Project Management migration

Migrate from ftrack to Microsoft Project

Field-level mapping, validation, and rollback between ftrack and Microsoft Project. We move data and schema; workflows are rebuilt natively in Microsoft Project.

ftrack logo

ftrack

Source

Microsoft Project

Destination

Microsoft Project logo

Compatibility

75%

9 of 12

objects map 1:1 between ftrack and Microsoft Project.

Complexity

BStandard

Timeline

3-5 weeks

Rollback included Accuracy guarantee Field-level validation

Overview

What this migration involves

Moving from ftrack to Microsoft Project is a domain shift from VFX production tracking to general-purpose project scheduling. ftrack's hierarchical data model (Project, Sequence, Shot, Task, Asset Version) maps to a much flatter structure in Microsoft Project: Projects hold Tasks, and Tasks hold subtasks. The review sessions, frame annotations, asset versions, and Location storage configuration that define ftrack's VFX workflow have no Microsoft Project equivalent—we flag these as write-only inventory for the customer's admin. We preserve task hierarchy by collapsing Sequences and Shots into Summary Tasks, map ftrack assignees to Microsoft Project Resources, and migrate custom attribute values into task custom fields. Note placement issues in ftrack's webplayer (where notes sometimes attach to the wrong task level) are resolved during the pre-import audit. Automations, review pipelines, and storage Location configurations do not migrate; we deliver a written inventory of these objects for the customer's team to rebuild or reconfigure in Microsoft Project manually.

Field-level fidelity

Every standard and custom field arrives verified.

Schema-aware mapping

AI proposes the map; you confirm before any record moves.

Relationships preserved

Parent–child, lookups, and ownership stay linked.

Full activity history

Calls, emails, meetings — with original timestamps.

Attachments & notes

Documents, uploads, and inline notes move with the record.

Why teams make this switch

Two sides of the same decision

Leaving

ftrack logo

ftrack

What's pushing teams away

  • Initial setup requires significant API scripting and custom pipeline integration, which strains smaller teams without a dedicated pipeline TD.
  • Regular ftrack updates occasionally break existing integrations and custom scripts, creating maintenance overhead that frustrates users.
  • Project navigation inside third-party integrations is described as poor, making it difficult to browse or update ftrack data from within DCC tools.
  • Notes posted in the webplayer sometimes attach to the wrong task level, requiring producers to manually verify and reassign them.
  • Storage configuration and Location management is complex for studios without a dedicated infrastructure engineer.

Choosing

Microsoft Project logo

Microsoft Project

What's pulling them in

  • Organizations already running Microsoft 365 and Azure AD adopt Microsoft PPM because it slots into existing identity, Teams, and SharePoint infrastructure without requiring a separate identity provider or SSO vendor.
  • Enterprise PMOs choose it for critical-path scheduling, baseline comparison, cross-project dependencies, and resource utilization reporting that standalone PM tools cannot replicate at this depth.
  • Project Online's integration with Power BI gives portfolio-level dashboards and cost-rollup reporting that satisfies executive governance requirements without third-party BI tooling.
  • Government, financial services, and healthcare organizations select it because FedRAMP, ISO 27001, and SOC 2 compliance certifications meet enterprise procurement requirements out of the box.
  • Large IT departments default to it as the market-leader in project portfolio management software, often driven by corporate licensing agreements that bundle it with other Microsoft 365 seats.

Object mapping

How ftrack objects map to Microsoft Project

Each row shows how a ftrack object lands in Microsoft Project, including any object-level transformations, lookup resolution, or schema-design dependencies.

