Andy Patterson
Forum Replies Created
-
[Oliver Peters] “[andy patterson] “Adobe updates since the CC have been mediocre. I would agree that Adobe should focus on creating a good product but they still have bugs form over a year ago. Adobe is not offering a superior product anymore over the competition. ”
Hmm… I would completely disagree. I work at plenty of shops that shifted to Premiere precisely because of where the app is today or was a couple of years ago after CC. In the state it was in during CS, they might have been AE customers, but would have never considered Premiere over the competition. Even given FCPX. Had Premiere not continued to address their needs, those costumers would have (and many did) shifted back to Avid.”
I am not saying Premiere Pro has not gotten updates. I am saying the last couple of years the updates were not that great and we keep getting bugs with each update that should have been caught by Adobe. Keep in mind 64 bit, CUDA and adding Audition go back to the CS days. Adobe Anywhere seems cool for certain users but that was implemented over two years ago. Having said that what do you think is the biggest improvement in the last 2 years that made people switch? I don’t doubt there might be something but I can easily say CS 4.0 to CS 5.0 was a huge update. To much to list.
[Oliver Peters] “FWIW – no NLE manufacturer is offering a superior product.”
Premiere Pro is buggier now days. I used to think Premiere Pro was awesome but the past couple of years have been a love hate situation. I see minor updates at the cost of more bugs. I never made videos about Premiere Pro bugs in CS days.
[Oliver Peters] “One more thing – Aren’t you failing to follow through to the conclusions of your own argument? Vbloggers and hobbyists already have a powerful free tool in Resolve.”
My conclusion? Have you actually read any of my comments? I have already stated Adobe is not worried about the bloggers. I have also stated Apple and BMD design are trying to get that market. Or at the very least their products probably appeal to that market more than the CC subscription model. Keep in mind many CS users held on to CS 6 for as long as they could. The majority of people didn’t say the CC is the best thing since sliced bread. In fact most people did not like it for a multitude of reasons. I bought CS 5.5 in 2011 and did not join the CC until 2014. There were enough features that I wanted by that time. As I stated I see more bugs and I pay for updates even if I don’t think they are useful for my needs. That was not the case with the CS paradigm. As sated I pay more and get less with the CC. I admit I get more bugs now but that is not a good thing.
[Oliver Peters] “Now look at Adobe. Let’s say they cut their prices 50% – so $25/mo. for CC, $10/mo. for Premiere individually, etc. This still won’t attract the free users, who in your thoughts already have a superior product”
They don’t need a free product. They need something more affordable. Why do you think they have student pricing? Also if the free version of DR is buggier than Premiere Pro people might opt for Premiere Pro, AE and Audition for $9.99.
[Oliver Peters] “So the people who are comfortable in paying Adobe’s current rates, now only pay half, and Adobe loses 50% of their revenue stream. And don’t tell me Adobe still makes money, because neither of us have the info to know that.”
If they lower the price or even offer Premiere Pro, AE and Audition for $9.99 they may increase the CC subscription by 300%. Having said that we cannot say what the future holds at this point in time. We can only speculate.
-
[Andrew Kimery] ” I didn’t mention the price drop because the conversation keeps focusing on lowering prices and free is a lot lower than $299.”
Price is important to the hobbyists. For that market FCPX and DR might seem to be a better option.
[Andrew Kimery] “I think I started with DR at version 9 and people have been saying DR is a game changer for the past 3 or 4 years. Each year people praise the updates to it’s NLE functionality, but then the tone changes to “the updates are great but…” When it actually starts changing the game I’ll believe it is a game changer.”
Fairlight is nice but I like DR’s marker system better than Premiere Pro. I had suggested a feature request to Adobe but BMD did it.
[Andrew Kimery] “Secondly, they pretty much failed to secure the vacated inroads FCP Legend made into the high end.”
Adobe wants the high-end market. I did not say they are the high-end market.
[Andrew Kimery] “I’d guess Avid owns more of the high end now than it has in years as places that used to use FCP Legend opted to switch to Avid instead of X or PPro.”
