Final Cut catching up with Speed Edit?

[pox]

Just saw this on digg.com
http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/software/final-cut-pro-is-now-a-format-ho-252408.php

(They say "it just works," and from the demo, looks like all kinds of formats can nicely live together on the same editing timeline, where they had to be transcoded to work together before.)

[Ivan D. Young]

check and you will find that Final cut can also support the Red Camera footage and it's codec. SpeedEdit neeeds to do this soon. Final Cut is cabable of working at 4k and 2k now, mainly 2k output.

[Bobt]

Well there is no released stuff yet. So when there is.

Bob

[digitalpost]

and finalcut also has to " RENDER " just about everything.
All the REAL TIME things we expect like keys, CC, DVEs and PIP that we get with SE will have to render..... I think they have a long way to catch up.
no thanks

[Ivan]

Unless you are going out to tape or a set top DVD burner everything needs to render. And if you need to render, batch rendering and distributed rendering should be on the list of features. Given that FCP has these and neither VT or SE has them it is a question of your work flow as to who has to catch up. If you want to render your Mpg2 with TMPG or your DVD Program in SE you need to render to render. How does that save time? At least VT has AVI Wrapper.

Ivan

[axaboss]

and finalcut also has to " RENDER " just about everything.
All the REAL TIME things we expect like keys, CC, DVEs and PIP that we get with SE will have to render..... I think they have a long way to catch up.
no thanks

You sound a little bias.

Regardless, Speededit has its storyboard/timeline editor which no one can do. I love it. I'm a FCP user as well, and find that both programs compliment my application arsenal rather nicely. Each are good at a specific kind of project. But, my bet is still with FCPro for long format projects with complex sound editing.

[Captain Obvious]

I'm not a video guy (I only saw this thread because of the "New Posts" button), but it strikes me as strange to say "catch up." To me, it seems that Final Cut Pro and SpeedEdit take entirely different approaches to what they do. A direct comparison is thusly hard, if not impossible.

Also, as axaboss said: Two apps are better than one. ;)

[digitalpost]

I agree that both apps are better than one.
I also agree that both apps need to render final for DVD or for final files.
My point is.... render keys, greenscreen, PIPs, transistions, is something
MOST of the " other " editing apps DON"T need to do... including SE.
It's about SPEED for me. When a client is paying an hourly rate for post, tweaking and rendering-tweaking and rendering-tweaking and rendering-tweaking and rendering- will take longer & make me more $$$, but most of
my client base that buys blocks of production here use our studio because
of "what" we do... and how "fast" we edit.
I know that FC is a killer app, but I don't know of any other app that is crippled by having to render almost any changes you make.
I guess MAC os has no other choice right now.... until Adobe kicks in again!

[Ivan]

I don't know of anything that needs to be rendered to see a preview. Pretty much everyone has this figured out by now even FCP. I have a dual 800 Mac and I can get as good of a preview with that as I do on a dual 3ghz with SE. Not that SE is bad but FCP is not drawing the video one frame at a time like you make it sound. If you do need to render to final isn't it nice that Apple has figured out distributed rendering? It's no big deal now because on the latest Macs rendering to Mpeg2 is close to real-time. The big advantage that they have is that they have it now and when you really start to need it for HD it won't be version one playing catch-up. Additionally the batch render capability makes output of multiple project to multiple resolutions much easier. It's nice that SE can output to any file type and any size but without batch rendering its a day of render, wait, render, wait, render, wait....

Ivan

[axaboss]

I have to admit - Speededit is hands down the best editor for short form (15secs to 5mins.) projects with lots of cuts and layers. I love it. I charge the same and get more time to sunbathe near the pool.

[billmi]

Unless you are going out to tape or a set top DVD burner everything needs to render.

While that is true, not waiting for renders to view the final look of a change you are tweaking is a huge productivity difference.

Yesterday I posted a 5-minute green-screen and animation composite in which the talent is explaining features in an illustrative animation weather-man style. I made a mistake when shooting though. I had an overlay on the monitor with pointing targets for the dashing yet skilled talent, and due to using the GL-1's LCD monitor for this, which mirror images when facing the forward, everything was pointed to on the opposite side of the screen from where it should be.

While posting, I flipped the animation 180 degrees on the Y axis to match the mistake in shooting. I also had to edit together several stills out of the animation along with the animation itself playing bacck at various rates, to time the motion of the background to the talent pointing, pushing and talking about the operating process, and had to reposition the footage of the talent a couple of times, so that the pointing was more exact. There was no waiting, there was no rendering. Everything was realtime. That's where rendering or realtime makes the difference.

If I had to wait for a render after each of those tweaks it would have been forever to edit - but it took less than a half an hour (not to mention no time to render the output since it will import to the program it is going in as a sub-project.)

