Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
As someone that works in Hollywood everyday. I don't think I know a single editor that uses Premiere for any sort of Hollywood production. Maybe it's just super small independents but if you make TV or Film content you are probably using Avid. Davinci Resolve is growing a lot though.

And then in News people love Final Cut because it's just unmatchable for speed and stability. It's actually hard not to love Final Cut as an editor if you just get past the initial misconceptions. Even though big film and tv projects only want you to edit in Avid.

But man Final Cut is just SOOO fast. Just ran a test of the exact same project, it took 34 minutes in Premiere and it took 2 minutes and 35 seconds to render out in Final Cut.

I'm just so confused as to why people use Premiere. I've always wanted to know. It's slower than all the other editors, It's not able to be as bare metal native like Final Cut, It's not an industry standard like Avid, it's not free like Resolve. It's not stable and it's sooooo slow. Is it just what people are used to. I've always been curious why people would actively choose to work in it.
I think that's a solid analysis. I think a lot of the video ad agency and corporate world are stuck in premiere because of the ease to share project files among freelancers and other editors. Resolve (which I love) and the others are a bit harder to throw at someone due to database things etc. The ad agency and corporate places I've worked work too fast and with older drive tech to get off the Adobe boob feeding.
 
  • Like
Reactions: peanuts_of_pathos
As an editor you need to know both Avid and Premiere, no-one really cares about FCPX, they used to, then it changed and all the FCP editors moved to Premiere. It really depends on the client, I have broadcast channels that are all set up for Avid, and others which are all for Premiere (A few years ago the BBC decided Quantel was the future but that didn't last long). Though since COVID and home working nobody cares they just want the work done and it's up to you how you do it as you're working from home with your own kit. Resolve is great for grading but I don't know anyone that cuts on it for paid work.
 
Hollywood: Avid and Premiere and Resolve (Finishing)
YouTubers: Premiere/Final Cut Pro/iMovie and Resolve (Finishing)
Beginngers: Final Cut Pro/iMovie

Resolve still isn't an 'editor' it's finishing and is used by Hollywood & YouTubers. Hollywood basically won't touch FCPX, I see it in my editor circles, and in industry circles. It's built for a single user to edit a single thing, not share.
I don’t know where you’re getting this beginner fcp x data from but the reality is fcp x is a far more capable, stable, fast and efficient editor than premiere pro and the pricing is an absolute steal. Old hands bristle at the changes fcp x introduced but anyone who gets over the learning curve ends up swearing by it.
 
I think that's a solid analysis. I think a lot of the video ad agency and corporate world are stuck in premiere because of the ease to share project files among freelancers and other editors. Resolve (which I love) and the others are a bit harder to throw at someone due to database things etc. The ad agency and corporate places I've worked work too fast and with older drive tech to get off the Adobe boob feeding.
Yeah, Premiere is king (outside of actual show production) because almost every graphics department already uses After Effects and Photoshop, and there’s a lot of corporate appeal to one integrated suite, as well as the CYA factor of the massive Adobe brand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: peanuts_of_pathos
I don’t know where you’re getting this beginner fcp x data from but the reality is fcp x is a far more capable, stable, fast and efficient editor than premiere pro and the pricing is an absolute steal. Old hands bristle at the changes fcp x introduced but anyone who gets over the learning curve ends up swearing by it.
For my work (commercial editing), FCPX is a complete non-starter. When your content must be an exact duration, the mandatory magnetic timeline is a no-go.

But, more than that, Apple completely destroyed trust in the industry with the colossal F.U. of FCPX. Our network (one of the Big Four) transitioned our worldwide installations over to Final Cut 6, at the cost of many, many, many millions of dollars. 6 months later, Apple killed the product overnight, and the new (utterly incompetent) software couldn’t even OPEN THE PROJECTS of the old one. Needless to say, the network (and the gargantuan media empire that owns it) was… not happy. 😂

Especially because Apple sold them hard on the product, KNOWING they were shooting it in the face 6 months later. That’s not soon forgotten.
 
