The prospect of not being able to migrate projects from legacy FCP to FCP X was, shall we say, daunting. For some editors the ability to open FCP 7 projects in FCP X is a prerequisite. It’s certainly an area I’m acutely interested in and those of you who’ve read earlier posts will know that I’ve been experimenting for a while with the solutions brought forward by Automatic Duck, CatDV and DaVinci Resolve for FCP X interchange. As of yesterday, there is another tool to add to the collection: 7toX for Final Cut Pro.

The key to the whole process is FCPXML and the update in the newly released Final Cut Pro X 10.0.3 means more information can be transferred between applications. 7toX is extremely easy to use. All you really need to know is that it works really rather well. Genius.

Exporting XML from FCP 7

1. Open a Final Cut Pro 7 Project file.



(Though this is a relatively simple sequence with a single text generator, audio fades, slugs and a couple of transitions, I can report success with more complex projects. For a full list of compatible features see the Intelligent Assistance web site.)

2. Select the Browser window and choose Edit > Deselect All (⇑⌘A) to ensure that nothing is selected.



3. Select File > Export > XML.
4. Confirm that all of the items to be exported are listed amongst the sources in the Export XML dialogue box and Apple XML Interchange Format, version 5 is selected.
5. Click OK.



6. Enter a meaningful name and choose an appropriate destination to save the file.
7. Click Save.

Once the XML file has been exported from FCP 7 it must be converted to the format required by FCP X. This is where 7toX does the heavy lifting.

Translating XML with 7toX for Final Cut Pro

1. Launch the 7toX for Final Cut Pro application.
2. Select the FCP 7 XML file.
3. Click the Open button.



4. Select the Send to Final Cut Pro X option and click OK.



A new event containing the clips, sequences and bins from the FCP 7 project is instantly added to the FCP X Event Library.

Of course the sequence has been transformed into a compound clip and the bins to Keyword Collections. I did mention 7toX was clever. It doesn’t stop there however, there’s still more to see.

Exploring the Details of 7toX

It goes without saying that the key to the successful interchange of projects between systems lies with the fidelity of the translation. 7toX provides some elegant solutions to overcome the vast differences between FCP 7 and FCP X.

• Each bin from the FCP 7 project is transformed into a Keyword Collection.



• Range-based Keywords (identified by a blue line across the top of the clip) have been applied to show which sections of a clip have been used in the Timeline.



• Select a Keyword Collection to view only the ranges.



• There is a separate Keyword Collection for the compound clips 7toX created from sequences in the FCP 7 project.

All of this translation is extremely useful, but there’s still more to the work undertaken by 7toX.

Editing a Compound Clip

1. Select the compound clip in the Event Library and edit it into a Timeline.
2. Right-click the compound clip in the Timeline and choose Break Apart Clip Items (⇑⌘G).



The compound clip reverts to the individual clips and arrangement from the FCP 7 sequence.



Several items including transitions, keyframes, text and generators transfers. Depending on the structure and features utilised in the FCP 7 project there may be additional work required to fully transfer the sequence to FCP X. To help with this process 7toX has added To Do Markers at points where further attention is required.

3. Open the Timeline Index and ensure that the Tags option is selected.
4. Select individual markers to navigate the Timeline.



5. Double-click a Marker to review translation details.



6. Select the Completed checkbox once the clip has been appropriately fixed.

The nature and scale of the work in broadcast and film usually requires many hands, numerous specialist workstations and purpose built rooms. In that environment the ability to move projects and timelines between different applications is a core requirement. It was important that FCP 7 do this and it’s just as crucial for FCP X. 7toX for Final Cut Pro provides a means of translation that’s both fast and accurate. I know I’m not the only one who knows that is exactly what’s needed.

The ability to export and import XML (Extensible Markup Language) files is a key component of many existing workflows and something a lot of Final Cut Pro editors rely on today. In large part, the foundation of the Final Cut Studio ecosystem was built on the interchange of XML files between different applications. For those of us who were startled by the omission in June release of FCP X, the absence will perhaps become notable for how short-lived it was. It seems clear Apple would like us to view the 10.0.1 update to Final Cut Pro X as a signal of intent.

Before we consider the function(s) of XML in contemporary workflows, it may be useful to understand where the impetus to transfer projects originates and identify the issue XML attempts to address. As we all know, historically the film and television industries have relied on dedicated technologies for specific tasks. For years the fabled Edit Decision List (EDL) has been the tool used to recreate projects on different systems — to grade the picture or mix the sound, for example. The EDL has been around for a long time and is regarded by many as antiquated, but it’s survived and is featured in a whole host of current applications you’ll be aware of, including Resolve, Scratch and Smoke. By design an EDL is intended to reduce a project to its core components — reel and timecode data. It’s intentionally minimal, restricted to the essential information necessary to describe and recreate the edited timeline. It may seem blunt, but by and large it works. Its longevity is rooted in its simplicity.

