Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
loyallion

premiere vs finalcut pro

Recommended Posts

Until FCP, you could not be an editor unless you had $100,000 to put down for

a reliable system. Unless you wanted to flunky at an editing house for a few

years.

 

The reason for this is that Adobe refused to make Premiere stable. They

knew that after a 54 hour render, the shit would crash on the last frame.

They would do nothing about it.

 

It was assumed that Adobe did not want to encrouch on Avid and Media100, so

they screwed over their own customers.

 

Only when FCP came along did Adobe decide to improve Premiere.

 

So let's say we all drop FCP and run back to Premiere. Does it take a

rocket scientist to figure out what will happen?

 

The Adobe CEO will shake hands with the Avid CEO, and Premiere will go

straight to hell again.

 

As our President says, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, it's

not good or something."

Edited by tomcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sao_Bento
Until FCP, you could not be an editor unless you had $100,000 to put down for

a reliable system. Unless you wanted to flunky at an editing house for a few

years.

 

The reason for this is that Adobe refused to make Premiere stable. They

knew that after a 54 hour render, the shit would crash on the last frame.

They would do nothing about it.

 

It was assumed that Adobe did not want to encrouch on Avid and Media100, so

they screwed over their own customers.

 

Only when FCP came along did Adobe decide to improve Premiere.

 

So let's say we all drop FCP and run back to Premiere. Does it take a

rocket scientist to figure out what will happen?

 

The Adobe CEO will shake hands with the Avid CEO, and Premiere will go

straight to hell again.

 

As our President says, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, it's

not good or something."

You're right on everything except that you needed 100K to edit prior to FCP. Media 100 was way less than that, which is why it was so widely adopted by the pre FCP generation (pretty much everyone who was in the game prior to FCP had a Media 100). FCP+Decklink is certainly higher quality for 1/3 of the price, but FCP wasn't the app that opened up the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea that FCP invented the affordable NLE space is laughable. Please, get some shield from Apple marketing :)

 

The innovations FCP 1.x provided in 1999 were:

 

* Full-frame effect previews over Firewire DV (before that, you had a tiny preview in an effects window). Please note I said Firewire DV, because when this super pro app came out, it only did DV and Targa boards.

* Automatic alpha channels, as in PS and AE. In other words, you got transparency when scaling/moving/cropping a clip. That wasn't common for NLEs back then.

* A fairly powerful keyframing model for the time (still untouched since then, and surpassed by everyone else but Avid).

* Manual manipulation of spatial properties in Canvas window (just like AE).

* Reliable log and capture.

* Non-square pixel and YUV color space processing (as of FCP 1.21). We're coming full circle, because now in 2007 it isn't that clear that keeping native YUV is better than the overhead RGB color space provide.

 

That's it. That was what FCP first brought to the table then. To say the truth, all of these and more were available in an editing app from that time called SpeedRazor. It had a rather idiosyncratic interface (much like Jaleo), and it was Windows only, which is a problem for me :)

 

On the other hand, FCP 1.x had these problems:

 

* No RT effects of any kind, at a time where everyone else had those (fixed a bit in FCP 2, another bit in FCP 3, and finally addressed in FCP 4).

* Worse DV codec in the industry (fixed in QT 5.0)

* No VU Meters! (fixed in FCP 2)

* No scopes or color correction tools (fixed in V3).

 

I recommend some critical thinking, like Sao Bento has, for example. You can't imagine how well it feels.

Edited by arozenfeld

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a cut program...They do the same thing cut video and put it together.

You’ll have to get dirty on your hands and try both of them ...see which one you’ll like.

It doesn’t matter what tool you use as long as you’ll provide the same product....I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with a cut is a cut, fade a fade, and such - most of all your programs out there will do 99% of the everyday stuff you need to do - and once its rendered it is hard to tell what program did what -

 

for me - I dont use fcp or pre - I use sony vegas - have since it was an audio only app - and will prob always use it - and I cant do anything fcp or prem cant do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree completely with the notion of "a cut is a cut and a fade is a fade" (*)

 

It's as true as P2 is P2, and color curves are color curves. If you don't have support for the former (FCP does and PPro doesn't), there isn't anything to cut (if the source is P2, I mean). For the later (like PPro has and FCP doesn't) no amount of linear level adjustments will match the subtlety in tonal correction you can get with it.