Hollywood: Avid and Premiere and Resolve (Finishing)
YouTubers: Premiere/Final Cut Pro/iMovie and Resolve (Finishing)
Beginngers: Final Cut Pro/iMovie
I think this is the most accurate answer. FCP is very popular for Youtube because it works well on single-person projects. I think professionals on large projects stay clear of Apple products to avoid "lock-in" risk. Many of them remember Apple dropping support with short notice. And also Apple is very bad with multi-user workflows.
 
For my work (commercial editing), FCPX is a complete non-starter. When your content must be an exact duration, the mandatory magnetic timeline is a no-go.

But, more than that, Apple completely destroyed trust in the industry with the colossal F.U. of FCPX. Our network (one of the Big Four) transitioned our worldwide installations over to Final Cut 6, at the cost of many, many, many millions of dollars. 6 months later, Apple killed the product overnight, and the new (utterly incompetent) software couldn’t even OPEN THE PROJECTS of the old one. Needless to say, the network (and the gargantuan media empire that owns it) was… not happy. 😂

Especially because Apple sold them hard on the product, KNOWING they were shooting it in the face 6 months later. That’s not soon forgotten.
I do a lot of corporate stuff, and some commercial. The 'exact duration' thing is not any kind of a problem, even with the magnetic timeline. I agree, Apple really screwed up the launch. And I'm still pissed that it can't open old projects natively (have a decade's worth of those, too).

Having said that, with the features added shortly after launch, and really fighting through the initial WTF IS THIS curve, I absolutely cannot stand to use anything else. Premiere has been terrible forever, Resolve is trying to be everything to everyone and falls short in every aspect aside from grading, and I never had any reason to go Avid.

I've found workarounds for conversion to/from PPr, and fortunately don't have to do so very often. My commercial spots always pass tech, fwiw.
 
I'm just so confused as to why people use Premiere.

Huge plugin library and "seamless" integration with After Effects.
I hate Pr, and it has the worst stuck in the 1990s iterface possible, but the integration with After Effects is priceless (when it works).

That said, if you don't use After Effects there's very little sense in using premiere.
On windows Resolve is growing a lot and on macOS Final Cut is pretty much a no brainer (once again assuming your workflow contemplates editing exclusively).

Anyway the Media Encoder native release is even more interesting for me, as it is a vital part of using Premiere Pro and After Effects.
 
  • Like
Reactions: peanuts_of_pathos
For my work (commercial editing), FCPX is a complete non-starter. When your content must be an exact duration, the mandatory magnetic timeline is a no-go.

But, more than that, Apple completely destroyed trust in the industry with the colossal F.U. of FCPX. Our network (one of the Big Four) transitioned our worldwide installations over to Final Cut 6, at the cost of many, many, many millions of dollars. 6 months later, Apple killed the product overnight, and the new (utterly incompetent) software couldn’t even OPEN THE PROJECTS of the old one. Needless to say, the network (and the gargantuan media empire that owns it) was… not happy. 😂

Especially because Apple sold them hard on the product, KNOWING they were shooting it in the face 6 months later. That’s not soon forgotten.
Are they going to take action against Apple for knowingly fudging up a product to gain millions only for it to die on M1? I’d pay $$ to be in THAT front row!
Edit: this wasn’t recently, I take it? Or was it?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: peanuts_of_pathos
I do a lot of corporate stuff, and some commercial. The 'exact duration' thing is not any kind of a problem, even with the magnetic timeline. I agree, Apple really screwed up the launch. And I'm still pissed that it can't open old projects natively (have a decade's worth of those, too).

Having said that, with the features added shortly after launch, and really fighting through the initial WTF IS THIS curve, I absolutely cannot stand to use anything else. Premiere has been terrible forever, Resolve is trying to be everything to everyone and falls short in every aspect aside from grading, and I never had any reason to go Avid.

I've found workarounds for conversion to/from PPr, and fortunately don't have to do so very often. My commercial spots always pass tech, fwiw.
Apple didn't just botch the launch of FCPX, it destroyed the trust of the entire industry and the many editor-evangelists they had working on their behalf.

