rfigliolini
Member
I'm trying to make a decision on which editing software to use.
Adobe Premiere Pro or Final Cut Pro. Can someone convince me why APP
would be better than FCP? What's the advantages for a marketing company
wanting to take this in-house for some production work.
robgrauert
Member
I'd go with FCP actually. The new Final Cut Studio bundle has a lot of nice new features. Plus, there's the Apple ProRes codec.
tomskowronski
Administrator
personally i'd go with Adobe, but thats because I feel like there is more that a user can get out of it. They both handle the same, equally as confusing at first but then they start to become more user friendly
robgrauert
Member
Honestly, I think for you to get a good answer, you need to give us more info. What are you trying to accomplish. What are you shooting? What do you want to do in post production? How do you want to deliver? Once all the questions are answered, we'll be able to direct you down the right path.
rfigliolini
Member
thank you Rob. I'm working in a marketing company that wants to bring some of the video editing in-house. Not something too complicated. I want to be able to edit video supplied from outside sources. Sometimes they come in .mov, wmv, P2 (a panasonic file), etc. The ability to strip audio, add my own, overlay tracks, add some special effects, type manipulation (that might have to be outside this program) and to grow with experience on that software. Final use would be mainly (for now) the web. Whether it's YouTube, Vimeo, microsite, website or other use like DVD replication for TV or computer monitor.
Currently we've had to work with a videographer that supplies a P2 format (native to a panasonic camera.) But, I know that we'll also get mov and mp4.
I've done some tutorials on Adobe Premiere (lynda.com stuff.)
Is After Effects a big deal for some effects - does it work best with AP?
I understand the pro suite of premiere will take FCP native files now too.
Th
robgrauert
Member
I think the biggest issue is the fact that you will be getting multiple formats, and because you will be getting different types of formats to edit, I would get Final Cut because you can transcode everything to ProRes and work in a timeline that contains all the same codec.
Also, Final Cut Studio includes programs that edit video, create graphics, edit sound, high-end color grading, and program devoted to compression. All for $1000 bucks. I'm sure Premiere has a lot of the same capabilities, but I doubt it has anything like the ProRes codec and I dont think it has anything that comes close to Color, Apple's color grading program.
Also, After Effects works fine with Final Cut, but you can also use Motion, which is Apple's motion graphics program.
Franko
Member
I personaly prefer Premiere Pro. You can get it in a pack for about the same as Final Cut Pro Studio. And the Prodcuction Premeum pack has just about the same feature as Final Cut Studio, and more; including Flash Pro. Or you an buy both individually for about the same price if I'm not mistaken.
My prefrence may be of personal tast though, I have used Final Cut the most, as all of my Universities editing bays are Macs. And after using it alot, and even taking a work shop dedicated to it. I always strugle with it. somethign goes wrong that I didnt expect and I'm left spending hours fixing it. Where I have had no formal training in Premiere and I can get double the work done in the same amount of time. To me its just easier to use, yet both are complex and confusing at first.
In the end its up to you, try tirals for both. its all based on personal tast. And in all truthieness, Final Cut Pro is really just Adobe Premiere with a Mac finish. Good luck to you sir.
robgrauert
Member
"And the Prodcuction Premeum pack has just about the same feature as Final Cut Studio"
It doesn't have anything like Apple's ProRes codec, which is essential if you're going to be given multiple formats to work with.
Ryan3078
Member
Multiple formats aren't challenging to work with. You can drop a .wmv, .mov, and .avi into a timeline in Premiere, all with different resolutions, hit the render key, and be on your way.
robgrauert
Member
i dont mean mixing .mov with .wmv. I'm talking about mixing DVCProHD, DV/NTSC, Beta, .mp4, etc.
And yes, you can mix all these in timelines, but the point of ProRes is to keep your timeline consistent to avoid having to render. It's also a better codec to work with when using motion graphics, compositing, and color correction/grading because it's a 10-bit codec.
rfigliolini
Member
so let me get this straight. Essentially they seem to be comparable. There are tastes and preferences yes. I see that. But, Rob you're telling me that the ProRes is the turning point on this. I'm not sure I understand it well enough to make a judgement on it. I do understand - tell me if I'm wrong - that using ProRes means I can:
From the others like Franko I can use Premiere Pro Premium (which I think also has after effects.)
Rob can you bullet the benefits more compellingly with the ProRes codec. I know you like it, but I'm not understanding it's compelling qualities. Can you make me understand it better?
Thank you all. It's been a good learning process. Hope to hear from you Rob
robgrauert
Member
I guess I should have said codec. DVCProHD, HDV, DV/NTSC...those are codecs, and when you get multiple codecs to work with, post production becomes a nightmare. So that's where ProRes comes in. Transcode everything to ProRes and you will be working with media that's all in the same codec.