 

(*) A fade is a fade? But it can be linear (like video) or exponential (like film). So, a fade is not just a fade :) Fortunately, both FCP and PPro have value curves to adjust that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You're right on everything except that you needed 100K to edit prior to FCP. Media 100 was way less than that, which is why it was so widely adopted by the pre FCP generation (pretty much everyone who was in the game prior to FCP had a Media 100). FCP+Decklink is certainly higher quality for 1/3 of the price, but FCP wasn't the app that opened up the market.

 

It is amazing how quickly Media 100 came and went.. to the point where people have obviously forgotten about them almost entirely. Their death was due, primarly, to some REALLY stupid product decisions.. like the deciding to focus very heavily on the "hardware based" systems during a time where things where shifting to software solutions. Plus the A/B interface was kind of stupid, and it crashed a LOT. I certainly wasn't surpised when their stock dropped to a penny and Artel bought them out.

 

When Media 100 shot themselves in the foot, I thought it would be a good lesson learned about introducing reliable software editing solutions. For this, I was really surprised when Adobe dropped Premiere on the Mac. It seemed so childish.. like "OH.. well, I see you don't NEED an editing app. FINE." And when the production community as a whole didn't adopt Premiere, they backpeddled and seem to be releasing the software a little too late, no matter how good it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
...Still same thing: you don't have to convert it to anything if you bring it with FCP.

 

i guess i didnt write my last post very clearly...

 

when i drop in a .m2t file in PPRO, i can drag it directly to the timeline, wait a sec for it to process, and then continue on my merry way. if i preview the footage (spacebar) it will play. when i drop the same .m2t file into FCP, i get warnings about not being optimized, and then when trying to view the footage i only see text stating "unrendered".

 

although i don't have to convert it to import it, its quite useless unless i do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You explained it very clearly. But the underlying reasoning is wrong.

 

What you said is basically:

If I go to Norway and speak in Norwegian, they understand me perfectly.

If I go to Italy and speak Norwegian again, they don't have a clue.

 

Then you blame italians :)

 

In other words, PPro handles transport streams as m2t, and FCP handles that as QT. If you give PPro a Quicktime with MPEG-2 compression, it won't play in RT either.

 

Is it clear now?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The more I hear about it, the more excited I am to get the cs3 production bundle for mac. After Effects is my bread and butter program and if premiere integrates well with AE and vice versa I may never need to never use FCP again. If I was an editor I might not feel that way but hey this is mograph.net isn't it. ;

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Following your advice and thinking critically, I can't help but wonder why you didn't post the specs on Premiere 1.x so that we can all see how bad it sucked at the time it was first released.

 

Funny how Apple goes after Avid's market share by improving on a pre-existing product, and then Adobe has the opportunity to do the same but somehow creates a shitty facsimile that functions poorly and is marketed even more poorly. Then, they discontinue it on the most popular platform for editing. Then they bring it back years later, and it still pales in comparison to the competition and has absolutely no innovations to speak of. Plus the aforementioned marketing problem and, since the discontinue/recontinue, trust issues with end users.

 

FCP got ahead eventually because of speed innovations, resolution independence, and price point. What does Premiere have that sets it apart? Convenience for PC users... thus it is far more useful to compare Premiere to Vegas.

 

It sounds like PPro is just fine and dandy for the everyday needs of mographers. But anyone with any inkling towards editing should learn Avid and Final Cut.

 

The innovations FCP 1.x provided in 1999 were:

 

* Full-frame effect previews over Firewire DV (before that, you had a tiny preview in an effects window). Please note I said Firewire DV, because when this super pro app came out, it only did DV and Targa boards.

* Automatic alpha channels, as in PS and AE. In other words, you got transparency when scaling/moving/cropping a clip. That wasn't common for NLEs back then.

* A fairly powerful keyframing model for the time (still untouched since then, and surpassed by everyone else but Avid).

* Manual manipulation of spatial properties in Canvas window (just like AE).

