Steve Kanter: What FCPX CAN Do

[Gary Huff]

I think, then, that we are ultimately at an impasse which will only become clearer once someone actually makes it possible to import and we can all see what actually happens with the timeline at that point. Whether that happens or not depends on what the status is on acceptance of FCPX as an editor in those worlds come a year from now.

[Chris Upchurch]

[Gary Huff] “I think, then, that we are ultimately at an impasse which will only become clearer once someone actually makes it possible to import and we can all see what actually happens with the timeline at that point. Whether that happens or not depends on what the status is on acceptance of FCPX as an editor in those worlds come a year from now.”

I think it’s almost certain that some third party will build an import tool. There’s too much demand for someone not to try and fulfill it.

[David Roth weiss]

[Bill Davis] “for me, this debate is remaining far too long in a place where people seldom interested in a rational discussion of the whys and wherefores – but rather just REACTING angrily to a changing game.”

Bill,

Everyone on this forum heard your message loud and clear by about the seventh or eighth time you repeated it, it’s getting old now that you’ve reached your fortieth repeat.

Okay, we get it, we understand that you’re the official Miss Manners here, arbiter of that which is timely, correct, and well-mannered, and that we must all listen when you dictate when the “official period” of X mourning should end.

Now that you know we’ve all heard you, would you mind kindly ceasing the insertion of all the capitalized crap that you try to pound into us, such as: “HUGE, BIG TIME, IS, REACTING, WOULD, WAY, RESEARCH, etc., etc., etc.?

David Roth Weiss
Director/Editor/Colorist
David Weiss Productions, Inc.
Los Angeles
https://www.drwfilms.com

Don’t miss my new tutorial: Prepare for a seamless transition to FCP X and OS X Lion
https://library.creativecow.net/weiss_roth_david/FCP-10-MAC-Lion/1

POST-PRODUCTION WITHOUT THE USUAL INSANITY ™

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

[Gary Huff]

I think that really depends on a lot of things. Apple has still to release the APIs to make that possible for one. I’m not sure what is out there regarding the FCP7 project file data structure. If there’s nothing official, then it will have to be “hacked” essentially in order to be read. If, by the time this has all happened, FCPX is a wash for use in those production houses that have a vested interested in opening legacy projects, it may not be financially viable to do.

So, it largely remains to be seen what happens.

[Thomas Frank]

Hmmmm why dint we all get to gather with some prodigy programers make our own NLE program?
Man we could cretae the perfect tool the best from Avid (like the name Vida) 😉 Premiere Pro, Smoke, Final Cut Pro and Media100!
Oh yeah make it a streamline interface like cinema 4D and multi platform so it looks a like and feels the same on any OS!
Why not? Oh yeah the Blender in the NLE world! 🙂

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Gary Huff]
“Video 3]_____________________<———->________________
Video 2]___________________<——->_________<——->___
Video 1]<————————————————>
Audio 1]<————————————————>
Audio 2]_____________<–>___________<–>___<–>_________
Audio 3]_________________<——–>______________________”

This is where it gets weird. So, in FCPx terms, V1 and A1 are essentially the primary storyline?

My first questions is, what if they aren’t? Then what does FCPx do?

In order for a dissolve to happen on anything that’s not in the primary storyline, it needs to be on a secondary storyline, so on your v2 and v3 where both of those tracks overlap, you would need to create a compound clip within the secondary storyline, but what if that’s not the intent (meaning maybe v2 and v3 both have transparency and are creating a composition)? What if all you want to do is dissolve from v2 to v3? Then you can simply add a secondary storyline with no compound clip, and add a cross dissolve between the two elements. Another scenario is, are they simple connected clips? Then they would have to have opacity transformed applied to them instead of dissolves. How does FCPx know which one to use?

What if you don’t need a dissolve or you decide to do it through opacity transforms? Then there’s no need for a secondary storyline. So how does the XML tell FCPx this? Quite simply, it doesn’t. It is here that FCPx has to make some sort of guess and right there is where the information might get “lost”.

Also, little things like Motion tab transforms, audio/video filters and the like will probably not translate directly or at all, but to me it is more about how the layers from FCP7 will translate to FCPx.

I agree, that it would be easy to just being everything that’s not v1 in as connected clips in time (FCPx still has a timer, a clip @ 1 second in FCP7 can come in to FCPx @ 1 second as well), but you would start to lose meaning if there’s dissolves involved.