[imagic]

MacHeads are always right, I've come to learn this. The superiority of Apple should go unchallenged, because of course everyone is playing catchup to everything they do.:ohmy:

Apple makes great ads, but very often they flat-out lie about the performance of the Mac.:devil: In fact the notion that Macs outperform PC in computation-heavy tasks (rendering, etc) is one of the great urban legends. Switching to Intel helped them catch-up, but that's all.

BTW I do find MPEG encoding during render from SpeedEdit to be surprisingly slow, about half the speed of Vegas 7 using the MainConcept CODEC.

With vegas 7, even on an older P4 machine, MPEG2-DVD rendering is "real-time", as in it takes as long to render as the running time of the footage... so that's not very impressive at all for FCP to render MPEG in "real-time". Certainly nothing exclusive to a mac.

[Red_Oddity]

Sure realtime MPEG encoding is fun and all, but the reason i use the non realtime encoders is because of the simple fact that a multipass VBR MPEG is just much smaller and boast a visible superiority to the 'real' time one.

Anyhoo, so far i'm impressed by SE, eventhough it's still a bit of a beta program, but hey, just imagine where SE could be when that reaches version 6.

[Ivan]

Attacking the users, that's a new approach. It's not the users, it's the software. I have said over and over again VT2 just killed FCP2. You think I'm just saying that because it's what I used at the time? Have you ever heard of the Matrox RTMac? I have one, you want it? The simple fact is that VT and SE have lost so much ground that they are not even in the same class as FCP as an editor. That's to bad because VT started so far ahead and they both had the same five-six years to develop.

As for Mpeg encoding with Vegas vs. SE, are you using the same settings? Are you sure? If you are getting real-time or even close with an older system it is not totally due to the package you are using but the settings. I have a dual 3ghz Xeon that runs about 6 to 1 with TMPG using 2 pass high quality settings. If I set the setting low enough I bet I could beat that with my Amiga 4000(now those users are snooty).:)

Ivan

PS. As for V6, look at the past upgrades for VT and LW. That looks to be about once every two years. According to the Mayan calendar the earth is supposed to end in 2012 so maybe they could rush it a little.

[imagic]

Is there any reason FCP users are hanging out here cracking on SE? That behavior seems to verge on trolling. If you are going to use FCP/FCS, I'd think one's time would be much better spent on Apple's boards.

Hey, to each their own. This is real subjective stuff, figuring out which editor is better is like arguing politics.

[avkills]

Apple makes great ads, but very often they flat-out lie about the performance of the Mac.:devil: In fact the notion that Macs outperform PC in computation-heavy tasks (rendering, etc) is one of the great urban legends. Switching to Intel helped them catch-up, but that's all.

BTW I do find MPEG encoding during render from SpeedEdit to be surprisingly slow, about half the speed of Vegas 7 using the MainConcept CODEC.

With vegas 7, even on an older P4 machine, MPEG2-DVD rendering is "real-time", as in it takes as long to render as the running time of the footage... so that's not very impressive at all for FCP to render MPEG in "real-time". Certainly nothing exclusive to a mac.

I seriously doubt an older P4 machine was MPEG2 encoding in real time; at least not to any great quality. (Maybe the last round of net-burst P4s could, but probably not doing VBR 2-pass).

As of right now; Apple has the most cost effective 8-core workstation. When Apple went to Intel; they DID catch up; if you really want to call it playing catch up. Apples and Oranges; the FSB on the G5 is still superior overall; no quad pumping multiplexing weirdness; but hey if it works, what the hell. I'm glad Apple went to Intel; Steve Jobs had inside information apparently, because everything Intel has done up until the Core architecture was centered around clock-speed; not actual performance.

Urban legends aside; properly coded PPC software *really does fly* on a G5.

Stating editing software as being "real time* is about the same as quoting "Broadcast Quality" these days. Real time effects on DV res video is a lot easier than Real time effects on uncompressed 10bit 4:2:2 SD video. Not to mention that performance is greatly hindered by hard drive performance, etc etc.

Basically I am saying there are way too many variables involved to really compare the 2 systems. The only way it could be done is on identical hardware; hard drive subsystems and with identical video codecs.

That being said, about the only way I'd ditch Apple + FCP is if my company decided to drop some serious $$ on a AVID or Discreet Logic system. And not to beat a horse to death; but Apple has a great history of stuff actually working the first time as advertised.

-mark

[avkills]

One more thing to ponder upon; I seriously doubt professional editors mix and match formats on timelines. Yes it is a great feature for run and gun situations, but I'd say a majority of all productions focus on using the same format through the entire project. Nonetheless, I know I would. (at least try anyway)

-mark

[imagic]

Basically I agree, but of course Speededit is also much more affordable, as is a competent PC workstation.

I seriously doubt an older P4 machine was MPEG2 encoding in real time; at least not to any great quality. (Maybe the last round of net-burst P4s could, but probably not doing VBR 2-pass).