There were many people in the FCP (v. 4-7) User Groups who were trained Avid editors from Avid shops who put their personal credibility on the line and then got the rug pulled out from under them. I know because I was one of them.

I remember a large User Group meeting at the time watching the organizer, who had been recently hired by Apple, go though the FCPX launch announcement. It was clear that Apple had even lied to him until a couple weeks before launch.

People who don't actually work in film/video/production don't understand how important backwards compatibility and old license availability is. Sometimes you just need another seat to finish the project because the mix of tools you are using DO NOT WORK with the newest version and you're in the middle of an edit (or a season) and you just need your stuff to work. Apple screwed people and even stopped selling FCP 6/7 licenses for a while. That decision sealed their fate in pro circles.

Apple made the people who they had relied on to do the majority of their FCP product marketing for years look like fools. Everyone moved on, even those who liked FCPX. It was not a technology issue, all ancient history now.

Also, I agree magnetic timeline is not a big deal, just use the position tool. I prefer the Avid metaphor but whatever, out of the biz now.
 
Are they going to take action against Apple for knowingly fudging up a product to gain millions only for it to die on M1? I’d pay $$ to be in THAT front row!
I’m sure legal remedies were explored, but I think corporations just decided “We will never buy an Apple software package ever again.”
 
  • Like
Reactions: peanuts_of_pathos
I’m sure legal remedies were explored, but I think corporations just decided “We will never buy an Apple software package ever again.”
Figured. Windows may be ugly as heck, but at least it’s… useable in ALL versions and has backwards compatibility. Shame I can’t make it look like a Mac without destroying the configuration completely. :(
 
  • Like
Reactions: peanuts_of_pathos
Apple didn't just botch the launch of FCPX, it destroyed the trust of the entire industry and the many editor-evangelists they had working on their behalf.

There were many people in the FCP (v. 4-7) User Groups who were trained Avid editors from Avid shops who put their personal credibility on the line and then got the rug pulled out from under them. I know because I was one of them.

I remember a large User Group meeting at the time watching the organizer, who had been recently hired by Apple, go though the FCPX launch announcement. It was clear that Apple had even lied to him until a couple weeks before launch.

People who don't actually work in film/video/production don't understand how important backwards compatibility and old license availability is. Sometimes you just need another seat to finish the project because the mix of tools you are using DO NOT WORK with the newest version and you're in the middle of an edit (or a season) and you just need your stuff to work. Apple screwed people and even stopped selling FCP 6/7 licenses for a while. That decision sealed their fate in pro circles.

Apple made the people who they had relied on to do the majority of their FCP product marketing for years look like fools. Everyone moved on, even those who liked FCPX. It was not a technology issue, all ancient history now.

Also, I agree magnetic timeline is not a big deal, just use the position tool. I prefer the Avid metaphor but whatever, out of the biz now.
Was that LAFCPUG? If so, I was there too.

I remember when our execs returned from the secret meeting in Cupertino where they showed the biggest industry players the upcoming FCPX one month early. When they came back, I asked them “I know you’re under a crazy NDA, but just give me a smile, or a frown…”

The look they gave me was indescribable. 😂
 
  • Like
Reactions: peanuts_of_pathos
Just to break it down further…

Hollywood (Show Production): AVID
Hollywood (marketing, etc.): Premiere
Hollywood (Finishing): Resolve
YouTubers: FCPX, Resolve
Mom N Dad: iMovie

At our network, we’re taking a close look at Resolve for editing as well, though that would be a year or two out. It’s arguably turned into a superior editing platform than Premiere, which has basically been stagnant for the last 5 years or so, since Apple handed them the pro market on a silver platter with the FCPX debacle.
I agree with your listing, was going to comment the same. AVID is still a huge player here in scripted and unscripted work.

Resolve has a lot of interest – especially because it's free – but I still see plenty of complaints about it on the boards. It's Color workflow is top drawer but the editing tab still leaves a lot to be desired. I haven't tried the latest version but it seemed like their teams/collaboration functions were slim to non-existent; that's a big part of working in the industry and I don't see a lot of big post houses/depts. jumping on board if editors can't easily swap timelines.

