I personally do not expect any big moves in regard to features soon if ever. Looking at everything else Apple is doing FCP has now a very solid code base that makes it really stable and most importantly allows 3rd party developers to hook into the app. They did the same with Photos. And announcements like the raw plugin from the guys of ColorFinale shows were things are going. I don't think Apple will ever introduce collaborative workflow or the old style audio mixer. The first is covered by software like Postlab and the second would be totally against all the philosophy of FCP.
So for my taste they achieved what they wanted with the app and now we'll see bug fixes, new system compatibility and things that would improve basic functionality. The rest will be covered by 3rd party or not at all.
And you also see how stable and minimal in regards to bugs the app is by looking at forum posts. Mostly very basic problems. Now this could be A. because this true or B. not many professionals use the app and therefor you only see beginner problems. I think we know B is not true
How would a tool to professionally mix and master audio be going against the FCP philosophy? Minimal in bugs and stability? Come work at my TV station and see if you stick to that story. And no, FCP is used by a handful of professionals, not by the majority of them. So yes, B is partially true. In fact during a discussion on FCP.TV it was mentioned the Apple does in fact seems to be developing for the YouTube starts, not Hollywood starts. And what they did with Photos, well, I can't use it, it's a PITA now, it devolved from Aperture. It's all just our opinions, but there's huge holes in that line of though, IMHO. If I don't see necessary missing tools added by October, our station is switching to Resolve. I've also had this same sentiment shared with me by many professionals who are currently using FCP.
Software that doesn't continually evolve and grow, dies. Fact of life.
You can now mix professionally with FCP. You just do it differently then the old traditional mixer method. And using roles I can create master and stems way more flexibel and in one go than I can with any traditional mixer.
Sorry that FCP is unstable and with many bugs in your experience. I can't say the same from my work.
Don't know how many professionals use FCP but doubt it’s only a handful. And to say that functionality that is useful for the YouTube user is not useful for the professional is I think a mistake. Both always benefit from simplifying tasks.
I can’t argue with your feeling that Resolve is better fitted to your work but FCP is everything but 'not evolving' the editing experience. As a matter of fact I would argue that Resolve, and Blackmagic in general, is just polishing tools and workflows from 30 years ago including bringing back the control panels from back then
You know that you use roles to bus clips. Something you can’t do with the traditional approach where you can only bus tracks. And of course I don’t think that FCP is the answer to everything and everyone. I do think though we shouldn’t state that certain software is not professional when it is just not for you.
I think we have to be a bit careful about the "10 year plan" thing. That goes back to an offhanded comment made by a manager who is no longer there. I doubt that it was ever an "official" Apple timeline. The ProApps team (managers, engineers, etc) has changed and evolved over the decade.
Influencers (YouTube, Instagram, etc) are indeed a big focus for Apple in general and by extension, ProApps and FCP. The intent of all Apple software is to showcase the benefits of the Apple ecosystem and hardware. That's a completely different set of marching orders than the engineers at Blackmagic, Adobe, or Avid have.
Remember, too, that even though we haven't seen features that some of us would like to see, the engineers have done a lot of rewriting under-the-hood to accommodate hardware and OS changes, support new codecs, and support HDR. I also suspect that some things (a roles mixer, for example) simply might not be possible given the architecture. It might be doable, but doing so might be a far lower priority than other issues.
Stagnant in terms of features? Well maybe. Stagnant in terms of development? Hardly. I'm not sure Resolve is a good yardstick, because every change brings some level of re-arranging UI items, which can be disruptive. Those types of changes are not treated as lightly by Apple. Then, of course, changes impact the third-party developers, who are a very important aspect for FCP users.
Yes, I do recall that after you mentioned that. However, it may or may not work perfectly yet. I guess we'll still have to wait. I've been asking to be able to flatten multicams for ages and keep being told it's just not possible. Go figure.
I agree with Carsten on the professional audio mixing in FCP - it's more than achievable and we frequently do just that as well as conforming TV commercals for broadcast - all by using Roles smartly.
Of course, there's no substitute for producing audio in software that is specifically for that - such as Logic Pro, Pro Tools etc.
For anything pretty simple like voice over, music track and the odd effect, it can be done very easily in FCP. For anything more in depth, like more serious music editing or sound design, it's always better to do that in an audio app, in my opinion.
I'm with you 100% about the need for more comprehensive mixing tools in FCP, however, I wouldn't characterize it quite so harshly. While a different approach, FCP mixing is far superior to Media Composer, IMHO. Resolve only has the tools it has because BMD bought and grafted Fairlight into it. Personally I think mixing in Premiere is the most functional, with the exception that it lacks roles. But even there, a lot of Premiere editors bounce over to Audition for involved mixing that they can't do in Premiere. So maybe the better FCP approach would be to toggle the audio between Logic and FCP. Right now that transfer isn't too bad, except that FCP speed changes aren't recognized in Logic. However, that's probably the same if I send a file to ProTools. My biggest complaint with the current FCP workflow is the need to compound (often twice) in order to end up with the equivalent of submix and master tracks.
This is not a trick question but I'm genuinely curious: What exactly is missing for mixing in FCP? Why is Premiere best?
I'm not trying to argue against your opinions (not only you Oliver of course) but as I'm very happy with what I got inside FCP and I would like to understand your perspective.
Oliver Peters wrote: … Stagnant in terms of features? Well maybe. ….
The 'under the hood' improvement, e.g. making FinalCut 100% M1 compatible, … fine.
But Apple should be able to add some new features, and I mean really new features, such as a 'no-green-screen-needed-green-screening' (based upon depth-maps), or the for years awaited motion-tracking (based upon smart tracking objects ).
Not to mention a general overhaul of the free elements in Motion, which are soooo 80ies.-
Speaking of unofficial: how man seats of FC are sold? …