You keep responding with strawmans. I don’t doubt Avid is top dog but how is this relevant to the fact the Adobe is not worried about the little guy? That is what my comments are about. Can you please explain why the CC would be a better option for a blogger or hobbiest than the DR?
[Andrew Kimery] “Finally, they have YouTubers like Freddie Wong talking at their events and waste their time on down market features like the Social Media Publishing tool…”
Of course some Youtubers will be using the CC. What is your point? My point is for some companies their prices are dropping. Will Google Docs make MS Office Obsolete? Probably not. Can some people get by with Google Docs. Probably.
[Andrew Kimery] “One of the things Adobe has done a solid job of though is hoovering up a lot of the mid market and lower market that used to be dominated by FCP Legend.”
I think FCPX is what made people switch. If FCP 8 was here today who knows what would have happened?
I stand by all my statement you decided to quote. For a post production house that has clients every day $49.99 is is a non issues. On the flip side the bloggers who have stopped the CC subscription always mention FCPX is less expensive and does the job. Plus some think it is more stable than Premiere Pro and performs better than Premiere Pro. I don’t doubt FCPX might work better on a laptop than Premiere Pro.
-
Sounds like it.
-
[Brian Seegmiller] “But it has a great titler that can create logos. Just kidding Andy.”
Premiere Pro’s titling tools are good. Rather than create a canned effects generator Adobe should have fixed all the bugs. Having said that FCPX has bugs as well. So does DR 14 in the beta state. No NLE is perfect but Premiere used to have less bugs. Every CC release introduces new bugs. Most of them get fixed quick but some do not. When I only had a PC nothing looked like an option two years ago. No that I have a Mac and PC, DR and FCPX might prove to be a viable alternative.
-
[Andrew Kimery] “Though for the last 5yrs the points have been free DR, $299 FCP X, $49.99 CC, and $999-$1299 MC (or $49.99 for a 12/mo subscription), yet Adobe is hitting their subscriber numbers and their stock is amaze-balls”
I was not interested in DR five years ago. If you watch the video other people mention DR 14 is a game changer and the price for the paid version has dropped. You forgot to mention that. I think it was dropped to compete with FCPX but who knows for sure? Also Adobe can loose video editors and sill make money from graphic design artist.
[Andrew Kimery] “Even if Adobe cuts it’s CC price in half it’s still going to be more expensive than free DR from day one and more expensive than FCP X and paid DR as soon as year two of the subscription rolls around.”
It does not have to be free just affordable to the average web blogger. Having said that Premiere Pro does have to start making good updates again. DR 14 looks good and as other haves stated the price is right.
[Andrew Kimery] ”
I think blindly chasing falling prices will topple Adobe the same way it toppled many PC manufactures that chased Dell in its race-to-the-bottom pricing (with Dell itself ultimately bottoming out too). Adobe has to focus on selling value, not price, because they will always lose a price war to companies like Apple and BMD. If people find sufficient value in a product then they will pay for it even if it costs more than the competition. Maybe in a few years people will get tired of the recurring payments (which is a greater problem for Adobe than prices), or maybe the payments will fade into the background just like our phone bills, ISP bills, insurance bills, Netflix subscription, etc.,… It just becomes another cost lost in a seas of costs.”Adobe updates since the CC have been mediocre. I would agree that Adobe should focus on creating a good product but they still have bugs form over a year ago. Adobe is not offering a superior product anymore over the competition.
[Andrew Kimery] “Someone vlogging as hobby isn’t going to spend $1800 on the Production Premium CS. Even if Adobe cut its CS prices in half it would still be way more expensive than free DR and $299 FCP X (especially when you factor in Adobe charging for annual upgrades where as Apple and BMD do not).”
You are totally proving my point. I never stated a blogger would spend $1800.00 on the CS Production Premium. What I stated is that for the web blogger wanting a little more than what iMovie offers Adobe has opted not to compete with BMD or FCPX.
[Andrew Kimery] “You keep contrasting poor vloggers to post houses even though the industry is much more diverse than that.”
