-
Would like an objective comparison of Adobe Premiere CC and Avid Media Composer 7
-
Hey Chris,
We indeed all have different requirements for our specific workflows. I understand that for you the DNx and control surface support are a big deal, while for me these are irrelevant. That’s why in my replies I try to include the words “to us” as often as possible as I do respect that other people using different workflows might see things differently. I do think PP still needs a lot of work, which does not mean it isn’t already a decent NLE as it is now. We use FCP10 on a daily basis for very demanding customers and lord knows this app still needs some improvements as well ((-:
I sometimes envy people who can use different NLEs in their workflow. In a post house like ours with many editors working together on fast turnaround projects we need to develop a seamless workflow based on very specific choices. So I have to go with my gut feeling, a lot of testing and some 37 years of experience to make those choices. Like you said: not all workflows are the same, so choices and opinions will always differ and no-one will be right or wrong in the end. As long as you make the right choices for your specific requirements all is well.
-
[Ronny Courtens] ” I understand that for you the DNx and control surface support are a big deal, while for me these are irrelevant. “
I’m amazed that you can be working on broadcast materials and think of DNx as irrelevant. Here in LA it is, hands down, the most relevant CODEC out there.
[Ronny Courtens] “I sometimes envy people who can use different NLEs in their workflow. In a post house like ours with many editors working together on fast turnaround projects we need to develop a seamless workflow based on very specific choices. “
Again, here, every post house I’ve been associated with offers both Media Composer and FCP to their clients. Its been that way for about the last half dozen years, since FCP became industrially accepted. But you are speaking of teams of people in a way that makes me think that wherever you are defines a post house differently from how it is defined here. Here, a post house is a facility site that competes with similar sites to offer an array of post production services to both individual productions and entertainment conglomerates. The goal, for them would be to offer as many options as possible.
As for fast turn-around, and seamless workflow with “many editors working together” there is no question, in my mind, that that still belongs to Avid, with ISIS and Sphere. Of course, its relatively expensive, and its quite possible that eventually Anywhere may challenge that. I don’t see FCP X developing anything in that direction, though possibly 3rd party folk will fill that out somehow.
As far as envy goes, its not really an option, here, as much as it is a requirement. I’m also still curious which version of Pr you were comparing CC to. Was it 5.5 or 6?
-
I was comparing it with CS6.
Our shop in Brussels has been around for 50 years now, having started small as an audio post house for film. The one in Paris opened in 1987. In both we mainly work for national television, editing and finishing short to long form shows and documentaries.
Most of our clients have been with us for many years now as there is not really any fierce competition at our level, opposed to what you find in LA. Our clients always work with our own people. To most of them it does not matter what equipment we are using as long as the work gets done perfectly, in time and within budget. I think that’s a healthy attitude and it’s been woking really great for us ever since we started.
Since we went linear I have always opted for having the same NLE system in all our suites. Avid was perfect for a long time, until they got too greedy. When we transitioned from Avid to FCP we did use both for awhile, just like we kept using legacy FCP while we were testing out the new FCP workflow. As most of our editors haven been with us for a long time they can easily switch from one system to another without anyone ever noticing. It’s only hard- and software after all. To me our people are far more important because they make the real difference, not the equipment.
-
FWIW – few of the broadcasters I deal with care about DNxHD. Many have standardized on ProRes (mastering) and H264 (deliverables to the server). Also variations of MPEG2.
– Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Ronny Courtens] “Most of our clients have been with us for many years now as there is not really any fierce competition at our level, opposed to what you find in LA.”
Ah. Got it.
[Ronny Courtens] “To most of them it does not matter what equipment we are using as long as the work gets done perfectly, in time and within budget.”
That was becoming more the case here, largely because of FCP Legacy’s influence, and I hope it continues. Avid’s still on top though, followed by Legacy, which still gets an amazing amount of use for a tool 2 years EOLed. I was beginning to see a rapid Premiere pickup, but I’m not sure what the CC-only wildcard has done to that. It could quash it, but Anywhere and the metadata services that Adobe is offering might accelerate it as well. Plus, the idea of being able to expand and contract seats at will, as well as treating it all as a service could prove quite enticing to the powers that be. The coin’s still way up in the air.
[Ronny Courtens] ” It’s only hard- and software after all. To me our people are far more important because they make the real difference, not the equipment.”
No argument there. All we’re really doing is discussing hammers, here.
-
[Chris Harlan] ” followed by Legacy, which still gets an amazing amount of use for a tool 2 years EOLed.”
