Creative Communities of the World Forums

The peer to peer support community for media production professionals.

Forums Creative Community Conversations Email Exchange with Randy Ubillos, FCP X Designer

  • Email Exchange with Randy Ubillos, FCP X Designer

  • Paul Vlachos

    June 27, 2011 at 12:33 am

    I don’t mind learning new software, although I have better things to do with my time, honestly, and it’s a bit of a hassle. In fact, there’s stuff I need to put off or not do if I must re-learn an application. Always pissed me off that they changed the Compressor interface with every iteration, or DVD SP, for that matter.

    Anyway, I can deal with that.

    If FCP-X will not allow for opening old FCP projects down the road, though, that’s quite serious. I have years worth of old material that I need to go back to on a regular basis.

    I have been Apple’s biggest loyalist, apologist and evangelist for a long, long time, but I will move on faster than a thunderbolt if they can’t fix this. For about it being insensitive to real world needs and arrogant, in general. It’s just plain stupid.

  • Brandon Kraemer

    June 27, 2011 at 1:33 am

    Lack of SAN support is for now a non-starter for us, not that we’d jump at this app right now anyway, but no SAN means we can’t even really efficiently test a project with X and I have to assume this is also the case for most larger facilities. I hope this is on the priority list.

    I don’t know much about code or development, I am an end user… and I’ve been using NLEs since 1990, but in my guess it would seem that SAN support would be a basic foundation level thing and not an add on like XML. Lets hope I am wrong and it appears soon, but what we’d really like is a direct statement about these and other concerns.

  • Jerry Hofmann

    June 27, 2011 at 1:56 am

    We all know the only real dongle for FCP is a Mac. Maybe we could even get them to unlock already owned systems to be copied legally on any computer you or your company owns, dunno but extra seats will likely be available for quite some time on ebay I’ll wager.

    Maybe they’ll update it fast enough that we don’t have to wait until FCP 7 just doesn’t run anymore. In the presentation they said they’d be updating it faster than before.

    There is a roadmap I’m sure, and they will be adding or a third party will supply software to do what we must. If there’s a market, somebody is going to fill it. Some think it will be FCP’s competition. Some don’t. We’ll see. I like much of what I see in X. 64 bit, background renders et all. Facial recognition might even be in the cards with this new platform, they have it in the photo apps already… And that’s what it is a new platform. For starters, there has to be XML in the code of FCP X or Automatic Duck couldn’t have latched on to it… I believe they had that for sale within hours of FCP X’s release.

    I seriously believe waiting and playing around with X for the cost of a nice dinner for 4 is a good idea if you can. And most can. For how long will be up to Apple, they say it will be faster. We’ll see eh?


  • Richard Scott

    June 27, 2011 at 2:20 am

    [Chris Messineo] “”FCP7 projects do not have enough information in them to properly translate to FCPX (in FCP7 all of the clip connections live in the editor’s head, not in the timeline). We never expected anyone to switch editing software in the middle of a project, so project migration was not a priority.”

    I hate to disagree with the man who developed the software because he knows more about its internals than I can ever hope to. But I have to call bull on this one, and maybe my lack of engineer-level knowledge helps here.

    Final Cut Pro has a media library with metadata about your clips. FCPX has a media library with metadata about your clips. Surely you could figure out how to translate from one to the other.

    Final Cut Pro has timelines, which are nothing more than a sequence of clips. These clips have starting points, ending points, and transitions between them. FCPX has a different sort of timeline… which also has clips arranged in a sequence, with starting points and ending points and transitions between them. At their core, timelines of all sorts are nothing more than ordered lists of things. So what if there’s no such thing as “Track A”, just arrange the clips in the same order as they are in FCP 7 and that gets us 90% of the way there.

    “FCP7 all of the clip connections live in the editor’s head, not in the timeline.” I don’t even know what this means. When I open a FCP 7 project, the program knows full well what clip to place where. Sequences don’t appear in random order each time I open it. That’s all that needs to be translated.

    Chris, I think you’ve gotten too engrossed with how different the internals are between the programs to realize that we don’t care about such engineering details. Both organize clips into sequences, and surely you could figure out how to translate an ordered list of things into a new, entirely different storage model. I do know some things like specific filters will not translate over. But you can always give us the option to (a) flatten it into a rendered clip (using FCP7’s renderer as a client process) or (b) remove effects and revert to the original media.

    This isn’t impossible. It maybe difficult to translate data between two very different formats, and it would surely be time-consuming to implement and test. But it is definitely not impossible. It just takes time and effort that Apple has decided is not worth it. Everyone who has built a career on your software disagrees.

