[Jeff Markgraf]

[Oliver Peters] “most users’ experience is exactly the opposite.”

FWIW, except for the PSD issue, my experience pretty much mirrors Jeremy’s. Across three different systems (all MacPro trashcans) and two different versions (CC2015 snd CC2017). Nasty habit of crashing on deadline. Almost as if it were alive and malicious… 😉

[Jeff Markgraf]

[andy patterson] “Don’t back out on me, dude. “

Ahem…”dude”…Did I suddenly get time-warped back to middle school? Good heavens. Take a pill. Or something. No trolling here. I leave that to the usual suspects on this board.

My initial post stands on its own. Even so, Jeremy and Robin spelled out the specifics very well (each in his own inimitable way). I would only add, since there seems to be some confusion, that my comments refer to UI and UX, not capabilities.

Feel free to configure PPro panels any way you like. PPro will never have X’s timeline. It’s ever-increasing collection of windows/panels/whatever you wish to call them will never work in the context-sensitive simplicity that is built into the very design of X. The endless, convoluted twirldowns within twirldowns inside panels and submenus will continue to be the exasperating experience of daily editing that it is today and has been for years.

PPro’s UI/UX philosophy is antithetical that of FCPX. PPro can’t be made to effectively “mimic” X, let alone behave like it. I don’t think X can mimic PPro, let alone behave like it. Why would I even want to try such a thing?

If I find some benefit in using PPro, I’ll simply use PPro. I’ve used it for years. Almost never by choice, but I don’t always have a choice. Same with Avid. 20 years of Avid, and it’s still Avid, for better and for worse.

Clearly, I prefer FCPX, warts and all. It’s simply a better tool in almost all circumstances, for me. In those rare situations where PPro or Avid is the better tool, I’ll use it, if possible. But it’s ridiculous to pretend that Avid’s UI isn’t straight out of the 90s, with seriously flawed attempts to graft on pathes to accommodate modern workflow needs. And it’s ridiculous to pretend PPro, in spite of having been recoded for 64 bit hardware, isn’t still just a gussied up version of the original amateur editing app for graphics guys and computer geeks it started out as 20+ years ago. Much more capable, but still built on the same philosophical underpinnings.

TL;DR: Poor UI/UX does not necessarily equal lack of capability, merely poor usability.

Hope I didn’t let you down, dude.

[Jeff Markgraf]

[andy patterson] “Premiere Pro does have a nice GUI.”

Counterpoint: Premiere Pro has a lousy GUI. Crowded, fiddly, ugly, not at all pleasant to use on a daily basis.

[Jeff Markgraf]

Hi Bob, and all who have responded…

Thanks for the input. So far Axle and Cantemo seem like they may be the best fit for this group. I like Axle’s “hands off” approach to the existing file structures. But I also like Cantemo’s “related files” functionality, since many of these projects will be revisited multiple times over the course of a year. Both worth pursuing, I think.

I know this is going to be like pulling teeth. Devising a system may be the easy part. Enforcing the process will probably be a minor nightmare. Everyone’s always in a hurry, and I’m sure they “just won’t have the time” to do the tagging and follow the rules. Unfortunately, it may devolve to me to crack the whip! We’ll see.

And I know cost will be an issue as well. What fun.

[Jeff Markgraf]

Hi Bill.

I don’t disagree. In this case, however, we’re looking at stepping back in time several years. Essentially, trying to adapt a local news operation infrastructure and mentality to a station group/mini-network promo/marketing agenda. I think it’s going to require some heavy lifting. The fact that they recently went from FCP 7 to Premiere is disappointing, but it was decided before my appearance on the scene. So I’m dealing with the cards that have been dealt.

So this is very much in the large internal work group model. Collaborators come here. But I don’t think there’s any need for proprietary solutions. At least I hope not. The more open the better. I want to see this operation future-proofed as much as possible.

[Jeff Markgraf]

Andrew:

This is a broadcast promo operation that currently has no real system at all. They are rapidly growing and trying to get with a modern program, but need help. I’m the help!

Their current SAN is way too small and barely organized. Lots of old footage that needs to be cleaned out. It’s Gigabit Ethernet, designed for DVCPro broadcast files. It’s way too slow and unreliable to deal with the 2k and 4k footage that is increasingly the norm. There is no useable or thought-out system for tagging or organization currently in place. Edit bays are mostly working with local drives out of self defense, to stay off of the SAN. I’m told a new, larger SAN (probably Facilis TerraBlock) is on the way, with fiber connectivity to the trashcan Macs.

So: the need is to organize existing and incoming footage.

1. Tags, descriptions, etc.
2. Make it searchable.
3. Be able to create the equivalent of smart collections or playlists to bring into editing projects.
4. Allow for rough cuts and finished spots to go back into the system.
5. Needs to include graphics, vo, music and sfx.
6. Raw footage should be searchable and viewable by anyone from any platform. Spots too.
7. A notes and approval mechanism would be nice.
8. Some path to archiving in the near future.

I would be in favor of an LTO based online/near-offline/deep-offline model, but I doubt their budget will support it. I suspect backing up to stacks of drives is the most likely near-term scenario. Also, I don’t think they’re ready to wrap their heads around a remote or web-based access concept yet. Baby steps.

Essentially, Avid Interplay. Or at least Grass Valley Stratus. As I said, if this were FCPX, Keyflow Pro would be great.
I’ve looked into Cantemo Portal, and it seems to have a lot of the features. I don’t know enough about the other systems yet.

Any suggestions welcome.

[Jeff Markgraf]

Thoughts on relative merits and drawbacks of each?

[Jeff Markgraf]

[Oliver Peters] “they are the worst offenders.”

Yes, I guess that’s true. I got out of local TV years ago, but the slide into “good enough” had already started back then. Now I just stand and gape at some of the stuff I see on local.

Fortunately, because most facilities in LA still have to deal with network standards, there are minimum standards for equipment that keep things passable. But its probably just a matter of time here, too.

[Jeff Markgraf]

Actually, my question was kinda rhetorical.

[Oliver Peters] “many suites no longer have a QC-grade external monitor”
I guess it’s just the old broadcaster in my that makes me shudder at this unfortunate reality.

[Oliver Peters] “a properly calibrated computer display “
Is there such a thing in the wild? 😉 Actually, I’m shocked at how well my current LG 21:9 monitor matches the pix monitor.

Kidding aside, I understand the issues. But I hate the idea of giving in to the continuous slide in quality.

Imagine an audio mixing stage that no longer uses real reference grade speakers to mix. They just use whatever random consumer electronics big box store-bought speakers someone brings in that day. Or they use a boom box. Or the earphones that come standard with every iPhone. Because that’s how most people listen any more.

There has always been the need to check a mix on Auratones or some other restricted-bandwidth speaker. But you still want a reference playback system that is genuine hi-fi. I think it’s fine to see how the picture grade looks on different monitors and through different media players. But I think a video professional has to at least try to have some kind of professional reference as a baseline. I consider it the cost of doing business, even if the business is “just” corporate or YouTube.

[Jeff Markgraf]

Oliver, this is interesting and not surprising.

But I would ask, “so what?” I would never judge color on any computer display. That’s what picture monitors are for. Like, Flanders or JVC or Boland or any of the other broadcast monitors (I hesitate to include Marshall or TV Logic in the list).

Or is there a large group of people color correcting on computer displays? If so, God help us all…