-
Which networks use Premiere Pro?
I
-
42 Replies
-
Well none in the UK anyway.
The Major limitation here is the lack of proper media management tools and no end-to-end solution. On top of that Adobe don’t listen to what the professional & broadcast market need and therefore limit themselves to smaller networks that can’t afford Avid systems or who haven’t discovered FCP yet.
The development of the Matrox Axio product will help in the HD market but many broadcasters have already started to upgrade their Avid systems to support HD editing.
Premiere 2.0 is too little too late to be taken seriously by the major broadcasters.
-
[R. Hewitt] “Premiere 2.0 is too little too late to be taken seriously by the major broadcasters.”
Probably true on the broadcaster level. The lack of robust media management stops it cold from entering those markets. It would appear, from either limited development resources, or incompetent decision making, Adobe has abandoned the high end market. Really a pity, because they could have made a major dent had version 2 been everything it could and should have been.
As it stands, I think Axio (SD and HD) and ProspectHD will offer decent solutions to post shops. There’s a chance that both may enter the smaller broadcast stations but on a network level? No chance. Not without media management.
David
AllinOneFilms.com -
Another question you may ask yourself: How many networks use After Effects? Photoshop? Premiere suffers amongst professionals from it’s heritage as a toy. But now Adobe is merging all their production apps into an uber production package that may soon become the same no-brainer that After Effects and Photoshop are now. Stay tuned.
-
I’ve always been very curious about the market for video equipment. Clearly, Sony and Panasonic must make far more money selling $400 camcorders than $40,000 EFP cameras. Perhaps we are looking at PP2 from a user-perspective that is less relevant to Adobe than the larger market of lower-end video production. (=everything from hobbyists to in-house corporate video.)
re: lower-end video production: “Not that there’s anything wrong with it.”
— Bob C
-
After Effects and Photoshop are indeed used by broadcasters the world over. The reason for this though is the very capable applications developed for professional use that meet the need of the users. Premiere is a complete non-starter simply due to it’s lack of media management capabilities and does not fit the workflow of the majority of network ‘pros’.
Yes it’s great to have integration between the applications but Adobe have left it way to late to tempt any broadcaster away from the products they know well – Avid and more recently FCP.
It’s hard to imagine why the management/marketing team of Premiere simply do not understand the need of the users when they have After Effects and Photoshop spot on.
-
[Bob Cole] “Sony and Panasonic must make far more money selling $400 camcorders than $40,000 EFP cameras.”
I’m told by a Sony dealer that it’s the other way around. The profit margins on the $400-4000 camera’s are very slim.
[Bob Cole] “Perhaps we are looking at PP2 from a user-perspective that is less relevant to Adobe than the larger market of lower-end video production.”
One could come to that conclusion as opposed to lack of resources and/or incompetent decision making. OTOH they’ve said from the get go they intended to compete against Avid and FCP. I don’t think Matrox jumped in with Axio with the idea that they were going to sell it to wedding videographers. Obviously Adobe told them they were going after the higher end market.
David
AllinOneFilms.com -
[David Cherniack] “I’m told by a Sony dealer that it’s the other way around. The profit margins on the $400-4000 camera’s are very slim.”
But don’t the inexpensive camcorders make up for that in volume? As well as helping Sony with its corporate “image” in the mass market, which must be absolutely humongous. (Sony Everywhere, which helps them sell everything from Playstations to flat panel tv sets?)
I am still curious: how big a portion of the “video equipment” market is the broadcast-level anyway?
-
It’s hard to define it as a ‘video equipment’ market.
Broadcast equipment is the top-end of the range followed by Professional, Pro-sumer and finally consumer. For Sony and others, these are very distinct bands. As far as sales are concerned the largest number of sales (not profit) comes from the consumer market followed by the professional and broadcast markets. The broadcast and professional markets are where the profits come from. Pro-sumer is an oddity in that it is higher-end consumer equipment used by serious amateurs and some ‘professionals’ ie. those that make an income from using their equipment. These are not to be confused with the professionals who make their living from the equipment and their skills.
Adobe are trying to aim Premiere Pro at the professional/broadcast market but they simply don’t understand the needs of those markets and are continuing to lose out to Avid and Apple.
-
There are three recognised markets, broadcast, professional and consumer. Pro-sumer is a marketing terminology coined to double dip the upper end of the consumer market. The broadcast market is the principle industry market and the most profitable. We had one particular Asian project in 1998/99 building two studios that together consumed $129 million in equipment. Hard to find any retail chain worldwide who would exceed this per annum.
It’s also hard to compare one part of the industry with the other as by nature they service entirely different clients with different products.This was very evident ten years ago with say BVU recorders for the broadcast market and VHS for the consumer. That still happens, Digibeta vs DV. The common denominator is R&D. Develop a new technology like HDV and try it on the consumer market. The consumer market is less challenging and has more disposable income. If it doesn’t work, dump it. If it does then just watch it flourish in broadcast.
I think Adobe simply lacks a good business plan and a clear line of deliniation between techheads and marketers. It won’t be the first or last company to suffer this problem. A recent example of this would be Canopus who were technically adept but hopeless in marketing. Grass Valley realised this and gobbled them up. Maybe Adobe will suffer the same fate, is Apple watching?Redgum Television Productions
Broadcast & Corporate Documentaries
Brisbane, Australia -
I think all you armchair marketing guru’s are funny. To even suggest that your seemingly well educated guesses at adobe’s marketing plan or lack there of is spot on is probably far off. Adobe probably has people light years ahead of anything you guys read in DVmagazine regarding adobes marketing. Their people probably got masters in marketing and years experience doing so. It’s like joe moviemaker down the block critisizing spielberg or tarintino or (insert favorite movie maker here). But you are all entitled to your opinions and I definately enjoy reading them.
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up