Also, understand that formats, such as .wmv or .mov, are encoded with a codec. So you could have a DVCProHD .mov, but you could have a DVCProHD .wmv too. You can have a DV/NTSC .mov, but you can have a DV/NTSC .wmv too. And so on, etc, etc,
You pretty much have it right about ProRes. Here are some of the major qualities:
-If you have multiple formats, transcoding everything to ProRes helps streamline post production because you will be working in one codec, ProRes.
-No need to render so much because all media is in the same codec.
-If it's HD, ProRes is full-raster HD (1920X1080) as opposed to 1440X1080.
-ProRes is a 10-bit codec, so graphics, compositing, and color grading will have better results.
-Final Cut Studio comes with many programs, each designed to target a specific area in post - cutting, sound editing, graphics/effects, color grading, compression, and DVD Authoring.
Now, back to your .wmv, .mov, .avi thing. FCP works best with .mov. So if people are giving you .wmv or .avi, you need to convert them to .mov. I never had to do that before so I don't know how to go about doing that. I guess if you have a Windows Media Player you can convert to .mov.
rfigliolini
Member
Great. Thank you guys. You have been very helpful.
jerronsmith
Moderator
Final Cut Studio and Creative Suite Production Premium have very similar tools sets. There are two main differences that I see between them though, one is in the programs in the suite and the other is in regard to the way the video editing programs handle different video formats and codecs.
Final Cut pro chooses to use an intermediary codec to handle different media. This means that you should transcode your media files into the ProRes codec and then work with them in the suite. Adobe choose to go with native format editing of media files which basically means that Premiere can import and work with a wide variety of video types right on the timeline without first transcoding them. Opinions vary on which is the best way to work with files, I personally prefer the way premiere does it as I don't have to spend time on the transcoding process before I can work with my files.
The other major difference is in the programs that come in each suite. With the exception of video editing and color grading, Adobe offers a much stronger line of products. Adobe software is the industry standard for both the creation of graphics and animation. The Adobe suite comes with After Effects, Illustrator, Photoshop and Flash. Each one of these is an industry icon in it's own right. For example Motion is a very good and powerful motion graphics applications but is considerably weaker than After Effects is, and the Apple suite lacks programs for creating 2-d and 3-d graphics such as Illustrator and Photoshop. Additionally, Adobe has for the last several versions been pushing the idea of a seemless integration between the programs and has in many aspects achieved this in the CS4 release. But this is also why the Adobe suite is more expensive.
chrisbyrnes
Member
Since you are in a business environment you might have one other consideration. If your comapny uses Windows pretty much exclusively you may have difficulty bringing in (and getting any support for) a Mac. The Adobe suite runs on both Windows and Mac. Other than that, Jerron rules! Listen to him.
zoobie
Member
After Effects, Final Cut, Creative Suite Production Premium, Sony Vegas Pro, Premiere Pro, Edius, Magix, Pinnacle, etc, etc, etc. There's a new one released every month.
The only thing that is industry standard about them is the fact that they are made by standard software industries. It is only standard consumer level software for the masses...and it shows. This is why there's no real consensus on your question.
The actual, real, genuine, authentic industry standard for editing film and video has software whose names you've never heard of.
This is why it's a crapshoot...I'd suggest DL'ing each editor you've researched and try each out.
jerronsmith
Moderator
>>The only thing that is industry standard about them is the fact that
they are made by standard software industries. It is only standard consumer level software for the masses...and it shows. This is why there's no real consensus on your question.<<
Zoobie,
I'm sorry but that is a massive over generalization. There is a great deal of proprietary software used especially in the CG industry and even more proprietary plug-ins and extensions that have been created. To say there is no standardization is just wrong. There is software and hardware for that matter as well that have achieved a level of standardization in the professional television and video industry. At least in the major markets. In NYC where I am at for example the major networks are still using Avid for editing while many of the production companies that feed them and and much of cable TV is using FCP. While no one software has been the single industry standard for a long time (most of the ones that were were the first to market like Quantel), to say that there aren't industry standards for which software is used and for what is just not representative of the modern landscape.
jerronsmith
Moderator
>>It's also a better codec to work with when using motion graphics,
compositing, and color correction/grading because it's a 10-bit codec.<<
Rob,
For motion graphics I wold actually recommend using a codec that has no color compression, like Animation.
jerronsmith
Moderator
>>It's also a better codec to work with when using motion graphics,
compositing, and color correction/grading because it's a 10-bit codec.<<
Rob,
For motion graphics I would actually recommend using a codec that has no color compression at all, like Animation.
Eventvideoguy
Member
It all depends on whether you own a MAC or not. If you don't own a MAC then I would definitely go with Adobe.
Why buy more equipment just to run a program?
But if you do have a MAC, you could use either.
Really it is just more of a preference. There seems to be more documentation about Adobe products and more tutorials, etc.