Typical mapping — final map is confirmed during the sample migration step.

ftrack

Project

maps to

Microsoft Project

Project

1:1
Fully supported

ftrack Projects map directly to Microsoft Project .mpp files or Project for the web/Planner projects. Each ftrack Project becomes a single .mpp file or one Project Online project. Project-level custom attributes migrate to Project-level custom fields. We preserve the Project start date as the baseline and project status from ftrack's project-level metadata.

ftrack

Sequence

maps to

Microsoft Project

Summary Task

1:many
Fully supported

ftrack Sequences sit between Project and Shots in the hierarchy. When migrating, each Sequence becomes a Microsoft Project Summary Task grouped under the parent Project. Shots nested within the Sequence become child Tasks of the Summary Task. This preserves the creative production grouping without forcing the customer to rebuild Sequence-level task groupings manually.

ftrack

Shot

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task

1:1
Fully supported

ftrack Shots map to Microsoft Project Tasks at the same hierarchy level as Sequences' child level. Each Shot's name, status, and due date migrate to the Task name, percent complete, and finish date. Shot-level custom attributes migrate to task custom fields. Shot thumbnail references are not stored in Microsoft Project; we document the expected thumbnail path in the written inventory for the customer's reference.

ftrack

Task

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task

1:1
Fully supported

ftrack Tasks map to Microsoft Project Tasks with full parent-child hierarchy preserved. Task status, assignee, due date, notes, and custom attributes migrate. If a Task has no parent Shot (orphan task at project level), it becomes a top-level Task under the Project. Task notes migrate as Task Notes text field; ftrack note attachment misplacements are resolved during the pre-import audit.

ftrack

User / Assignee

maps to

Microsoft Project

Resource

1:1
Fully supported

ftrack Users assigned to Tasks as assignees map to Microsoft Project Resources. We extract the distinct assignee list from ftrack Tasks, match by email against the destination Resource list, and create Resource records with name, initials, and type (Material or Work). ftrack role names (e.g., 'Lead', 'Artist') migrate as Resource Notes for the customer's team to assign to Resource Groups.

ftrack

Note

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task Note

1:1
Fully supported

ftrack Notes on any entity (Project, Shot, Task) migrate to the Microsoft Project Task Notes field of the matching parent. A known ftrack webplayer behavior causes notes to attach to the wrong task level (topmost parent instead of intended child); we detect these mismatches during pre-import scope by comparing note context_id against the task hierarchy and re-associate them with the correct parent before writing. Notes that cannot be resolved are flagged in the written inventory.

ftrack

Custom Attribute

maps to

Microsoft Project

Custom Field

lossy
Fully supported

ftrack custom attributes (typed key-value pairs on any entity) map to Microsoft Project task custom fields using the closest equivalent type: text attributes map to Text fields, numeric to Number, date to Date, and dropdown options to dropdown custom fields. Hierarchical custom attributes that return raw values in the ftrack API (rather than inherited evaluated values) are flagged during scoping; we query the parent entity for the effective value and write that. Expression attributes are flagged as needing recalculation post-migration because the ftrack API returns only the unevaluated formula string.

ftrack

Task Status

maps to

Microsoft Project

Task Percent Complete or Flag

lossy
Fully supported

ftrack Task Statuses (configurable per project) map to Microsoft Project percent complete or a custom Flag field depending on status semantics. Status names with no exact Microsoft Project equivalent are flagged in the written scope for the customer to map manually before migration. The status schema variation between ftrack workspaces is handled per-project during scoping.

ftrack

Asset

maps to

Microsoft Project

Attachment (no equivalent)

1:1
Fully supported

ftrack Assets (published files or asset builds) have no Microsoft Project equivalent. Asset names, types, and metadata are exported as a written inventory document with expected file paths. The asset inventory lists which Assets belong to which Shot or Task so the customer's team can re-link attachments manually after migration. Asset version history is not migrated; the latest version reference is included in the inventory.

ftrack

Asset Version

maps to

Microsoft Project

Attachment (no equivalent)

1:1
Fully supported

ftrack Asset Versions have no Microsoft Project equivalent. Version numbers, file paths, and component metadata are included in the Asset inventory document with a reference to the parent Asset and Shot context. The customer manually re-attaches files or links to SharePoint after migration. Review session annotations linked to specific Asset Versions are documented separately in the written inventory.

