why Avid?

[Michael Hancock]

If you’re a one man band or a small shop that has the storage space (or is working on smaller, shorter projects) and you’re going to online everything from the start then Avid may not be the best choice. Especially if you want a suite or products all from one company (like the integration of the Adobe Creative Suite or Final Cut Studio). I rarely offline anything because everything I cut now is shortform so I can afford to cut in an online resolution (say uncompressed for everything). However, I prefer the speed of editing on an Avid. It’s much more rigid than FCP or Premiere as far as moving clips around the timeline and all, but it’s what I prefer, and for any effects I go to After Effects, Photoshop, or Illustrator, so I don’t need an all in one package. The editor is most important to me, and Avid’s editing system is the best I’ve used as far as speed and ease of cutting.

If you’re working or are going to work with an offline/online workflow Avid really can’t be beat. It has the best media management in the business so you don’t have to worry about bringing your final cut back at an online resolution. Apple’s media manager is often lovingly referred to as Media Mangler because it struggles to work properly without being very, very careful and really understanding what it’s doing. Even then, it butchers stuff. Avid, on the other hand, is almost idiot proof. Decompose, recapture, batch import and you’re back online. I personally think that’s one reason Avid is still used so much. It’s a tried and true workflow that have been proven to work over and over and over. It’s reliable. The software is less reliable now than when it was all hardware based, but I still find it very rock solid (you’ll hear others disagree, I’m sure).

As you learn more about Avid and get deeper into the program I think you’ll start to appreciate it more, especially as you memorize and customize your keyboard/interface to work best for you. However, if you learned and have been cutting with FCP or Premiere for a while you may never like Avid. I’ve found that most people like the first NLE they used the best, and I think it’s because they probably spent the most time with it and it’s the most comfortable for them. It’s like a movie–if you see the original first, the remake is never as good.

Another reason Avid is used so much is because it just keeps working. A lot of shops are still running old Media Composers on G3s and G4s. At my last job I was using an Xpress Meridien that was discontinued and had been for a few years–couldn’t update the software, the hardware, or the OS, but it was a workhorse and produced just as much as our newer XPress Pro and Media Composer. If your system still works, there’s no reason to switch unless you just want the latest toy or have to move on to work with a new format. And if you’re offlining on an Avid, it’s easy to online in a newer Avid than learn an all new edit system to online/offline with.

Those are my immediate thoughts. I’m sure others will chime in with their reasons why Avid is still used and why it’s worth learning. Honestly, learn as many NLEs and other programs as you can. It’ll only make you a better editor and make you more marketable.

Michael.

[Themis]

Michael

I can’t thank you enough for your immediate and honest answer. What you said is absolutely true. Once you start with a certain software, you stick with it, only because you know it so well. The truth is that integration is a great help, especially for a freelancer like me. Adobe’s package came in very handy when I started cutting material for a company that offers a DVD with each one of its three monthly magazines. As you can understand, the workflow was endless. As such, when I was asked what kind of editing studio they could set up with their rather limited budget, I instantly thought a Matrox RT.x 2 workstation with Adobe’s Creative Suite would be the best solution, considering I was extremely familiar with it and it would provide a fully authored master DVD from scratch.

As it turned out, my choice was fully justified by the outcome. However, lately a new job offer came along, in a local broadcast studio that only has Avid Media Composer suites. I had to turn it down ’cause I was not familiar with that work environment, but I don’t want to do so in the future. It’s not the money at all, it’s just that I was really amazed by exactly what you said: the software works like no other and frankly some things are done in an instant. So I think it’s a pity to miss out on a trully professional workflow that would open a new world to me and I’m determined to go for it. I really like it, too. I just had to take a second opinion because I don’t like professionals who stand up for Avid without really justifying their point of view and don’t even begin to listen when it comes to other software, calling it “non-professional” (something like the “war” between the PC and the Mac users). I’m really glad your answer was so objective, Michael.

One last question. Xpress Pro or Media Composer? What’s the difference. Also any other opinions on Avid would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks a lot in advance

[David Braswell]

Here’s a PDF chart that compares the two products.

Briefly, MC allows you to work in more resolutions than Xpress Pro. MC also allows for more than 1 stream of HD. I believe it also has more robust features for working with film. There’s also VBI preservation, adjustable motion control parameters, top and tail and a few other niceties.

