-
iMovie (2013) is an unreleased version of Final Cut Pro X with a consumer UI
The investigation…..
n July 2011 I took a look inside the newly released Final Cut Pro X 10.0.0. I found text and graphics that hinted at unimplemented features. These features could have have missed the cut for the first public release. I guessed they would be more fully developed in future versions or dropped.
The evidence suggested that Apple might be working on features such as the reintroduction of Multicam, XML import and export, AppleScript integration, flexible window layouts and multi-user editing. Some of these appeared in later versions of Final Cut, some didn’t.
A new version of iMovie was launched as part of Apple’s October announcements. Here is some of what I’ve discovered inside iMovie (2013).
iMovie (2013) isn’t an updated version of iMovie ’11 (version 9), it is Final Cut Pro X with additional resources to implement the iMovie consumer editing interface.
https://alex4d.com/notes/item/imovie-2013-is-consumer-ui-on-fcpx
Brian Mulligan
Senior Editor – Autodesk Smoke
WTHR-TV Indianapolis,IN, USA
Twitter: @bkmeditor -
67 Replies
-
Great stuff as usual from Alex.
It seems like a new Project/Event structure is a lock at this point.
Very exciting. I’d go cross-eyed trying to look for this stuff…
-
[Marcus Moore] “It seems like a new Project/Event structure is a lock at this point.”
This part looks as though it would be a massive improvement on the current X system – let’s hope it does happen.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Brian Mulligan] ”
iMovie (2013) isn’t an updated version of iMovie ’11 (version 9), it is Final Cut Pro X with additional resources to implement the iMovie consumer editing interface.”Or, the inverse is true, and FCP X really is iMovie after all. 🙂
-
[Andy Branner] “I’d also say that this quite clearly shows that FCP X never in fact was “iMovie Pro” (which was easily proven before this also, but never mind)”
Yes, let’s mind if you please.
Prove it easily.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
FCPX shared no code with iMovie.
-
[Marcus Moore] “FCPX shared no code with iMovie.”
This unfortunately is very far from being the clincher so many people think it is.
What FCP X did share is all the basic design principles of iMovie and that is far more relevant to the discussion.
The point being that the design principles were utterly radical and shared by no other NLE – except iMovie.
Rewriting the code from scratch may have been tiresome drudgery but it happens all the time in software development.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Marcus Moore] “FCPX shared no code with iMovie.”
But FCPX clearly shared a data model with iMovie. FCPX’s storyline concepts and mechanics clearly have a predecessor in iMovie, and FCPX could import iMovie projects (but not FCP Legend projects).
Personally, I’d suspect Apple very likely re-used at least some code related to the timeline data model — but so what?
I have never understood the “iMovie Pro” discussion. Both sides are right, but neither claim makes any difference. It should be clear that FCPX uses concepts first shown in iMovie. It should also be clear that FCPX stands on its own (64-bit, AVFoundation, all that).
What does it matter where the ideas or code came from? Shouldn’t this be about the feature set and workflow, not the development heritage?
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Andy Branner] “Exactamundo… until now. Easily deduced from Alex’ article. Well, for most. Aside from being said over and over and over by various experts on the subject such as Philip Hodgetts etc.
If one were actually to go by LOOKS alone, then there are a boatload of other apps that could equally nonsensically be qualified as “iMovie Pro”. So that’s frightfully disingenuous imho.
Then again, I can’t believe that debunked nonsense is even being rehashed again… :eyes roll:”
As I’m sure you are aware, the appeal to authority is no basis for an argument.
As Walter has just pointed out, “It should be clear that FCPX uses concepts first shown in iMovie”.
What he meant was that all the design principles of FCP X were already fully developed in iMovie long before X ever appeared on the scene.
Whether the code is the same, not the same, or slightly the same, is an utter irrelevance.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
I think that’s the key- first shown.
Just like what Alex points to- I think the relationship is much more symbiotic- and that it took much longer to get FCPX out the door. FCPX was a much bigger coding job, which is why they likely didn’t bother (or aborted early) the 32bit Carbon version of X (or FirstCut or whatever it was at that very early stage)
-
[Marcus Moore] “FCPX was a much bigger coding job”
I think unless you were there (and I don’t know about you but I wasn’t) that this sort of statement is highly debatable.
iMovie was a seriously sophisticated offering well before X’s release. As to how much coding was involved in the separate offerings it’s frankly anybody’s guess.
And let’s not attach too much importance to the coding – it’s the design that’s the really significant factor.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up