But how has Premiere Pro been "stagnant"? It's come a long way from the version that shipped in 2017. New essential graphics and title tools, new color workflows, new collaboration features with Productions, and now Speech-to-Text (for FREE) -- did you miss all those?
 
  • Like
Reactions: peanuts_of_pathos
Was that LAFCPUG? If so, I was there too.

I remember when our execs returned from the secret meeting in Cupertino where they showed the biggest industry players the upcoming FCPX one month early. When they came back, I asked them “I know you’re under a crazy NDA, but just give me a smile, or a frown…”

The look they gave me was indescribable. 😂
No, I was visiting the South Florida FCPUG which had grown to a very respectable size, plus had a very similar experience at one in Atlanta, which is a much bigger pond for editors.

Everyone basically thought, "iMovie Pro, great." This is why you bought Shake?
 
As someone that works in Hollywood everyday. I don't think I know a single editor that uses Premiere for any sort of Hollywood production. Maybe it's just super small independents but if you make TV or Film content you are probably using Avid. Davinci Resolve is growing a lot though.

And then in News people love Final Cut because it's just unmatchable for speed and stability. It's actually hard not to love Final Cut as an editor if you just get past the initial misconceptions. Even though big film and tv projects only want you to edit in Avid.

But man Final Cut is just SOOO fast. Just ran a test of the exact same project, it took 34 minutes in Premiere and it took 2 minutes and 35 seconds to render out in Final Cut.

I'm just so confused as to why people use Premiere. I've always wanted to know. It's slower than all the other editors, It's not able to be as bare metal native like Final Cut, It's not an industry standard like Avid, it's not free like Resolve. It's not stable and it's sooooo slow. Is it just what people are used to. I've always been curious why people would actively choose to work in it.
Come on man. If you indeed "work in Hollywood everyday" then you know that what you're experiencing is a small subset of the overall work that's actually happening in this town.

"Hollywood Productions" = I assume you mean high-profile TV shows and movies and yes, those are almost always Avid. Any big place that does lots of unscripted under one roof (like Mark Burnham Prods.) is also Avid.

FCPX = definitely being used a lot for social media work, as well as things like weddings and event videography. Pretty much anyone who's a freelancer that doesn't need to swap file with others can use whatever they want. Resolve is starting to carve out space here too because of the price. I didn't know that about the News using FCPX, that's one industry I wasn't keyed into; makes sense that they would use it.

So who uses Premiere? Literally everybody else doing all kinds of projects. Trailer editors (I taught Premiere to the crew at one of the big trailer houses 2 years ago, they were still on FCP7), Industrials and Marketing videos (I just finished a massive conference edit for Amazon and it was all Premiere), some inroads into television (my indy company did two seasons of a small cable show in Premiere), promos, web series, and everything in-between.

"Not an industry standard" -- I'm sorry, but do you actually work in this town as you claim to? Just go on the job boards -- any job boards -- and look at the software requirements that come up. There are two NLEs that come up more than any others; one starts with an A and one starts with a P.
 
I don’t know where you’re getting this beginner fcp x data from but the reality is fcp x is a far more capable, stable, fast and efficient editor than premiere pro and the pricing is an absolute steal. Old hands bristle at the changes fcp x introduced but anyone who gets over the learning curve ends up swearing by it.
FCPX may be totally solid and fast, but half the battle in getting an NLE to be "industry standard" is simply getting pros to change their mindset and actually make the switch. A lot of editors are on Avid -- which at one point looked like a dead man walking -- mostly due to established licenses and infrastructure but also because of muscle memory. Why change horses mid-stream if everybody is going to be faster on the software they already know? Premiere also has an advantage because a lot of places had to dump FCP7 for something so now there's a lot of Premiere-proficient folks who don't want to switch either. FCPX *still* has the stink of it's botched release about it, and even though there are plenty of freelancers who use it "at home" it simply hasn't been able to penetrate the film & TV industry to any great degree because by and large it's extremely adverse to CHANGE.
 
