Adobe Premiere Pro vs. AVID

[Alex Udell]

It has checkered support. Usually Low to medium tier. But currently with the release of CS5, they seem to be on a roll with more broadcasting groups picking it up (due to it’s native format support, low price of entry, and real time capabilities).

The world is such a mixed bag now. Everything seems to be used everywhere.

I’ve liked it since CS2…but then again I use both it and FCP routinely depending on where I’m working.

Alex

[Andy Prada]

As a freelancer I use FCP, Avid and PPCS5 for Corporate and Broadcast – but I’m based in London.

I prefer CS5, have my own system but I’m always happy to work on whatever the client so deems fit to ask me to work on.

I suspect your college chose Avid because it definitely gives you an advantage over and above PPro in the freelance marketplace – most facilities will have Avid, fewer I suspect would have PPro. Having good skills in the former will help earn you money as a freelancer. You might get a bit hungry relying on the latter – at least in London and the UK anyway.

But I chose PPro for my own system because it really is so flexible and in CS5 guise, is right up there amongst the best. The ability to seemlessly link photoshop,encore,after effects etc is still unique in a marketplace that sees a merging of creative skills – graphics, editing etc.

[John Frey]

Andy has said it right. CS5 is so far advanced from the old days of 5.1 and 2.0, etc. Adobe has taken a huge step up into the broadcast market in terms of acceptability.

John D. Frey
25 Year owner/operator of two California-based production studios.

Digital West Video Productions of San Luis Obispo and Inland Images of Lake Elsinore

[Mike Gray]

I agree with Alex, it is really a mixed bag out there.

It seems that Avid and Final Cut still have more market share with the companies I’ve worked with, but Premiere is gaining ground. I use Premiere and Avid for freelance work, but most productions studios I’ve seen are Avid or Final Cut.

[Joseph W. bourke]

It seems that whatever tool you are most comfortable with, you will use, unless it is demanded by the workplace you’re in. Here’s my experience.

I’m a motion graphics artist, and worked at a broadcast facility. We made the jump from linear A/B roll systems to Discreet Logic Edit, which, for the money, was an incredibly powerful system, especially when used with Combustion. A few years later, the ownership (a large magazine corporation which also owned a chain of TV stations) was sold a bill of goods by AVID – they were told that they could do workgroup editing on News, magazine format shows, promos, and commercial production, and it would all be accesible, real time, and if one workstation went down (they also sold us an extremely expensive Unity storage system) nothing would be lost. To put it short, editors who were creatively fluent in the art of editing had to be sent to AVID school, because nothing was intuitive on the AVID – you had to pay to learn. AVID fosters an “I’m an F-16 pilot” mentality among their trained editors, mostly because of an obsolete, arcane, interface, and icons that would confuse an AVID software developer. You have to spend a huge amount on education, and support, or you’re screwed. And we were. Our editing staff became at least 30 to 40 percent less efficient, the “nothing ever gets lost when a workstation goes done” turned into to a relinking nightmare, where much was lost, and often one workstation crash would crash the whole system. We spent more on support calls and visits than we spent on four Discreet Edit systems. At the time we made the purchase, we (editors, art director, and others who knew what was available and good, AND how to use it) begged our Engineering department to consider the Adobe Suite (at the time in its’ first incarnation). They laughed at us.

Five years later the word went down that several of the stations put a moratorium on AVID purchases, because the resellers couldn’t configure them to work reliably, the down time was excessive, and productivity was at a huge low.

We managed to get one Adobe Creative Suite in house, and it became the go-to machine for all the editors. The AVIDs were quickly being used only as capture stations. As of now, the owners are in the process of transitioning all of their stations to Adobe products. Regardless of the cache in the AVID name (much tarnished, unless you buy the highest end products), there’s a need to be fast, have little downtime, and get the product to air. The AVID systems which were sold as fast, upgradeable to HD via a new card (never happened), and capable of doing everything needed in a broadcast facility, never lived up to their promise.