[Bouke Vahl]

my reason for having Avid,
All software has bugs, but with Avid, their mostly KNOWN bugs, and there are workarounds.

All fancy bells and whistles in other programs are nice, but fact is, i spent 95% on an average job just on ingesting, cutting, audio levelling and spitting it out to tape/DVD.

So i need something that is strong there, not in integration with a zillion other apps i don’t get time for to use.

Also, we are a small local shop, we do not like to test every upgrade, and we have so many projects going on at the same time that it is impossible for us to upgrade between projects (as is recommended by everyone, including myself…)
For us the extra cost for Avid is reasonable as we have almost no downtime.

YMMV

Bouke

http://www.videoToolShed.com
smart tools for video pro’s

[Themis]

[Bouke Vahl] “All fancy bells and whistles in other programs are nice, but fact is, i spent 95% on an average job just on ingesting, cutting, audio levelling and spitting it out to tape/DVD”

Well, Bouke, if that’s the case you are quite right to keep your trust in Avid. I would, too, now that I’ve seen how easier these things are in that application. But in my case we’re talking about full production from capturing to mastering a DVD, done by one man alone (me, who else?). In that case I believe software integration is a great tool and I’m sure you’ll agree on that.

[Bouke Vahl] “we do not like to test every upgrade, and we have so many projects going on at the same time that it is impossible for us to upgrade between projects”

Also a different case. While I totally second your opinion, try for a moment to put aside what you or even I like and figure out what would work in a case like the one I mentioned before. For a limited budget studio that was built from scratch Avid only (or mainly) does the editing work (aside from the fact that it does it really good and trouble-free!). On the other hand, a Premiere-based platform made our lives much easier, especially when we could jump from, say Premiere to After Effects and then to Encore DVD or Photoshop to make changes and those changes were also present in each of these apps.

Anyway, apart from all that, I am trully enthusiasted with Media Composer and, as soon as I can get the money 🙂 I intend to go for a qualified workstation. I’m sure it’s worth it and, finally, I’ll be using what most pros are so crazy about…

Finally, a big thanks to all of you for your immediate replies. You may find this hard to believe, but in my country it’s a rare thing to be able to share knowledge with experienced professionals, so for me it is a great pleasure that you all find time to deal with me.

Thanks again. Looking forward to come back

Themis

[Bouke Vahl]

[themis] “we’re talking about full production from capturing to mastering a DVD, done by one man alone (me, who else?). In that case I believe software integration is a great tool and I’m sure you’ll agree on that.”

Sure, but i never trust too much integration, and i totally don’t trust moving projects from one machine to another.
(but i’m out of my league here, i did NOT test these workflows myself.

I loved Premiere when i started out my own business, 12 years ago i had a 80 Mhz mac with Premiere 4.1 and was able to outperform really high end studios on heavy fx work.
But now, Premiere still does not has dual mono audio, making it a joke for my work.

integration also implies being tied to specific apps…
Now i’m a real Adobe fan, we have Photoshop, AE, Audition (and a bunch more, but these are our main Adobe apps), and with the correct workflow, all works nice together.
But i need DVD SP for serious authoring work, and i want to use Cinemacraft for our MpegII encoding, so there are no options for me to have integration….

It all comes down to money, speed and quality. All three are related one way or the other.

I’ve made the choice it’s nonsense to spend a few days on a DVD project, have the final product be compromised due to a cheap encoder, as the encoder is (although Cinemacraft is one of the most expensive ones) just a fraction of the total cost.

In my business, i have no alternatives than the ‘relative’ best. But there are a zillion other ways of making money, and that’s what this is still about…

[themis] “You may find this hard to believe, but in my country it’s a rare thing to be able to share knowledge with experienced professionals”

So, where you’re from?

Bouke

http://www.videoToolShed.com
smart tools for video pro’s

[Themis]

[Bouke Vahl] “I’ve made the choice it’s nonsense to spend a few days on a DVD project, have the final product be compromised due to a cheap encoder, as the encoder is (although Cinemacraft is one of the most expensive ones) just a fraction of the total cost.”

I’m sure you know better after all these years, or at least you know certainly more than me when it comes to Avid. I’d suggest you take a look at the new Adobe’s Creative Suite, though, especially when combined with Matrox’s Axio video card and the appropriate workstation. When it comes to encoding, you’ll find out the export capabilities have a lot to say. Again, no comparison to the expensive Avid suites, that I admit…

[Bouke Vahl] “So, where you’re from?”

