-
AE drives the NLE decision
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “I just don’t see this as news that Adobe After Effects, Photoshop, and Illustrator are being taught to students and students are using them to get high quality work done.
Hasn’t it been this way for some time now?
Out of all the video tools I’ve used, After Effects is the one I’ve been using the longest.”
Oh, I completely agree. I think the point is now that Premiere has received major enhancements — many in direct response to FCP Legacy user requests — it’s now poised to join them in the NLE space.
_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl -
[Oliver Peters] “FCP X can work in a multi-user/multi-seat facility, but it’s really ill-suited to do so. Event Manager X is an essential tool, but to say that it provides the same ease as clicking a single-self-contained project file is a joke. It’s not. And navigating your way through sparse disk images or SAN locations is an equal kluge.”
I can’t speak to sparse images, but why do you have to wade your way through SAN Locations?
Just export a Project XML and all the info is stored in the XML.
Once imported on another machine a new Event is created with organization, as well as the Project.
I can’t use Event Manager X at work as it doesn’t work with a SAN, but I find it no different than navigating through a mass of Finder folders for fcp7 projects.
[Oliver Peters] “The Events/Projects approach is simply bad UI design that was copied from Avid without the elegance of Avid. In a typical Xsan situation I see, let’s assume 30 ongoing clients with 3 years’ worth of past projects. If the station created only 1 project file a year per client with 5 sequences inside each, that’s 450 edits you have to deal with. Simply no elegant way to do it with X and Apple continues to be mute on this issue when pressed. Their current “fair haired boy” is Cantemo Portal.”
Can’t you create one Wvent a year with 5 compounds in it?
Or if you use projects, you’d have 5 projects in a SAN Location. Is that really all that bad?
[Oliver Peters] “All I can say is that if you think the majority of multi-seat/multi-user facilities will migrate to X instead of PPro, you’ve got blinders on.”
I don’t know who you are talking to specifically here, but in my experience, multi-user, multi-seat Pr environments isn’t exactly a cake walk especially when you account for all the caching Pr seems to do with certain formats.
Yes, Pr operates similar to how fcp7 s project structure is situated, but is hardly call that the pinnacle of a shared system.
It is much easier for me to send an FCPXML with just the information I need to send to another editor on the system and that XML carries not only edit information, but organization as well.
I can’t get that with Pr.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] in my experience, multi-user, multi-seat Pr environments isn’t exactly a cake walk especially when you account for all the caching Pr seems to do with certain formats.
Yes, Pr operates similar to how fcp7 s project structure is situated, but is hardly call that the pinnacle of a shared system.
It is much easier for me to send an FCPXML with just the information I need to send to another editor on the system and that XML carries not only edit information, but organization as well.
I can’t get that with Pr.
Going by what’s available in CS6, I agree with you. But collaboration is one of the areas that got a massive re-tooling in the new version. Soon you’ll be able to bring in another project while someone else is working on another part of it- with no XML required.
______________________________________________
“Up until here, we still have enough track to stop the locomotive before it plunges into the ravine… But after this windmill it’s the future or bust.” -
It sounds good, along with the new relinking.
As I mentioned, Adobe has done some really good work with Pr.
My blinders aren’t on, that’s for sure.
-
[Jeremy Garchow] “Out of all the video tools I’ve used, After Effects is the one I’ve been using the longest.”
Me too. Well PS and Quark going back to college – but AE pretty much solidly for fourteen years now. FCP since version 3.
I agree with David’s point largely. A lot of people who became quite symbiotic between AE and FCP have to be pretty overwhelmingly likely to roll over that relationship to Premiere. PPro 7 is sending out massive massive come hither signs to me personally. (Like you don’t know that).
God knows I’ve said this before, but out of everyone I know in London, I am the only one who has paid for, and uses at all, FCPX. Not alone is there no natural inclination towards it, but it effectively has zero visibility.