As of right now; Apple has the most cost effective 8-core workstation. When Apple went to Intel; they DID catch up; if you really want to call it playing catch up. Apples and Oranges; the FSB on the G5 is still superior overall; no quad pumping multiplexing weirdness; but hey if it works, what the hell. I'm glad Apple went to Intel; Steve Jobs had inside information apparently, because everything Intel has done up until the Core architecture was centered around clock-speed; not actual performance.

Urban legends aside; properly coded PPC software *really does fly* on a G5.

Stating editing software as being "real time* is about the same as quoting "Broadcast Quality" these days. Real time effects on DV res video is a lot easier than Real time effects on uncompressed 10bit 4:2:2 SD video. Not to mention that performance is greatly hindered by hard drive performance, etc etc.

Basically I am saying there are way too many variables involved to really compare the 2 systems. The only way it could be done is on identical hardware; hard drive subsystems and with identical video codecs.

That being said, about the only way I'd ditch Apple + FCP is if my company decided to drop some serious $$ on a AVID or Discreet Logic system. And not to beat a horse to death; but Apple has a great history of stuff actually working the first time as advertised.

-mark

[Ivan]

<quote>Is there any reason FCP users are hanging out here cracking on SE?</quote>


Yeah, five years ago I was as excited about VT as you likely are about SE. After upgrading faithfully each time hoping that VT would maintain it's lead over FCP I realize that it isn't happening. I ran/run a user group for VT users and I am extremely unhappy that I encouraged other users to upgrade as well only to find that feature after feature has not been implemented.

That said, you are right. I should stop now, if Newtek wanted to implement these features they would have been in there. I guess SE is done then since everyone seem happy with it.

Thanks for the wake up.:twak: I'm better now.:)

Ivan

[imagic]

OK so I'm a noob and you're a disgruntled vet in this newtek thing. I really like some things SpeedEdit does that are specific to my workflow. I will still be using After Effects and Vegas 7 and VirtualDub along with SpeedEdit. I have my niche, and it all works for me. Then again I don't wish to disparage Apple, but they are a huge company, Newtek is not, and personally I support what Newtek is doing, regardless. Most of my money goes to Adobe anyhow, someday maybe Photoshop will end up doing it all anyhow. Videoshop, anybody?:)

Yeah, five years ago I was as excited about VT as you likely are about SE. After upgrading faithfully each time hoping that VT would maintain it's lead over FCP I realize that it isn't happening. I ran/run a user group for VT users and I am extremely unhappy that I encouraged other users to upgrade as well only to find that feature after feature has not been implemented.

That said, you are right. I should stop now, if Newtek wanted to implement these features they would have been in there. I guess SE is done then since everyone seem happy with it.

Thanks for the wake up.:twak: I'm better now.:)

Ivan

[avkills]

I agree about After Effects; Motion just rubs me wrong; but I am going to take a close look at Motion 3 since it has 3D capabilities.

SpeedEdit seems to be great for what it was built for; basically run and gun situations where who knows what format someone is going to throw at you. I'd try it if they had an OS X version.

-mark

[bobgilles]

When I started at Akamai in 1999, we had a very expensive tape based system. I started using iMovie because I found it more reliable and easier to use, even though I hated the Mac Avids at the time (which wasn't). We did some really big webcasts at the time and the clients would have freaked out if they only knew we cut them on iMovie!

What I loved most is the quick storyboard tied to the timeline feature, when I saw Speededit, I cheered.

[Brian Peterson]

One more thing to ponder upon; I seriously doubt professional editors mix and match formats on timelines.

The need for this is fairly obvious, even for "professional" editors. We are in the middle of the first realy format change in American history for television. Yes there was a change from b&w to color but it was for the most part the same format, just extra information. Now we are going from analog to digital, from 4x3 to 16x9, from 720x480 to 1080 or beyond. But we have a ton of past product. I can easily see, heck the examples are already out there of productions that incorporate old video with new. In the coming years mixing formats will become more important, not less.

[Ivan]

I'm a noob and you're a disgruntled vet

Yes, disgruntled. Please note that many of the features that are now being requested for SE have been requested since VT2. That's a long time to stick with a company that continues to not meet expectations. Take a good look at the feature requests, you will notice that these are not "new" cutting edge features, these are work-flow items that simply don't exist in SE. You may not need them now and there are always work-arounds but sooner or later you'll wish you had them. Look at the posters, most are new. Many who have been here since the beginning have finally left. And good riddens too, all they did was ask for features so they could stay competetive. Bunch of cry babies if you ask me.

