-
RedShark News: Opinion: Which are the best NLEs right now?
RedShark News: Opinion: Which are the best NLEs right now?
https://www.redsharknews.com/post/item/2160-opinion-which-are-the-best-nles-right-nowCan an article be both fluffy and provocative?
He clearly likes and is comfortable with Premiere Pro
Moving to Premiere Pro CC was a no-brainer for me, as that’s where most of my clients went. They wanted things cut faster, preferably on the edge of set, and didn’t want to wait around while I transcoded things. The move from FCP7 to Premiere Pro CC was seamless.
but seems very interested in FCPX
Moving forward, for my money, the most interesting piece of software out there is Final Cut Pro X. Pretty much anyone who is doing something interesting or innovative is doing it in connection with FCPX.
But for now, the most interesting place to be, seems to be with FCPX. It’s also the platform potential clients are asking if I know.
and Avid?
I found things clunky and uncustomizable. The entire process was just outdated and entrenched in a mindset of “this is our way of doing things,” get on or get out. Yes, there were moments of magic – the trimming tools are somehow better than anyone else’s – but the transition to Avid felt like a step backward, especially in terms of workflow simplicity, rather than a step towards the cutting edge.
-
269 Replies
-
[Craig Seeman] “Can an article be both fluffy and provocative?
“The answer is apparently, yes, an article can be both fluffy and provocative. LOL
So, provocatively, what’s your take on this? Not just your take on his take, but your thinking on the big picture?
-
My take:
I am going to rank FCP X and Premiere Pro in a very tight spot for first place.
Premiere and tight integration between other Adobe products is no doubt the strong point. All of this followed by more innovation, which has sense accelerated since the subscription only model. Downside for some is the ongoing cost and no off ramp. For those relying on high-end motion graphics work After Effects is another valuable tool in the set.
On the Final Cut side of things, X is a joy to work with. Magnetic timeline (once you understand the philosophy), ability to create custom stuff in Motion, and the excellent organizing capabilities. Downside is trimming, no keyframing for color correction, and the lack of “Send To Motion” command. The ability to create custom titles, generators, effects and transitions in Motion does is a bonus. So is the workflow to and from Resolve.
-
[Tim Wilson] “So, provocatively, what’s your take on this? Not just your take on his take, but your thinking on the big picture?”
Everyone always expects the unexpected from Apple and FCPX. Even PPro users, finding it a comfortable (and impressive) progression from Legacy, are eyeing FCPX, not because it’s “the best” but the most innovative (not every risk is a success though).
The past year Apple FCPX has been focused on “professional” (broadcast) improvements with Library rethinking and MXF support. Many FCPX users may even be frustrated, for the time being, at Apple’s pragmatic approach of the last year. This probably has given some none FCPXers time to play with it without feeling they’re being hit with “feature innovation” onslaught. I think people are expecting a few rounds of feature improvements along with more innovation in the coming year though.
Adobe PPro has been adding new features at a somewhat consistent and relatively fast pace. Not the “radical” features that Apple is capable of though. In fact when “radical” Adobe feature, speech recognition, didn’t progress, they dropped it.
What is clear to me is that there’s two very divergent company development philosophies. Adobe the progressive and Apple the risk taking radical.
Big picture.
Adobe PPro grows fastest but Apple’s FCPX inroads will quicken.
In the next major update Blackmagic DaVinci Resolve will develop into a more reasonable NLE. Plugin developers are quickly adding support.
Avid MC will remain in its niche and as the other NLEs progress, will see more erosion outside of its niche. Avid will refocus on making that niche more profitable though.Ultimately, Apple’s exciting to watch because, sometimes, despite some faltering, they do innovate.
-
[Tim Wilson] “So, provocatively, what’s your take on this?”
