With the release Tuesday of Final Cut Pro 10.0.1, Apple added the ability to import and export XML files. While not a direct benefit to FCP X editors, indirectly, this is huge. Let me explain why.
Video, and film, editing is accomplished using a wide variety of software tools. I like to think of editing as a wheel, where the editing software is at the hub and lots of different specialized tools orbit around it. From Photoshop, to ProTools or Soundtrack Pro, to After Effects or Motion, Compressor, DVD Studio Pro…. well, you get the idea — it takes a whole suite to raise a project.
This was one of the big problems with FCP X at release — it offered a walled garden. As long as what you needed was in the program, you were fine. But if you needed to share files to other applications, you had problems. Basically, you couldn’t.
One of the most glaring omissions was audio mixing — we couldn’t get our audio out of FCP X into Soundtrack Pro or ProTools for an audio mix. Wes Plate and the talented folks at Automatic Duck came to our rescue with Pro Export FCP 5.0, which exported FCP X projects for ProTools. — http://www.automaticduck.com/products/pefcp/ —
But that solved only a part of the problem; it got us to ProTools, but we were still essentially caught inside FCP X.
With the release of FCP X 10.0.1, Apple provided the ability to export and import XML. XML is the interchange language of applications. From XML we can derive EDLs, OMFs, AAFs, and all the other acronyms we need to move files from one place to another.
However, there’s still a problem – XML is like language, there are variations. Which means that before we, as editors, can take advantage of this, developers need to work with it first.
Let me explain by way of an analogy. Think of XML as a tab-delimited text file (it isn’t, really, this is an analogy…). However, that file is written in French, while other applications expect the file to be in English. So, a developer needs to convert this XML format from the version exported by FCP X, into the version needed by their application.
Wednesday night, Philip Hodgetts, CEO of Intelligent Assistance, demoed a beta program they are developing that illustrates what this new XML feature provides. Philip showed how an FCP X project can be exported as XML, converted, then imported into FCP 7. From FCP 7, it can be sent to Soundtrack Pro for mixing, or ProTools via OMF, or Color for color correction, or any of the other applications that link in with FCP 7.
The program is called: “Project X27” and should be released in the next couple of weeks. It is SO new, in fact, it doesn’t have a webpage yet – when it does, you’ll find it at this website: — www. intelligentassistance.com —
I think this signals the tip of the iceberg where, finally, FCP X editors can start to share elements of their programs with the rest of the world. This still requires developers to do their part to support this, but the new XML export in FCP X 10.0.1 is the essential first step.
As always, let me know what you think.
Larry
38 Responses to The Beginning of Something Exciting
Newer Comments →-
Scott says:
September 23, 2011 at 2:14 pm
-
Larry says:
September 23, 2011 at 2:18 pm
-
Marcus R. Moore says:
September 23, 2011 at 2:40 pm
-
Larry says:
September 23, 2011 at 2:46 pm
-
Dave says:
September 23, 2011 at 4:10 pm
-
Jesse Koepke says:
September 23, 2011 at 4:51 pm
-
Larry says:
September 23, 2011 at 4:58 pm
-
Edgar says:
September 23, 2011 at 6:15 pm
-
Larry says:
September 23, 2011 at 6:21 pm
-
Dick Applebaum says:
September 23, 2011 at 6:30 pm
-
Edgar says:
September 23, 2011 at 6:33 pm
-
Larry says:
September 23, 2011 at 6:46 pm
-
Walter Biscardi says:
September 23, 2011 at 11:06 pm
-
Larry says:
September 23, 2011 at 11:19 pm
-
nickeditor says:
September 24, 2011 at 6:35 am
-
Larry says:
September 24, 2011 at 9:46 am
-
DRob says:
September 24, 2011 at 12:22 pm
Newer Comments →This sounds really good, Larry. Do you think this will also enable someone to create a way to export from FCP7 to FCPX?
The XML feature offers hope of that, but Apple so far says no.
Larry
I think someone will do it, but to some extent it will aways be a question of degrees. Because FCPX is “trackless”, some more complicated shows might be difficult or neigh impossible to accurately translate.
Larry, so do you see direct OMF export coming more from the developer-side than Apple? Different companies/programs may want to use the metadata differently- so it wouldn’t surprise me. It may even have to be independent developers, since I’m not sure how much motivation the ProTools team at AVID have to support FCPX…
Marcus:
Apple has been very clear from the beginning that they expect the third-party developer community to provide a lot of high-end tools. AJA, Blackmagic Design, Matrox for output to tape, for instance. Apple provides access thru XML — then the developers take over to convert that XML into their own systems.
Larry
The problem with all of this logic is, why would we be so excited that we now get to take our FCPX xml lose some of it’s features just to take it into dead programs. Color. Soundtrack. DVD Studio pro. How long will these keep working in Apple’s OS. Why are we creating back logs of projects that we can never get new features in the apps and one day, they just won’t work.