XML on the other hand is far more sophisticated in what it is able to describe. As a result we can use it to transfer all sorts of data. Indeed anyone who has experienced the Final Cut Pro 7 to Color 1.5 round-trip workflow will have marvelled at the depth and complexity of information that flows between the two applications. Alongside the Final Cut Studio workflows, third-party developers like Automatic Duck, Digital Heaven and Intelligent Assistance have created numerous products to augment our toolset by utilising XML in clever and powerful ways. (To get a sense of what I mean you should take a look at Digital Heaven’s AutoMotion in action.)

Markup Instructions

To properly understand the nature of XML, it may be prudent to consider what we actually mean by markup language. As Philip Hodgetts notes in his 2007 article on XML and Final Cut Studio, markup predates the digital systems with which we’re familiar. Like Philip, we may commonly associate the practice with the layout of type for newspapers and magazines, but in fact, the act of “marking up” manuscripts dates back centuries.

Traditionally markup refers to the process of labelling or annotating text with instructions for the typesetter — which typeface to use, the style and size of the letters. Today we’re all used to the process of highlighting text in a word processor to change its appearance. We might italicise a sentence to add emphasis or if we’re feeling fancy, create a special look for headings so to distinguish them from the main body of a document (just as I have done in this article). We do this to give our documents a structure. Of course, most modern software is WYSIWYG and will create the necessary instructions behind the scenes to keep it from becoming a distraction. Because the application is doing all of the work we rarely have to trouble ourselves with the intricacies of the markup language that defines the structure and layout of our documents. Given that, we must cast a little wider to see where else we might encounter a markup language. This is where the years I spent teaching web development become useful! When I began creating content for the web, the first step was to learn to code HTML. Fortunately for me, the rules weren’t too difficult to grasp and the number of elements you needed to grapple with was finite.

Adding HTML Tags

The first thing you need to understand about HTML is that it uses tags, defined by angle brackets (< and >). These are used to isolate particular sections of a document. Each instruction looks like the sort of a label you’d attach to a suitcase. (You might need to squint a little.)

Tags operate as containers. They require both an opening and closing statement. Each tag features an element, which is the specific instruction and the closing tag includes a termination symbol (/). For example, if you wish to identify text as a paragraph, in HTML, you need to enclose words with the p tag element:

<p>This sentence has been tagged with HTML to define a paragraph.</p>

Notice that the tags open and close. Anything between the tags is labelled by the rule you’ve created.

Creating Structure

Now without wanting to attempt to teach HTML in a single post, let’s take a look at slightly more involved example involving HTML list tags:

This code define two distinct ordered lists (ol). Each list contains three list items (li). Again notice how each tag opens and closes, as well has how the <li> tags are contained within the <ol> tags. When we render the HTML, it would look something like this:

1. Red
2. Green
3. Blue

1. 720 x 576
2. 1280 x 720
3. 1920 x 1080

You can see immediately how intelligent these lists are. The structure of the code means that each item is numbered in the appropriate order. If I were to insert more items the numbers would adjust accordingly.

It’s vital that the code I write is well-formed. This means I open and close each tag in order. If I accidentally create overlapping tags the results will be unpredictable and may force an error.

Whilst HTML is very good at structuring documents, the labels we use to define the lists don’t have any meaningful connection to the content. The code used in both instances is identical, yet in my example we recognise lists containing colours and frame sizes. There’s simply no way for me to specify the difference within the code. That finite collection of tags that made HTML so easy for me to learn can only take us so far. This is not so surprising if we understand that HTML was originally created to support the electronic transfer of technical documents. The need to create more meaningful, semantic data structures leads us to XML, a markup language in which you define the tags you use.

Meaningful Structure

If I had the power to define my own tags for the two lists, it would make sense to create elements that relate explicitly to the content:

The above example the code is easy to read by humans and each tag relates meaningfully to the content. By harnessing the power of XML in this way I’m sure you can imagine how you can begin to describe all manner of objects. This is what’s happening in FCPXML.

Writing FCPXML

You can use any text editor to write XML, you just need to be able to save your document as a plain text file. TextEdit will do this, or if you prefer a dedicated application, there are a number of excellent tools available, including the free, TextWrangler.

In this exercise, derived from example code available in the Final Cut Pro X XML Format document, we’re going to create an FCPXML file that will import a video file, create an Event and Project and insert a portion of the clip into the timeline.

Download Project Files

1. Create a new document in the text editor of your choice.
2. Enter the first fcpxml tag elements.
<fcpxml>
</fcpxml>

You’ll find it easier to open and close the tags as you go — remember tags operate as containers.

3. Add the version attribute to the fcpxml tag element.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
</fcpxml>

Though the rules of XML permit exceptions, attributes typically exist as name and value pairs. In this case, version is the attribute name and 1.0 is the value. Note the quotes around the value, this is required by the XML specification. We use this attribute to declare which version of FCPXML we’re using.

