During a special event at the National Association of Broadcasters conference today, Apple introduced some new products. They introduced Final Cut Server and Final Cut Studio 2. "Final Cut Studio 2 puts a powerful new version of Final Cut Pro at the center of an integrated post-production workflow. Final Cut Pro 6, Motion 3, Soundtrack Pro 2, Compressor 3, DVD Studio Pro 4, and Color - a brand-new application for professional color grading - are all included in Final Cut Studio for USD 1299."
Post a Comment
Member since:
2005-06-29
Apple is doing a great job with it's professional editing line.
I just wanted all this working nicely with other editing products besides Apple's own. Some nice open and patent-free file format specs, etc...
This market is becoming even more proprietary, proprietary project files, proprietary file formats... it's difficult to choose you're own work flow. And it's not becoming easier to use different companies software together...
...at last, open source software at this area still at baby steps... So I wonder if that's going to change anytime soon...
Member since:2005-07-15
Member since:2005-07-06
While Hollywood does have a lot of Linux based clusters for high end graphics, all Hollywood cares about is getting the job done. I don't think Hollywood cares too much about proprietary or open source software. Both open source and properitary are just methods for achieving the goal, Hollywood just chooses the one that is most convenient.
Member since:2005-07-06
Hollywood doesn't care because Hollywood doesn't make films. Films are made by countless people in thousands of production houses around the world. Some of these people swear by a properiary tool chain, other are hard core open source fanatics. Most are somewhere inbetween.
Some try to sell their inhouse tools for profit, some release their tools as GPL and other keep their inhouse tools inhouse.
Trying to speak about Hollywood in general is pointless since Hollywood isn't a person or even a company.
Member since:2007-03-26
Member since:2006-01-12
I thought Apple's products supports anything supported by Quicktime, which uses the MP4 container format by default and can be extended to support competing formats such as NUT and Matroska.
In addition, I don't think Final Cut Studio as a whole is all that competitive yet, considering that Motion is still far from being a replacement for AfterEffects and Premiere Pro is coming to OS X.
Edited 2007-04-16 01:37
Member since:2005-06-29
Member since:2006-01-12
I thought the MP4 container format is not simply a final distribution format, but a format designed for the whole workflow (starting from the capture step).
In addition, I don't think FCP is in a position to lock other products out, considering the weakness of Motion as a compositing application.
Member since:2007-01-30
Member since:2005-12-21
In addition, I don't think FCP is in a position to lock other products out, considering the weakness of Motion as a compositing application.
Have you used Motion 3, or are you just guessing here?
Member since:
2005-11-06
A nice summary of the NAB event:
http://www.engadget.com/2007/04/15/apple-keynote-live-from-nab-2007...
(MacRumors actually gave up their usually nice live coverage and linked to them instead)
I'm not their target customer for these apps, but at least is nice to know that the iPhone hasn't taken over even more Apple projects.
Member since:
2005-07-10
Not that I was expecting anything spectacular, but I was really hoping for updated MacBook Pros. If not immediately available, but at least announced so that I could put in an order. My Powerbook is getting a bit old...
I guess we'll have to wait until Intel announces Santa Rosa.
Member since:2006-01-24
Member since:2005-07-10
So you feel that the Macbook line that is available today is crap?
Are you replying to me? If so, did you even read what I wrote? On the off chance that you're not the troll i think you are, I'll answer.
No, the MacBook line that is available now is quite good. When they introduced the Core 2 Duo line, I was disappointed that it didn't support 4 GB of memory, but that's to be expected when the motherboard chipset was made for 32-bit CPUs. When Santa Rosa comes, it will finally be updated to full 64-bit architecture, which means that I can put 4 GB of memory in the computer. Since the MacBook Pro is such an expensive computer, at least to me, being able to upgrade the memory beyond 3 GB will extend its usable life. I should also mention that this would also let the computer run dual-channel memory, which requires two memory modules in order to work. If I recall correctly, the memory performance decreases when you go from 2 GB to 3 GB.
Since Apple update their laptops roughly every 6 months, and last update came in October, its rather likely that we'll see an update fairly soon. (As in the next two months.)
And, before you cry about me not needing so much memory for browsing the web or sending email, I'd like to point out that yes, I do run heavy scientific applications on my computers...
