Software Selection Advice

[John Baumchen]

I would reccomend Adobe Production Studio Premium.

It has everything one needs to produce professional and polished video, or graphics. An added plus is the fact that all the programs integrate seamlessly with each other. No annoying compatibility issues to deal with.

https://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/production/

Cheers

[Ron Lindeboom]

There are basically a few different “suites” that most people use…

At the top of the food chain, there are the “systems” that are used by people with lots (and I mean lots) of money. These systems include:

• Quantel
• Discreet
• Avid DS
• etc.

Next, down the foodchain come the hardware-assisted suites from both Apple and Adobe, etc., that include cards like:

• AJA Kona, Xena, Io, etc.
• Blackmagic Design Decklink, Eclipse, Multibridge, etc.
• Matrox Axio, MXO, RTX, etc.
• etc.

Then, just below this are the unassisted suites themselves, which include:

• Adobe Production Studio
• Apple Final Cut Studio
• Avid Media Composer, Liquid or other Avid tools
• Sony Vegas
• etc.

The last category run on the computers unassisted and can handle many of the duties in software alone.

If you are on a Mac, then the choices exclude Sony Vegas. If you are on a PC, then the choices exclude Final Cut Studio.

For more on these tools, you can visit the websites of Apple, Adobe, etc.

Best regards,

Ron Lindeboom

[13]

[Frank J. Lozano] “I often see video work (not done by big companies) and wonder what software was used to make it look so polished and professional. Where can one I get advice on what software to buy so I can be competitive and not buy a bunch of incompatible applications? “

Software is just the tool, the biggest thing that will make any production “look” professional is to do quality professional production. Proper attention to the attention to the visual things like composition, lighting, exposure, focus etc. and to getting good audio during production goes a long way.

You must start with quality to end with quality.

As far as software goes my observation is (and I may be wrong, its just what I have personally seen) that most big post houses use ether Final Cut Studio, or Avid. Really the only place I have seen the Adobe production suite used is in small wedding videographers.

I would personally look into Final Cut Studio 2 that is being released next month. Apple always seems to be a step or two ahead of Adobe, take for example the addition of Color to the package.

[Mark Suszko]

The same camera footage on a Smoke workstation and a FCP Express is going to look… the same. It is not about the software, it’s about the wetware: The guy shooting and editing it, and what’s between his ears.

No 3-d animation software has a button that says: “make dinosaur”. Neither does any NLE have a button that says “make this video stink/not stink”.

Your quality starts at aquisition. A quality script, delivered by a quality talent. A properly lit scene, with attractive composition, a BIG lens feeding a BIG set of chips, sitting on a solid tripod with a good pan head, recording to the least-compressed, most lossless format you can afford to use. Quality mics placed with skill and recorded properly.

Quality editing begins with assembling a properly-spec’d system, conformed to standards for levels and such, and set up to work with as uncompressed and artifact-free a format as you can afford. Then you import and log the tapes carefully, and assemble the shots according to a well-thought-out plan.

No audience can tell what brand or make of editing software an award-winning and popular show was cut on. It’s not about the tool, it’s about the man who wields it.

[John Baumchen]

Really the only place I have seen the Adobe production suite used is in small wedding videographers

About four years ago, Adobe wasn’t up to par for professional use and I would have agreed with the above statement. But times they are a changin. We have an Avid Adrenaline running Media Composer and a Matrox Axio LE running Adobe Production Studio Premium.

Having worked on both systems, let me voice my observations between the two.

Adobe outputs just as good quality as the Avid, at about 1/3rd the cost and without a $3700 annual maintenance cost, is far more user friendly than Avid, is much more compatible with different media file types, does not have a 2GB file limit on exporting media, can author DVD’s without resorting to third party software, and allows for much better media management. In addition, PremierePro, AfterEffects, Illustrator, Photoshop, Audition, Encore, and Flash are all tightly integrated with each other, making edit and authoring sessions very productive.

So, as a production department for the Federal Government, have to say that we’ll take the Axio running Adobe over the Avid any day.

[Eric Pautsch]

Depends on what your talking about. For editing, most places use an Avid or FCP system – and this goes for most Hollywood productions with cash to spend. For compositing After Effects can do most of what your see on TV or in films with the right artist at the controls. The days of “high end” and “low end” tools are pretty much over – its all talent now.

[Clare Neff]

[Mark Suszko] “It’s not about the tool, it’s about the man who wields it.”

Sorry, Mark. It’s not always about the “man” doing the work.

[Del Holford]

I agree that talent overrides software but disagree that high end tools are “over”. We bought “high end” because it was the only HD editing software available 7 years ago. I’ve seen FCS2 and Avid and Adobe and anything they can do Autodesk advanced systems can do faster and cleaner due to RGB 4:4:4 uncompressed processing. Chris and Trish Meyers and Aharon Rabinowitz are awesome with After Effects and their work is seen nationwide, but flame artists aren’t worried about losing their jobs to After Effects. Autodesk advanced systems are constantly improving both their toolsets and workflow and I for one wish our PBS station could afford to continue using them. The editor/artist who puts together the CBS Evening News open every night would freak out if you took away his smoke! For time critical broadcast deadlines speed is king and high end is where that’s at.

I work on Autodesk editing software that is coming to end of hardware life. Due to the extremely reduced costs of Final Cut Studio we probably will unplug our systems and replace them with Final Cut Studio. What we give up is speed and the visual effects tools tightly integrated into the software. If we had the money I would choose the faster option because deadlines tend to bite me. Producers don’t have those last few graphic files and they want to change the music or whoops, we misspelled these names on a credit roll. And it airs tonight at 8! We are making the conscious choice to go slower because of the economies involved, but those Hollywood companies who do commercials and effects work won’t be giving up their “high end” systems anytime soon. Apple is making inroads because they are improving as well, and many “high end” post facilities also use FCP in addition to their flame and smoke software but to say “high end” is over is stretching the point a bit. Call me back in five years and I’ll probably agree with you then 🙂

Del
fire*, smoke*, photoshopCS2
Charlotte Public Television

[Eric Pautsch]

Well true…but like I said its “…pretty much over” – as in not yet but very close. I was talking about what can be done with a thousand dollar tool compared to a multi thousand dollar tool. Yes..these flame and smoke artist and their tools aren’t going anywhere. It’s so well entrenched in that environment, but the same work can be achieved for much cheaper.

It’s very similar in my field of DVD authoring. Even if you came out with a better, cheaper and more powerful authoring tool many folks still would stick with Scenarist. But that thin line is getting thinner every year.

[Ron Lindeboom]

No, sometimes it’s about the “woman” behind the controls.

…but it will indeed be about the human and not the software.

Best,

Ron Lindeboom