4. Insert project tag elements between the fcpxml tags.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
<project>
</project>
</fcpxml>

Again note that the tags open and close and that the project tags are nested between the fcpxml tags. This code is well-formed.

5. Add the name attribute to the project tag element.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
<project name=”London Eye Project”>
</project>
</fcpxml>

The value of the name attribute will become the name of our project in FCP X. Feel free to call it whatever you like as long as you keep the value within the quotes.

6. Insert the open and close resources tag elements between the project tags.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
<project name=”London Eye Project”>
<resources>
</resources>
</project>
</fcpxml>
7. Add the projectRef tag element between the project tags.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
<project name=”London Eye Project”>
<resources>
<projectRef/>
</resources>
</project>
</fcpxml>

The projectRef element is an example of an empty tag — one that does not have a separate close tag. Note the termination symbol is included within the tag.

8. Insert id and name attributes to the projectRef tag.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
<project name=”London Eye Project”>
<resources>
<projectRef id=”myEvent” name=”London Sights Event”/>
</resources>
</project>
</fcpxml>

The projectRef tag element has two separate attribute pairs. The id attribute is used by Final Cut Pro whenever it needs to refer to, or identify the Event the project is associated with. The name is used to assign the name to the Event you’ll see within FCP X when the FCPXML file is imported.

9. Insert an asset element after the projectRef tag.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
<project name=”London Eye Project”>
<resources>
<projectRef id=”myEvent” name=”London Sights Event”/>
<asset id=”myVideo” projectRef=”myEvent” src=”file:/Volumes/PostPostMedia/LondonEye.mov”/>
</resources>
</project>
</fcpxml>

The asset is another empty tag. It features an id attribute, which will be used to identify the video later, a projectRef attribute which we use to associate the video with our existing event (Note that the value is the same as our earlier event) and a src attribute which contains an absolute path, or URL to the video file you’d like to import.

It’s crucial that the path is correct and that it features no spaces. If there are spaces you need to replace them. For example:

file:/Volumes/PostPostMedia/London Eye.mov

should be written as:

file:/Volumes/PostPostMedia/London%20Eye.mov
10. Add a format element after the asset tag.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
<project name=”London Eye Project”>
<resources>
<projectRef id=”myEvent” name=”London Sights Event”/>
<asset id=”myVideo” projectRef=”myEvent” src=”file:/Volumes/PostPostMedia/LondonEye.mov”/>
<format id=”myFormat” name=”FFVideoFormat720p25″/>
</resources>
</project>
</fcpxml>

As before, format is an empty tag. It also features an id attribute, which will be used to identify the video format again further down in the code. It also includes a name attribute. A list of format values can be found in the Final Cut Pro X XML Format document. Needless to say you should pick the format that’s appropriate to your video!

11. Insert open and closing sequence tag elements after the close resources tag.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
<project name=”London Eye Project”>
<resources>
<projectRef id=”myEvent” name=”London Sights Event”/>
<asset id=”myVideo” projectRef=”myEvent” src=”file:/Volumes/PostPostMedia/LondonEye.mov”/>
<format id=”myFormat” name=”FFVideoFormat720p25″/>
</resources>
<sequence format=”myFormat” tcStart=”36000″>
</project>
</fcpxml>

The format attribute refers back to the setting we specified in the previous tag. The tcStart attribute specified the starting time of your timeline in seconds (36000 = 10 hours = 10:00:00:00. If you’d like your timecode to start at 01:00:00:00 use a value of 3600 seconds).

12. Add open and closing spine elements between the sequence tags.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
<project name=”London Eye Project”>
<resources>
<projectRef id=”myEvent” name=”London Sights Event”/>
<asset id=”myVideo” projectRef=”myEvent” src=”file:/Volumes/PostPostMedia/LondonEye.mov”/>
<format id=”myFormat” name=”FFVideoFormat720p25″/>
</resources>
<sequence format=”myFormat” tcStart=”36000″>
<spine>
</spine>
</project>
</fcpxml>

The spine tag element defines the Primary Storyline in your FCP X timeline.

13. Insert open and closing video elements between the spine tags.
<fcpxml version=”1.0″>
<project name=”London Eye Project”>
<resources>
<projectRef id=”myEvent” name=”London Sights Event”/>
<asset id=”myVideo” projectRef=”myEvent” src=”file:/Volumes/PostPostMedia/LondonEye.mov”/>
<format id=”myFormat” name=”FFVideoFormat720p25″/>
</resources>
<sequence format=”myFormat” tcStart=”36000″>
<spine>
<video ref=”myVideo” duration=”3s”></video>
</spine>
</project>
</fcpxml>

This places a specified video clip into the Primary Storyline. The ref attribute in the video tag is used to refer back to the video file we imported and the duration attribute trims the clip to a specified length (3s = 3 seconds).