Also, there’s the audio. Does the V2 track have audio? DO you then bring in the audio embedded to the video? Or is it a totally separate clip in which case, it will simply be an audio element tied to the primary storyline.

I do think there will be some translation programs written, but I am sure there will be a bit of work once it is in FCPx to bring it back to the editor’s FCP7 intentions.

What I find weird is the “before and after” picture that Apple used at the Supermeet. Essentially they said, here’s the timeline in FCP7, and here’s the same timeline in FCPx. Any questions?

That was a bit of a tease.

[Herb Sevush]

Jeremy –

Assume in any of your scenarios that the translation guessed wrong, that what should have been a connected clip was put on the second storyline, or vice-versa. How hard would it be for the editor to manually fix things, now that the basic clip info was in the project? (that is a real, not rhetorical, question, I personally have no idea.)

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Herb Sevush] “How hard would it be for the editor to manually fix things, now that the basic clip info was in the project?”

It really depends on the complexity of the project and how it was laid out in FCP7 and what the intention of the clips are.

I would think the easiest thing to do would be to bring anything that is not on v1 and the embedded audio attached to v1 as connected clips. You would then translate dissolves to other layers as opacity transforms. All “non-embedded” audio would come in as connected clips.

I think this would give you the most “bare bones” translation, meaning, it’s the closest thing to breaking apart all the layers in a way that makes sense in FCPx as you are going to get. From there, as the editor, you might have to make some adjustments (adding secondary storylines, make compound clips etc., whatever makes sense for the piece). If the translation program does less guessing and more simplification, then I think it’s best in the long run for the FCPx editor. If it’s a complex edit with multilayer composites, then perhaps it won’t be. Even in that case, I still think laying out the “layers” as simply as possible is the “best” way, but time and testing will tell I’m sure.

[Gary Huff]

[Jeremy Garchow]My first questions is, what if they aren’t? Then what does FCPx do?

FCPX importing a FCP7 project would make Video 1 the primary and Video 2 secondary and so on. I’m not sure what the problem is. As long as the layering of the videos remain intact, the edit will work.

What if all you want to do is dissolve from v2 to v3? Then you can simply add a secondary storyline with no compound clip, and add a cross dissolve between the two elements. Another scenario is, are they simple connected clips? Then they would have to have opacity transformed applied to them instead of dissolves. How does FCPx know which one to use?

I’m not sure what you are getting at here. The same problems occur because you can’t add a transition between a clip in V2 and V3. You’d have to alter opacity handles, which can easily be translated into FCPX, because you can do the same effect. You could even default to relating all Video tracks as secondary storylines and be done with it, and then fix it as you want. I don’t see how this would effect being able to easily make changes to a legacy timeline in FCPX.

Also, little things like Motion tab transforms, audio/video filters and the like will probably not translate directly or at all, but to me it is more about how the layers from FCP7 will translate to FCPx.

Yes, but this would be the case with any importer (it will be similar in going from FCP to Premier for instance). I don’t think the layering of the video will be difficult at all in translating a timeline from FCP7 to FCPX.

Also, there’s the audio. Does the V2 track have audio? DO you then bring in the audio embedded to the video? Or is it a totally separate clip in which case, it will simply be an audio element tied to the primary storyline.

It would be an audio element tied to the primary storyline. I’m not saying that clip connections might not be odd, but as long as everything runs at the appropriate moment in the timeline, the edit should be good. The problems will be in the connections, and that’s either going to be an easy fix or not, meaning that FCPX is either easy to work with and makes changes in or not.

[Jeremy Garchow]

[Gary Huff] “FCPX importing a FCP7 project would make Video 1 the primary and Video 2 secondary and so on. I’m not sure what the problem is. As long as the layering of the videos remain intact, the edit will work.”

But what if it makes more sense that the music is the primary storyline? Or the VO, which is not on V1 or A1? Then what? It can be a problem.

[Gary Huff] “I’m not sure what you are getting at here. The same problems occur because you can’t add a transition between a clip in V2 and V3. You’d have to alter opacity handles, which can easily be translated into FCPX, because you can do the same effect.”

I understand and outlined that, but what if that’s not what’s needed or what’s “best”?

[Gary Huff] “I don’t think the layering of the video will be difficult at all in translating a timeline from FCP7 to FCPX.”

To me, that will be the most difficult. Filters and transforms can be ignored. As far as the connection points, those can be easily fixed as well, once the timeline is in FCPx.