The whole concept of “I worked in FCP7, the next logical move is FCPX” just makes no sense. Any FCP7 editor could pick up Adobe Premiere Pro in a day or two and be working nearly up to speed. Final Cut X is a totally different workflow and still has glaring omissions in terms of pro features. Tape support, broadcast monitoring, multicam. Sure those things may come, but why wait for apple to play catch up. We’ve waited long enough. Sure FCPX has some cool features, but nothing is stopping Adobe or Avid to develop similar of better features that work within a normal editing paradigm that we are all used to as professional editors.
The adobe suite offers the editor, the compositor/graphics program, the photo editor, the sound program, the dvd program, and soon the color correction program. Every one of these tools is still being developed.
FCPX is for the time being anyway, a waste of time. If in 5 years from now, I want to switch back to it, I can export my PP project as xml and move on over. FCPX can’t even say that for FCP7 projects.
Let’s all just move on.
This is a funny quote about Philip Hodgetts: “Philip showed how an FCP X project can be exported as XML, converted, then imported into FCP 7. From FCP 7, it can be sent to Soundtrack Pro for mixing, or ProTools via OMF, or Color for color correction, or any of the other applications that link in with FCP 7.”
If we’re still needing to go out to Soundtrack Pro, Color, or DVD Studio Pro, why did Apple kill them off in the first place? Using the old version of FCP as a gateway to programs I need seems like a ridiculous solution.
Apple’s update for FCPX is definitely helpful and gets the program on the right track toward adding the functionality that my editing team needs. But before the developers get the XML languages right, it’d be great if Apple would.
Dave sums it up: “If in 5 years from now, I want to switch back to it, I can export my PP project as xml and move on over. FCPX can’t even say that for FCP7 projects.”
Jesse:
We can certainly debate why they were killed off. However, STP does better sound mixes than FCP X does, as of the current version. Same for ProTools. It is nice to know that we at least have the option to do the mix outside of FCP X. The new version of XML, with FCP X, provides far more capability than the version of XML shipped with FCP 7. From what I have been told, this version of XML is excellent. Now the developers need to get their hands on it to finishing connecting all the dots.
Larry
Larry,
I see that you didn’t mention “FoolCut AE.” Is that viable option? Where does that fit in the equation?
The author of FoolCut AE and I have been chatting, but I just have not had time to look at it. If it does what the author claims, it would be a very exciting alternative. It is on my list of “interesting products to check out ASAP.”
Larry
Larry,
I agree that its very important that Apple has provided a way to export and import media from/to FCPX via XML
However, the XML dialect that FCPX understands (fcpxml) is quite primitive — for those interested it is defined at:
http://developer.apple.com/library/mac/documentation/FinalCutProX/Reference/FinalCutProXXMLFormat/FinalCutProXXMLFormat.pdf
The reason I bring this up is that you can export and import the clips with their In/Out points — but that’s about all.
If you adjust the sound, or modify a title or effect then export/import round-trip to FCPX, the clip data is preserved but any “settings or modifications” (things you change in the clip display or “Info” windows data is reset to the default.
What you have, in effect, is lossy round-tripping.
In my opinion, this makes FCPX’s XML capabilities much less powerful than they could be!
Does that mean, that FCPX’s XML capability is worthless — far from it.
According to the fcpxml spec (linked above) this is version 1.0 of fcpxml.
Ahh… that old version 1.0 thing again.
But, it is a statement, a line in the sand, if you will.
I have been dealing with and observing Apple since 1978. Apple does some amazing and revolutionary things — that take years of behind-the-scenes effort.
They try to build incrementally, taking baby steps, gaining confidence, being in control.
I suspect that the 1.0 fcpxml dialect will be fleshed out as FCPX is enhanced — and we’ll get a very robust FCPX import/export capability.
When I discovered the limitations of the current fcmxml dialect, I began to submit bug reports (probably should have been enhancement requests). This is important. Apple needs to know what the issues are — if they are going to have any chance of correcting them.
Here’s the body of a bug report I submitted today:
1) You have a clip with the Mask effect applied.
2) You have arranged the OSC to expose portions of underlying clips
3) You export the Projext XML
4) You reimport the Project XML
5) A new Project is created
6) The clips are imported properly
7) The Mask is imported — but all the parameters are reset to their default values.
Upon examination of the exported fcpxml file, it shows that no Mask parameters were exported:
*
*
*
I think it is very important to submit feedback. There’s no guarantee that will address the issues– but they will read about them and know that they exist!
Dick
To be honest, I took a chance and bought it. I played around a little using a simple project from FCP X. Everything seem to come over into AfterEffects. I was even able to Dynamic link into Premiere Pro and wow there it was.. right in the timeline. Maybe, when you get a chance you could do a more involved test.
