AVID | Premiere Pro

[iampaulb]

1st off this isnt a Vs or which one thread...id like to know from you professionals the history behind them. Like..

Why is AVID industry standard, and why not Premiere? I'm not mentioning FCP7 becauses thats EOD, and FCPX doesnt seem to be up to the studio needs.

From what i have read Premiere CS6 seems to be taking the FCP7 slot, Bandito Brothers who shot Act of Valor are using CS6. Also after emailing Eric Hansen (bloody nice chap) a few times i learnt that BrainFarm are moving from FCP7 to Premiere CS6.

Reading in places that Adobe have made Premiere CS6 quite similar to FCP7 (not sure in what ways, but thats what i have read) This is clearly to snap up FCP7 users who arent happy with FCPX

Will there be more studios moving to Premiere in the future? Why is AVID the top dog? I dont know much about AVID but what i do know is that Hollywood is using it and it has the largest market share between the 3.

I know it would be best to know all 3 AVID, Premiere and FCP7 / FCPX knowing 2 out the 3 is better than just knowing one (i have cut on Pr / FCP7 & FCPx - not to a high standard but i know my way around)

I am just curious really...to why studios use what they do.

 

[WRP]

Because Avid was around wayyyy longer than premiere. Because premiere sucked forever until the past few years. Because adobe stopped supporting premiere on Macs a long time ago and then realized it was stupid and started again. Because premiere for windows and premiere for OS X were different apps.

There is a million reasons.

And I wouldn't go "all in" on any app replacing the foothold Avid has on the industry. FCP did a good job creating another market but I wouldn't bet on which software those markets jump to. I assume many will go to Premiere because they already have the package due to PS, AE and IL no doubt. While other higher end FCP markets will go to Avid. I suspect very few will go to FCP X anytime in the near future.

 

[iampaulb]

Because Avid was around wayyyy longer than premiere. Because premiere sucked forever until the past few years. Because adobe stopped supporting premiere on Macs a long time ago and then realized it was stupid and started again. Because premiere for windows and premiere for OS X were different apps.

There is a million reasons.

And I wouldn't go "all in" on any app replacing the foothold Avid has on the industry. FCP did a good job creating another market but I wouldn't bet on which software those markets jump to. I assume many will go to Premiere because they already have the package due to PS, AE and IL no doubt. While other higher end FCP markets will go to Avid. I suspect very few will go to FCP X anytime in the near future.

Seeee i never knew that about adobe! What plonkers not supporting premiere on macs. Interesting to find out though, its a shame i dont have tones of money as id love to learn AVID but i cant fork out for the package if i am just cutting GoPro...guess could use the trail?

But is there a reason why AVID is top dog, is it because its just been around for years and its grown into being the industry standard?

 

[WRP]

Some light reading on the history of non-linear editing and this should give you some insight into the questions you have. I didn't start editing until 1995 so a lot of this was before my time as well.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-linear_editing_system

 

[Small White Car]

But is there a reason why AVID is top dog, is it because its just been around for years and its grown into being the industry standard?

The main reason is that Avid designed hardware to go with their software long before your desktop computer could edit video. (They weren't alone, but they became the most successful. And their competition was not adobe or Apple back then.)

You bought an "Avid Machine" back then, not just software. Eventually home computers starting coming with things like "4 GB hard drives" in them and then Adobe and Apple started making video editing software too.

But they were definitely the new kids on the block. While Avid was selling $50,000 machines, Adobe and Apple were trying to add editing software onto $3,000 desktops. You can see the difference.

Eventually computers got more powerful and now everyone uses similar hardware, so the main difference these days is in the software. But you can see how Avid got a huge head start not only in experience, but also in mindshare. It's hard to shake something like that.

 

[mBox]

Dont forget most that invested in Avid years ago stayed with Avid due to the initial cost.
My company started with Avid in 1996 (I came in at 98) and probably paid upwards to 100k from the start till now (Nitris addition).
Paying 2k a year for support since makes it an easier option.
Sure we have a ton of CS6/CS5.5/CS5 Master installed but dont bother with PPro due to other reasons.
Added FCS in 2000 and now FCPX.
Add Adobe and Apple products and still doesnt match the Avid initial purchase.