I do not keep contrasting them at all. I am saying that in 2017 there is a market for hobbyist unlike in the year 2002. I never stated there are only YouTubers and post production house. Never did I make that statement.
[Andrew Kimery] “Every week I see job ads posted on Staff Me Up, Film and TV Pro, Media Match, various FB groups, Craigslist, etc., from small and medium sized businesses across the US looking for editors that know Premiere Pro. Corporate, news, ad/marketing, web/digital, low budget indies, docs, etc.,.. Over the past few years I’ve seen nothing but growing demand for Premiere users across the spectrum.”
I never said otherwise but you have to learn to comprehend that DR 14 is still in beta. Where will DR be in another two years? I am on a PC and never gave DR a second look until now. I never thought about FCPX but I now have a Mac and a PC and all I can say is competition is good.
-
[Oliver Peters] “If we are talking about pro users, price isn’t a factor here. Both Fusion and Motion have radically different approaches to AE, so therefore AE is still pretty entrenched. The price isn’t going to be a determining factor. Same reason Flame continues to exist.”
Are you suggestion YouTube bloggers should invest in a Flame system?
I have already stated for a post production house $49.99 is not expensive. I posted that in plain English.
In fact I stated for the average blogger $49.99 is expensive.
I doubt the average blogger needs AE while on the other hand Motion and FCPX can offer a lot for the price. If you can respond with a counter argument why the average blogger with no clients in the year 2017 needs the CC over DR or FCPX I would love to hear your reasons. To say $49.99 is not to expensive for a post production house is a non issues and no one that I can recall has ever made that argument that $49.99 is to expensive for a post production house. What I am stating is Adobe wants to cater exclusively to the higher end editors like Avid once did. However in the year 2017 there a millions of dollars to be made from video bloggers who want a little more than what iMovie has to offer. Adobe has decide those customers can use DR, FCPX, Vegas Video or Pinnacle Studio. That is the point I am making and that is what you must address.
[Oliver Peters] “[andy patterson] “Will BMD have a photo/graphic arts program at NAB 2018 for $99.99? Who knows? ”
Serif Affinity and Pixelmator have been out for a while. Both groups are excellent products and legitimate rivals to Photoshop and Illustrator. Yet they don’t really seem to be much of a challenge to Adobe.”
My point is BMD design sees the value in software. If BMD can create a graphic/photo program that integrates with DR then that would be much better than using Serif Affinity or Pixelmator. You must think about the bigger picture. Adobe has great integration with other Adobe Programs. That kind of ecosystem is hard to top but BMD could do the same thing.
-
[Andrew Kimery] “Sure, PPro has competition, but what about After Effects? And how many editors need After Effects? If an editor already pays the $49.99 to get After Effects, doesn’t it seem likely that they’ll give PPro a shot since it’s included in the $49.99”
Why pay $49.99 for CC if the competition can make a better offer? What if BMD offers fusion and DR for $199.99 at NAB 2018? I doubt that will happen but who knows for sure? FCPX is only $299.99 and Motion is only $50.00. The competition in the world of NLE is lowering prices. Some could argue that if Adobe still had the CS paradigm the prices might have had to drop slightly to compete with the competition. I am not saying Adobe will drop the CC prices but they may loose some revenue. As I have stated $49.99 is not a lot of money for a post production house but for a web blogger it is. Not everyone has clients in the year 2017. Some do it as a hobby. There was a time when Adobe cared about the little guy. The little guy might opt for DR or FCPX. Will BMD have a photo/graphic arts program at NAB 2018 for $99.99? Who knows? I would not be surprised if it happens. I think BMD realizes the value of software. $49.99 per month is not bad but competition is out there. For some DR and FCPX might be a better option. I don’t doubt BMD is looking at purchasing other software titles.
-
[Bill Davis] “A few years back I’d read 1000 times that a big desktop level machine was required to do serious daily editing for money.”
There is no shortage of BS on the internet. Six years ago many FCPX users claimed you need an $8500.00 workstation to edit native AVCHD using Premiere Pro. A few years ago it changed to you need a $8500.00 workstation to edit 4K using premiere Pro. As I have stated there is a lot of BS on the internet.