I was born and reside in Greece. It doesn’t have to do with my country but with the general attitude of many professionals in the business here. I’m proud to say what I’ve learned so far comes from endless years of reading and practising and not from someone else showing me what to do. There’s a general idea that any kind of knowledge should be protected as a dark secret, thus leaving out of the business young people who are thirsty to offer their skills and talent. It happens, believe me. I, on the other hand, feel that each professional keeps his “seat” by working hard and making himself better with each day that passes by.

Anyway, sorry for the prolonged… “whining”. It’s just a complaint for a system whose main target is to divert people from their dreams and turn them into office employees. I just wouldn’t stand for a minute to be like that…

Thanks for hearing out, Bouke 🙂

Themis

[Tim Kolb]

I tend to graze in other parts of the pasture, but I saw this thread featured on the home page and wanted to tune in…

Out of the three A’s, I’m a core Adobe user, an occasional FCP user and have worked on Avids only a bit over the years…

I think the key with Avid isn’t so much that it’s somehow limiting creativity…it was designed for productivity.

At the time the basic Avid interface was introduced, we were all editing on a keyboard…with a CMX, or a Sony controller or whatever enhanced deck controller we may have had, with GPI triggered effects once in a while, but for the most part we were cutting footage. That was what an editor did…cut. Not do compositing, or aggressive color correction, or DVD authoring…or even titles in many cases. The editor was cutting the show (spot…whatever). The Avid was designed to make the transition from a deck-centered workflow to a data-centered workflow as intuitive as possible.

I think the role of editor has changed in all but the highest end parts of our business…for the bulk of us who work with post…that is the new role-post. All post. Edit/color correct/compositing/effects/audio in many cases/author to DVD/Flash/web…it simply goes on and on. Of course we are paid the same or less than we were paid 10 years ago, but those are the expectations.

The box of CS3 Production Studio must weigh close to 20 pounds and it contains a wider variety of software and more intense capability than any high end post house in any top 5 market 8-10 years ago. Integration is great and it puts a lot of capability in your hands with these software suites, but it also makes your system more heavily burdened and the time spent developing integration takes resources away from creating the most effective version of any one app for any single purpose.

I couldn’t replace my Adobe suite with Avid right now as my clients expect the sort of work I do with Adobe, but that doesn’t mean that there isn’t obvious merit to Avid’s focus on creating the most efficient editing tool possible.

Unfortunately, I think that Avid’s tools serve editors well…but the bulk of our industry has lost sight of the value of editing as a skillset in itself, and therefore, dedicated “editors” as we know them are simply going be extinct in any but the highest levels of the industry in a few short years…

Whether it’s cutting or lighting or color timing, I think our industry’s shift toward “generalists” will ultimately cause us to neglect/ignore/or simply lose a lot of deep, detailed and subtle knowledge of technique that dedicated experts have accumulated over their careers…as well as some elegant tools.

I hope Avid does indeed have a good plan for the future…

…from the other side of the fence where the grass may be greener, but we can’t cut it nearly as fast…

TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,

Creative Cow Host,
Author/Trainer
http://www.focalpress.com
http://www.classondemand.net

[Themis]

[Tim Kolb] ” Of course we are paid the same or less than we were paid 10 years ago, but those are the expectations. “

I laughed really hard on this one… 🙂 Tim sure knows what he is talking about….

In general, I strongly agree with Tim. That’s why I also suggested the Adobe Creative Suite, because I also think that the role of thee standard editor, especially the freelancer, has changed dramatically in the last years.

Themis

[Grinner Hester]

I miss Avid.
The question “why Avid” ten years ago was quickly answered by most with a “to stay in business.” Competing with somone with “an Avid” whithout “an Avid” was a tough job in the 90’s.
What changed? Well, from the outside looking in, I’d say sales managers becoming product managers. I don’t know how many people are working on Adrenaline. I do know it’s not enough. Xpress? Man, I dunno. It looked like they made the new Media Composer from it but now I think they just removed some features from MC and called it Xpress. Upgrades in Avid land are now just bug fixes while Adobe, Apple and everyone else actually grows to meet market demands.
So today… why Avid? I cant give a single good arguement for it. Today I couldn’t bring myself to wroye another check to Avid.