 

[iampaulb]

Sure we have a ton of CS6/CS5.5/CS5 Master installed but dont bother with PPro due to other reasons.

Can you shed light on those reasons?
Thanks for the link WRP ill read that tomorrow at work! lol.

Looks like i am going to have to find a way to learn AVID.

 

[Kevin Monahan]

Because Avid was around wayyyy longer than premiere.

Not precisely true, Avid/1 was '89. Adobe Premiere was '91.

 

[mBox]

Not precisely true, Avid/1 was '89. Adobe Premiere was '91.

I started with Premiere 1.0...ugh Im old

----------

Can you shed light on those reasons?
Thanks for the link WRP ill read that tomorrow at work! lol.

Looks like i am going to have to find a way to learn AVID.

I for one suggest FCPX if you are starting new a this.
Everyone will tell you that it sucks but I dont think it does.
For what I do at home, its perfect.
I have my own Avid MC/Symphony dongles and own a copy of Adobe Master CS6.
I learned FCPX for my other job (teach at college) and honestly it works for what I do
Avid has a student option as well as Adobe so you cant go wrong.

 

[WRP]

Not precisely true, Avid/1 was '89. Adobe Premiere was '91.

It was around way longer in the professional field. Not many professionals just up and started using Premiere when it was released as it was for multimedia, didn't support smtpe timecode and no capture support. But yes, technically it was 2 year difference in the software creation

And again, I'm surprised the 5 year hiatus they stopped developing for Macs wasn't a nail in the coffin for them. Luckily for them Apple shot themselves in the foot.

 

[mBox]

It was around way longer in the professional field. Not many professionals just up and started using Premiere when it was released as it was for multimedia.

And again, I'm surprised the 5 year hiatus they stopped developing for Macs wasn't a nail in the coffin for them. Luckily for them Apple shot themselves in the foot.

Well I wouldn't say shot themselves.
I don't think their stocks took a hit when they EOL FCS.
They offer us tools, we use em

 

[iampaulb]

I started with Premiere 1.0...ugh Im old

----------


I for one suggest FCPX if you are starting new a this.
Everyone will tell you that it sucks but I dont think it does.
For what I do at home, its perfect.
I have my own Avid MC/Symphony dongles and own a copy of Adobe Master CS6.
I learned FCPX for my other job (teach at college) and honestly it works for what I do
Avid has a student option as well as Adobe so you cant go wrong.

Yea i really like FCPX and have used it a lot. But ideally id like to maybe one day going into editing as a career or part time job or something a bit more than hobbie. I really enjoy the FCPX interface and gui.

I just feel 'at home' with premiere, i used it before i got stuck in with FCP7, and being a massive photoshop fan too with decent knowledge of layers, masks and what not, i feel premiere is my stronger side. Id love to learn AE too...which i will do eventually. AVID on the other hand, just been watching some tutorials, it looks a beast! Ton of RAM and SSD spring to mind.

 

[mBox]

I just feel 'at home' with premiere, i used it before i got stuck in with FCP7, and being a massive photoshop fan too with decent knowledge of layers, masks and what not, i feel premiere is my stronger side. Id love to learn AE too...

Born and raised on AE
Its my bread and butter along with Maya.
Avid is just as resource heavy as any of em.
We have all three NLE on the same system along with Resolve.
Learn everything when you can.
If you dont have access to Avid and Adobe then use FCPX.

 

[iampaulb]

Born and raised on AE
Its my bread and butter

Teach me all you know ol' wise one

 

[mBox]

Teach me all you know ol' wise one

Get out of this business before it eats you ALIVE!!
LOL!

 

[iampaulb]

Get out of this business before it eats you ALIVE!!
LOL!

LMAO!!! *takes note* just lacing up my running shoes now!

 

[mBox]

AE and some...

Great places to learn.

creativecow.net
videocopilot.net
lynda.com (sub)
digitaltutors.com (sub)

A few others to more but have to Google.

Just have fun thats all I can say

 

[codymac]

I started with Premiere 1.0...ugh Im old

And you probably still threw your arms up and used the Steenbeck in the corner like everyone I knew did back then.