What I’m gaining from this thread is that humans are resistant to change because it impacts production timing and value and forces crunches, which tends to be unhealthy for the indivduals forces to learn the new programs as they’re pulling all-nighters to do what they can do with one program “better” than the other. But if the time cost to learn that new program removes profits, is it ACTUALLY a profit?

(did this make sense at all? Workflow with mutiple files at the same time sounds really great though not gonna lie…)
 
What I’m gaining from this thread is that humans are resistant to change because it impacts production timing and value and forces crunches, which tends to be unhealthy for the indivduals forces to learn the new programs as they’re pulling all-nighters to do what they can do with one program “better” than the other. But if the time cost to learn that new program removes profits, is it ACTUALLY a profit?

(did this make sense at all? Workflow with mutiple files at the same time sounds really great though not gonna lie…)
You pretty much nailed it. MUSCLE MEMORY in the industry is no small factor. Why force your crew to use new software if the learning curve is going to impact the schedule and/or the bottom line? It's probably why Avid has remained a player for as long as it has.

I can attest to being present for a mass NLE changeover, when a trailer house had to finally dump FCP7 a couple years ago. They had already tried Avid and rejected it. So with their software EOL and their hardware options growing limited they had to jump ship quickly -- and Premiere Pro was the ticket. And that crew took to it like a fish to water. It only took a full weekend of lessons (the only downtime they had) for them to grasp the basics, and then it was about a month for them to slowly transition out of FCP7 and start new projects in Premiere. They asked a lot of questions and I had to put out a lot of fires. But by the end of that month I was barely fielding any calls.

That was about 20-30 editors under one roof, plus assistants. Now imagine trying to do that changeover at a big unscripted TV facility with about 80 editors. I'm not surprised that the producers would avoid disruptive CHANGE at that scale.
 
Hollywood: Avid and Premiere and Resolve (Finishing)
YouTubers: Premiere/Final Cut Pro/iMovie and Resolve (Finishing)
Beginngers: Final Cut Pro/iMovie

Resolve still isn't an 'editor' it's finishing and is used by Hollywood & YouTubers. Hollywood basically won't touch FCPX, I see it in my editor circles, and in industry circles. It's built for a single user to edit a single thing, not share.
I don’t know what circles you frequent but the ones I do have mostly moved to Resolve. It’s not just good for colour. It’s actually a really good editor these days. I moved from Premiere to Resolve and I literally miss this much from Premiere…0
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: peanuts_of_pathos
I agree with your listing, was going to comment the same. AVID is still a huge player here in scripted and unscripted work.

Resolve has a lot of interest – especially because it's free – but I still see plenty of complaints about it on the boards. It's Color workflow is top drawer but the editing tab still leaves a lot to be desired. I haven't tried the latest version but it seemed like their teams/collaboration functions were slim to non-existent; that's a big part of working in the industry and I don't see a lot of big post houses/depts. jumping on board if editors can't easily swap timelines.

But how has Premiere Pro been "stagnant"? It's come a long way from the version that shipped in 2017. New essential graphics and title tools, new color workflows, new collaboration features with Productions, and now Speech-to-Text (for FREE) -- did you miss all those?
I’m not a fan of those “essential” tools, which were basically just repackaging of existing tools. The collaboration features aren’t strong enough to make them useful (AVID has this part down pat). Speech-to-text is just them buying Boris Soundbite, which a lot of us already owned.

Premiere is using an ancient codebase, which makes it slow and buggy as hell. Its UI hasn’t changed in almost a decade, Resolve and FCPX are far more modern, especially in their timeline behaviors (as much as I despise the magnetic timeline, its feel is very slick). Heck, Premiere still can’t copy/paste tracking info onto another clip, to allow simple title tracking. That’s something they could probably implement with a week’s worth of programming.

Premiere was poised to become great, but Al Mooney was poached by Apple (I believe), and his vision for the future ended at Adobe. They basically didn’t replace him, and I can’t totally blame them. Why invest in making your product much better when you have a stranglehold on the pro market?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.