Seriously? Again? Oi! 😉
One guy’s opinion and one guy only. YMMV.
sw
Scott Witthaus
Senior Editor/Post Production Supervisor
1708 Inc./Editorial
Professor, VCU Brandcenter -
I thought the most interesting quote in that article was:
“To wrap up FCP7, on the other hand (aside from legacy editing), it’s like an old friend you catch up with every six months or so, but sooner or later you’ll never see again.“
Because that is the real question: “What are all those FCP 7 editors going to do?” Why after 3 years from it’s demise FCP 7 is still being used? Where are they ultimately going to go? and did the FCP 7 users that moved to Premiere Pro simply do so because it was more familiar to their old “legacy” way of thinking? (which means they didn’t move forward, they simply moved sideways)
Moving to FCP X requires rethinking what an NLE can be. Editors who resist the magnetic timeline need to rethink about what they are doing when they edit. They are telling a story where events happen in a particular order and these events have corresponding things that all happen together (e.g., a video clip with a video overlay, and a sound effect with music accompaniment) and when you move the video to alter the story, the fact that the sound fx and music and overlays and whatever else is associated with it moves with it is pure genius. Why would it work any other way?
That’s what an NLE “should” do (i.e., help you tell the story and not get in the way) but FCP 7 editors seemed burdened by their past habits. What’s a track? There are no “tracks” in real life. Why would video software introduce tracks? It doesn’t make sense. It was a poor paradigm that editors had to learn and now can’t unlearn. Having a primary storyline to tell a story with connected clips to keep everything together seems so natural to me now. Why would I want to work any other way? That’s Apple keeping it “simple”.
The best NLE is one that doesn’t get in the way. The best NLE is the one that frees you to tell the story without thinking about the mechanics of editing. The best NLE is not necessarily the one that works the way that you do because you may not be working as efficiently as you could be and the best NLE would change that and make you more efficient… but you must be willing to change your “legacy” ways. 😉
~jr
http://www.johnrofrano.com
http://www.vasst.com -
[John Rofrano] ”
The best NLE is one that doesn’t get in the way. The best NLE is the one that frees you to tell the story without thinking about the mechanics of editing. The best NLE is not necessarily the one that works the way that you do because you may not be working as efficiently as you could be and the best NLE would change that and make you more efficient… but you must be willing to change your “legacy” ways. 😉~jr”
As the saying goes, “Old habits die hard.” Which is exactly the boat I was in at the start. After watching a few videos it began to make perfect sense. Freedom at last, just need to change the way of approaching certain tasks. Connected clips are good but can be disabled when needed.
Organizing is much better then the traditional bins, though the latter does have its advantages. On the flip side of the coin, keywords, collections, and events are a much more logical approach.
Bottom line is very simple, FCP X makes editing fun again as it should be.
-
Really the only reason I’m using FCP 7 still is it’s excellent tape input support. I have over 30 years of archives to deal with. From there I move the ProRes to FCPX or even Media 100 2.1.5 (much less so now) Bought CS4-CS6 Production Premium before the CC bomb and used and liked it. However, Creative Cloud rental is not in my future.
Jim Wiseman
Sony PMW-EX1, Pana AJ-D810 DVCPro, DVX-100, Nikon D7000, Final Cut Pro X 10.1.4, Final Cut Studio 2 and 3, Media 100 Suite 2.1.5, Premiere Pro CS 5.5 and 6.0, AJA ioHD, AJA Kona LHi, Blackmagic Ultrastudio 4K, Blackmagic Teranex, Avid MC, 2013 Mac Pro Hexacore, 1 TB SSD, 64GB RAM, 2-D500: 2012 Hexacore MacPro 3.33 Ghz 24Gb RAM GTX-285 120GB SSD, Macbook Pro 17″ 2011 2.2 Ghz Quadcore i7 16GB RAM 250GB SSD -
The tone of the article was interesting in that the author seemed to like FCPX because it has the least developed workflow. By that I mean if you are using FCP X for a Hollywood feature film, for example, you are figuring out a lot of thing as you go where is if you are using Avid MC on a Hollywood feature film you’ve got a couple decades worth of knowledge to pull from. Avid MC is “less interesting” because it is so well known. That’s more of a gear head perspective than an enduser perspective, IMO. Not that one is better than the other, just an observation (and if I had to label myself one or the other I would put myself in the gear head category).
[John Rofrano] “Because that is the real question: “What are all those FCP 7 editors going to do?” Why after 3 years from it’s demise FCP 7 is still being used?
Once place I used to work at is still FCP 7 because it gets the job done for them and the investment to switch to another NLE is nothing to sneeze at (both in terms of human assets and gear). A place my buddy works at is still on FCP 7 because they run custom software that allows their DAM to work hand in hand with FCP 7. The switch from FCP 6 to 7 required rewriting of the custom software so switching to something completely different is no small task. A mom and pop sized shop I do work for occasionally is still on FCP 7 because they’ve hammered out workflow that works for them and the talent pool for FCP and Avid editors is way, way deeper in LA than the talent pool for people that know X or PPro.