Member since:2005-07-07
When they introduced the Core 2 Duo line, I was disappointed that it didn't support 4 GB of memory, but that's to be expected when the motherboard chipset was made for 32-bit CPUs. When Santa Rosa comes, it will finally be updated to full 64-bit architecture, which means that I can put 4 GB of memory in the computer. Since the MacBook Pro is such an expensive computer, at least to me, being able to upgrade the memory beyond 3 GB will extend its usable life.
Just to add to what you said.
You don't need 64-bit cpus to address 4GB. 32-bits address 4096 MB (4GB) just fine. Intel chips have been able to address more than 4GB with hardware hacks ala PAE.
I am not sure Apple's decision to limit them to 3GB is bounded by the CPU's addressing mode. But more a problem with x86 hardware in general. about 1GB of address space is carved for I/O devices Leaving only 3 GB for memory.
Edited 2007-04-16 14:27
Member since:2005-12-13
Member since:2005-07-10
No, it's not an Apple-exclusive limit. The Intel 945 chipset only supports 32-bit addressing, which does allow for up to "4 GB of memory". What they don't mention, is that addressing of other hardware is also done in the same address space. The result is that you'll end up with only 3.2-3.4 GB of memory, depending on the computer you're using. This is the same for Dell, HP, etc. (Note, that the OS will report 4 GB, but will not be able to use all of it.) This limit will disappear when the addressing space is expanded from 32 bits to 64 bits.
Member since:
2005-11-17
The big news today is the IO-HD device. This device, which hooks up via Firewire 800, can do up-conversion and down-conversion of 4K HD video to their Pro-Res 422 format. It works with their laptops and pro machines, which is a benefit for editing in the field.
Pro-Res 422 also provides extremely good 4K HD support, and has support from other companies.
In other words, you can now do uncompressed 4K HD editing in the field on a MacBook Pro. That's big.
They're doing for high-end and HD post-production what Newtek did for TV production 15-20 years ago with the Video Toaster.
However, with Final Cut Server, OS X Server (and its rendering cluster abilities), XSan, Final Cut Studio, the XServe, and XServe RAID, Apple's offering the entire package for managing large video content workflows across departments. This is something that Newtek didn't do years ago, and which Apple can do really well because they have OS X.
They already had the market for low-end DVD production with Final Cut Studio. They've managed to build out a package of products that support higher-end production studios, and allow smaller departments to operate together at a lower cost.
With this move, they are actively targeting the same markets Newtek was and is, and are aiming straight at the film industry.
Apple is also making it incredibly appealing by offering the whole package, from software to storage. You can buy everything from one place, and if you want to interoperate other components, such as your EMC SAN or Linux boxes, you can.
After NVidia and ATI release their next generation of cards, I'd expect Apple to release a 4K display to complement these products as well.
Member since:
2005-11-15
Member since:
2005-11-17
Wes,
you're right...I spoke too soon about the 4K support. It does have 1080p support though, which is NICE.
The biggest news, again, is that they have a device which can do HD upconversion and downconversion with a mess of ports in back, including HDMI.
This is smart of them, as it doesn't require you to have a big piece of HW there just to do video work. The video on the Apple site showed the IO-HD on a desk.
Still, this makes news because it allows teams to work together better on HD content at a much lower price.
Member since:
2005-07-06
while i cannot really comment much on Final Cut Server as it really is not relevant to what i do, i can say that Final Cut Studio 2 looks nice and i will likely be upgrading to it in the somewhat near future.
color looks nice and it also appears that many things in final cut studio have been simplified which is always a good thing as long as you do not lose features in the process which does not appear to be the case.
i have friends that will buy this asap. I will play with it on their systems and decide from there, but i have a feeling i will end up purchasing this.
apple has its quarks and annoyances like everything else, but final cut studio is not one of them (in my experience). I have found final cut studio to be powerful and as intuitive as a professional video editing suite can be.
Member since:
2005-07-03
Member since:2007-03-26
Member since:
2005-07-06
For those that didn't read he noted the following:
"I should also mention that this would also let the computer run dual-channel memory, which requires two memory modules in order to work. If I recall correctly, the memory performance decreases when you go from 2 GB to 3 GB."
He is correct about this.
Member since:
2006-01-17
Why do comments whining about proprietary file formats get modded up to plus five in response to a review of a commercial software package?
And "Hollywood use already many opensource tool to make movies"?
This article isn't about hollywood's use of open source products. Why are there so many script kiddies pissing and whining about points not even relevant to a commercial software package getting modded up?
Oh it's not GNU so it's not good. Typical fanboism.
