Eric Jurgenson
Forum Replies Created
-
Features, workflow..yes. Audio is considered one of Premiere’s bright spots. Yes, conforming intrudes occasionally, and there is the lack of mono tracks (although the copy left and copy right filters effectively make the track mono, it would be nice to have a mono waveform displayed), and there is the weak metering, and the keyframing interface is clunky, and the pen tool is obnoxious, and there is no direct audio CD import, but other than that, it’s pretty good. Everybody loves Audition, too.
If you are purchasing a pro level system, you should be getting support from your dealer. If they can’t handle your problem directly, they have procedures for contacting the manufacturer.
-
It might be all over by then.
-
[Tim Kolb] “Bottom line is that anyone who contends they know what Ppro users in general, want…is speaking for themselves and whatever fraction of users find themselves in duplicate circumstances…and it’s always a smaller fraction of the whole than one might think.”
Tim, I think I’m typical of a small but growing group of editors who are trying to deal with Premiere as a pro editing tool. We are starting to use advanced HD editing engines like Axio, or ProspectHD on high performance dual/dual core workstations.
Many of us are used to more advanced editing tools than are currently in Premiere’s tool set. So naturally we are eager to see Adobe address our particular needs. But take it from me… “Try it, you’ll like it.”
Pardon me if I’m outspoken. I have a vision. Its that Adobe makes a major move to surpass FCP in it’s quest to redefine the NLE marketplace. For a company with the resources of Adobe, this is largely an executive decision.
I also think that users can play a role in the process by coming up with suggestions, and this forum is a great resource for that sort of thing. I also enjoy the input from visitors from the other forums.
The point I was trying to make in the last post is for some of us, its not as much about the money as about wanting to use the most powerful engines on the most powerful workstations that run on the world’s most common operating system – without spending a ridiculous amount of money on a a system that is obsolete before we buy it. We want to work with a suite of best of breed products that are highly integrated. Adobe gives us that hope… someday.
But we gotta go NOW, baby. Because our Edits and Media100s are dead, and HD is knockin’ on the door, and SD’s got about 2 years to live. So pardon me if I offer up a few lines of encouragement. Besides, I DO think it would be a smart business move for Adobe.
-
Professional editors will naturally gravitate to the best software available. Right now admittedly this is Avid – due to the fact that they wrote some great software in 1995. Their current competition, Apple and Adobe, started out as prosumer applications that sold for a tiny fraction of the cost of the big Avids.
But they are catching up in the professional market. Apple in particular is kicking Avid’s butt pretty bad right now.
We are entering a new era in editing now. Integration across a suite of applications is important. High performance HD is important. Digital media management is important. Anything to do with tape or film is becoming irrelevant.
It’s true that broadcasters and Hollywood will hold on to their Avids way too long, but that is the least of their problems. Cable is eating broadcasters, and will in turn be eaten by the phone company. Independant film and bootleggers will rise to snuff out Hollywood. Networks will die as people access programming on demand. People won’t watch movies in theatres any more. Apple will make ipods that fit in your navel, and we will be pledging allegiance to Microsoft, Adobe, and Ma Bell.
-
By increasing the frequency of their updates, Adobe could make more money. Pro users wouldn’t mind paying a couple of hundred bucks every six months or so. To be fair to the little guys, Adobe could make the updates retroactive to 1.0, so users would have the option of skipping a few releases without paying a financial penalty.
-
I don’t mean to disparage the mac folks. The reality is I’m jealous of the functionality in FCP, but I prefer the power and economy of the PC. I also have a vision of what could be if Adobe gets busy. I don’t see FCP as the ultimate editing app; I think Premiere is 80% of the way toward coming up with something better on the PC.
I am trying to keep my suggestions relatively simple to implement by (for example) borrowing features from other Adobe apps, or modifying existing tools.
As far as the appropriateness of bringing up suggestions on the eve of the 2.0 release, why not? This is the time when Adobe should be considering their next move, and when users can decide whether Adobe is really serious about Premiere becoming a truly pro editing application.
-
Don’t assume… You make an ass out of u and me. : )
I just think it’s high time Adobe does whatever it takes to make Premiere best of breed (like AE and Photoshop). They’ll make money in the long run, and we’ll all be happier (except for the macheads).
-
I think part of the problem is that Adobe doesn’t want to alienate their prosumer user base. They figure (rightly) that for every pro editor there are fifty consumer types throwing together 3 minute home movies, and they don’t want to lose that market. So they are reluctant to load the application with too many advanced features.
But FCP has shown that pretending to be a pro application sells (even though it can lead to feature bloat).
I’d like to see Adobe pick up the pace of development, with the ultimate goal of becoming the best editing software available. To do this they are going to have to make major improvements in media management and integration. That’s the hard stuff, but who is in a better position to do this than Adobe? With what’s going on in Photoshop (Version Cue, Bridge)
it’s clear that Adobe WANTS to address advanced search and collaborative workflow across all their applications.Coming up with a more advanced edit toolset is relatively simple. If the folks at Adobe are clever, and take suggestions from professional editors (like us) to heart, they can make great improvements without sacrificing the simplicity that remains one of Premiere’s strong points. And if they can sell us, the wannabees will fall right in line with wallets open. Hell, it might even send their stock up.
Bottom line: it’s time for Adobe to get off the pot and dedicate some major resources to speed Premiere’s development. And we can help. After all, our suggestions are FREE. All we want is to make Premiere a better product… no, the BEST product, because that’s what we prefer to spend our money on.
-
The FireWire port on the RTX100 card will work with HDV capture; no need to buy a seperate FireWire card.
-
That’s why I like the idea of a macro tool. A lot of these things could be implemented through something not too different from the macro tool in Photoshop (actions).
OK, I’m going to say it. Could we pleeze have point to point timeline selection indicated by a color change on record enabled.. I mean TARGETED tracks, which could subsequently be removed and rippled by hitting the delete key? I thought not. damn.