-
Predictions for FCPX in 2013
-
That’s still an “integrated” design, with Thunderbolt as a faster optional expansion port; but in a rack-mountable form, if I’m imagining it correctly.
-
[Marcus Moore] “• audio mixing either within FCPX or with tight Logic integration”
This is at the top of many’s list and I believe will be part of a free update.
[Marcus Moore] “• collaborative workflow”
Less popular but key to FCPX being adopted by larger shops with shared storage. I think this will be part of a paid, hopefully 10.1, version.
The question is: What can Apple do specifically to improve collaborative workflows?
What kind of collaboration are we talking about?
Moving FCPX projects to other apps for grading and audio.
Offline/Online
Multi-user editing with shared storage.The first two are in pretty good shape. That leaves multi-user editing with shared storage.
Not to rehash Events Good or Bad but how Events work is key to truly sharing projects and more importantly Events. With local storage and a single user, Events organize and present a single view of all media to present and future projects, it’s really a nice built in MAM. Any metadata additions are applied to a single presentation and there are no duplicates to worry about.
Once an Event is placed on shared storage and shared (really duplicated) it’s shared singularity vanishes. Each Event on a San Location is only available to one user. This forces one to duplicate Events into new San Locations in order to work concurrently. Every duplicate made to allow another editor to work with the same media invites additions/changes to the original event. This is entirely counter to a proper MAM which presents the same view of all asset to all users.
Restoring the singularity of Events to shared storage is key to multi-user editing. In my opinion.
So how does Apple do that?
John
-
I’m usually not one to go on record with predictions, but I’ll jump in here.
In 2013, Final Cut Pro X will gain minor collaboration updates, and benefit from a re-designed “booster rocket” MacPro that attaches to any other Mac to perform heavy lifting.
Like early OS X, Final Cut Pro X may only get minor updates for a year while people revisit it. Apple has changed so much, that there’s really not much to add to it for their target audience. I heartily enjoy using it and I: a) never shot betaSP, b) work primarily on a laptop, and c) make a living from video production
As long as we look back to the original Macintosh and OS X and the iPad, everything becomes really clear with Final Cut Pro X: make something that’s usually overly-complicated into something that’s approachable and fun.
-Andrew
Mooing the lawn.
-
I think we’re going to have a lot of fun talking about your blog post.
I read your “Part 1” look at the past year. It’ll be interesting to discuss how our “crystal balls” work.
-
[John Heagy] “Restoring the singularity of Events to shared storage is key to multi-user editing. In my opinion.
So how does Apple do that? “
Well, as I understand it, FCPX is built on the same database structure as FinalCutServer was, so theoretically anything that people USED to do with FCS is possible with FCPX, but as we’ve seen, the dev team doesn’t seem interested in merely reintegrating old functionality.
I never worked with FCS, so I’m not sure of it’s limitations.
From a practical working perspective, an Event being used by multiple users simultaneously needs to be able to leverage the input from multiple users across all users, while at the same time allowing an individual editor to filter out the information he needs from all that metadata. Events need to be able to be updated with footage or logging info, and have that perpetuate down to all users without screwing up the database.
Perhaps it could be possible to assign logging info to a specific user. So you could have a MASTER metadata file, with information considered universal to all jobs using the Event [names, places, etc.], and then have USER metadata files generated when an editor adds his own notes, favourites, or ratings to the material. that way two editors can have their own separate subsets of metadata for the Event for their own specific jobs, and if a 3rd job is started by another editor, that editor could choose to leverage just the MASTER metadata, one of the USER metadata file, or all of it depending on what is relevant to the new job.
I’d give huge bonus points for Apple considering virtual studios as well, allowing editors working in different cities to have local copies of the footage, with the Events syncing over iCloud. Perhaps even have new footage added to the Even that a remote editor doesn’t have automatically download as ProResProxy until the original full-size file can be transferred.
-
I think it’s a shot in the dark. There’s clearly some low hanging fruit for the FCPX dev team to tackle.
But whether we get another feature-rich update early next year or not, I have a hard time imagining a scenario where 10.1 doesn’t appear this Summer.
Last year I was extreemely doubtful about 10.1- there was too much left to do. But for 2013, I just don’t think there’s another year of holes to be filled.
-
I will also pitch the prediction that X gets a full number upgrade to “XI”, in a rebranding effort. Final Cut Pro XI. This could diffentiate a product that just entered the market from one with it’s wrinkles ironed out. It’s no major rebrand like Phillip Morris becoming Altria, or Blackwater becoming Xe and then later becoming Academi. But it serves the same purpose in redirecting attention.
Not really a feature, but indicates new features.
-Andrew
I’m here because I’m not all there.
-
[Marcus Moore] “FCPX is built on the same database structure as FinalCutServer”
I was never a fan of FCS and prefer it never come back. Any Asset Manager that starts life dealing with only images and later adds video never works very well. FSC was born from Art Box… nuff said.
[Marcus Moore] “Perhaps it could be possible to assign logging info to a specific user.”
Managing write access to metadata will require user permissions (Open Directory) and a centralized server/database. Saving projects directly to this database, much like Adobe’s Anywhere, would make sense.
Deciding how to manage global/institutional metadata vs user/project metadata is the real trick. User permissions could easily lock certain users from changing certain fields. Locking everything up would limit much of FCPX’s abilities. There could be a user set of metadata that would follow the user login but never be part of the global. This could be viewed by other users but not changed or eventually added to the global.
John
-
My prediction is that NOT ONE feature will be cut on this POS.
Paul Harb-Producer/Director
Wrong Beach Multimedia
Dual 3.2 GHz Quad/10.5.5/8GIG RAM/FCP 6.0.4/QT 7.5.5 -
It’s the measured and thoughtful responses like these I really value…
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up