ftrack

Review Session

maps to

Microsoft Project

No equivalent

1:1
Fully supported

ftrack review sessions with frame annotations and approval status have no Microsoft Project equivalent. Review session metadata (session name, date, participants, annotations list, approval decision) is exported as a written inventory document organized by Asset Version. Media files are not moved; the inventory references the expected media location for the customer's review team. We do not migrate review data as records.

ftrack

Location

maps to

Microsoft Project

No equivalent

1:1
Fully supported

ftrack Locations define storage configuration for studio infrastructure (cloud and on-premises paths, Python plugin logic for file transfer). These are studio-specific and have no Microsoft Project equivalent. We export Location names, path templates, and storage type as metadata in the written inventory. The customer's infrastructure team uses this to reconfigure any downstream storage integrations after migration.

Gotchas + challenges

What specifically takes care here

Platform-specific issues from each side, plus the pair-specific challenges that don't show up on either platform's page on its own.

ftrack logo

ftrack gotchas

Medium

Notes attach to wrong task level in webplayer

Medium

Hierarchical custom attributes return raw values in API

Low

Expression custom attributes not evaluated by API

High

Import wizard does not delete records

Microsoft Project logo

Microsoft Project gotchas

High

Project for the web is being retired and merged into Microsoft Planner

Medium

Planner-tier portfolio features are incomplete despite Plan 5 labeling

Medium

Web app constraint controls are weaker than the Windows desktop client

High

Project requires a separate license not bundled with standard Microsoft 365

Medium

Project Online API is edition-gated and inconsistently documented

Pair-specific challenges

  • Review sessions and frame annotations have no Microsoft Project home

    ftrack's core differentiator—browser-based media review with frame annotations, version comparisons, and approval workflows—has no Microsoft Project equivalent. Review session metadata, annotation coordinates, approval decisions, and participant lists cannot be written into Microsoft Project as records. We export this as a structured written inventory organized by Asset Version and Project, with expected file paths and participant lists. The customer's review team must establish a new review workflow (SharePoint, Frame.io, Cinematik, or another tool) post-migration. Skipping this step means losing the record of what was approved and by whom.

  • ftrack note attachment hierarchy mismatches must be corrected before import

    ftrack's webplayer sometimes posts notes to the topmost parent object instead of the intended child Task, creating orphaned or misplaced notes in the hierarchy. We detect these mismatches during pre-migration scope by comparing each note's context_id against the full task tree, re-associate notes with the correct parent Task, and flag any that cannot be resolved. If these mismatches are not caught and corrected, notes arrive in Microsoft Project linked to the wrong task or project, breaking the note trail that producers and leads rely on for production continuity.

  • Microsoft Project has no media file storage or location management

    ftrack's Locations feature manages multi-site storage configuration (cloud paths, on-premises file servers, automated cross-site file transfer) as studio infrastructure. Microsoft Project has no storage management—files attach to SharePoint or OneDrive or remain on local disk. The Location configuration, including Python plugin logic for file transfer automation, cannot be migrated. We export Location names, path templates, and storage types as metadata for the customer's infrastructure team to re-implement outside Microsoft Project.

  • Expression custom attributes must be recalculated post-migration

    ftrack expression attributes are calculated formulas (e.g., SUM, COUNT, date arithmetic) evaluated by the ftrack UI but not by the API. The API returns only the raw unevaluated expression string. We flag all expression attribute fields in the pre-migration scope and advise the customer that these values must be recalculated in Microsoft Project after import. If the expression performs a critical calculation (budget totals, asset counts, progress ratios), the customer should verify the recalculated values against the ftrack UI before going live.

  • Resource capacity and calendars require manual configuration in Microsoft Project

    ftrack assignees carry availability and role information but no capacity or calendar data. Microsoft Project Resources have independent calendars and capacity settings (hours per day, vacation, overtime). We create Resource records with names and types from ftrack assignees, but the customer's project manager must configure each Resource's calendar, max units, and cost rate in Microsoft Project before scheduling. For teams migrating from ftrack's Studio tier with time tracking enabled, the resource hours data is exported as a written reference for manual calendar population.

