-
The Question – An Update On My Choices In NLEs
There have been a few (very few) updates from some participants on where they stand on the “post-revolutionary” landscape and choosing the NLE that they work in. I thought I would add my own brief contribution (as I approach a thousand posts here in the forum).
It’s been over 5 years since Apple’s last major update to the old FCP, and over three years since Apple redefined “end-of-life” by announcing end-of-development and crossing its anthropomorphic fingers. I’ll start by stating first my surprise that I’m still entertaining answers to the question of “what next”.
This past year, however, I’ve had an opportunity to do a bit more in terms of trying out options. It should go without saying (but I’ll state it anyway) that the following is my considered opinion reflecting my own subjective technological, workflow, and creative needs, and what I observe professionally and creatively.
Adobe Premiere Pro CC
I used PPro CC to do some short work; I still haven’t attempted longer, more involved projects and it’s difficult to find any reports of larger projects (with many sequences). The software seems quite promising and recent developments continue to suggest real potential. (Someone on the design team even decided that displaying clip codecs was worthwhile in 2014!)The rental scheme is onerous and keeps me from commitment to Adobe, and I continue to warn those I advise away from their software for this reason.
Avid Media Composer
I finished some longer work in Avid Media Composer (6.5.3 I believe). I hadn’t seriously used the software for something near ten years and was optimistic about my return (particularly in light of recent comments by Chris Harlan and others). It was an incredibly discouraging experience. I was amazed at the robust effort and fine attention to detail that the designers continue to put into frustrating the user. Aside from the frustrations of user-interface (modes, toggles, exceptions abound), AMA playback was abysmal and native MXF only a bit better. Bugs persist that should have been addressed long ago (odd incomplete display of selections in the timeline, random one track exceptions to deletions, etc.). No doubt some of my frustration was due to user error, but much was not. I achieved my results in spite of the software.The future Avid as a company is still a mystery, though they’ve recently announced they will file 2011-2014 financial statements in September. I’m discouraged that the consensus here seems to be that Avid is consolidating their position as the NLE of choice in certain niches of post (N.Y. and L.A.). If there is any evidence of the need for a revolution, this is it.
Final Cut Pro X
I collaborated for some time on a longer project cut in FCP X, on which I did very little operating. (It was primarily a creative collaboration.) While there are aspects of X that seem well designed – and notably even aspects of the audio handling – many design choices seem unfortunate (I’ll leave it at that – except to note that the cutesy animations become an annoyance fairly quickly). I found the few but regular beach-ball interruptions on longer timelines annoying (my collaborator referred to them as FCP X “thinking”) and we experienced (on the only occasion we had access to it) unsolved playback problems on a new Mac Pro and AJA box. The lack of a dedicated mixing interface (beyond the timeline) is a major lapse.The larger issue with X, however, continues to be the question of Apple’s reliability as part of my work. Their history in this field (and software features in general) continues to give pause. Further, their (hard to justify?) insistence on annual OS updates seems more annoyance than benefit – and I say this as someone who updated regularly from 10.0 through 10.6 (because I saw value).
Resolve & Lightworks
I have to admit that I’ve only opened these to tinker, but in both cases I was immediately put off by poor audio features in the timeline, including the near-unusable playback issues in Resolve. I’d give either of these another try, but only after reports of how wrong I might be or the addition of new features to address audio.The Present
I recently started a feature project – in Final Cut Pro 7. It was the choice that made the most sense. The major strengths are flexibility, speed, robustness, and design, as well as familiarity. The major drawback comes down to rendering times. (In a project where all material is transcoded to an editing format, real time playback of various sources is of lesser value.)It’s a longer schedule and it will likely take me into the new year. … which means FCP 7 in 2015.
My choice seems quite common in the circles that I’m aware of.
Reflecting on the Apple user numbers (that I posted last week), I was struck by the momentum of FCP adoption in the final year or two of FCP 7. It suggests a potential that is very different from where we are 3 years later. I’ll take the opportunity to reiterate that I think the change that Apple ushered in with their “revolution” was the shift away from editors who worked with one NLE of their choice to a post landscape where editors have to be more flexible about the software they use (even if they have a primary preference).
This is also interesting if you think about those 2 million and more users of FCP 1-7. How many of them are still weighing the options against the value of the incumbent?
My comments above may sound a bit negative, but broadly I think all the options have improved in many ways over the past 3 years (and FCP7 has held up surprisingly in the face of all that.) That’s important because at some point, when it becomes the weaker option, I’ll have to move on from FCP 7. And I want great options.
Congratulations to Apple. End-of-Life has never been so good.
Franz.
-
138 Replies
-
So basically, unless Adobe change their model, you don’t have a favoured replacement
[Franz Bieberkopf] “I recently started a feature project – in Final Cut Pro 7. It was the choice that made the most sense. The major strengths are flexibility, speed, robustness, and design”
Faster it isn’t!
No sig on my posts as it’s apparently very old fashioned
-
After reading the original post, I agree with very much everything that was said.
Was hoping that Resolve would be a serious contender but it still needs work. Have not yet tried Lightworks, been curious about it but don’t know much about the software either. For now FCP X is my editing software of choice. Yes, there are a few things that need improving but I see value on the software. I am hopeful with the next OS X release that FCP X will see some useful improvements, to media management (vastly improved since initial blunder of a release), curves for color correction, and better keyframing. Prefer the small stuff be addressed then talk about super cool features at a later time.
On the motion graphics side, for me, Motion is a top notch program. I do not use complex or high end effects, and my work does not call for it. I am more of “less is more” approach, preferring practical effects over plug-ins for practical reasons (no pun intended). Only thing I would like to see added are expressions, which are much more flexible. I do prefer groups over a pre-comp any day.