That’s the funny part. After 2 years of beating on X and having worked with Avid since the early 90s, I still prefer the way I edit in FCP 7, even though PrProCC is trying to come very close. Something about it just isn’t quite there. The bottom line for me is that I feel like Apple did the best job of “nailing” timeline editing in FCP 7, except for MC’s better trimming mode. Right now I’m left with not being completely satisfied with any of them any longer 😉
Oliver
Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com -
[Oliver Peters] “FWIW – few of the broadcasters I deal with care about DNxHD. Many have standardized on ProRes (mastering) and H264 (deliverables to the server). Also variations of MPEG2.
“For me, for delivery, it is generally either ProResHQ or DNx. That’s also what I get as source material from the studios or networks that I’m dealing with. Here, it would be a bit of a detriment to try to get by on just one of those. When tape was seriously around, it wasn’t really quite the same issue, because tape offered a solid no man’s land between platforms, and the CODECs were so far apart that no one expected anything other than machine or tape conversion. In the last four years, or so, those walls have broken down quite a bit. So, for me, that Premiere can read and write both ProResHQ and DNx is just all-caps WOW. It is something that is probably quite necessary for it to make inroads into the studios, here, where Avid is still king, and also, is something that Apple couldn’t or wouldn’t do.
-
[Oliver Peters] “[Chris Harlan] ” followed by Legacy, which still gets an amazing amount of use for a tool 2 years EOLed.”
That’s the funny part. After 2 years of beating on X and having worked with Avid since the early 90s, I still prefer the way I edit in FCP 7, even though PrProCC is trying to come very close. Something about it just isn’t quite there. The bottom line for me is that I feel like Apple did the best job of “nailing” timeline editing in FCP 7, except for MC’s better trimming mode. Right now I’m left with not being completely satisfied with any of them any longer 😉
“For sure. I’m working on a Legacy project right now, and enjoying myself immensely. With the exception, of course, of out of memory messages. The thing that I love the most about it, as you pointed out in one of your fine articles, is the fluidity of the interface. Premiere is technically there, and yet I agree, it doesn’t feel quite as easeful an approach. I truthfully don’t know if its because I’m not used to it yet, or if there is actually something a bit cleaner about the FCP design. I am happy that somebody thinks its important to do that, though, and maybe when I start to take that Adobe window-docking procedure as second nature, I’ll be completely on board.
-
To be fair, I haven’t played much with PP CC (although I am currently a subscriber), but I spent a considerable amount of time with CS6 and I liked it immensely.
I’m an Avid guy thru and thru, but I was to cut a VFX heavy RED movie of the week for Syfy a year ago and I briefly toyed with the idea of cutting it natively in PP CS6. The performance seemed to be there and I actually liked some of the features of it. But the deeper I got into it the more I realized it wasn’t quite ready for prime time.
For instance, it was a double-system show, meaning all the audio had to be synced. This wasn’t an issue. But, at least at the time, PP didn’t have a means of exporting AAFs from post-synced audio. Instant deal killer. No means of making deliveries on the back end. I’ve since heard that some users came up with a work around by sending the audio to Audition and then exporting it from there. Not sure if that’s still a necessity or not?
But in addition to that, there was no way to match back to post-synced audio, for instance. This was a problem because I had a scene where a character was playing piano in a lounge. I cut the piano track on V1 and A1, then started inserting cutaways into the shot. But as it got more complicated, and we made some music edits to the cue, there was no way for me to match back to my synced picture from the piano cue I was using as a reference.
It’s just things like that which made me realize Avid is king of the hill, at least in the broadcast and feature world, for a reason. Pretty much all of those types of contingencies have been thought of and accounted for. Is it exciting? Not really. But damn if there’s something you want to do and can’t find a way to do it. It’s just that deep after 20+ years of doing what it does.
If you want to get into network television or major features, I’d recommend learning Media Composer.
Chris
-
Thank you all for your feedback! I have a Creative Cloud subscription until November and its been smooth transition for a FCP 7 Editor. Especially like the updates from today. At the same time, I’m about to start my 30 day trial of Media Composer 7 and been checking out Kevin McAuliffe’s 80+ tutorials on Media Composer ahead of time. Figure, living in Los Angeles, Media Composer is almost essential to know. From a personal editing standpoint, the benefit I see from FCP Legacy EOL is it has opened up my mind to learning other tools and being versatile storyteller….though not as efficient until I familiarize myself and learn the workflow and snags of other NLE…and I’m ok w/ that because if I wasn’t passionate in being a digital storyteller then I’m in the wrong business. 😉
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up