Will there be more studios moving to Premiere in the future?

Here's a different way to ask that question. Will more people be using Premiere in the future due to the "democratization of filmmaking" (credit to Philip Bloom for that one) that DSLRs, etc. are creating right now?

I think that's a more interesting question.

 

[ppc_michael]

Looks like i am going to have to find a way to learn AVID.

You can download a 30-day trial from Avid's website, and there are some pretty good beginner tutorials on YouTube and elsewhere. If you're familiar with another NLE, most of the concepts are the same, so you should be able to get going with it, but there are two or three big differences that can take some getting used to.

 

[mBox]

...two or three big differences that can take some getting used to.

How it handles files is a big one.
Avid saves all working files in a specific folder structure.
Be careful with that when moving projects around.

 

[LethalWolfe]

From what i have read Premiere CS6 seems to be taking the FCP7 slot, Bandito Brothers who shot Act of Valor are using CS6. Also after emailing Eric Hansen (bloody nice chap) a few times i learnt that BrainFarm are moving from FCP7 to Premiere CS6.

The guys at Bandito Brothers have been Adobe enthusiast for a long time. They cut a feature doc called Dust to Glory 7 or 8 years ago on PPro 1.x. When I first read about it I thought that could be the beginning of PPro making it a three dog race but that never really materialized.

I am just curious really...to why studios use what they do.

Prestige and comfort play roles as well. Some people want to say their movie was cut on an Avid because the brand name still carries more weight than Final Cut or Premiere. Comfort plays a big part in it to because, basically, if it ain't broke why fix it? Especially when you have millions of dollars riding on each project. Predictability and reliability go a long, long way in this industry.

And again, I'm surprised the 5 year hiatus they stopped developing for Macs wasn't a nail in the coffin for them. Luckily for them Apple shot themselves in the foot.

I think by that point I think Premiere, which has a healthy PC following, was just getting totally annihilated by FCP on the Mac side. Plus, Macs back then were still struggling mightily in terms of performance and sales (like 2% market share and lacking some features that PC-based Avids had). Launching PPro on the Mac in those conditions would've been an massive uphill battle for a very small number of users and, even in hind sight, I think Adobe made the right call. I just don't see any version of PPro disrupting the popularity of FCP on the Mac side during that time period. I mean, I'd guess that the majority of people that have CS3 or higher installed on Mac have never opened PPro.

Here's a different way to ask that question. Will more people be using Premiere in the future due to the "democratization of filmmaking" (credit to Philip Bloom for that one) that DSLRs, etc. are creating right now?

I think that's a more interesting question.

I think more people have been using Premiere (Pro and pre-Pro) than Avid for the better part of two decades. There are many, many more people that do weddings, corporate/industrial pieces, events, local and regional commercials, etc., than work on 'Hollywood' movies, network TV shows or commercials that air nationally.

I think FCPX stands to gain the most from today's democratization (I phrase it like that 'cause DV in the late 90's is what really opened the flood gates) because it has the lowest barrier of entry in two key places. It's the least expensive and it's the easiest for a novice to use. Whether or not FCPX gains a lot of traction with people that edit day in and day out on big budget productions is another thing entirely.

 

[mBox]

..I think more people have been using Premiere (Pro and pre-Pro) than Avid for the better part of two decades. There are many, many more people that do weddings, corporate/industrial pieces, events, local and regional commercials, etc., than work on 'Hollywood' movies, network TV shows or commercials that air nationally...

Up here in Canada Id say for the last 5 years, I dont think Premiere Pro got any traction at all.
The reason I say this is that with my other job as an instructor, Ive kept in contact with media professionals, past students, teachers and other major schools across the country and kept an eye on what is the norm.
Its been a wide margin for both Avid and FCP legacy.
And as you stated earlier, they all have access to PPro via CS package but never bothered to use it.

Of course I havent checked lately but with the Cloud option and of with the negative Apple has been in for the last year, maybe things have changed a little.