14. Save your document as PostPostImport.fcpxml. The filename is not important, but it’s a good habit to name files like this meaningfully. The .fcpxml extension is very important though. Without this Final Cut Pro X will not be able to import the file.
15. Make sure your storage is connected (or open the sparse image file included with this tutorial).
16. Launch FCP X and choose File > Import > XML.



17. Select the PostPostImport.fcpxml file.
18. Confirm that the correct Storage Location is selected and click the Import button.



Final Cut Pro should import the video file into a new event. It should also appear in the timeline of a new project, trimmed to the duration you specified in the code. The timeline should also begin at the timecode value you assigned in your code.

As you can see a few short lines of code can be immensely powerful. The next step is for developers to take these new tools and explore different ways the data can be manipulated. If you’ve made it this far I imagine that you’ve already read Philip Hodgett’s article, Why is it so hard to convert FCP 7 XML to FCP X XML?, which outlines some of the challenges faced by developers working on XML solutions for FCP X today.Smoke, Resolve and CatDV have already announced support for XML interchange with Final Cut Pro X. Curiously these are the very same applications I have busied myself learning these past few months. Now that XML support is there it seems FCP X has decided to become my companion on this journey into new worlds.

In legacy versions of Final Cut Pro you could apply a Broadcast Safe filter to any individual clip or Nested Sequence. It was always important to apply the filter last to prevent any subsequent changes overriding the limiting effect of Broadcast Safe. In Final Cut Pro X you can also apply the new Broadcast Safe effect to a clip or a Compound Clip. However any corrections you make to an individual clip appear to be applied after Broadcast Safe in the effects pipeline. As before any adjustments you make afterwards will overrule the effect and if you’re not careful you could push the clip outside the regulatory requirements.

Lifting Highlights

1. Select a clip in the Timeline.
2. Choose Window > Show Color Board [⌘6].
3. Click Exposure to select the Exposure pane [^⌘E].
4. Choose Window > Show Video Scopes [⌘7]
5. Select the Waveform scope from the settings pop-up menu.



Tip: You can use the keyboard to navigate directly to the Waveform scope with the command: ⇑⌘7.

6. Drag the Highlights slider up to increase the brightness of the clip outside the broadcast safe range (past 100 IRE on the Waveform scale).

Applying Broadcast Safe to Individual Clips

1. Choose Window > Media Browser > Effects to open the Effects Browser [⌘5] (or click on the Effects button in the toolbar).
2. Select Basics category and double-click the Broadcast Safe effect to apply it to the selected clip.



3. Choose Window > Hide Color Board [⌘6] to return to the Video inspector.
4. Confirm that the Broadcast Safe Fix Method parameter is set to Reduce Luminance.



In this context the Broadcast Safe effect will not bring the highlights down within legal limits. To properly benefit from the application of the Broadcast Safe effect you need to collect your footage together in a Compound Clip.

5. Click to select the Broadcast Safe effect in the Video inspector and choose Mark > Delete [←] to remove the effect.

Applying Broadcast Safe to Compound Clips

1. Click in the Timeline and choose Edit > Select All [⌘A].



2. Choose File > New Compound Clip [⌥G] (or right-click one of the selected clips and choose New Compound Clip from the menu).



3. Double-click the Broadcast Safe effect to apply it to the selected Compound Clip.
4. Skim through the clip to see that the problem clip has been adjusted and the luminance is now safely within legal limits.

In many ways the steps of applying Broadcast Safe to a Compound Clip mirror a technique we would commonly use with nested sequences in legacy versions of Final Cut Pro. The key is to understand that in both situations the order in which effects are processed defines the final outcome. With FCP X corrections you make to individual clips are addressed after all of the effects. By applying an effect to a Compound Clip you ensure it appears after any effects on individual clips in the render pipeline. In the case of Broadcast Safe this is the best way to achieve predictable results.

As Patrick Inhofer laments the passing of Color, my thoughts turn to the other applications we appear to have lost this week. Soundtrack Pro, DVD Studio Pro, Final Cut Server and Final Cut Pro 7. As a trainer and consultant my job involved helping people understand how these tools could enhance their workflow and create new possibilities for their projects. Latterly with Final Cut Server I had spent time helping these same people understand the importance of preserving their creative work. Not just keeping it, but making it accessible.

I do understand that software comes and goes. The best one can hope for is that the files are of a sufficiently open standard and that translation tools exist should an ignominious fate befall your tool of choice. Regarding this week’s news my friends at Meta Media Technologies have immediately declared a commitment to help creative companies transition with Final Cut Pro and Object Matrix have announced support for Final Cut Server migration. I’m sure others have similar intentions and I know I’m already embroiled in all sorts of discussions — it’s been rather a long week!

