AVID – Why Not?

[David Mathis]

Rich,

First and foremost think you for the excellent post.

I have used Avid in the past, started out with with FCP 3, skipped version 6, now working under X and have Resolve 12 as an option. For me Resolve has top notch color grading tools, an interface that does not look like it came from a dinosaur age and I own a Blackmagic Cinema Camera planning to add a Digital Bolex to the mix.

On top of that, Resolve is becoming a better NLE alternative though there is still room for improvement. I prefer the node based environment for color grading, just me. Now the people from Blacmagic Design Team just released Fusion for Mac OS X, also node based. I am not a high end compositor type of guy, for from it. On occasion, I like to add some style to my footage on a single scene basis. Fusion gives me the power and flexibility. Besides, nodes are fun.

I also have Motion as part of the mix for the times I need to do a quick and easy motion graphics package. It also always for me to build custom titles, generators, transitions and effects to publish out for use in Final Cut Pro X, a very nice touch. Avid lacks blend modes and other tools that often come in handy for such needs as just described. Not saying Avid is a bad tool, just does not fit my needs right now. I do like the road Avid is taking and will certainly consider them again. My two cents, which is not worth very much in this screwball economy. LOL

The magnetic timeline, it’s magnetic-o-matic!

[Shane Ross]

Do you need a good compositing NLE? Don’t use Avid. Premiere is much better suited.

Do you use a lot of stills in your projects? Don’t use Avid…I do and it’s a pain compared to FCP 7/Premiere pro. Between MOVING PICTURE linking issues at online, and the horrible Avid Pan & Zoom, and Boris Pan & Zoom…and Sapphire’s expensive and equally useless Pan & Zoom…doing docs with lots of stills in Avid is time consuming as hell.

Good titles? Don’t use Avid, unless you like the Blue Titler Pro. I haven’t touched that yet.

Want plugins that are priced right, not too expensive? Then don’t use Avid. BCC is $1200, Sapphire is $2000-$3600 (rental available). Plugins just are not cheap, and there isn’t a lot of them to choose from either.

Easy multigrouping? FCX is best…Avid, well…if you have multiple starts and stops then the process is a 4-5 step, complex beast.

Really…the only reason I can see to USE an Avid is when you are in a pipeline designed around Avid. Or if you need multiple editors to work seamlessly on one project, or if you do basic editing…nothing complex in terms of compositing on the timeline. Or if you want good responsiveness on the timeline, and you have time to transcode to Avid media…offline/online is by far more solid on Avid than anything else (FCX is very close, though…I’ll have to say.)

Why invest in the software Hollywood uses? What does the fact that Hollywood uses it get you? No…you base your editing investment on what tool will get the jobs you need done. Period. Who cares who uses it! I mainly cut on Avid because I work in Hollywood, and because I work on shows with 4-6 editors are working on one episode, and we need access to a HUGE amount of footage (three seasons worth), so we need to offline/online. For that, Avid is PERFECT! But if I did a stand alone edit, I would use Premiere…just like I did when I made the initial leap to FCP.

Shane
Little Frog Post
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Mark Raudonis]

Rich,

Why not? Better to ask, “WHY?”. The reasons that AVID is strong in Hollywood center around the few things that they do better than anyone else: Large, shared storage work groups. Large projects (features, reality TV) require many people all working on the same media simultaneously. None of the other players can
match Avid’s mastery of this workflow.

So, if this workflow is mission critical to your livelihood, then you’ll choose AVID, and ignore all of the “dinosaur” comments about UI and features. However, if you’re in a small shop, working alone, then
this feature is irrelevant to you and many of the other things that Adobe or FCP X offer will be more appealing. It really comes down to “WHY” you’re making the choice.

Hope this helps.

[Oliver Peters]

Hmm… There are no “best” tools. Only “best for the circumstance”. Stills are problems in all NLE applications. If you’re smart, you’ll animate them separately and bring them in as baked media.

I use and have used them all. I like FCP X a lot, but it often disappoints. Not much call for Avid in my neck of the woods and much of the local market has moved to Premiere. So locally it’s Premiere or FCP X for me most the time. Avid offers you a very solid workflow and if you correctly prepping media for it, then editing with it and moving between other apps is solid and seamless. Resolve 12 is a great grading tool and a possible editor, but honestly, 90% of the time I can get comparable looks with built-in tools and filters.

