FCP BMD / Avid comparison

[Chriswhill]

I have an FCP Decklink HD system which I love. Lately I used it to edit an HDCAM feature, offline AND ONLINE for Sony pictures this year. I also use Avid at another studio I edit at.

My feeling from dealing with other editors and engineers at facilities is that, first, many of the older guys still don’t really know the Avid that well, so asking them to learn a whole new system freightens them. These aren’t people who teach themselves software, the Avid techs send trainers who sit with them for weeks to drill the basics in.

Technically speaking, FCP is far superior in almost every way to Avid.
The basics:
Even using hot keys, you have to press twice the buttons to do the same task in Avid you do with one in FCP, making editors arguably less productive.
FCP can black and code a tape, Avid can’t.
FCP with decklink hardware has built in serial deck control, the Meridians I’ve used all rely on that cheap keyspan USB to serial adapter, which is constantly loosing comunication with the deck.
FCP creates standard quicktime files which can be taken to any other station and worked on, AVID creates proprietary files which appear as jumbled crap in their folders, useless, unless “exported out of the AVID”, which can be very time consuming for lots of clips.
You are very limited in terms of how many filters you can put on a clip unless you nest them, I’ve had Avid comps 9 layers deep, and the AVID has to render each effect individually, so YOU ACTUALLY WATCH IN SHOCK AS THIS SUPER DUPER AVID RENDERS THE SAME BLOODY CLIP 9 TIMES, OVER AND OVER!!!!
(These are but a few of my gripes with Avid, which I edit with daily by the way)

It’s kind of unbelievable how awful the Avid really is. It’s based on code written in the ’80s. For it’s time, it was a true break thru. But at this point, I think facilities prefer it because they know it, and they trust the Avid techs to show up on a moments’ notice to fix these mysterious machines that none of them really understand.

One very valid reason is that there is a larger talent pool of high end, qualified editors who use Avid than FCP. Some might take offense to that, but think of it. If you’re a post supervisor at NBC looking for a high end editor, one easy way to narrow your list of applicants is to only interview people who have a history in broadcast with the Avid. As these days, everyone who has a bootleg copy of FCP on their Imac says they’re an editor.

Another reason I think some facilities are reluctant to switch, especially the larger ones, is that they see the end of their business model in FCP. Here in LA, the post houses are all dying a slow death, unless they’ve seriously diversified.

It’s two different ethics. Avid is safe, they hold your hand and even tell you which version of MAC OS you have to use. Meanwhile Apple says, go luck dude! Our software is super solid, and even when it does break, we trust you’ll figure it out!

[Jacques Martin]

Thanks for the answer, Chill. It’s very useful to me.
Can you precise which kind of Avid you use : xpress, composer, dv, ….?

Jacques

[Chriswhill]

I use The old Meridian systems running Composer on a G4 mostly. I also use The Adrenaline though.

[J Smith]

Wow. What a loaded post. In the same manner I refrain from commenting on FCP because I am only somewhat accustomed with it, I think perhaps Chill should brush up on Avid, or refrain from bashing it quite as strongly.

I’ve cut Avid for nearly 10 years, and yah it’s REALLY showing its age. FCP DOES trump it in many respects, but not necessarily the ones you list.

“Even using hot keys, you have to press twice the buttons to do the same task in Avid you do with one in FCP, making editors arguably less productive.”

I hear this a lot, but have found this to be the opposite. But then again, I don’t know FCP that well–perhaps I was going the long route…

“FCP can black and code a tape, Avid can’t.”

Why do you need either to black a tape? Hit “play and rec”.

“FCP with decklink hardware has built in serial deck control, the Meridians I’ve used all rely on that cheap keyspan USB to serial adapter, which is constantly loosing comunication with the deck.”

I have no idea if our systems use a keyspan adapter because its never given me a problem. Nor have any of the >20 Avids I’ve worked on, ranging from Composers to Xpress Pro’s.

“FCP creates standard quicktime files which can be taken to any other station and worked on, AVID creates proprietary files which appear as jumbled crap in their folders, useless, unless “exported out of the AVID”, which can be very time consuming for lots of clips.”

This is a very valid point.