Ivan

[axaboss]

Between 2001 and 2006 (5 years) NewTek barely added features to LightWave. While everyone around them merged and increased features... Newtek added plugins or hacks to compete. LW users and first time purchasers recognized the instability of the software and sales decreased or stayed still. We can blame Luxology or NewTek or whomever, but this affected the financial climate at NewTek. LightWave is without a doubt their main "bread and butter." If LightWave sales go dry it affects every other Newtek product down the line. Its amazing to me that a small company like NewTek can offer so many products and LightWave in a variety of OS flavors. They are truly incredible. I believe LightWave is getting its steam back. Slowly but surely.

Tricaster and Speededit are two amazing products along side LightWave. The rest of the product line is weak. The VT hardware should be optional to improving or scaling up Speededit's output capabilities. They should cut an entire commercial at the NAB show in less than 15 minutes. This will WOW the audience and they will realize what this software can really do. Its the storyboard/timeline split screen where it screams "buy me."

When it comes to computers and software, I'm PC (politically correct). I use Windows-based computers for 3D and web design, and Apple computers for editing and motion graphics. I only buy the best man for the job so I can be creative and productive.

You should too. Speededit is a good start and it can only get better. I cross my fingers that it doesn't turn into an Aura-Mirage transformation.

[avkills]

The need for this is fairly obvious, even for "professional" editors. We are in the middle of the first realy format change in American history for television. Yes there was a change from b&w to color but it was for the most part the same format, just extra information. Now we are going from analog to digital, from 4x3 to 16x9, from 720x480 to 1080 or beyond. But we have a ton of past product. I can easily see, heck the examples are already out there of productions that incorporate old video with new. In the coming years mixing formats will become more important, not less.

Since most video is digested into a digital system already, the only need I see is being able to upscan SD to HD and HD down to SD. It is very easy today to take any analog format and digitize all of it to the same modern digital format that may be used for today's productions.

HD and SD on the same timeline is a must; the rest seems sort of pointless and in my opinion just enables lazy editors to stay lazy. If you're cutting a program in UC 10bit SD.... who here would not digitize or convert every analog or digital source to UC 10bit SD?

-mark

[Brian Peterson]

HD and SD on the same timeline is a must; the rest seems sort of pointless and in my opinion just enables lazy editors to stay lazy. If you're cutting a program in UC 10bit SD.... who here would not digitize or convert every analog or digital source to UC 10bit SD?
-mark

Lazy for not wanting to do a first pass render before taking it to timeline. Sorry I'm lazy. SpeedEDIT has already paid off for me with it's multi-format timeline, since I had to take some flash video and mix it with an m2v file. Copy to hard drive and edit, why the heck would I want an intermediate step of rendering to UC 10bit SD if I don't need it?

[Brian Peterson]

Tricaster and Speededit are two amazing products along side LightWave. The rest of the product line is weak. The VT hardware should be optional to improving or scaling up Speededit's output capabilities. They should cut an entire commercial at the NAB show in less than 15 minutes. This will WOW the audience and they will realize what this software can really do. Its the storyboard/timeline split screen where it screams "buy me."

There is a NAB party report somewhere on these forums that states VT sales have never been better, and TriCaster is selling faster than they can produce. I don't call that a weak product line. One thing all of us should realize is that the forums are only a small cross section of the user base. Most people just don't post or visit them.

Ivan typedMany who have been here since the beginning have finally left. And good riddens too, all they did was ask for features so they could stay competetive. Bunch of cry babies if you ask me.

Really many of the people on the VT forums who were there in the early VTNT days are still there. Let's be honest, newbies are far more likely to post than an experienced long term user.

[avkills]

Lazy for not wanting to do a first pass render before taking it to timeline. Sorry I'm lazy. SpeedEDIT has already paid off for me with it's multi-format timeline, since I had to take some flash video and mix it with an m2v file. Copy to hard drive and edit, why the heck would I want an intermediate step of rendering to UC 10bit SD if I don't need it?

First off; technically you should not be editing m2v files; why they based HDV on MPEG2 is beyond me; stupid idiotic idea.

And yes, I *would* have converted both of those files to DV25 (no sense in UC 10bit for already compressed files); punched it through the editor and then delivered it to whatever format the client wanted.

But hey, different workflows work for different people; I like all my source footage to be the same format when I edit it.

-mark

[imagic]

I really don't want/need SpeedEdit to adopt many new features. On the contrary I'd prefer if it remained simple and efficient, as it is now, with R&D going towards making it still faster and more stable. Fulfilling each user's feature request could easily turn SE into bloatware.

If I did want to transcode a bunch of footage into one unified format, SpeedEdit is exactly where I would do it, even if I intended to work on the video somewhere else.

If I am feeling lazy and just want to hack together a video... SpeedEdit. If I want a good final product as fast as possible... SpeedEdit.

If I want total control over pixels, I'll work in Vegas and/or After Effects.