I did love Adobe products at one time, and still like them very much. Just really don’t care for the subscription only model based on principal. Still no off ramp, or exit strategy as there is no rent-to-buy option available. My other fear is that rent can go up, services or certain software will be cut. Just not a “risk” I am willing to take.
camera operator | editor | production assistant
-
Steve,
Faster for you most likely does not mean what it does for Franz and many others – as they say, it’s all relative, and that can be to one’s familiarity with the software, complexity and length of the project they’re editing, etc.
So, while you and others might find X faster for short form projects, many may argue that it’s not necessarily so fast when working on long form projects, such as feature films. Some of that difference might be chalked up to user error or experience, but some may be directly attributable to issues with the app.
In any case, if an editor feels they can spend the majority of their time making creative decisions with any particular application rather than tinkering with the underlying application, and they feel that app is most likely going to get them to the finish-line faster, regardless of all other considerations, then that’s the fastest NLE for them.
David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.comSales | Integration | Support
David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.
-
[Franz Bieberkopf] “Congratulations to Apple. End-of-Life has never been so good.
“FWIW, you’ll probably be able to update to the latest greatest OS if you like, and still use FCP 7. After that… ???
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[David Roth Weiss] “n any case, if an editor feels they can spend of their time making creative decisions with any particular application, and that app is most likely going to get them to the finish-line faster, regardless of all other considerations, then that’s the fastest NLE for them.”
True. For me that’s FCP X, and I work in mostly short form. Anecdotally X is great and or not so great for long form, there’s evidence for both results. I do still use others, mostly 7, some Pr. But as you say, whatever you feel best working in… use that. 😉
————————————————————-
~ My FCPX Babbling blog ~
~”It is a poor craftsman who blames his tools.”~
~”The function you just attempted is not yet implemented”~ -
[David Roth Weiss] “Faster for you most likely does not mean what it does for Franz and many others – as they say, it’s all relative, and that can be to one’s familiarity with the software, complexity and length of the project they’re editing, et
“Not having to transcode is a big timesaver to start with and the general speed of the software is faster than 7 as well. Of course you are faster on the NLE that you know, but if we all thought like that then we would never move on.
[David Roth Weiss] “So, while you and others might find X faster for short form projects, many may argue that it’s not necessarily so fast when working on long form projects, such as feature films.”
Having cut a feature on FCPX as well as a number of 100 minute plus event documentaries on it then I would argue, from experience, that it is faster than FCP7 on long-form. But of course only if you are familiar with the software.
[David Roth Weiss] “In any case, if an editor feels they can spend of their time making creative decisions with any particular application, and that app is most likely going to get them to the finish-line faster, regardless of all other considerations, then that’s the fastest NLE for them.”
I agree 100%
Nice to see you back on here David!
No sig on my posts as it’s apparently very old fashioned
-
I’m also cutting a 100 minute event documentary on PPro CC2014 at the moment and that is also much faster than FCP7 on a long form project.
No sig on my posts as it’s apparently very old fashioned
-
[Charlie Austin] “True. For me that’s FCP X, and I work in mostly short form. Anecdotally X is great and or not so great for long form, there’s evidence for both results. I do still use others, mostly 7, some Pr. But as you say, whatever you feel best working in… use that. ;-)”
I always chuckle when this X is faster discussion arises – an F-22 Raptor is certainly faster than a Volkswagen, but if you’re a good driver and are comfortable operating a Volkswagen, you’ll get to your destination a lot faster in your Volkswagen that you would in a Raptor if you first have to learn how to fly.
So, while the continued evolution of X over the last three years may be wonderful for some users, for many others whose primary focus is creative decision making and storytelling, the evolution of the product has meant a continuous and arduous learning curve, one that interferes with their creative process instead of speeding it up. And, that evolution continues, meaning good things to some, but maybe not for others.
David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.comSales | Integration | Support
David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.
-
[David Roth Weiss] ” for many others whose primary focus is creative decision making and storytelling”
Isn’t that the primary focus for ALL Editors?
No sig on my posts as it’s apparently very old fashioned
-
[Steve Connor] “Faster it isn’t!”
[Steve Connor] “… the general speed of the software is faster than 7 as well.”
[Steve Connor] I would argue, from experience, that it is faster than FCP7 on long-form.”
[Steve Connor] “… PPro CC2014 … is also much faster than FCP7 on a long form project.”
Steve,
As I’ve argued elsewhere speed is a reference to certain features – certain functions can be timed and compared between different software implementations. Without naming the specific functions, things get pretty vague and subjective (which is also fine) and on that count Final Cut Pro 7 is fast, and perhaps the fastest. (Your experience may vary here.)
Through my experience on the project cut in X, I can say that nothing fundamentally made a difference to the speed in execution of that project (on either micro or macro levels) except the background transcode. In a project with assistants prepping (including among their tasks, transcoding) this is of lesser impact.
I’ll also state that part of my frustration with Media Composer (the part that was user error, no doubt) was the constant feeling that I was not operating as fast as I could think and respond.
I have no doubt that you experience your editing as “faster” with FCP X and I have no reason to question that.
[Steve Connor] “Not having to transcode is a big timesaver to start with …”
The issue of transcoding only saves time if your workflow is better without an editing (“mezzanine”) codec. There are workflows that are better if you transcode and it is not a given that every project should be editing in camera formats.
Transcoding media is still a viable (and in some cases preferred) workflow.
Franz.
Edit: for clarity, I take the speed question to be quite a separate issue from being “up to speed” (ie. learning the software) which is where these comments seem to be leading.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up