I use FCP but that is just a preference. I have absolutely nothing bad to say about Adobe.
Good luck
rfigliolini
Member
This is the first time I've actually posted to a forum and I tell ya it's been extremely enlightening. I've used Premiere a bit and I've used FinalCutPro (without previous exposure and lessons in it's use.) But, one to the other seemed easy enough. But, the ProRes conversion bothers me. It sounds like before I edit any video I need to convert the video - even if I know that I won't be using half of it I still need to convert to see it. Rendering was an issue for me. I've been able to use Premiere without any of that. Am I missing something?
THank you Jerron and Rob. You've been very helpful.
jerronsmith
Moderator
ProRes422 is what is called an intermediary codec. It is intended to allow you to consolidate multiple formats (HD and SD) into a single format. This allows FCP to work with the different video better in a more consistent way since the program no longer as to perform intermediary renders as it does when you try to mix and match different formats in the same project or sequence. The idea behind this is that it will free up system resources that would otherwise be devoted to constantly processing the video.
zoobie
Member
jerron...the idea of yours that the professional film and video industry uses FCP or any consumer software is laughable at best
like I said before, professional houses use custom software that's available only to them with names you've never heard of
jerronsmith
Moderator
Zoobie,
So your saying that most tv graphics especially at the cable level aren't created in After Effects and Photoshop?
That AVID isn't used as the main editing ap for Film and TV?
It's funny, I work at MTV. I have friends and colleagues building graphics and editing at every level of the industry. I have worked with editors and graphics producers from a very wide variety of companies throughout the USA.
Who do you work with that you think I am wrong?
robgrauert
Member
Zoobie,
First, FCP isn't consumer software.
Second, the only thing that's laughable is the fact that you think there are no standards. If things are made for broadcast, 99% of the time they are cut on an Avid or with FCP. Hell, big studios have entire Avid systems installed because if it's stability. I've heard of places still using Avids on G4s.
If graphics are being made, Illustrator, Photoshop and After Effects are always used together.
3DS Max and Maya seem to be use all the time for 3D work.
A Di Vinci is always used for color grading, although Color seems to be gaining ground.
FCP hasn't really gained any ground in Hollywood features...that's ALL Avid with maybe a few exceptions. FCP seems to be mostly used for broadcast.
I've never walked into any broadcast environment and saw editors using Vegas, or even Premiere.
There may be houses that use "custom software" but I would assume that is extremely rare. What if they need to bring in an outside editor? Is he or she supposed to learn their "custom software." Yea, that's practical.
Jerron,
About the motion graphics, you are right, render out an Animation codec from your graphics program. What I meant was bringing that graphic into your ProRes timeline in FCP will better preserve the quality of that graphic rather than working in a DV timeline or even DVCPro HD. Sorry. I should have clarified.
robgrauert
Member
you really must live under a rock or out in the boonies if you think FCP isn't used in professional broadcast. Sorry if that's mean, but you need a reality check.
Eventvideoguy
Member
Many films use AVID. Or at least I assume they use it since at the end of the credits in a movie, when it says, "Thanks to: AVID, KODAK, ETC, ETC" it means that they were used in the films. I have noticed that more and more. Some say Apple or Final Cut, with their logos.
peachydingo
Member
For someone entering the field, it looks like FCP is the way to go. Am I wrong? I can't afford Avid, but I want to become proficient on an industry standard.
Going FCP does limit you to buying Mac, which are MUCH more expensive than the new Windows offerings. On the flip side, Windows Vista has been a major letdown as far as reliability, and who know what Windows 7 will be like.
Do most of you have both FCP and the Adobe suite on your Mac?
robgrauert
Member
Can't go wrong learning FCP and/or Avid. And yes, Macs can be pricey, but they are used by many in the industry. And lets face it, this isn't a cheap industry. Just as a tip though, you don't need to get the biggest, baddest, fastest Mac to edit. The more important part is the components you add to your Mac, such as a Kona Card, a RAID, external monitor, etc. It's those components that allow for smooth editing, not necessarily fast processors. Editors work with uncompressed video on G5s, not because they have fast CPS...they don't, it's because of the components they have with their computers.
I have only FCP in my edit bay, but there is nothing wrong with having more than one NLE loaded to your computer.
jerronsmith
Moderator
I agree with Rob's assessment except when it comes to the processor. I would always recommend getting the computer with the fastest and most numerous processors you can afford. I don't know anyone who edits on an older, slower computer because they want to.
adobe advice Apple audio AVCHD beginner camcorder camera canon Capture comedy computer contest Documentary DV DVD edit editing FCP film final cut Final Cut Pro Footage HD HDV HELP JVC lighting Mac magix mic microphone movie music music video New panasonic PC premiere pro Production quality software Sony sound vegas video video editing wedding Youtube
No Members around.