[Bill Davis] “That wisdom was totally and utterly wrong – yet years later, people are still parroting it.
People working only in desktop machines missed the gap closing in mobile vs desktop processor performance along with the development of modern proxy workflows.”Not everyone wants to use a proxy workflow. Some people want to edit 4K, 6K and 8K at full resolution using camera raw files and other native formats. For that you probably do need an $8500.00 desktop computer.
-
At 17:30 Bob Zelin basically said the exact same thing I have said many times but I get dissed for saying it. Will Bob get dissed for saying it or be revered as a genius with tremendous insight?
FCPX and DR are getting less expensive. Almost free as stated by Bob himself as compared to the prices of the past. While $49.99 for the Creative Cloud might seem like a good deal today in another two years it might seem expensive compared to the competition. I stated that in another thread and Bob implied it in this video. Having said that Lightroom and Photoshop are kind of the industry standard for photo editing but they are bundled together for $9.99. Adobe owns the photography market so they really don’t need to cut any deals for those two programs. On the other hand the video editing market is very very competitive right now as Bob stated in the video but you don’t see Premiere Pro, AE and Audition bundled for $9.99. Will Audition become part of Premiere Pro like Fairlight is part of DR? Who knows? I think Adobe is going to have to pick up the pace on their updates and also make alterations to the CC. Obviously I am not the only who sees the competition as a threat to Adobe’s CC paradigm. I think BMD dropped the price of DR to compete against Avid, CC and FCPX but who knows for sure? I think DR was revamped because BMD really wants to gain market share for DR since AV hardware is becoming obsolete as stated in this video.
On a side note I still use my Intensity Shuttle when editing interlaced video and for client previews. For $199.99 it was well worth the money but I doubt I will ever need to buy another AV I/O devices again. BMD did a good job with the Intensity Shuttle in my opinion. Having said that I may soon become a paying customer of DR 14.
-
[Brian Seegmiller] “Your example is why we would not want to design a logo in PP”
Do you think that is a wise comment to make? You are saying that with all the drawing tools Premiere Pro has you could not create a logo? Then you probably could not create a logo with Photoshop or Illustrator either. Perhaps you should have said something like this “with all the tools available in Premiere Pro I think I could create a better logo than you did” as opposed to “Your example is why we would not want to design a logo in PP”. Having said that perhaps you can show us a logo you created in FCPX or Motion. I don’t create logos using Premiere Pro anymore but then again I would not use Motion either because many times logos are used for print (something FCPX and Motion are not good at). Having said that I create logos with Illustrator and use them in Premiere Pro. For masks and mattes I simply use Premiere Pro because masks and mattes are not going to be used for print. See the method to the madness? See how FCPX and Motion are lacking for my needs? That is why some people want Apple to make a photo/graphic design program. Will Apple finally catch up or will BMD do it?
[Brian Seegmiller] “Andy Paterson “It needs a lot of work compared to what? Are you saying you can do more with FCPX’s titling tools than with Premiere’s titling tools?”
I was referring to the the Essentials Graphics Panel compared to FCP X and Motion. Not the titling tool.”
What exactly is lacking? Keep in mind dynamic link works for me. We really didn’t need the Essentials Graphics Panel. It is more or less a canned effects template generator. I am not saying it will not be useful for many post production houses.
[Brian Seegmiller] “You can create custom titles, effects, transitions, and generators in Motion for FCP X. PP will soon follow suit and copy.”
Soon follow and copy? We have been able to do it for over ten years but now we can make templates with editable parameters.
[Brian Seegmiller] ” I disagree that the new EGP was made just for canned effects.”
It is just that. The old titling system has more design tools and it is still there. I don’t doubt the Essential Graphics Panel will get more design tools but shouldn’t FCPX get some design tools of it’s own?
[Brian Seegmiller] “Some of the default templates in both FCP X and PP’s new EGP are however pretty lame.”
I don’t doubt that but I have not really bothered to check either.