FCPX – Should we move to Premiere???

[Andy Patterson]

If you use Photoshop and AE then you are already paying into the CC so cost should not be an issue. If you use AE Premiere Pro might be a better option. Premiere Pro has good audio capabilities and I am sure they will continue to get better but then again so will all the other NLE.

Both should work but everyone’s needs will be different and every editor editing style is slightly different. That is why some prefer one NLE over the other.

I can only say that for myself when the Adobe products are combined as whole it make’s Premiere Pro shine a little brighter than it otherwise would. Having said that maybe you could let the employees demo of there top ten must have items for the NLE of their choice and see what items are the most valuable to your companies work flow.

[Glenn Grant]

I wouldn’t switch just because a few new guys know Premier better.

As for NAS, there are some pretty solid solutions for FCPX so that shouldn’t be a problem.

Depending on what you use After Effects for, you might be better off using Motion with FCP. That would be an easier and more cost effective switch than going to Premier.

I have projects and custom Motion Templates set up for my recurring clients and I can finish most projects without opening Motion. Now it’s real easy to make sure any editor that opens the project has the Motion files to go with it.

[Oliver Peters]

If you are happy with FCPX and performance with the NAS is fine, don’t change. Try to help the new guys get comfortable with X. It takes a bit of a learning curve and an adjustment period.

– Oliver

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

[Bill Davis]

And there are certainly more than a few useful training programs out there designed to help ease their pathway to figuring out the new stuff!

; )

Creator of XinTwo – https://www.xintwo.com
The shortest path to FCP X mastery.

[Noah Kadner]

Why hire editors if they don’t use the house app? Just curious why the tail gets to wag the dog.

Noah

FCPWORKS – FCPX Workflow
FCP Exchange – FCPX Workshops
XinTwo – FCPX Training

[Brian Seegmiller]

Set them down with FCP X and let them use it for a week or so. They may realize they hate tracks.

[Ronny Courtens]

Hi Alex,

This is a no-brainer. You have established solid workflows with FCP X, and it looks like your productions are running well. So if others want to join your team, they should adapt to your workflows and not the other way around. A really talented editor will have no problem whatsoever doing this. For the kind of work you do, mixed workflows will only add complexity without real benefits.

– Ronny

[Oliver Peters]

[Noah Kadner] “Why hire editors if they don’t use the house app? Just curious why the tail gets to wag the dog.”

When you hire based on talent, that’s often more important than the tools. In the high-end world of color correction, facilities often build rooms around the requirements of the colorists they bring on board. It’s because they bring clients with them. I’m sure that’s changing there and I’m not saying that’s the case here, but it’s a reason.

Currently I’m at a shop that’s doing a lot of work and bringing in freelancers to the team. We are Premiere-based, so the people who aren’t familiar with Premiere don’t get quite the same consideration, however, we are willing to accept some ramp up time. In our case, where editors often open up and work on projects started by others, consistency of app is critical. Hence, I agree that in Alex’s case, sticking with FCPX is the obvious choice for the good of the facility.

However, if all of the editors only work on their own projects, then Premiere could be an option for those who want to use it, assuming the shop is already paying the subscription cost. This leaves you with a split in tools. That’s not uncommon either in commercial shops where projects typically aren’t shared among editors.

– Oliver

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

[Bob Woodhead]

Oliver, you post so frequently in here, perhaps you could help the OP’s question with a related one of my own – what is better currently about PPro over FCPX? I may find myself in the opposite case; a group I work with is considering a mandated use of PPro (currently editor’s decision). I’m in the minority on X, and would like some counter arguments. Though without some strategic advantage in X, I expect to lose the argument due to simple numerical weight.

Cost is not an issue, CS is on all desktops, graphics are split between AE & Motion, no collab editing though project “tag-teaming” is a possibility while currently infrequent, work is corporate short to long form, audio is relatively simple, color correction is also basic (ie; Resolve unlikely).

On strategic advantages; I could see proxy editing over an intranet as being a big asset. Another potential asset would be a curated broll library, probably 5TB minimum to start, with associated need of useful metadata. Graphics that would flow “top down”, preferably with “automatic” updates would be useful. Again, all this with an intranet in mind.

\”Constituo, ergo sum\”

Bob Woodhead / Atlanta
CMX-Quantel-Avid-Premiere-FCPX-AFX-Crayola
\”What a long strange trip it\’s been….\”

[Alex James]

Thanks for all of your fast responses. Please keep them coming as they offer great incite:

I suppose hear are a few doubts from FCPX which we have struggled with and wonder if Premiere could solve?:

1. Motion Templates: With different projects moving to different computers, or a project being revisited months later. We often have problems of missing plugins and struggle to keep our machines coherent. Could this issue be solved with premier?

2. Transcoded media: With FCPX DATA is essentially doubled, I.e the PRORES files that are created within the optimised media folder to work best with FCPX are in addition to our original RUSHES on our NAS and are taking more space the necessary. I suppose this is a separate question but if we stop optimising media will we see FCPX start to run much slower? – Whereas Premiere on the other hand works with the native format.

3. AE Integration: Is the integration with aftereffects really that good? As much as I’d love to find an awesome Motion editor, they seem to be virtually non-existent here in Ireland.

4. Future of FCPX: I feel Apple have shown an enthusiasm of late for FCPX with major updates, the introduction of SMB and a far more professional overhaul feel to the NLE in 10.3. Although some of my colleagues feel a danger of being left high and dry like with the death of FCP7. What are peoples thoughts on this?

Many Thanks,

Alex James

TINY ARK
http://www.tinyark.com