[John Rofrano] “The best NLE is one that doesn’t get in the way. The best NLE is the one that frees you to tell the story without thinking about the mechanics of editing. The best NLE is not necessarily the one that works the way that you do because you may not be working as efficiently as you could be and the best NLE would change that and make you more efficient… but you must be willing to change your “legacy” ways. ;-)”
Ah, it’s been a few weeks since a nice “Pick the best NLE for you… which should obviously be FCP X” type post. 😉
-
[John Rofrano] ” Editors who resist the magnetic timeline need to rethink about what they are doing when they edit.”
Actually, it’s quite the reverse. Editors who resist the magnetic timeline don’t have to rethink what they are doing, which is half the story.
[John Rofrano] “They are telling a story where events happen in a particular order and these events have corresponding things that all happen together (e.g., a video clip with a video overlay, and a sound effect with music accompaniment) and when you move the video to alter the story, the fact that the sound fx and music and overlays and whatever else is associated with it moves with it is pure genius. Why would it work any other way?”
Why indeed. Which is why all NLE’s can accomplish this quite easily, or we would all still be cutting film. However some editors like the freedom of choosing exactly what elements they wish to move and where precisely they are going to end up, all without any encumbrances, even if it takes a few more keystrokes. Which is why I always cut with my audio unattached to my video, even if they were recorded together. Other editors are troubled by such freedoms, which require worrying about things like sync, and are thrilled that they can have their hands held as they move their locked-together media around the timeline. This forum has shown nothing if it hasn’t shown the enormous range of editing workflows that are employed by various editors; and one editor’s “genius” is the next editor’s “WTF”.
and that’s the other half of the story.
[John Rofrano] ” What’s a track? There are no “tracks” in real life.”
I live right next to a railroad, and believe me there are tracks in real life.
[John Rofrano] “Why would video software introduce tracks? It doesn’t make sense.”
If you had ever edited film and used a syncronizer, you would understand where the paradigm of “tracks” came from.
[John Rofrano] “Having a primary storyline to tell a story with connected clips to keep everything together seems so natural to me now. Why would I want to work any other way?”
I give up – why would you?
I know why I would though, and that keeps me working with almost anything other than X, despite it’s many virtues. The paradigm of a “primary storyline” is much crazier to me than the paradigm of “tracks.” But YMMV — and it obviously does.
[John Rofrano] “you may not be working as efficiently as you could be and the best NLE would change that and make you more efficient… but you must be willing to change your “legacy” ways.”
My ways were formed before Legacy was a gleam in Randy Ubillos’s eye. Editor’s have been editing moving pictures for over a hundred years and the least significant difference between all of them is their choice of tools.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[John Rofrano] ” What’s a track? There are no “tracks” in real life.”
When audio DAWs were being created (last century) I was invited to a meeting at Fairlight where they unveiled their first attempt at a DAW following on from their CMI (Computer Musical Instrument). Asked for an opinion on the screen layout I asked why the tracks were horizontal not vertical which is how dubbing charts had laid out tracks to match the layout of a mixing desk. Their answer was simple, it was based on musical notation which was horizontal. So if you are looking for tracks in real life then the overwhelming paradigm that we have been working with is the track based layout of musical notation.
Imagine the chaos if notation was not track based but randomly assigned. The reason many of us are happy with tracks is the organizational layout that helps humans with pattern recognition rather than seeing the world as a computer does. Recent developments in how computers recognize visual patterns has revealed that they can easily be fooled unlike a human so the real question should not be why tracks are a problem but why NLEs have always taken a primitive overwrite paradigm to tracks rendering them problematic.
There are other ways to make track based NLEs much smarter without throwing away the organizational strengths that a track based system gives. The retrofitting of Roles showed that a totally unrelated trackless system had serious limitations. Everytime I swap from Fairlight to FCP7 or Pr or Resolve I am frustrated by their poor use of tracks. This however should be an argument about why have tracks been so poorly implemented in NLEs. Throwing tracks away is an improvement for some but I think it appeals to editors who have never had a system that utilized the power of proper track implementation.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up