AVID | Premiere Pro

[iampaulb]

Great reply YTK, very informative thanks...

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.

I noticed that last night, that will take a lot of getting use to i feel.

 

[rei101]

I will go Avid.

I work at a TV station and we use FCP 7. After Apple *#&% us with FCPX (biggest flop in software history), we are using FCP 7 until we have to realistically switch all our systems.

That is because Avid has been an industry standard and for all the above reasons.

Premiere is amazing but it was cannibalized by FCP when Apple changed from OS9 to OSX. Premiere didn't do the switch and the only software available for editing was Apple proprietary FCP. That is why Premiere got behind far far away, but I really used to like it. Back in 1999 Premiere was doing things that FCP 7 still wishes,

My advice... learn Avid, it will make you look realistically professional and is what is going to give you a job.

 

[WRP]

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.

Feel old? M100 was bought a few years ago by Boris FX and still a viable (albeit crappy) solution. If you worked for WM or Matchstick I probably know you in some way. I worked for TGR.

Back in 1999 Premiere was doing things that FCP 7 still wishes,

WTF? Tell me one thing that Premiere was doing in 1999 that FCP 7 does not do. Oh... that's right, you're talking out your ass.

 

[mBox]

...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...

IMHO I find Avids editing options in the sequence kludgy compared to FCP legacy.
Ive been using Avid/FCP for about the same time 15 years roughly but Im sure not as intense as the typical Hollywood editor.
I wont get into why I find it this way but lets just say I shouldnt have to focus in so damn close to an edit point just to get it to move. Then add the fact that it toggles back to a different mode once it thinks Im done.
Maybe its an option that Ive never bothered to fix or research.
However Avid is by far (when its working of course) the most robust NLE in the market.
Ive had to work on all (yes even media100 for 4 years) the Mac options over my years in this field.
I am not a traditional editor more towards 3D/Motion design.

----------

...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...

Weird I didnt read this part.
Same sentiments. I too felt that the Meridien system for us was robust compared to the Nitris age.
We just picked a few Symphony crossgrades (I know the GUI is the same) but havent installed yet.
Regarding FCPX, I for one dont think its a joke. Its a great tool and will be helpful for a lot of us.
After my years with Premiere/media100/Avid I too thought FCP legacy was a joke but I think users (and myself) proved it wasnt.
I do understand your opinion.
Ive had to deal with it all year since June 21, 2011

 

[ytk]

I wont get into why I find it this way but lets just say I shouldnt have to focus in so damn close to an edit point just to get it to move. Then add the fact that it toggles back to a different mode once it thinks Im done.
Maybe its an option that Ive never bothered to fix or research.

It is. There are several ways to get edit points to move in Avid, and none of them require you to zoom in on the edit point. If you're using trim mode, which is usually the best way, simply park the playhead near the edit point, enable the tracks you want to change, and hit the trim mode button. You can make any changes you like from trim mode, and it won't leave trim mode until you explicitly click out of it. Also, you can park the playhead where you want the edit point to move to, enable the proper track(s), set an in or out mark, and press "extend edit" and the edit point(s) will jump to the in or out mark. Additionally, you can use the roll edit tool to simply drag an edit point where you want it to go. There's an option (I believe it's in the timeline settings) to keep the tool enabled until you explicitly turn it off.

Regarding FCPX, I for one dont think its a joke. Its a great tool and will be helpful for a lot of us.
After my years with Premiere/media100/Avid I too thought FCP legacy was a joke but I think users (and myself) proved it wasnt.
I do understand your opinion.
Ive had to deal with it all year since June 21, 2011

Not to get too much into the FCPX debate here, but I can tell you that, although you may well be happy with FCPX, it will never make the same inroads into the professional world that FCP did, unless it drastically changes to be, well, more like FCP. For one thing, project sharing on FCPX is much, much more difficult than it ever was before. That right there is a dealbreaker. Also, FCPX is far more loosey-goosey about how it deals with time. Take things out and move them around, and you suddenly find your overall length has changed. On a TV series where the finished product must be precisely a specified length (down to the frame) this is unacceptable. Also, the "storyline" concept, with multiple nested timelines, doesn't really match the way professional editors work. The majority of editors that I've worked with prefer to use a single video track and 6-10 audio tracks, keeping dialog, sfx, and music all on separate tracks. FCPX makes this very difficult, if not impossible, to do. Also, three point (source/record) editing is the standard way of doing things, and FCPX doesn't really support it.

Based on all of these factors, essentially no feature or TV editor would be willing to even give it a second glance, and no studio would be willing to take a risk on renting such a system. It's not like it was when FCP challenged Avid's dominance, where FCP was seen as a potential alternative but "not quite there" in terms of professional functionality. This is a whole new paradigm, and it's just too "weird" for professionals to be interested in it. I mean, if you can't even get Walter Murch on board, you're pretty much screwed. I know several die-hard FCP editors who are now switching over to Avid because they feel abandoned by Apple. FCPX may or may not be "better", but I can tell you for certain that it will never be considered a professional-level editing tool in its current form.

 

[mBox]

...Not to get too much into the FCPX debate here, but I can tell you that, although you may well be happy with FCPX, it will never make the same inroads into the professional world that FCP did...

well I def wont debate it here since Im already on a few professional forums that have real world NLE users.
To each his/her own when it comes to tools so no harm.
I for one cant say what will happen to what, for all I know Avid could go under within a month then Adobe decides to stop supporting Apple.
Its easy to say all that but I live day to day in this industry and have no vested interest on what is better for everyone else other than myself and my workflow