-
why Avid?
-
I’m amazed to find out that things have changed so much not only in my country but also all around the world. I must say I felt quite stupid every time I said I am using Premiere to edit. Many colleagues consider it a non-professional software and I found it hard to understand why. It’s good to know there’s nothing wrong with my platform… 🙂
Themis
-
[themis] “I must say I felt quite stupid every time I said I am using Premiere to edit… It’s good to know there’s nothing wrong with my platform… :-)”
I think each platform has it’s pluses and minuses. As a PPro user myself, I can tell you that in my opinion, there are plenty of issues I’d like to see addressed, but it seems t0 be the best fit for how I work and think about work…which is really the key.
There are other software packages that I simply struggle with as the operating “metaphors” used just don’t seem intuitive to me…for others PPro is the weirdest and least effective interface they’ve ever seen…
Keep in mind that Premiere started life as more of a media editor…it has developed into something better suited for professional video/film editing, but it still has some things that could be improved. However, while Avid was orignally developed as a professional editing tool for television/film, it has never had the graphic and file format flexibility that PPro has had…it wasn’t a core feature need at the time.
As I said earlier, in my opinion, the bulk of “video editors” are responsible for far more than the cut these days so i think the holy grail is a cumulative alloy of the two operating models. Which is why most video editing software is getting so incredibly bloated and memory hungry. (IMO)
TimK,
Director, Consultant
Kolb Productions,Creative Cow Host,
Author/Trainer
http://www.focalpress.com
http://www.classondemand.net -
[Tim Kolb] “However, while Avid was orignally developed as a professional editing tool for television/film, it has never had the graphic and file format flexibility that PPro has had..”
That was the main reason for which I gave up on Avid Xpress Pro a few years back, Tim. Even then, meeting the needs of a more complex workflow was a problem for Avid. As soon as I started being more and more enthusiasted with its environment, I came across a “weakness” that didn’t allow me to move one step further. It wasn’t long before I went back to my familiar editing environment, convinced that Avid’s software was just too hard for me to understand…
As the years passed and I got more and more experienced, I realized I at least had to give Avid one more shot, simply because it owns such a big part of the market. Staying out of the game (I think we agree on the fact that the “game” is in Avid’s hands, considering most Hollywood cuts are done with MC) just because some of us (including me) gave up easily on an interface that seemed unfamiliar, is “cutting points”… in some cases, money, too, if – apart from free-lancing – we can’t work in a big bunch of studios, right?
On the other hand, I agree on the fact that Avid has to make its software meet the complex demands of today. Let’s hope it will…
Themis
-
I’ll join this a bit late..
I can’t compare to PPro, as I have been near it in years… But certainly to compared to FCP and other products I’ve used, there is no system, I think, that is as efficient for editing – while Xpress Pro lacks the snazzy bits that may be offered FCP or PPro, it does cut really really well.
I think FCP at least really needs to improve some of it’s basic editing workflow – the media management and even basic video capture doesn’t stand up to Avid’s – and basic editing tools like trim are somewhat lacking.
That said, I have onlined hundreds of hours of broadcast television for broadcasters in many countries on Avid Media Composer, and/or Xpress Pro.
Final Cut is a very impressive application – for less than the price of an Avid Adrenaline DNXcel device, we have purchased a MacPro 8-core box, FCS2, Blackmagic HD card, and we can do much more than the HD Adrenaline can. But we’re still doing the hardcore editing on the Avid, and that will remain the case for some time yet.
If nothing else, Avid is a very good skill set – and I think that editing in the ‘Avid Way’ actually teaches (forces?) good editing practice that can be applied to all systems.
-
Well, my situation is that I was an assistant editor in a post house full of Avids and learned my way around that system. I then got a job as an editor working on FCP, offlining, onlining and colouring and have been using that exclusively.
I have come to realise that to get more of the sort of work I want (broadcast) I will have to learn to edit in Avid properly which, to be honest, I am dreading.
I have become so accustomed to FCP that the idea of learning a new system, or even an old one, does not fill me with joy.
I have noticed that many of the editors I know feel the same. They are nearly all Avid editors who hate using FCP.
I have been encouraged to read here that there are those few editors able to use both systems at the same time. I have yet to meet one in real life! Maybe I’ll have a play around with MC again. -
Once FCP ups it’s anty with media management, I don’t think we’ll see much kickin’ and screamin’ from editors goin’ from Avid to the FCP. This will happen before current Avid products step up to where FCP is in every other catagory.
-
I think we are forgetting about a basic issue.
Avid, is an editing software, which, like others applications did, was incorporating more tools, in its development through the years.
I also have to say, and other people have to admit it, that Avid “almost” has invented the Non linear way of editing, and the other applications had inspirited A LOT in its tools.
The other thing I have to add to the conversation is that is possible that there are others applications that could works better for certain workflows, but if you count with an experienced Avid editor, one who knows deep the software and the profession of being an editor; I bet that he will find a way to improve your productivity, and will guide you, through the best way to accomplish your goals, obviously with an Avid on his side. I think people really doesn’t know what an Avid really can do.
It has thousands of tools. Some of them are for basic compositing. There is a pluging called Elastic Gasket, that allow you to use the after Effects’ plugins with the Avid, this only if you don’t want to buy th Studio toolkit.
So, integration? which integration, almost everything inside Avid.
Authoring? Transcode with Sorenson and build with DVD It. What else you need? Do you need more integration? Export an OMF an mix with Protools… Or may be you want to add 3D tittles, and which is the problem? Avid 3d!Two more and leaves you.
I have a client who has an old Avid Xpress running in a power PC, Im talking of more than ten years… and its still working, and they still using it. Anybody seen something like this in other applications?
The last about integration.
I have read here about the benefits of integration and the professional and non professional software.
Avid was born like a tool in the media industry; film & television’s workflows are those for wich Avid brings solutions. In those workflows NO ONE do the all job. There, the director says “cut”, the Director of photography, Illuminates, the writer, writes, the editor, edits, the compositor, writes & plays music, the colorist, touches the colors, an so on…I will put an example, for you to realize that with a simple tool like a TIMECODE CALCULATOR (basic, very very very basic tool) Avid knows what you need. (I have never seen this tool in other editing software, I also Know deep FCP features)
Not even talk about waveform, or may make a cut list, to end your film short.
Avid… make, manage, move media…
Merry Christmas.
Die Go
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up