That’s my experience. I’m now the onwner of my own business, doing motion graphics, 3D animation, and television production, and am using the CS4 Production Suite, waiting for CS5 (especially Premiere) to become a bit more stable. It gets the job done on a timely basis, and not one of my clients has asked for an AVID system. Yes, there’s something to be said for the number of trained users available when you own a multi-suite facility, but if the software interface is intuitive, you don’t have to be a jet pilot to fly it. Just my two cents.

Joe Bourke
Creative Director / Multimedia Specialist
B&S Exhibits and Multimedia
bs-exhibits.com

[Brett Howe]

Some things never seem to change, and brand awareness is still a premium marketing tool. That’s why companies spend so much cash on getting their brand to the forefront of peoples minds.

This has been especially true of the video business during a transition from linear tape editing to non-linear workstations. At the end of the day, time was money, and the non liniear options had to play ball, and play well. Hence, systems like AVID, Media 100 and the like got a foothold, and were acceppted as the “Industry Standard” because they were a viable alternative to tape, and a more creative one.

Fast forward about 20 years, and the landscape has changed dramatically. Thanks to companies like Blackmagic Design, AJA, and Matrox, it’s not about the hardware, it’s about the software, and reliability, and of course cost.

Back to your question. All the other bovines who posted here are right. Yes you may well find work more work at established production facilities with Avid under your belt…for now…but a good editor is a good editor, no matter what he cuts on. As long as it works.

I have cut on AVID, Quantel, Final Cut, Velocity, Vegas and Premiere….but as a studio choice, we went for the Adobe suite. Why. Well it works. The workflow is intuative and flexible, the tools are great and the hardware options are much more flexible.

I don’t think there is a best “tool” for editing, just different tools. The key is to remain flexible.

As for studio’s adopting the ADOBE solution over the others…well I think it is happening more and more. The bottom line advantages of working with the Production Suites will continue to play a major role in the progress of the software into more and more production facilities.

Brett Howe
Creative Director / Producer
Brave Vision Pty Ltd

[Chase Smith]

I have to agree with Brett here and say Adobe’s the way to go. Although Avid and FCP and other products have a lot to offer – Adobe’s name goes a long way. All of their products are detailed and consistently innovating which each new release.

[Justin Stephenson]

Well I might be the lone voice of dissent here. I just made the switch back to avid. I worked in FCP fro many years. When they made the switch to X I needed to find a new home as it really is not a professional solution.

I moved over to PPro5 and I LOVED it. The functionality and the user experience is the best there is I think. The issue is that it really does not work properly yet. The media manager does not do what its supposed to do, AAF exports don;t work, EDLs are not standard. This is not to mention the dropped frames and stuttering timeline.

Its an amazing system if you are starting and ending in PPRo, but if you need to talk to other systems, its not ideal. I’ve been bouncing out of PPRo into FCP to get things to work in other systems.

I would say that the promise of PPro is greater than what it delivers. I’m sure they’ll get better with each iteration, but there’s nothing like a few shotty EDLs and AAFs when you’re on a deadline to make you want to switch.

MC6 is truly amazing and everything works. Yes…its got its parochial hangups, and I would never dream of doing any motion or compositing in it, but its a cutting machine and it talks to everything.

————————-
Design, Animation, Editing, Color for Cinema, Broadcast, Web and Installation.

Gear: 2 X Macpro 8 Core Nehalem, ATTO R380, Proavio EB8MS, nVidia GTX-286, Blackmagic Decklink Studio, AJA LHi, FSI LM-2461W, Tangent Wave, Yamaha HS50Ms W HS10w Sub

Tools: Avid MC 5.5 (formerly FCP), CS 5.5, C4D13, Resolve 8.1, VDMX, Quartz Composer, Processing, Cubase 5.

[Abdulla Siyad]

Hi,

Now that you have said that the broadcast groups are picking adobe.
Could you please check and let know any 3 famous broadcasters who have successfuly rolled out adobe premiere in to there work flow.

Thanks