The biggest issue I find is interoperability if you need to roundtrip media to other apps, like Pro Tools, grading and After Effects. In that case, the connectivity tools are already built into Media Composer for interchange. In FCP X it generally requires 3rd party utilities and in Premiere the results are often problematic if not downright unsuccessful.

Note that there is some danger in the FCP X or Premiere routes. With FCP X you are riding the crest of needing the newest, fastest Mac and OS version. With Premiere you are locked into the rental and if you quit, you will not be able to open old project files unless you re-up on the subscription or take the project file and media to someone with an active subscription. Also X and PPro are NOT backwards compatible in any way, shape or form.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Andrew Kimery]

[Shane Ross] “Easy multigrouping? FCX is best…Avid, well…if you have multiple starts and stops then the process is a 4-5 step, complex beast.”

I don’t know if I would say X’s is the best. I’ve only kicked the tires on X but both PPro and X have very comparable multicam tools from what I’ve seen/heard but both are worlds better than prepping things by hand in Avid or FCP Legend.

I agree 100% w/your comments about compositing and stills though. You can still do cool things in Avid but it’s just so much more labor intensive. Avid really, really (really) needs to improve how it handles stills and FX.

-Andrew

[Neil Goodman]

I think all the 3 big NLE’s have their time and place,

But I’ve staked my career on Avid simply because round here, its most used in my line of work, and the most lucrative.

I also recommend it to projects I’m hired on freelance because its what i can use the fastest and get the best results from.

Keep in mind i don’t market myself as Title/Mograph guy, colorist, or audio guy. I can do it all but don’t offer those services professionally so for me, Avid does everything i need it to do assuming a professional audio and GFX guy comes in later.

Do you need to share projects, footage, and timelines – Simple – go Avid.

If not – you could pick any of the 3 and be happy these days.

[Neil Goodman]

I will add in tho..

Avid has come along way in version 8.

The Proxy workflow in 4k is really simple. One touch like FCPX but you can pick resolutions. 4k basically native on really old machines.

Another area where Avid excels, still works great on older hardware.

Also lots of options to trans-code to if you do in fact need to trans-code. Not just Pro-res.

Search in the bins/timelines, is alot like keywords in FCPX – if you label your clips accordingly.

Also way more stable than the other two options out there. Still has little annoying bugs – but havent had any show stoppers in years.

[Steve Connor]

[Neil Goodman] “Also way more stable than the other two options out there”

Not sure that’s fair, every system is different, but for me FCPX has been solid as a rock for quite a while.

[David Mathis]

[Mark Raudonis] “So, if this workflow is mission critical to your livelihood, then you’ll choose AVID, and ignore all of the “dinosaur” comments about UI and features. However, if you’re in a small shop, working alone, then
this feature is irrelevant to you and many of the other things that Adobe or FCP X offer will be more appealing. It really comes down to “WHY” you’re making the choice.

Hope this helps.”

As for my dinosaur comment, been reading one Donald Trump tweet too many. The interface does need some updating, just my opinion. I agree with you 100% on your entire post. Everyone has different needs and a different style of doing things. Avid is just not for me since I am a single editor and not doing any workflows with others at the moment. The moment that does change I will give very strong consideration to Avid for that very reason. Hope this explains my point of view and thank you to everyone for chiming in. This is why I love this forum and go directly to it first!

The magnetic timeline, it’s magnetic-o-matic!

[Neil Goodman]

[Steve Connor] “[Neil Goodman] “Also way more stable than the other two options out there”

Not sure that’s fair, every system is different, but for me FCPX has been solid as a rock for quite a while.
“

Fair enough,

FCPX has been hit or miss with me depending on the version.. lots of sluggishness in the timeline and beachballing = kind of a showstopper for me as I get super frustrated duringthe creative process

PPRO has a thing on my system where intermittently the audio just drops out and stops playing even though the levels are still jumping. Rebooting the app fix’s it for me. Again really intermittent. Really annoying.

Avid has a lot of little bugs and error messages that dont seem to mean anything or effect the program – but ive never been able to not work through it.