Just because I am a new customer doesn't imply that I cannot judge the worth of software. SpeedEdit is great for a certain kind of user, the independent on a low budget, or in a hurry. Nothing wrong with that.

However my feeling about the SE run deeper. I feel the software's true "feature" is it's overall structure. There are many simple operations that are easier or more efficient to perform than in other software, that's why it can be faster... It's not just render times or previewing in real-time that make SpeedEdit fast. One needs to work with the program for a few days, and forget the "inefficiencies" of other editors, before passing judgement.

Only time will tell how things work out with SE, but here's a subjective truth: I don't need any more features in SE to make it a useful tool for me, so in my eyes NewTek is not failing.

[imagic]

So you like to introduce generational loss in every project you do? And I guess you actually like spending money on hard-drive space.

Every major NLE has added some sort of real-time support for HDV, and in the last year editing HDV has basically become standard. The only technical reasons for not editing HDV native are that the software doesn't handle it properly (no native long-GOP editing) but again that's a "technicality" that lives in the past.

The other reason to transcode is because you are going to process the video in some manner that SpeedEdit doesn't handle internally. For those clips one shoul transcode to an intermediate format, which in fact should be a lossless-compression format (HuffYUV works great). Transcoding HDV to any other compressed format compounds artifacts, even Cineform's HD CODEC in highest quality introduces more artifacts to HDV compared to HuffYUV or the native HDV file.

First off; technically you should not be editing m2v files; why they based HDV on MPEG2 is beyond me; stupid idiotic idea.

And yes, I *would* have converted both of those files to DV25 (no sense in UC 10bit for already compressed files); punched it through the editor and then delivered it to whatever format the client wanted.

But hey, different workflows work for different people; I like all my source footage to be the same format when I edit it.

-mark

[avkills]

So you like to introduce generational loss in every project you do? And I guess you actually like spending money on hard-drive space.

Every major NLE has added some sort of real-time support for HDV, and in the last year editing HDV has basically become standard. The only technical reasons for not editing HDV native are that the software doesn't handle it properly (no native long-GOP editing) but again that's a "technicality" that lives in the past.

The other reason to transcode is because you are going to process the video in some manner that SpeedEdit doesn't handle internally. For those clips one shoul transcode to an intermediate format, which in fact should be a lossless-compression format (HuffYUV works great). Transcoding HDV to any other compressed format compounds artifacts, even Cineform's HD CODEC in highest quality introduces more artifacts to HDV compared to HuffYUV or the native HDV file.

I think you are missing my point. If I was to edit a project in HDV; then I would eventually process all my graphics to HDV; thus all my source footage would be HDV. But I am going to give you a quick tip; HDV is for consumers/prosumers. Nobody in the professional world is going to edit in HDV. Professionals use DVCPRO-HD, HDCAM, Digital Beta, etc etc. Hard drive space is cheap. What is expensive is drive bandwidth and backup solutions. Currently I use G-RAIDs, which support a single stream of UC 10bit SD, and apparently have the bandwidth to support the new Apple ProRes format also.

And yes technology has caught up; but editing in MPEG-2 is still a stupid idea.

If someone hands me a DVD; and wants to add it to a project in which I am editing in UC10bit SD, DV25 or DV50; then yes I am going to convert the DVD so it matches the rest of my source footage. MPEG Streamclip does this very well; and considering it is already a compressed format with artifacts, any extra artifacts probably are not going to matter. If if did matter, they would have handed you a Digital BetaSP tape instead.

Eventually, everything is going to lean towards HD only editing, with SD down conversion when necessary. That is going to be a very expensive day for a lot of people.

-mark

[tfrank]

Nobody in the professional world is going to edit in HDV. Professionals use DVCPRO-HD, HDCAM, Digital Beta, etc etc.
-mark
Not necessarily true Mark. Even the "Major" Television Networks use HDV. I attended a CBS engineering breakfast at last years NAB where they reviewed all of the then formats and gave a technical description of each. The bottom line was, if there is a need for it (HDV)...use it. After being in this business for as long as I have, it's my observation that the line is now very blurred between what is professional and what is consumer. Even the so called consumer formats can put a technically legal product out.

[avkills]

Not necessarily true Mark. Even the "Major" Television Networks use HDV. I attended a CBS engineering breakfast at last years NAB where they reviewed all of the then formats and gave a technical description of each. The bottom line was, if there is a need for it (HDV)...use it. After being in this business for as long as I have, it's my observation that the line is now very blurred between what is professional and what is consumer. Even the so called consumer formats can put a technically legal product out.

Good point; I can see the use of HDV in the news market; it is cheap, fast and easy to get tools to edit it with; just as DV25 is heavily used also.

Technically, every format can put a legal product out; put I definitely see your point.

I'm typically using DVCAM these days; with occasional use of BetaSP. Although I keep pushing DVCAM at work since the recording times are much longer and the quality is good.

