “Will one still need the LUT Utility or not?”

Not sure if you’ve used Arri LogC in FCPX, but it is basically a check box (on or off).

The LogC LUT in FCPX is a fixed LUT. Unless you have one of the gamma profiles in your footage, then FCPX won’t allow you to use those LUTs.

LUT Utility allows loading of different LUTS which allows you to change looks as well as provide accuracy.

LUT Utility will still be very useful.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Walter Soyka] “Alex has some guesses at new features for a future release of FCP X”

Alex is the hero FCPX needs, just not the hero FCPX deserves right now.

…..Or however the saying goes. 😉

Jeremy

[Douglas K. dempsey]

The denigrating appellation “FCPX is iMovie Pro” a couple years back … turns out to be true.

When I introduce it to students who proclaim they have no NLE experience, and are a bit wary of apps like Premiere Pro … I ask them, “Have you used iMovie, the free app on your Mac?” When they say yes, I tell them “Don’t worry, you’re ready to start FCPX, which looks very similar. It’s kinda like ‘iMovie Pro’.”

It does point, though, to the scenario where FCPX never really breaks its bonds into a super-featured app … in the way many had hoped when it came out, e.g. comparing it to the arc taken from FCP 1 to FCP 7.

Already you are seeing posts by people like David Lawrence, who noted that FCPX is a great meta-data-wrangling organizational app for eventual cutting on other NLEs. And some of use who enjoyed the teasing/promise of Resolve 11, imagined cutting in FCPX and finishing in Resolve.

We may have to accept that FCPX will always be its own module, a quick-on-its-feet app that some of us will use for entire productions, and others will use along with a bundle of third-party products … just another tool in the box.

Doug D

[Marcus Moore]

I dunno, I’d suggest we’ve already seen more evolution to X in the last 3 years than legacy FCP had in it’s decade of active development. While there were feature additions, and eventually Studio cross-platform functionality (parts of which never worked properly), X has already seen one massive foundational change with the 10.1 Library structure.

You’re right, it’s hard/impossible to say what the “end game” is for FCP X. Is more cross-application support coming ala the old Studio model? Are there more Pro Apps coming to fill out the picture? Does Apple plan to build up the internal feature set so only super-specialized workflows need to go outside? Or does Apple see FCP X as a platform on which 3rd party tools play an important part of filling out the needs of different workflows?

Every NLE in the last decade has wrestled with questions like this, and I don’t think anyone has the right answer- at least not for everyone.

At the core of what makes X special is the differences it has from other NLEs- those are the things I’m most keen not to have them give up. That they’re preferred or right for everyone isn’t possible. I’m glad there’s traditional track-based solutions out there, but I’m also glad that there’s a different solution available as well.

[Scott Witthaus]

[Douglas K. Dempsey] “The denigrating appellation “FCPX is iMovie Pro” a couple years back … turns out to be true.”

Using that logic, back in the day Symphony should have been called Avid MC Express Pro…..

Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter

[Andy Neil]

[Douglas K. Dempsey] “The denigrating appellation “FCPX is iMovie Pro” a couple years back … turns out to be true.”

I’d say, “iMovie is really FCPX Lite” is a more accurate description. iMovie’s code and engine and overall design have changed more due to FCPX than FCPX has changed due to iMovie.

Andy

https://plus.google.com/u/0/107277729326633563425/videos