Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cinema Tools for Final Cut Pro

Posted by pudge on from the now-i-can-finish-my-documentary-on-hacker-mating-rituals dept.

batobin writes "Looks like Apple is expanding their grasp on the film editing industry with their new release of Cinema Tools for Final Cut Pro. It enables FCP 3 to better manage film and 24 fps high density video. The product is expected to ship in May."

2 of 142 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Cool by Oculus+Habent · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Statements like that are what are wrong with us today.

    When do you need to make cinema-quality video? I understand people wanting the cool technology, but at some point you have to be content. You have to accept that you can never have the newest/fastest/coolest/best thing for very long (unless you have a 7 figure disposable income).

    People claim they can't live without Photoshop, and they actively obtain the newest version. But how many people stop to think "Gee, I've been using Photoshop for 8 years now, maybe I should save up and buy a copy."

    I'm not a software purist, who has sent a check to every shareware developer whose program he has used more than twice. I won't say that I don't have any software I didn't pay for, (I use IE and Mozilla ;) but I have paid for software I considered worthwhile. That includes a legal copy of Photoshop.

    The reality is that we end up spending money on the software we don't own and don't need. If you ever bought a bigger hard drive instead of deleting LightWave, 3D Studio Max, and Maya, you spent money on that software. If you really use the software regularly, for more than playing around, it's probably worth investing money in. If you use it for an occupation, you have probably considered the legal implications.

    I won't waste my time telling people not to steal software. Just consider the makers. If nobody bought Photoshop, Adobe would give up on it. If you and 9 friends all use Photoshop frequently, get together and buy it. Is it what Adobe wants? No. Is it better for Adobe than getting a copy on KaZaA? Yes.

    Just my opinion.

    --
    Freedom of information doesn't mean information should be free. Just because you can read the book doesn't mean you shouldn't pay for it.

    --
    That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
  2. Re:A bit for your buck. by stripes · · Score: 4, Insightful
    So $1K AMR for a 10Mb piece of software. They could at least put in a few DVD's of Job's famous "never been done before" speaches and maybe one of his turtleneck shirts or something. And I thought Adobe was nuts for charging $1+ for photoshop and a per page fee for a usable version of Acrobat.

    Well to be honest most people don't need this product, so trying to make a profit (or clear the dev costs) is going to need high prices. Heck, most people don't have DV cams, and most of the ones that do can get by with iMovie. Of the ones that can't get by with iMovie, most don't need more then what Final Cut Pro does. The few that do can afford $1000, right? And since there are only 300 or so people that need it, charging $30 won't make the dev costs back at all...

    Sure the size of the program has nothing to do with it's value though when you spend a bucket of cash you feel ripped off when you are returned with just a sandwich bag of product.

    First we bitch at MS for making a 12G install of MS Office because it's too bloated, and now at Apple for producing a lean mean fighting machine?