Thanks for the feedback. Looking at this app is on my list.
Larry
I just don’t see the logic here.
Apple releases a “brand new paradigm” but now someone has figured a way to go back to the “old paradigm” so you can talk to other applications. SoundTrack Pro, Color and DVD Studio Pro are all EOL so they are dead apps. But now we’re to get excited that instead of working in one Non-Linear Editing system, we can start in one, then export everything and then use a second Non-Linear system so we can finish a project or send it off for finish?
So what this “exciting new development” does is require you need to keep running dual NLE’s. From a business standpoint, why do I want to do this? Ok Editor 1, you’re done with the edit, it looks good, now I want you to export everything so we can open it in FCP 7 and then we can prep it to go into Color and so on.
No offense to Philip but this is not anything for large Post houses and Broadcasters to get excited about. This just creates a small tunnel to go under the wall that Apple has created with FCP X. All of these “solutions” are convoluted workarounds brought on by the very design of the application. Philip’s solution requires you to use two NLEs to do the work of one, there’s just no way to call this efficient or professional. Apple is leaning on someone like Philip to solve a tremendous problem they brought on themselves by not listening to the beta testers when they still had time to change the application.
In my case, we’re now starting to edit projects in Adobe Premiere Pro. We’ve already delivered projects to CNN and PBS from PPro and it’s working quite well. It’s an efficient workflow because one primary NLE talks to everything else.
As for moving FCP 7 projects forward to FCP X, it’s obvious that Sequences should be able to move forward and I’m quite surprised no one has come out with that one yet. But as far as the entire Project Structure including Bins, Sequences, and all organization, that just doesn’t seem possible with new operation of FCP X. So if all you need is a Sequence or two from your old project, you’ll be fine, but if you want the entire organization, that really doesn’t seem like it’ll ever happen.
It’s going to be a few years it seems until Apple unravels the mess of a position they put themselves in. I really don’t see the release of something that moves a project backwards into an old app as the “tip of the iceberg” for moving forward. For me it shows that Apple really has no idea of how to fix the complete mess that the trackless editing paradigm has brought to their application being accepted by the Post Production community. I fear we’re going to end up with dozens of applications and plug-ins that will need to be installed on every system just to ensure the system can sort of kind of talk to the other tools we use every day for projects.
Walter:
All good comments. My use of the “Beginning of Something Exciting” was not, specifically, related to moving FCP X to FCP 7. Rather, it was to try to explain the significance of why XML import/export is so important. XML is how FCP 7 talks to other apps in the Suite, it’s also how Premiere Pro talks to all the different apps in Production Premium. Without XML, no significant communication is possible. With XML, and the support of third-party developers, FCP X can finally communicate with the rest of the world.
Larry
Will we have to depend on third parties?
It’s like buying a “house” and move to find it with no doors and no windows and we have to find someone to put them. If we have a problem with a door or a window, what happens if who put it is no more? Would you go to claim the architect?
We also find that the price of the “house” is not real, is the price of the “house” plus the cost of the doors, plus the cost of the windows and cross your fingers in cause you do not miss something else.
That is the “house” that Apple sells when Apple sells Final Cut X: without doors and without windows.
Well…. I understand what you are saying, but I don’t agree with it. The reason FCP 7 is so valuable is the vast array of third-party plugins that work with it. This doesn’t mean FCP 7 isn’t valuable in itself, but what makes it so exciting is everything that connects to it. I would MUCH prefer a vibrant community of developers creating new filters, effects, plugins, hardware on a constant basis, than having to wait for Apple to create everything.
To expect one developer – say Apple – to create everything for the application, would make for a very dull application. Imagine what FCP 7 would be like with no plug-ins?
Larry
I agree with the “Beginning of Something Exciting” statement especially when it comes to third party developers and competition. Look at the plugin market for FCPX already. It seems as though Crumple Pop releases a new product every week or so. They’ve stated that they are 100% in when it comes to FCPX, which is very obvious. Red Giant have stated that they are in too and GenArt’s excellent Sapphire Edge plugins are already in beta. And there are others that are making quality plugins with very attractive pricing. This doesn’t even touch on how much more superior it is to actually use plugins/effects in FCPX compared to FCP 7.
I just did a VERY simple test with FoolCut AE and it works! More competition benefits the end user. It’s going to be very interesting to see Automatic Duck’s solution and especially their pricing. Speaking of, what would FCP 7 be for many users if it wasn’t for Pro Import AE? Remember, Apple only provided the infrastructure and Automatic Duck provided the solution. And that’s what Apple just did with the new XML in FCPX. It will be very telling to see how many third party solutions are available related to the XML import and export in the coming months.