FCP to Media Composer switch? Downsides?

[Job Ter burg]

“there must be a reason FCP built up a following”
You mean other than price? I’d love to finally hear one such reason. Really, I have found FCP to be extremely overhyped throughout its entire existence.

But OK, here’s some thoughts:

Avid’s effects handling, while sufficient for most, is not as flexible as FCP’s.

FCP is resolution independent up to almost 4K, IRRC. With Avid, you get PAL, NTSC, 720p, 1080i and 1080p. Nothing more, nothing less, nothing in between.

Avid doesn’t do XML. It does AAF, though.

[Job Ter burg]

“there must be a reason FCP built up a following”
You mean other than price? I’d love to finally hear one such reason.

OK, to be a bit more honest, Avid’s effects handling, while sufficient for most, is not as flexible as FCP’s.
FCP is resolution independent up to almost 4K, IRRC. With Avid, you get PAL, NTSC, 720p, 1080i and 1080p. Nothing more, nothing less, nothing in between.

Avid doesn’t do XML. It does AAF, though.

And the great thing about Avid is: 30 day free trial version, fully functional.

[Cal Thorley]

Thanks for the reply. I will download the trial but unfortunately my 80 hour weeks will probably limit my ability to really get my head around it before the 60% switch offer expires.

Yes, price was the reason I went with FCP all those years ago but to its credit, it’s certainly done the job I needed it to do. Until now.

I’ve read internet whispers that Avid may support other Matrox I/O in the near future. Does anyone know anything about this or are they just rumours?

Thanks,
Cal

[Daniel Frome]

When it comes to actual ‘editing’ you can tell that Avid was designed by editors, and FCP was designed by “designers.” Avid’s editing is clearly easier and faster once you get used to it.

When it comes to effects, you can tell that Avid was programmed by those same editors, who unfortunately had no clue how to do it as effectively as the Apple/Premiere guys who had a background in effects and graphic design.

[Juris Eksts]

The only thing I miss from FCP is sub-frame audio editing – being able to fade up or down in less than a frame is a great advantage in dialogue editing.

Other than that, Avid is far easier and faster, (once you get your head around the different way of doing things),

[Job Ter burg]

They are not just rumors, but no one can say which devices will be supported and when. Those who know, can’t publicly speak about it.

[Shane Ross]

[Job ter Burg] “I’d love to finally hear one such reason. Really, I have found FCP to be extremely overhyped throughout its entire existence.”

Manipulating footage on the timeline is very easy, and logical in how it works. I MUCH prefer that way to the way Avid does things. So much easier, I edit so much quicker. It works like my brain works.

[Job ter Burg] “Avid’s effects handling, while sufficient for most, is not as flexible as FCP’s. “

That’s another reason. Compositing, adding effects, making effects are MUCH easier and more logical in FCP. What took me an hour to do in the Avid…and a lot of steps and fumbling about…I could accomplish in FCP in minutes (about 15). Again, the way FCP handled effects was only logical. I remember working on a network show that required having a backplate, 6 pictures of contestants with a border around them, and then a few layers of text. That took me 2 hours to build, and then more time to render….like another hour. Then I went home and did the same thing in FCP, including the render, in about 40 minutes.

But mainly it’s how I can manipulate footage on the timeline that made FCP my app of choice. And the ease of making effects was a huge plus. And yes, getting a fully loaded system capable of capturing HD, upconverting SD to HD and outputting to a monitor, or deck…for $14,000, opposed to (today’s Avid pricing with hardware) $30,000…is a huge plus. The Kona 3 ($2600) is far more capable than the Nitris DX ($14,000)…it was a no brainer.

Add in Color, Motion, DVD authoring capabilities (Avid DVD is PC only)…and the fact that I could edit broadcast shows, and work in a shared project environment (albeit that is a VERY tricky thing to pull off), made FCP an easy choice.

BUT NOW…Avid offers so much. MIX and Match…transition preservation…the smart tools…ability to move clips down stream (one of my favorite FCP things)…AMA…soon the ability to work with the more affordable hardware. And the options they had that worked so much better than FCP: Shared project workflows with multiple editors, media management that was friggin ROCK SOLID…zero worries, zero issues outputting to tape (FCP slipped every now and again, pain!), trimming ability that is second to none, ability to name tracks. Lots of options.

But, Avid still lacks easy graphics tools (yeah, there’s Boris, that isn’t easy), and it still is very clumsy to do graphics and composite with. The really good color corrector is in Symphony…a different more expensive Avid product (Gotta look at RESOLVE), still no DVD authoring solution, and editing on the timeline isn’t as easy and fun as it was with FCP, or is with Premiere. The black in between shots isn’t nothing, it is “black filler.” And if you don’t select it when moving footage on either side of it, things won’t work. OH, keyframing is finally doable, but still lacking (no side to side moving of the keyframes)

The way you work with Media is VERY different in Avid than FCP…and that’s the main thing you need to worry about. If FCP, you captured as Quicktime files, and you could find those easily on the system, move them, organize them, share them…just grab and copy. They were named what you named them when you brought them in.

But Avid captures to MXF…and video and each audio track is separate. And they all go into one large folder on your media drive. The “1” folder in the Avid MediaFiles>MXF folders is where everything is. Avid doesn’t separate the media by project. And to access the clips, the footage, you need to do so within Avid. Either from the bins, or the MEDIA TOOL. So copying from project to project can be tricky. You need to do so by putting clips in bins, and using the CONSOLIDATE tool (like FCPs MEDIA MANAGER, only far better). Deleting media for the project only is tricky too. But once you get the hang of it, it works out.

Shane

GETTING ORGANIZED WITH FINAL CUT PRO DVD…don’t miss it.
Read my blog, Little Frog in High Def

[Eduardo Serrano]

Best answer ever regarding FCP vs Avid.

I’m a graphic designer by background experience, so FCP always felt easier. Once I spent 2 years in a cinema course, starting with the good old flatbed steenbeck, I realised how better avid was. It’s just like he says. Everyone has some kind of experience with photoshopt, layers etc but it is not the best way to feel the rhythm of a cut.

[Chris Conlee]

From an FCP user coming to Avid you’re points are mostly valid, Shane. However, one quick correction: you can move keyframes side to side by holding the option key down…

Chris

[Cal Thorley]

Thanks everyone who took the time to post. Certainly lots to think about.
I’m at the point now where I might just make a leap of faith and buy MC at it’s $995 special.
Presuming I can, I’ll just ignore the hardware I/O side of things for now and do the inc training and learn on some less important projects, and make the switch next year and see where the hardware is at then.
Thanks again for your time.
Cal