* Reliable log and capture.

* Non-square pixel and YUV color space processing (as of FCP 1.21). We're coming full circle, because now in 2007 it isn't that clear that keeping native YUV is better than the overhead RGB color space provide.

 

That's it. That was what FCP first brought to the table then. To say the truth, all of these and more were available in an editing app from that time called SpeedRazor. It had a rather idiosyncratic interface (much like Jaleo), and it was Windows only, which is a problem for me :)

 

On the other hand, FCP 1.x had these problems:

 

* No RT effects of any kind, at a time where everyone else had those (fixed a bit in FCP 2, another bit in FCP 3, and finally addressed in FCP 4).

* Worse DV codec in the industry (fixed in QT 5.0)

* No VU Meters! (fixed in FCP 2)

* No scopes or color correction tools (fixed in V3).

 

I recommend some critical thinking, like Sao Bento has, for example. You can't imagine how well it feels.

Edited by pixelthief

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The more I hear about it, the more excited I am to get the cs3 production bundle for mac. After Effects is my bread and butter program and if premiere integrates well with AE and vice versa I may never need to never use FCP again. If I was an editor I might not feel that way but hey this is mograph.net isn't it. ;

 

How about the fact that you can use the PPro capture utility within AE? You have to have the Production suite for this but that is very cool for an AE artist.

 

-gl

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sick of this argument. I want to go back to editing linear in a huge room with a switcher, edit controller and 3 video decks in front of me! No rendering, no compression issues (ok so there is a 1 generation loss). Of course revisions sure were a bitch back then...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sao_Bento
I'm sick of this argument. I want to go back to editing linear in a huge room with a switcher, edit controller and 3 video decks in front of me! No rendering, no compression issues (ok so there is a 1 generation loss). Of course revisions sure were a bitch back then...

Technically, there is plenty of compression in an analog TV signal . . .

I'm just so glad someone revived this thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm on FCP now and previously edited in an older Premiere system (6.5). We have projects that tend to come back for re-edit after a few years due to personnel changes and that sort of thing. Premiere is absolutely stupid about restoring projects unless I back up every clip and restore it. Batch lists don't store information about whether a clip has audio, for instance. So I have to make batch lists for clips with audio and for clips without. If any of that information is broken or garbled by the project file itself, I'm screwed. I just went through this last week on a project that I didn't even edit the first time.

 

FCP, however, will allow me to store a ton of information for each clip and, if something is missing in my timeline, it's smart enough to let me click on the clip in the timeline and batch capture it back into place. I love it.

 

As far as effects and a lot of the other whiz-bangs that editing applications feel are necessary to throw in, all I want is 1) good footage and batch management, 2) good color correction tools, and 3) a handy timeline window with lots of hotkeys. I can't speak for Premiere Cut Pro, as I like to refer to it, but FCP sure solved at least the first two of those desires. I hate having to highlight the timeline window with a mouse click before any hotkeys become active for timeline functions, but I'm getting used to it.

 

Then I have times like last week where I jump between a project restoration in Premiere and a new project in FCP, then go home to cut a project on my dpsVelocity and REALLY screw myself over with hotkeys. Grrr.

 

Just gimme a switcher and a room full of decks again.

 

Cf

 

 

OOPS - I forgot to ask: since I'm on an old version of Premiere, I'm curious...did the three things I mention above get any better with Premiere Pro?

Edited by VelocityVideo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

lemme rack up a few more pathetic geeknerd demerits by mentioning something i had forgotten about-- months ago, apple bought up the maker of finaltouch, one of the better color grading / DI tools in existence... i assume there's a slight chance that might become integrated into whatever their new configuration/bundle is gonna be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Sao_Bento
lemme rack up a few more pathetic geeknerd demerits by mentioning something i had forgotten about-- months ago, apple bought up the maker of finaltouch, one of the better color grading / DI tools in existence... i assume there's a slight chance that might become integrated into whatever their new configuration/bundle is gonna be.

I'd say that it's more than likely. Final Touch by itself used to cost what? - 15k?

 

HDforIndies confirms that "Color" is the new incarnation of Final Touch (previously $24,999.00 by itself).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...