  • Randy Phillips

    June 27, 2011 at 4:06 am

    I truly look forward to each & every upgrade of FCS, X included. I look forward to the day when I can integrate this into my workflow, but that will not be until I can open legacy projects.
    I do 100’s of tv commercials & dozens of industrial projects every year & for me to be required to start all of them from scratch is ludicrous.
    Yes, I can keep 7 installed along with X, but then I’m not moving forward, I’m holding on to the past.
    In the last month, I revised 6 different projects for a large local corporation that I had previously done & it took a couple weeks of editing. If I would have started from scratch, it would have taken months & the client would have lost thousands of dollars. These were dvd’s that had to be shipped with each unit & their client began assessing fines for the product not being delivered. True, the client waited too long to get me started on the project revisions, but which one of us has not been under the gun like this?
    What needs to happen is there needs to be a “legacy” mode that allows exiting projects to be opened up in FCPX, then re-saved with whatever attributes are necessary for FCPX integration. Until that happens, I’ll be living in the past with 7. I suppose if the day comes that I need to start from scratch, I will, but how much bad publicity has this been for our editing platform? Yes, any piece of software is a work in progress until the day it’s discontinued, but while some say this is a totally new product, I humbly disagree. This is the next step in the evolution of Final Cut. The lessons & experience learned from all the years it’s existed seem to have been pushed aside for the new interface. I have no doubt it’s incredible & will change the way people think about video editing, but as of right now, my 9 years worth of archived projects seem to be of no interest to Apple. Wow…….just wow.

    Randy Phillips
    Randy’s Video
    Quincy, IL

  • Charles B

    June 27, 2011 at 5:41 am

    Who is this semen guy? and why does it seem like he’s about to spill his name all over FCP X?

  • Richard Clark

    June 27, 2011 at 5:58 am

    “Businesses can’t just jump off a cliff with no connection to the past. They need to do their work the way the client wants, and many times that means building on what they’ve done with the client before. Apple really doesn’t understand business. I can’t believe how wrong they got this release. Didn’t they talk to any editing professionals before this release?”

    I really disagree with this attitude that it is our clients who tell us how to work, life is about change, if we hang onto the past we die, however, it is healthy to learn from the past. I still use my film experience as my work attitude and process, FCP or whatever, is simply a tool. I would never, ever allow a client to dictate how I work and on what platform I work. I am an Editor, they are clients. I listen to them, take on board where they wish the project to be and then I take them there, simple really. So many post production businesses are dead in the water because of their refusal to consider new business plans. I created a very successful Post House way back in 1971 in Sydney Australia, I tried to recreate the same business model in Venice Beach California and fell on my face. I hung on too long. Now I am hopefully smarter, I must be ūüôā I moved back to Aotearoa NZ but seriously my new way of working IS smarter, faster, sleeker and much more cost effective. Outsourcing, virtual relationships, keeping lines of communication open and doing business in a very transparent manner all help. Again and I say it over and over, it’s all about attitude, simple really.

    Richard Clark’s
    Film | Photography | Writing
    Aotearoa aka New Zealand

  • David Roth Weiss

    June 27, 2011 at 4:11 pm

    [Richard Clark] “I really disagree with this attitude that it is our clients who tell us how to work, life is about change, if we hang onto the past we die”


    Though you have worked in L.A., your move to New Zealand seems to have caused you to forget that there is an entire well-established and interconnected industry ecosystem here that was created to manufacture a product in a fashion originally patterned after the factory assembly lines owned by the first studio owners before they created this new industry.

    The model they originally created still works today in much the same fashion, though the assembly line hasn’t been under one roof for many decades, and may today be spread all over the world. However, it still depends upon collaboration and the ability to hand-off the work product to other professionals who do their work at stages along the line, with the goal of ultimately producing a final completed product that conforms to one or more of today’s growing list of multiple standards (if you can still call them standards) so the product can be shown in venues targeted for it’s exhibition.

    The entire point of this being, if you don’t recognize that you’re part of an assembly line, or if you work completely autonomously, your clients may not care how you work, but if you work collaboratively, and many still do, you still very much need to be able to assure those you work for that you can fit into the virtual assembly line of their design.

    So, for many who still do work collaboratively, and the best films and video are still made that way, no man is an island. In fact, many clients still do care what tools we use to do our work. Even at the very lowest levels of the biz, ads for jobs on Craigslist specify what tools producers want their prospective editors to cut on. So, I don’t think your argument really flies.

    David Roth Weiss
    David Weiss Productions, Inc.
    Los Angeles

    Don’t miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion


    Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Business & Marketing and Apple Final Cut Pro forums.

  • Ted Beke

    June 27, 2011 at 4:39 pm

    I agree. Couldn’t they just create it where linked clips from FCP 7 are a storyline in FCPX. All b-roll and audio tracks in FCP 7 are connected to these storylines in FCP X. An editor could go through and break any clip connections that shouldn’t be there. It would be a lot better way to get a handle of the program than sitting around being frustrated because it lacks compatibility. This might be a flawed and tricky feature, but this is something they should work on or at least heavily hint to a third party developer like automatic duck to work on. In my opinion this was just a very lazy move on their part.

    Ted Beke
    Precious Ham Productions

Viewing 71 - 79 of 79 posts

Log in to reply.

We use anonymous cookies to give you the best experience we can.
Our Privacy policy | GDPR Policy