Migration approach

Six steps for a successful ftrack to Microsoft Project data migration

  1. Discovery and hierarchy audit

    We audit the source ftrack workspace across all projects, Sequences, Shots, Tasks, Assets, review sessions, and custom attribute schemas. We capture the full entity tree depth, note attachment integrity, assignee distribution, and custom attribute type definitions. This includes running the note-misplacement detection query against all Projects to flag notes attached to the wrong hierarchy level. The discovery output is a written migration scope that specifies record counts per object, hierarchy depth per Project, and any unmappable objects (review sessions, Assets, Locations) that become part of the written inventory.

  2. Microsoft Project environment setup

    We confirm the destination Microsoft Project tier (Project Plan 1, 3, or 5) and set up the Project structure. For Project for the web or Project Online, we create the project hierarchy; for Project Desktop, we prepare the .xml import structure. We define task custom fields to match the ftrack custom attribute schema, using the closest Microsoft Project type equivalents. Resource records are pre-created from the ftrack assignee list so that Task-Resource assignments resolve at import time. We document the calendar and capacity setup that the customer's PM must complete post-migration.

  3. Note hierarchy correction and expression attribute flagging

    We run the ftrack note placement audit to identify all notes attached to the wrong task level. Each mismatched note is re-associated with its correct parent Task in the export dataset before writing to Microsoft Project. Notes that cannot be resolved (orphaned notes with no identifiable correct parent) are listed separately in the written inventory. Expression attributes are flagged with their evaluated values (retrieved from the ftrack UI during discovery) so that the customer can set them manually in Microsoft Project after import.

  4. Sandbox or pilot migration

    We run a pilot migration of two to three representative Projects (one simple, one with deep Sequence-Shot-Task hierarchy, one with significant custom attribute usage) into a Microsoft Project test file or Project Online sandbox. The customer's project manager spot-checks 25-50 tasks per pilot project for name accuracy, hierarchy correctness, assignee assignment, due dates, custom field values, and note content. Any mapping corrections—wrong status mapping, missed custom field, hierarchy flattening issue—are addressed before full production migration. We do not proceed to production until the pilot is signed off.

  5. Production migration in dependency order

    We run production migration in hierarchy order: Projects first, then Summary Tasks (from Sequences), then Tasks (from Shots and standalone Tasks), then Resources (assignee resolution), then custom field values. Notes are written into the Task Notes field as the last step per project. Each phase emits a row-count reconciliation report before the next phase begins. Assets, Asset Versions, review session metadata, and Location configuration are exported as the written inventory document concurrently—not imported into Microsoft Project.

  6. Cutover, validation, and written inventory handoff

    We freeze ftrack writes during cutover, run a final delta migration of any records modified during the migration window, then enable Microsoft Project as the system of record. We deliver the written inventory of unmappable objects (review sessions, asset metadata, Locations) to the customer's team. We support a one-week hypercare window where we resolve any reconciliation issues raised by the project management team. We do not reconfigure Microsoft Project Resource calendars, build Power Automate workflows, or establish SharePoint document links inside the migration scope; these are separate configuration tasks for the customer's PMO or IT team.

Platform deep dives

Context on both ends of the pair

ftrack logo

ftrack

Source

Strengths

  • End-to-end production tracking from planning through review and final delivery in a single platform.
  • Interactive browser-based media review with annotation tools that clients and stakeholders can access without a full ftrack seat.
  • Python API with JSON-schema-based dynamic schemas that adapt to each workspace's custom entity types and attributes.
  • Locations feature for managing multi-site storage and automated file transfer across studio infrastructure.
  • Custom attribute system allowing studios to extend any entity type with project-specific fields.