For bumpers or stingers though, I will finish in Uncompressed 10-bit and then usually go to BetaSP for playback, although I would really like to have some DVCPRO-50 decks that could double as DVCAM recorders. It is a tough choice to spend any money on SD stuff though, probably not worth it in the long-run; just rent it when you need it.

-mark

[axaboss]

There is a NAB party report somewhere on these forums that states VT sales have never been better, and TriCaster is selling faster than they can produce.

I suppose you would jump off a bridge if you NewTek told you to jump.

Let's be honest, newbies are far more likely to post than an experienced long term user.

Does that mean we are both newbies?

I am just trying to point out how ridiculous your statements are. Please think before you write.

[axaboss]

Professionals use DVCPRO-HD, HDCAM, Digital Beta, etc etc. Hard drive space is cheap. What is expensive is drive bandwidth and backup solutions. Currently I use G-RAIDs, which support a single stream of UC 10bit SD, and apparently have the bandwidth to support the new Apple ProRes format also.

Most pros use these formats. HDV is used, but to a limited degree or for acquisition only. HDV is lossy and horrible for green screen. HDV is beautiful footage out the gate, but goes downhill during editing. DVCPro is awesome.

[Brian Peterson]

Good point; I can see the use of HDV in the news market;

Look up the name Douglas Spotted Eagle, he was bragging that he's managed to get the Sony HDV cameras in use on several network programs. The one that comes to mind is in the last season of JAG. If he isn't blowing hot air then they do use it inside of regular programing.

[Brian Peterson]

I suppose you would jump off a bridge if you NewTek told you to jump.

And the level of intelligence in this thread just took a dump. So you are calling the staff of NewTek liars?

Does that mean we are both newbies?
:twak: Looking at your join date vs mine, you sure are sonny. You obviously have your own ax to grind. I'm sure there is some FCP forum where you can go stroke your ego and they'll all agree with you.

I am just trying to point out how ridiculous your statements are. Please think before you write.
:screwy: The only ridiculous person I see on this thread is you. Goodbye.

[avkills]

Look up the name Douglas Spotted Eagle, he was bragging that he's managed to get the Sony HDV cameras in use on several network programs. The one that comes to mind is in the last season of JAG. If he isn't blowing hot air then they do use it inside of regular programing.

That is encouraging. I can see where a decent HDV camera might be very useful in difficult shots where space is a concern. I know JVC makes a nice HDV camera that has SDI out; so you can easily take the image right off the CCDs to a better acquisition format if you choose (although kind of tough unless you are in a studio.)

I'm just not ready to spend any money (or my companies money) on HDV products. I'll go with DVCPRO HD first. The HVX-200 is real tempting; if it wasn't for the insane cost of P2 cards.

-mark

[Brian Peterson]

I'm just not ready to spend any money (or my companies money) on HDV products. I'll go with DVCPRO HD first. The HVX-200 is real tempting; if it wasn't for the insane cost of P2 cards.

Well I don't consider it very encouraging, personally I think the guy is full of hot air.

Frankly I'm hoping to hold off on any camera purchase for a year. If I need HD I'll rent a DVCProHD unit and otherwise stick with my SD DVCPro cameras. The JVC cameras are interesting but I just don't like HDV.

What I hope happens is Red gets the specs for the Mini they announced Monday together quickly and the camera is out next year. All reports say that you can't beat the quality.

[axaboss]

And the level of intelligence in this thread just took a dump. So you are calling the staff of NewTek liars?


:twak: Looking at your join date vs mine, you sure are sonny. You obviously have your own ax to grind. I'm sure there is some FCP forum where you can go stroke your ego and they'll all agree with you.


:screwy: The only ridiculous person I see on this thread is you. Goodbye.

You are not thinking...

[axaboss]

I'm just not ready to spend any money (or my companies money) on HDV products. I'll go with DVCPRO HD first. The HVX-200 is real tempting; if it wasn't for the insane cost of P2 cards.

-mark

I agree with you entirely with DVCPRO HD. I've seen and played with HDV and I'm not impressed. Too much work to get it to behave like DVCPRO HD. One way to solve that problem...

P2 prices have dropped. Panasonic's Product Manager, Jan Crittenden mentioned a price drop on the 16GB cards to $900. You get 40 minutes of full HD (1080i) uncompressed on to two of those cards.

Speededit likes DVCPRO in all flavors. In a couple of weeks I will post results for everyone to see.

[avkills]

Well a HDV camera could be useful in production if you're going to smash a car into a wall and want POV shot. ;)

That is good to hear that P2 prices are dropping. I have not really kept up to date on it, even though I have a drooling problem with regards to the HVX-200.

-mark

[axaboss]

Well a HDV camera could be useful in production if you're going to smash a car into a wall and want POV shot. ;)

That is good to hear that P2 prices are dropping. I have not really kept up to date on it, even though I have a drooling problem with regards to the HVX-200.