I think there is maybe an interesting point to be made about the kind of timeline you want – if it is often a precursor to jumping in and out of AE. I want a reliable, clean tracked editing timeline mostly. Apart from anything else, FCPX is just so involved. It’s a pretty arcane space. I know it has XML and that, but it just feels too zany apart from anything else.
https://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics
-
“It’s interesting – in your broadcast experience you’re seeing facilities moving toward AVID – in my broadcast experience, I see them moving away from AVID to Adobe CS. My guess here is that we are all working in “micro-climates” of experience and choice.”
I see both happening. We have a Hearst station here, too, and they are using Premiere. Avid is the “devil you know” and they are making their best efforts at new sales. Not all users feel like they have been strong-armed by Avid.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
All good ideas. I didn’t say it couldn’t be done. Just that it was ill-suited. Everything you mention is a workaround that deviates from a standard workflow put in place at most facilities. So yes, it can be done, but I doubt many are interested in investigating these approaches and retraining staff accordingly.
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “All good ideas. I didn’t say it couldn’t be done. Just that it was ill-suited. Everything you mention is a workaround that deviates from a standard workflow put in place at most facilities. So yes, it can be done, but I doubt many are interested in investigating these approaches and retraining staff accordingly.”
There’s no question that fcpx works differently.
Avid sharing works differently as well.
The method that was born out of FCP the elder was born out of necessity, not necessarily design.
As Greg mentions, Pr CS Next will allow you to import parts of another project.
This means that you have to be able to have access to that project.
This, in some way, is similar to importing an FCPX XML, but with an enhanced “browse” type of feature.
This is also a different way of working than a typical dupe a project scenario.
What you see as workarounds is how I see as how the operation works. There’s a big difference at least on my mind, especially with the syntax.
I do not expect fcpx to work like Pr or Pr to work like Avid, or Smoke to work like Fcpx. That would be stifiling.
I hear you that incorporating fcpx will be hard work and time, but we are veering off the topic of Ae being the conduit.
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] “I think there is maybe an interesting point to be made about the kind of timeline you want – if it is often a precursor to jumping in and out of AE. I want a reliable, clean tracked editing timeline mostly. Apart from anything else, FCPX is just so involved. It’s a pretty arcane space. I know it has XML and that, but it just feels too zany apart from anything else.”
Then plain and simple, it won’t work for you. It’s that easy.
If Adobe’s multi channel output tracks are clean to you, then we really have a difference of opinion.
For me, there are really good things about the FCPX timeline, one of them is that I get to be more creative more quickly. I also like how dynamic the FCPX timeline can be, but again, it suits me. Everyone that sits back and watches an edit session knows that there’s something different and decent with FCPX, and many people don’t believe it until they really see it. The skepticism is certainly high.
I also don’t see the Avid style convention as the only way non linear editing needs to work. The world has changed so much from capturing a pull downed BetaSP and a match back to film change lists.
I’ll go on record and say that I’m not a huge fan of the marker style interface between Pr/Pl but that’s my hang up.
It is unfortunate that Adobe’s XMP system can’t be used in more of a manner like FCPX’s Event tagging, and data aggregation and sort system. If it did, I might feel differently about Pr. Organization is a big deal to me and to our workflows.
Jeremy
-
[Aindreas Gallagher] Apart from anything else, FCPX is just so involved. It’s a pretty arcane space. I know it has XML and that, but it just feels too zany apart from anything else.
This is what makes me really prefer Premiere if I’m going to be using AE. It’s not so much that X is ZANY- it’s just that it’s so different. Even if hopping from FCPX to AE were just as simple as it is with Premiere, I would have to totally switch gears into an entirely different frame of mind every time I did it. With Premiere I don’t have to worry about that. There are a lot of things in Premiere- the effect controls in particular- that are VERY similar to AE. And that makes it a lot easier to work with them combined. Going from Premiere to AE is like switching to another mode in the same application.
______________________________________________
“Up until here, we still have enough track to stop the locomotive before it plunges into the ravine… But after this windmill it’s the future or bust.”
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up