The thing is, you’ve probably guessed by now, I’m not really writing about software. I’m writing about our work. Our collective legacy. A few weeks ago I posted an entry about the importance of creating sustainable, well organised Libraries. At the time I was feeling encouraged by what we had seen of the Events Library in FCP X and had begun dreaming of what that might mean for Final Cut Server catalogues. It seems we’ll never know. In that piece I also wrote about the importance of preserving our media heritage. From home movies to mainstream, big budget media we should be concerned about preserving our stories. That’s what I really care about. It’s what I think we should all care about.

Metadata in FCP X is a great first step. I’d like a means of cataloguing and sharing that information amongst collaborators. It’s my hope that changes to the FCP project structure, while sealing the fate of Final Cut Server, will lead to a new, more robust media asset management system. One can dream.

This time next year (or perhaps sooner) we may all be merrily editing away with the Magnetic Timeline and watching the video playback on a calibrated reference monitor, quarrels about the feature set forgotten. I hope so. But we also need to make sure that we’re able to preserve our projects. Because they are our work. Our stories. The nomenclature of Final Cut Pro X actually recognise this. The developer team do understand. I know they do because open standards were the cornerstone of Final Cut Pro. I hope they understand that a project is never finished. That the work we create ought to live on. To achieve that sort of longevity, project files must to be both accessible and interpretable. We’re all depending on it.

UPDATE: Apple have published an FCP X FAQ, which explains that vast differences between FCP 7 and FCP X it may never be possible to update your legacy projects:

“Final Cut Pro X includes an all-new project architecture structured around a trackless timeline and connected clips. In addition, Final Cut Pro X features new and redesigned audio effects, video effects, and color grading tools. Because of these changes, there is no way to “translate” or bring in old projects without changing or losing data.”

UPDATE 2: In a post titled, Moving Forward, Larry Jordan recommends editors take action to ensure that they have a migration path for legacy FCP projects.

Amongst all the commotion this week the dearth of third-party tools for Final Cut Pro X is perhaps what I find most jarring about the release. While I might be interested and excited about some of the new tools, I don’t quite recognise FCP without the community of ancillary developers. Philip Hodgetts, who has managed to become ubiquitous in this story, makes several comments in his comprehensive “What are the Answers to the Unanswered Questions about Final Cut Pro X?” article. Perhaps most encouraging of all, he writes:

“[D]uring my direct briefing, the Apple folk made it abundantly clear that the ecosystem was very important to them, and that there will be a new, and much improved, replacement for the current XML workflow. That’s entirely consistent with what I’d heard pre-release that there would be a new form of XML and that it would be accessed by some sort of SDK (Software Developer Kit). This seems like encouraging news, even if it will mean a lot of extra work on our own software to ‘get back to where we are’. Unfortunately, access to these features is not available at today’s release, so we have to wait until Apple deem it complete enough to open to third parties like us at Intelligent Assistance.”

It may be very difficult to see envisage a happy ending today, especially if the absence of a specifc feature means you’re struggling to understand how FCP X fits into your workflow puzzle. I can only say that we’ve been here before. The web may not have been around to amplify the concern in the same way, or the pedigree of the existing product lead to such particular expectations, but the we ought to remember that the original FCP faced criticism and derision on release. Up until recently we were fairly sure we knew how that turned out.

As Philip suggests, I can’t imagine that it will be this way forever, indeed alongside the new features (Rigging, Publishing and FxPlug 2) in Motion 5, some third-party tools are already available and there are signs that developers are eager to move forward. Just how far there is to go and how long it will take is impossible to judge, but once this happens Final Cut Pro X might just emerge as an exciting and vibrant solution.

UPDATE: Paul Griffiths has written a thoughtful and provocative article, “Thoughts on FCPX after the London Supermeet”, in which he also raises the subject of thrid-party support. The comments are interesting too!

UPDATE 2: Jon Chappell of Digital Rebellion has just posted a fascinating article, “Final Cut Pro X from a Developer Perspective” in which he summarises some of the new features and opportunities available to third-parties with FCP X. It has to be a good sign when someone who has as much insight and experience is seeing positives. Jon also makes reference to the results of some digging by Chris Kenny. He also seems pleased with what he’s discovered.

Let nobody be in any doubt that Final Cut Pro X has arrived. And I’m not sure that anything will ever be quite the same again.

Even at this early stage, I think that it’s safe to say that FCP X is a phenomenon (my apologies to those still grieving the loss of Shake, I didn’t mean to stir bad memories). I certainly haven’t experienced anything quite like it before — perhaps the opening weekend of a big event movie, or ticket sales for a large stadium tour, or dare I say it, those lines we join around Apple Stores whenever a new iOS device is released. It might be difficult to gain proper perspective from inside the bubble, because I don’t actually believe FCP has the same mass appeal as the iPhone, but I do think something pretty significant happened today.

