Conforming?

[Oki Pienandoro]

Conforming happen because the source audio is not using the same sample rate that the premiere use.
https://help.adobe.com/en_US/PremierePro/4.0/WS00AF9E2E-9F99-4aff-8961-1E2F30E9ECCC.html

Edit :
As for your other question :

Premiere given the right GPU is really powerful editing suite. No need for trans-coding to other format.
Also the dynamic linking is great, especially if you have a client that constantly makes changes in each revision.
No need to render out files from AE.

What makes Premiere my choosen NLE?
I love in Premiere you can just work right of the bat without the need to transcode to other format
From what i gathered, FCPX do this in the background.
So, in FCPX case, if you finished your editing but the background transcode haven’t finished yet, you need to wait.
Is this correct ?

In premiere, there’s no need for that; Given the right GPU and there’s no bottleneck in the drive, you can work in 4K on realtime.

But you need to wait to conformed files in Premiere?
Yes, but conforming audio is a lot faster than transcoding video.
Also, if the source is already in conformed sample rate, no need to conform at all.

But what i really love in Premiere is the dynamic link. It saves me a lot of time, no need to render out files from AE. This is really helpful since client always makes changes. I can switch back to AE, makes some changes, then back in Premiere, all the changes is being applied automatically.

With new features to able to edit the AE comp text in premiere, is heaven sent feature.
This is really HUGE time saver to makes changes in lower3rd, no need to switch to AE at all.

Even if the AE comp is too “heavy” in Premiere timeline, i can do “render & replace” to lift the render burden, but still have the ability to switch back to original AE comp.

——————————————
Sorry for the english, not native speaker.

[Gordon Gurley]

OK, so I think what you are saying is that if I have a more powerful machine with the right gfx card, I don’t have to wait for conforming. I guess that makes sense, but my source is AVCHD. It’s not raw. Pretty much any machine should be able to work with that natively, or at least give me that option. Also, it’s goofy that PP “renders” or conforms in the background, without any ability to control it (as far as I can tell). Yes, you can change it’s location (hopefully before it fills your local drive), but I can’t see anywhere to stop or even pause it. In FCPX I can see a progress clock. I PP I can’t tell where in the process I am. I could be waiting 10 minutes, or 10 hours.

Gordon Gurley
Director of Operations
Stanford Video

[Gordon Gurley]

Oh and to add more fun, now the audio is getting corrupted and playing wrong sound that doesn’t match the video.

Gordon Gurley
Director of Operations
Stanford Video

[Oki Pienandoro]

That is really strange problem you have there, i never encounter a clip/project that play wrong audio, regardless what container.
Sorry, i can’t help you there.

Instead of working in Premiere, how about tell the guy to export as FCP XML, perhaps it will work in FCPX?

——————————————
Sorry for the english, not native speaker.

[Chris Wright]

hi,

does it get stuck for a really long time conforming? it could be corrupt media cache files you can safely delete.
also, if your footage isn’t handled well, you can pre-conform via prelude to a smart codec like prores or dnxhd which doesn’t need to be recompressed when rendering. If you setup smart rendering correctly, it will export 4-12x faster.
https://blogs.adobe.com/kevinmonahan/2012/10/11/smart-rendering-in-premiere-pro-cs6-6-0-1-and-later/

The new premiere 2016 coming soon will proxy in the background while you work.

[Alex Udell]

Hi Gordon…

sorry to hear your initial steps in to PPro have been bumpy and been unpleasant.

I think ppl’s chuckling and general distaste for FCPX come more from the way Apple handled the transition than the application itself.

They completely broke an established mature ecosystem with millions of loyal customers.

Not only that, they went further insulted professionals by introducing an inferior product built clearly on their consumer level product that did LESS than what they professionals had come to expect from the previous releases.

Now….all that has been hashed and rehashed and batted to death…frankly I don’t care. I’ll use whatever is in front of me. I fought Apple and Adobe working for a competitor in the same space…and lost…big. 🙂

Familiarity plays a key role for sure. Adobe stepped in and basically looked at what were people expecting from an FCP 8 and gave it to them wrapped in an interface and editing conventions that they could move to without much pain. Even some hardware was also supported.

Now…who knows?…Apple is playing a long game because they are diverse and have deep pockets. In my mind, clearly they are thinking about the next generation of content creators, many of whom will likely not be sitting at an edit desk, but using likely some cloud based backbone and gestural touch interface on a tablet like device where having the interface make a lot of “snap” and “magnetic” choices will be standard.

What content creation will be and why it will be is gong to change a lot. And they have a vision…that we just don’t understand yet. But it will seem completely logical in the end. Just like it did when FCP and DV blew the first hole in professional market.

So it all will be interesting to see play out.

I’m not really critical of FCPX…I’ve never used it. I’ve heard it it’s getting better. That’s fine….because it will keep pushing Adobe and others to compete.

🙂

Alex Udell
Editing, Motion Graphics, and Visual FX
Let’s Connect on Linkedin
Examples: Retail Automotive Motion Graphics Spots
Example: Customer Facing Explainer Video
Example: Infotainment & Package editorial