 

[WRP]

I think by that point I think Premiere, which has a healthy PC following, was just getting totally annihilated by FCP on the Mac side. Plus, Macs back then were still struggling mightily in terms of performance and sales (like 2% market share and lacking some features that PC-based Avids had). Launching PPro on the Mac in those conditions would've been an massive uphill battle for a very small number of users and, even in hind sight, I think Adobe made the right call. I just don't see any version of PPro disrupting the popularity of FCP on the Mac side during that time period. I mean, I'd guess that the majority of people that have CS3 or higher installed on Mac have never opened PPro.

I agree. But the thing was when FCP came out they just threw up their hands and quit. Premiere premiered on Macs. It wasn't until some years later they adopted the software for Windows. If they had continued to push development like the early days they would have found a better following through the transition. The reason FCP had such a killing was because it was the only cheap option out there since Adobe had abandoned them. At the time I was working for BorisFX and it got so bad we couldn't support Premiere on Mac because every update to our software killed something that used to work.

 

[ytk]

I work in editorial, both on Hollywood features and network television, so I think I'm fairly qualified to answer your question as to why Avid is the industry standard.

There are lots of reasons, actually. Honestly, Avid is just better suited for professional-level editing than either FCP or Premiere ever were. That's not to say you can't turn out a professional product with any program, but Avid is designed with an eye towards the professional editor, to a much greater degree than the other packages. For example, most editors consider Avid's trim mode essential to the way they work. FCP tried to implement a similar tool, but it never worked quite as well as Avid's. Remember that a lot of professional movie and TV editors started out cutting on film, and Avid does a good job of allowing these editors to apply their existing skillset, while at the same time enabling them to benefit from the advantages that come with digital and non-linear editing.

Also, Avid is really designed to do one thing—edit video. That means it's not focused as much on importing, transcoding, finishing, etc. Once you bring media into Avid, it doesn't matter what format it was to begin with, Avid will convert it to its own proprietary format before it lets you do anything with it. No framerate or codec issues—everything in a given project is the same framerate, and one of only a few supported codecs. All of this is changing, of course, as Avid tries to be more like FCP in order to capture that market segment, but it still maintains the core functionality that actually serves to simplify things a great deal.

Probably the biggest thing that Avid has going for it though is its robust ability to share projects and media. When using a Unity server, you can have multiple people working on the same project at the same time, and sharing the same media. An assistant can create a new bin, ingest some media, and then close the bin. The editor can then immediately open the bin on his system, build a sequence from the media, and send it back to the assistant to do outputs. No management of files is necessary—it's all done directly from within the program, and bin locking (which prevents you from making changes to a bin someone else is working on) is handled automatically. There's never any question as to which version of a project file is the latest one. Whichever one is on the Unity is, by definition, the current project. On a feature with an editor and an assistant working on the same project, this is really nice. On a one-hour TV series with three editors (each working on a different episode) and two assistants between them, it's practically indispensable. And on a reality or sports series, with 6-10 edit bays that are working nearly 24/7, it would be literally impossible to manage without it.

This is not to say that Avid is "good". In point of fact, Avid is slow, buggy, and crash prone. The interface has been dumbed down in recent years, and the program seems to get worse with every iteration. A lot of people seem to like the newest version, but in my opinion Media Composer is just a series of kludgey updates to a program that's over 20 years old now and has been showing its age for nearly a decade. That said, FCP honestly wasn't much better, and having played with Premiere 6 a bit I can tell you that it doesn't have a prayer of replacing Avid any time soon. And FCPX is just a bad joke as far as the industry is concerned. The new version of Smoke may have a chance, if only because the name carries a certain cachet, but I haven't checked it out yet so I can't tell you if it's got the potential to get a foothold in the industry. So for the foreseeable future, it's Avid all up and down, at least at the professional level. Which is a shame, really, because if there were a suitable program out there that actually offered the professional level functionality of Avid in a modern package, I think it would stand a very good chance of blowing Avid completely out of the water—something that is long overdue, if you ask me.

 

[spacepower7]

Should I feel old if I even mention Media100? For video, non-film work, that was great for many years. Especially in one industry that I worked, film to home video, think the biggest name in ski and snowboard movies.

I've successfully bounced from careers in audio to video and back and forth a few times.

The products we love to hate are Avid, Protools ( now owned by Avid but not when I started ) and Quark. But the other competition is Adobe, which everybody loves to hate too.