Courtesy of Apple

Alongside the initial rush to the Mac App Store to get the software, there’s been a flurry of “first look” reviews and Tweets galore. The thirst for information seems unprecedented, the Ripple Training servers appear to be groaning heavily under the volume of downloads and poor Larry Jordan had his server fall over completely at one point. Apparently he received 1.2 million requests in the first 3 hours following the release. Given that Apple were talking about an install base of 2 million in April, that’s really something else!

Now I haven’t yet used Final Cut Pro X enough to pass judgement and I promised myself that I would take my time. However as I sit here musing about the events of the day and reading the ongoing discourse around what might be right or wrong with the software, I can’t help wondering if we might be missing something of the larger picture. For example, a lot of the commentary has referred to the paucity of tape options in FCP X and how this confirms every suspicion we ever had about the lack of “pro” features. Well we’ve all read Philip Hodgetts on the death of tape (if you haven’t, you should), but even as we discuss how Final Cut Pro X could be the NLE for the next 10 years, it strikes me that what we’re really witnessing could be the end of broadcast television…

Earlier this week I had the good fortune of chatting with an editor who’s just wrapping up a video project to launch a new a high performance car. This advertisement had a budget of £1.5 million, but will never show on television, it’s been made specifically for the web. The thing is, this isn’t unusual, it’s rapidly becoming the norm. That conversation has helped put today’s events in some kind of perspective. Will we look back at this day as the moment a really big company made a clear signal of intent regarding the future of video content?

I may live to regret such grandiose thoughts, but as we move into the Morning After, I half expect to see a counter stamped at the bottom of the screen: Day Two.

Now I hate to be a spoilsport, but surely there’s a world of difference between suggesting the software will not work in a specific context and we will not know how to use it at first? To be fair to Larry, if you listen further I think he actually goes on to make this point himself when he says, we need to “make this work for us”. To miss the wider point you also have to ignore the moment at the beginning where Larry ponders, “maybe [FCP X] is the absolute pinnacle of professional applications”. The trouble is that if you take all of this on board, the headline isn’t quite as dramatic.

For the record, I meet editors everyday who are convinced Final Cut Pro 7 is completely broken until I help them understand how it actually works. I don’t see why FCP X should be judged to a different standard.

Whenever Final Cut Pro X becomes available, we’re going to have to learn how to use it. Those of us who want to edit with it most effectively will need to invest time and energy into that process of discovery. How steep and involved the learning curve will be remains to be seen. We just need to be clear about whether it’s the software or us that’s ready or not.

UPDATE: Just as I finished typing this entry Larry posted his own response to the furore, “Wiping Egg Off My Face” to say that since he gave the presentation he’s been persuaded otherwise.

© Mike Figgis

Needless to say I jumped at the opportunity to attend a Guardian Masterclass with Mike with both feet. So this past weekend I took myself on the EuroStar to Paris and had the pleasure of listening to him share some great stories about his experience and process.

In preparation for the class I spent some time revisiting Mike’s work and embarked on a bit of a Figgis marathon. While I’ve enjoyed watching the films again, it was reading his Digital Filmmaking book that stopped me in my tracks. There are lots of really great, challenging and provocative ideas expressed within the pages, but one observation seemed particularly apt:

“[T]he word ‘amateur’ isn’t used very much any more. Nowadays everyone is a filmmaker. There is an interesting reason for this. Back in the day, there were two very big factors that separated the amateur from the pro: money and technology. An amateur filmmaker shot Super-8, a pro shot on 16mm or 35mm. The difference in equipment and cost was huge. The price of a pro camera was prohibitive, and the cost of processing and post-production so high that only the very rich or professionals could afford it. But that world has now vanished, and along with it the label ‘amateur’.”
Mike Figgis, “Digital Filmmaking” Faber and Faber, 2007, p. 1.

Now this title was originally published in 2007. What is that in Final Cut years? For those of you keeping score, and to provide some context, it was the year FCP 6 was released and we first met Color, as well as the RED ONE and the iPhone. This was a time before DSLR video and the iPad. So much about the technology we use has changed in this time, yet, as I believe the discussion around FCP X has shown, a great many of us are labouring under the misapprehension that these labels still matter. And whilst we argue a generation of filmmakers have moved on.

As I find myself conducting a bit of a history lesson, we should acknowledge that for British filmmakers the seeds of this change were sown many years ago. If we look to the 1980s we see a similar discourse emerge around ACTT Workshop Declaration. Then as now, the mainstream, commercial industry was challenged by those with access to fledgling technologies and alternative ways of working.

Where does this leave us today? I don’t believe that there’s a definitive answer, but we must accept that digital technology has changed our world forever. It’s possible that we’re part of a cycle and that the bubble will burst, but short of one of those doomsday scenarios where all computers fail or the Internet gets unplugged, I’m not sure I would want to stake everything on that.