“You are very limited in terms of how many filters you can put on a clip unless you nest them, I’ve had Avid comps 9 layers deep, and the AVID has to render each effect individually, so YOU ACTUALLY WATCH IN SHOCK AS THIS SUPER DUPER AVID RENDERS THE SAME BLOODY CLIP 9 TIMES, OVER AND OVER!!!!”

What are you talking about?! Render the top layer only, or use a “submaster” and render that layer. Learn it before you slam it.

“(These are but a few of my gripes with Avid, which I edit with daily by the way)”

If you cut on the Avid daily and make comments like this, I have to wonder just how well you know the software. Maybe self-taught editing has it’s shortcomings?

[Chriswhill]

Hi,

These are my opinions, which is what the poster asked for. If he wanted the official line he could have gone to the Avid site.

Even when you render the top layer, which is what I do, you can watch on the NTSC monitor as the Avid struggles to render each filter seperately. And in some cases, you HAVE to render the lower layers first, as the Avid will freeze if you put too many on at once.

I work in high-end network Avid environments, and I know the machine quite well. I’m sure their are techs out there who know it better than I, but that’s kind of the point of my earlier post.

“Why do you need either to black a tape? Hit “play and rec””

Um, I’m not sure where to begin with that. I don’t know about you, but in my world, we need to lay control track on tapes before laying back to them. At least the first minute or two and then insert edit the program to tape.

I’ve worked at several networks, and they all have to do this. In Avid land, we have to do it directly at the deck. This can be a problem if you are using a deck that can’t self-black, or at smaller facilities where the one guy who knows how to set that particular deck to self-black can’t be found. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve been in a tape room with a bunch of other editors, all of us scrolling thorugh miles of menus on some deck trying to get it to self-black, and all I can think in those moments is, “will somebody just get me a Final Cut station for a sec?”

FCP has been able to black a tape since version 1.

“If you cut on the Avid daily and make comments like this, I have to wonder just how well you know the software. Maybe self-taught editing has it’s shortcomings?”

Ouch! I have a BFA from School of Visual Arts in New York, and I’ve been editing professionally for six years.

There’s nothing wrong with sticking with Avid, and Final Cut has many of it’s own quarks, but I think I also have a right to voice my frustration with it and those who disregard FCP and those who use it.

And my post was not meant as an attack on anyone on this forum, if you are here its cause you’ve already taken the plundge and use Final Cut. Bravo!

[Jacques Martin]

well, we are living in a world where many systems coexist.
I didn’t want to attack the Avid (I don’t know it enough), but tried to find some “positive” differences for FCP.
Thank you for your posts : I retain the point of the quicktime files and also the one of the black code (I am living in a land where we still black the tapes).

Thanks again

Jacques

[Dom Silverio]

[Chill] “Um, I’m not sure where to begin with that. I don’t know about you, but in my world,”

Why not use the deck? It is pointless to tie up a system just to black the tape. I mean there so many other features you can discuss.

Yes QT is easier to generate with FCP, but FCP is horrendous for media management. So that is a give and in my opion a lot of take.

Rendering in Avid is actually smarter. You can view lower tracks without losing render files. You can mix media types in the timeline. Working in 24p/film is easier. Real time moving alpha channels. Better motion FX control. Better color correction. etc.

But yes you have some valid claims. However, the biggest and I think the most valid is FCP’s affordability to move from DV all the way up to uncompress HD. The rest of you the technical stuff? It depends…

.02

[Kaspar Kallas]

I am very limited in my knoweldge of avid – never done a paid work on it, doodeled a bit thogh…
just wondering how the 24fps is easyer?

Thank You
-Kaspar

[Sean Oneil]

You seriously can’t compare Avid Meridian to FCP 4 or 5 w/ a Decklink. That’s a joke. Avid Meridian isn’t dated. It’s unbelievably beyond dated.

Comparing FCP 4 or 5 to a new Nitris system is another story. Although whatever you conclude, I don’t think there’s ANY argument that even comes close to justifying the enourmous price gap between the two. And even if you could justify it, in 2-5 years the Nitris system will become what the Meridian is now – dated and obsolete. Meanwhile for FCP users, the minor cost to upgrade to FCP 7 and a PowerMac G7 puts keeps you on top of the game for pennies to the dollar.

Sean