-mark

Sorry. I have to correct myself. I'm embarrassed. The 16GB Cards dropped $900 bringing them to $1300 or so and the 8GB cards dropped to $900. Sorry. Still kind of expensive. But great for a filmmaker, not good for long events, such as weddings or football games. I work like a filmmaker, everything is planned (some not) and storyboarded. Each P2 card fills up like a 400 foot film mag. I unload the media onto a laptop (my changing bag) and move on. I love it.

When I update Speededit I will see if it will manage or maintain the metadata on the P2 cards. FCPro does not. Even the new version doesn't do it. You have to use a program called HD logger to sort, transfer and maintain the metadata before you use FCPro. I hope there are no issues with SE.

[ted]

The "best" is what works for you. Plain and simple.
A hammer works great to drive nails, but a screwdriver handles screws better. Don't try and cut wood with either.
I love it when we get pissy about what is better!
But I will add that my FCP guy often tells me how glad he is that he didn't have to cut this or that project on FCP. :D

[axaboss]

But I will add that my FCP guy often tells me how glad he is that he didn't have to cut this or that project on FCP. :D

I like to know what projects he couldn't handle. Either he doesn't have the system specs to do it or he is not capable. I hate to educate you about this, but FCPro can handle just about anything you can throw at it. From a dinky wedding job to a huge motion picture. Its made me a hell of a lot of money.

I don't think anyone said one is better than the other. FCP vs SE. I think they are both great. One for hammering and the other for screwing. Doh! :)

[wvp]

I like to know what projects he couldn't handle.
Check what ted said -he said his editor is glad he diden't have to cut this or that project on FCP. NOT that FCP coudn't handle it.

The difference in the two programs is mostly FC being better integrated with its other programs (motion, authoring, etc) and a stronger set of tools for taking your "basic" edit to a more refined state. SE gives users some very quick and very easy ways to accomplish the "basic" edit.
Now if we could just marry the best of both!:beerchug:

[avkills]

I can honestly say it took me some time to get used to FCP; coming from using the Media100. Before that it was old school tape and Video Toaster Amiga fun. If you know your system well, you can cut stuff very quickly.

But I can also say that anyone who has had to edit using A/B roll tape systems are pretty much happy on any computer based system. :D

-mark

[axaboss]

Check what ted said -he said his editor is glad he diden't have to cut this or that project on FCP. NOT that FCP coudn't handle it.

The difference in the two programs is mostly FC being better integrated with its other programs (motion, authoring, etc) and a stronger set of tools for taking your "basic" edit to a more refined state. SE gives users some very quick and very easy ways to accomplish the "basic" edit.
Now if we could just marry the best of both!:beerchug:

Only correct me if you are sure of yourself. In this case, you misread the message yourself. He said "my FCP guy." There are many people in this group that don't think before they write. "...my FCP guy" means he has a guy who works with Final Cut Pro. Understand.

I'm on a fact mission, not a philosophical mission. Otherwise, everything else you mentioned in your message I can agree with...

[axaboss]

Only correct me if you are sure of yourself. In this case, you misread the message yourself. He said "my FCP guy." There are many people in this group that don't think before they write. "...my FCP guy" means he has a guy who works with Final Cut Pro. Understand.

You have to excuse me. I had a brain fart and wrote the stupid statement above. I apologize WVP. You are correct, sir.

Sometimes, I am my worst enemy. :(

[SBowie]

Only correct me if you are sure of yourself. In this case, you misread the message yourself. He said "my FCP guy." There are many people in this group that don't think before they write. "...my FCP guy" means he has a guy who works with Final Cut Pro. Understand.I can't say I do (understand) ... although I pretty much make my living by reading and writing English.

You are correct that Ted stated that he retains a fellow who edits with FCP. According to Ted, he has also basically stated (and Jeff is underlining the fact) that - when he is able to (doubtless because the nature of the work permits it) - he is happier not to have to do so. The clear implication is that he (the FCP editor) prefers to work with SE or VT (Ted has both, I believe) when possible. The only alternative inference reasonably permitted is that he prefers to be unemployed. The latter construction would be quite a stretch, taken in context.

So I don't get your point either, and agree with Jeff in his understanding of Ted's post.

[Edit: Oh, OK - clearly I type too slowly, and we are all now on the same page.]

[axaboss]

Oh, OK - clearly I type too slowly, and we are all now on the same page.

You need a macro to reply. :)

[Rich Deustachio]

I don't own FCP but from what I can gather from demos and user feedback both VT/SE and FCP can get the job done but it depends on what the job needs as to which application is better.

Most of here love NewTek and VT/SE for all of the things they do well. What bothers me about where VT5/SE are that they are losing ground fast when it comes to not only basic features that have been needed for a long time now, but the "sizzle" features that FCP and many other editing program have.