What I see is an expanding group of filmmakers, some of them well established figures like Mike Figgis or my friend, John Akomfrah, who are actively seeking alternative means to stay productive. The tools they embrace are changing the game. Rather than aspire for the big budget extravaganza, they’re choosing to tackle more personal projects that industry often considers too risky or lacking in commercial opportunity. Overall these filmmakers are happier to work with less money if it means they maintain creative control of the film.

In this space an efficient workflow becomes even more critical. FCP X may cost $299 when it arrives, this is great if you need to keep your costs down, but it’s only part of the story. How you make use of the software is going to matter too. When you attempt to work outside the mainstream you just don’t have the money to throw at difficult problems, especially those you haven’t anticipated. It becomes vital that you take time to properly understand the tools you’re using or find collaborators who do. In his book Mike suggests you treat all of the tools you use, even the inexpensive ones, with a “seriousness” that reflects the value you place on your work. I think it’s the relationship between cost and value that will define your experience FCP X.

The wait for news from Cupertino may continue, but it’s high time the debate moved on.

Filmstrip View in FCP X. Image courtesy of Apple.

As I’ve traversed these discussions, one of the features that appears to have polarised opinion is Filmstrip View in the Event Library. I understand Larry, for one, is reserving judgement, because he doesn’t think it is an effective way to display a large amount of clips. My immediate thought about that is, actually no matter how large the project becomes, when I’m editing I don’t actually want to see all of my footage at once. That can quickly become overwhelming. What I need is a way to narrow down the content, to sift through my footage, so that I only see whatever’s appropriate for the section I’m working on and the handful of clips I can choose from now. That’s how I’ve been working with Final Cut Server and the new tools in Final Cut Pro X seem to extend this concept further.

Of course for a lot of people the immediate point of reference for the Event Library is iMovie which includes dynamic filmstrips and skimming processes similar to those demonstrated in FCP X. I think that can nudge people towards feeling it lacks the gravitas required of a serious NLE. While I see that connection too, there’s something else, or more specifically, someone else that comes to mind.

I’ve had the pleasure of seeing Walter Murch speak on a few occasions and the honour of attending a special Master Class he taught a few years ago in Vancouver. You might argue that his approach is particularly idiosyncratic (whose methods aren’t when judged from the outside?), but I think we must all agree that his contributions to contemporary cinema are profound and there’s no-one more insightful, illuminating or provocative on the subject of editing films today.

You’ve probably already seen documentation of the “picture boards” Walter has mounted around his cutting room. Essentially they consist of vast collections of frames from the film he’s working on. Each image on the boards is intended to represent a significant aspect of the shot it’s taken from. The idea is that the boards facilitate a change in the editor’s viewpoint. From the vantage point afforded by this shift in perspective, the editor has the chance to make different casual connections or observe unexpected patterns in the footage.

Charles Koppelman, “Behind the Seen: How Walter Murch Edited Cold Mountain with Final Cut Pro and What this Means for Cinema” New Riders, 2004, p. 2.

In his 2004 book “Behind the Seen” Charles Koppelman describes the philosophy behind the picture boards in some detail:

“Ironically, the more techno-centric film editing gets the more powerful Murch’s custom-made innovations become. The organic qualities of the scene cards and photo boards compensate for perspectives that are hidden in the digital world. The efficiency, speed and increased choices of non-linear editing all have their benefits. But systems like Avid or Final Cut Pro obliterate some film editing tasks that contribute to the editor’s creative process. As Murch often points out, the simple act of having to rewind film on a flatbed editing machine gave him the chance to see footage in another context (high-speed, reverse) that could reveal a look, a gesture, or a completely forgotten shot. Likewise, the few moments he had to spend waiting for a reel to rewind injected a blank space into the process during which he could simply let his mind wander into subconscious areas. With random-access, computer-based editing, a mouse click instantly takes the editor right to a desired frame; there is no waiting, no downtime—and fewer happy accidents. The photo boards are one way to compensate for this.”
Charles Koppelman, “Behind the Seen: How Walter Murch Edited Cold Mountain with Final Cut Pro and What this Means for Cinema” New Riders, 2004, p. 142-143.

The serious editors amongst you might baulk at an idea as fluffy or new-age-sounding as “happy accidents” but when I’m feeling stuck anything that will help me breakthrough the block is a godsend. What I like about the picture boards — and I like them very much — is that they’re about changing how we view and understand the material we work with. They’re designed to spark our imagination, shift our perspective and in doing so inspire new ideas.

As demonstrated at the SuperMeet, the Event Library, through a multitude of features is intended to accelerate the editing process and provide that instant access to which Murch and Koppelman refer. While Filmstrips are clearly part of that re-imagined workflow, I also think that we’ll be able to use them to stimulate our creative process.