Weaknesses

  • API performance degrades with deeply linked queries and large unfocused data fetches, requiring careful query optimization.
  • Hierarchical and expression custom attributes are not fully supported in the API, returning raw rather than evaluated values.
  • Initial deployment and ongoing maintenance require dedicated pipeline TD resources or significant scripting investment.
  • Webplayer note posting can attach comments to the wrong hierarchical level, creating data integrity issues.
  • Enterprise tier pricing is opaque and requires a sales contact, making it hard to budget for large studio deployments.
Microsoft Project logo

Microsoft Project

Destination

Strengths

  • Deep critical-path scheduling with baseline comparison and cross-project dependency tracking unmatched by lighter PM tools.
  • Native Azure AD authentication, Teams integration, and Power BI reporting sit on infrastructure enterprises already license and manage.
  • Enterprise governance controls including demand intake workflows, resource request approval, and portfolio-level capacity analysis.
  • Supports both Waterfall and Agile methodologies within the same project, accommodating hybrid delivery teams.
  • Scalable from Project Plan 1 for small teams to Project Server on-premises for regulated industries with strict data-sovereignty requirements.

Weaknesses

  • Ease-of-use scores trail the category average by a wide margin; onboarding friction frustrates new users consistently across G2 and Capterra reviews.
  • Pricing ranks 42nd of 49 tools in its category — the total cost of ownership including IT administration and training is rarely recovered for small or mid-market teams.
  • No built-in client portal, external stakeholder sharing, or proofing workflow, limiting use cases to internal PMO environments only.
  • The web interface (Project for the web / Planner Premium) has materially weaker constraint controls and resource auto-leveling than the Windows desktop client.
  • Project for the web is being consolidated into Microsoft Planner, creating uncertainty about which product tier will host project portfolio data long-term.

Complexity grading

How hard is this migration?

Standard Project Management migration. 1 of 8 objects need a mapping; the rest are 1:1.

B

Overall complexity

Standard migration

Derived from compatibility, mapping clarity, API constraints, and data volume across ftrack and Microsoft Project.

  • Object compatibility

    B

    1 of 8 objects need a mapping; the rest are 1:1.

  • Field mapping clarity

    C

    Field mapping is derived from defaults — final spec confirmed during the sample migration.

  • Timeline complexity

    B

    8-object category — typical timelines run 2–7 days end-to-end.

  • API constraints

    B

    ftrack: Not publicly documented; ftrack advises optimizing queries to avoid server-side resource strain.

  • Data volume sensitivity

    B

    ftrack doesn't expose a bulk API — REST + parallelization used for high-volume runs.

Estimator

Estimate your ftrack to Microsoft Project migration cost

Rule-based pricing — no per-record fees, no manual quotes. Migrations over 2M records are scoped individually.

Step 1

What are you migrating?

Pick a category, then your source and destination platforms.

Category

FAQ

Frequently asked questions about ftrack to Microsoft Project data migrations

Answers to the questions buyers ask most during ftrack to Microsoft Project migration scoping. Not seeing yours? Book a call.

Can't find your answer?

Walk through your ftrack to Microsoft Project migration with a real engineer — 30 minutes, free, written quote within 24 hours.

Book a free 30 minute consultation

Most migrations land between three and five weeks for accounts under 50 Projects and 5,000 Tasks with no review session audit. Migrations with deep Sequence-Shot-Task hierarchies, 50+ custom attributes, active review sessions requiring written inventory, or multi-site Location metadata land between six and ten weeks because of hierarchy flattening logic, note audit and correction, and the unmappable object inventory work. Note that if the customer is moving from Project Online (being retired September 2026) to Microsoft Project Desktop or Planner, the destination setup adds additional timeline.

Adjacent paths

Related migrations to explore

Ready when you are

Move from ftrack.
Land in Microsoft Project, intact.

Tell us record counts and timeline. We'll come back with a written quote inside 1 business day — no commitment, no sales pitch.

Accuracy guarantee Rollback included Quote in 1 business day