Creating a back-up of your data is one thing, we can all copy data and stockpile drives, it’s creating a searchable archive and keeping your data available that’s the real trick. Though often a much larger, more involved operation, creating a searchable library will extend the life of your work. As Nick from Object Matrix is wont to say, “if you can’t find it, you haven’t got it.” (If Nick ever tries this line on you, tell him from me that he owes you a drink. Though if you’re glancing sideways at the mountain of drives you’ve accumulated, I suspect you already know it’s time to act and you might want to consider buying him one…)

Before we go any further, it might be worth taking a moment to provide some context to help you understand how this all started for me and why I feel the way I do. Moving pictures are my passion. It’s been that way for as long as I can remember. (Given that you’re reading this post, chances are you’ve also spent a good many hours/days/weeks/years in darkened rooms, gazing up at the silver screen so you can appreciate what I’m talking about.) I chose to study film theory at university because I wanted to learn not just about how films are made, but the history of the medium, the development of different forms and how cinema affects our lives. As a young scholar there was a devastating moment where I discovered that what we understand as early film is such a small percentage of all the films that were made. These missing films have been “lost forever“. While we can all enjoy stories about rescued episodes of Doctor Who and the like, the reality is quite bleak. Moving forward the onus is on us to take the steps necessary to preserve our moving picture heritage.

Entities like the BBC Archive are one thing, but I have conversations about the long-term preservation of media with clients of all shapes and sizes. If our stories are to live on, it’s absolutely vital we consider how digital media assets are stored and accessed. There are tools out there, tried and true solutions, but the cost of establishing and maintaining a comprehensive and secure catalogue can be prohibitive. Indeed Larry Jordan recently lamented the lack of an affordable, user-friendly archive for smaller independent production companies. It becomes especially difficult to raise this matter in meetings when cost is the obstacle. As much as I might like to believe that expense is relative, the stark reality is that some companies are not in a position to make the necessary investment. Instead they gamble on the ubiquitous drive-on-the-shelf method. Only today I met a fellow who told me he’d think about an archive “in the future”. When I explained to him that actually it would be more prudent to address the issue now before he’s faced with a large amount of media and limited resources to process it all. He took my point, but may not act on it. It may seem trite, but when it comes to archives, it really is important to start as you mean to go on!

While we can discuss the merits and vagaries of different LTO, disk or Cloud based solutions for the media industry, we ought to acknowledge that the problem really extends a lot further. That is to say for many of us the situation permeates our home lives too. I’m sure I’m not the only one of us to have had a chat with family members about how to best preserve and manage photos or home movies. And if our mothers are asking, I think we can all agree the issue is pervasive!

So what can we do? And how does all this relate to Final Cut Pro X?

When it comes to the next version of FCP, Philip Hodgetts makes a convincing argument about why metadata is the key ingredient to help us establish and organise media libraries. More recently Alex Gollner has presented his theories about how FCP X could store information in a searchable, sharable database. I can’t help thinking those who have experience of the “digital lifestyle” applications have a bit of a jump on those of us who’ve only worked with Final Cut Pro (as we know it today). I don’t just mean iMovie editors either, for example folks who use iPhoto to organise and manage their picture libraries already understand about metadata tagging (date, location and face detection). They’re likely to have experience of sifting and sorting in a variety of ways and of using Smart Albums to create dynamic collections. As I’ve written before, from watching the SuperMeet Sneak Peek it very much looks like variations of these tools have been integrated into FCP X.¹

I know too many organisations that have valuable footage bundled into a cupboard or strewn across portable hard drives. Whenever someone is tasked with finding a specific clip, the mission may well be delivered on exploding tape. But if you take the time to tag your media with appropriate keywords, it becomes so much easier to find the footage you’re looking for, not just when you need it for the current edit, but in the future too. Metadata in this context becomes about extending the life of your work, keeping your media accessible and creating additional value.

A library isn’t just about the media we will create however, if we’re to avoid a repeating past mistakes, it ought to include the media we’ve already acquired. It’s on this point that I struggle most with the “tape is dead” argument. If we look to the past of video production it involves huge amounts of tape. It’s not just the broadcasters or established media organisations, this issue effects everyone with a home movie collection. Philip may contend, “[d]ropping old technology and moving to new” is in the DNA at Apple, but I wholly disagree that tape capture offers no “benefit… [to] the vast majority of FCP users in 2012.” Given the stakes involved, the shared heritage that would be otherwise jeopardised, we need the ways and means to work with tape. When I look at iLife those applications seem to be designed to embrace our human tendencies and help us find more efficient, elegant and fun ways to be creative, to manage our media and protect the files we value most. I’ll be intrigued to see if FCP X is disposed to take us down a similar path next month.

^1. Those familiar with iPhoto will have also encountered a button with the magic wand icon before…

[Disclaimer: I have no idea whether the magic wand visible in the FCP X Sneak Peek also means “enhance.”]