I realize NewTek's funds are not at the level of the much larger companies and can only do so much at a time, but it doesn't change the fact that the editing software is still missing many features that are needed and wanted.

I am willing to give NewTek a bit more time to improve the editor in VT5/SE but when the day comes that I start losing business over not being able to do this or offer my clients that in the VT/SE system, that's when I jump ship and move on.

In the past NewTek had a survey on this forum that asked us to rate features we wanted most and least and I know HD editing was top on that list and now we have it so NewTek does listen to a point to the users, but in many other cases where features have been asked for for many years now the users have been ignored.

Probably not because NewTek intended to ignore us, but because of the limitations of the software at the time. So NewTek completely rewrote SE from the ground up. In my opinion since they had the opportunity to write it from the ground up, they should have eliminated the restrictions of the software to add the features that have been asked for since VT2.

Let's all just hope that some of the profits from the live switching sales will be put back into editing developments and not all into live switching. Even the live switch users need to edit content to put into their DDRs to play live so improvements to the editing part would be welcomed by both editors and live switch users.

[Brian Peterson]

I am willing to give NewTek a bit more time to improve the editor in VT5/SE but when the day comes that I start losing business over not being able to do this or offer my clients that in the VT/SE system, that's when I jump ship and move on.

Rich, at today's prices I would recommend just invest in Premier or Vegas to fullfill your ancillary needs as many of us have. I have Premier CS2 and FCS just to meet the needs of my customers. FCS especially since I have a few who insist on FCP. When I need one of the others I go to it and then return to SpeedEDIT.

I own FCS because I have customers who insist on it and it keeps them happy even though I'll do a lot of the work over on my VT system. It's paid for itself.

[imagic]

Assuredly I can't see jumping ship on any one app just because another app has a new feature or two. I can, however, see buying theother app and using both. Indeed that's how I do most of my work.

SpeedEdit doesn't even cost enough to justify complaining that it doesn't do everything. Has anybody here heard of the genius of the "AND" and the tyrrany of the "OR". I like SE and Vegas and VirtualDub and AE.

If you own VT or SpeedEdit, and you jump ship because of some snazzy new feature in another NLE, whose to say that VT or SpeedEdit won't still beat that NLE in other areas, or for other uses.

Who's to say what the best workflow is? Video is a wild kingdom of formats, styles, software, and delivery mediums. I have good clients, some national and very famous, and I've created work for them in a combination of all the apps listed above, and many more. No software suite can be the holy grail.

[Ivan]

In my opinion since they had the opportunity to write it from the ground up, they should have eliminated the restrictions of the software to add the features that have been asked for since VT2.


It is because of the missing features and restrictions that I am not as convinced as you that SE was written from the ground up. If you were going to start over wouldn't you eliminate those restrictions somehow?

Even if I were to believe that this was a "start from scratch" project, that would make me wonder how they can write a complete application in that amount of time but cannot implement seemingly simple features that would enhance workflow like user defined keyboard shortcuts in the five - six years since VT2 shipped.

Ivan

[imagic]

I was under the impression that NewTek writes parts part of VT/SpeedEdit in Assembly language... at least some of the video processing routines. I can't see why they'd just toss all that, I understand that assembly coding is difficult, but apps coded in assembly can run much faster. If true, this also would explain the relatively slow pace by which NewTek adds features, and why certain features are not going to be anytime soon. Perhaps I am wrong, but that's what I understand. However it would also explain why implemented features work so fast. I would think that the app itself could be written from the ground up, using a modern language, but that the video processing itself is proprietary NewTek code, some of it coming from VT. What do I know, anyhow. I'm just guessing.:hey:

It is because of the missing features and restrictions that I am not as convinced as you that SE was written from the ground up. If you were going to start over wouldn't you eliminate those restrictions somehow?

Even if I were to believe that this was a "start from scratch" project, that would make me wonder how they can write a complete application in that amount of time but cannot implement seemingly simple features that would enhance workflow like user defined keyboard shortcuts in the five - six years since VT2 shipped.

Ivan

[ted]

So I don't get your point either, and agree with Jeff in his understanding of Ted's post.

Thanks Steve. I didn't think NAB had me that delerious and was trying to avoid lenghty details.
Not sure why I drew so much attention about a comment implying each of us should use what works for us and not be so bothered by the "other side". :)

So here is the rest of the story if needed.
Matt is my Editor/GFX designer. He has been using FCP for years and is a die hard MAC fan. For the last year he has never stopped making comments or e-mailing me MAC is better and Final Cut can do this and that quotes. Mostly just to screw with me.
I keep telling him don't hold your breath. I don't ever plan to change out our systems unless we can't take a job because of it.
Don't get me wrong, they are great tools used by many. Disclaimed enough or should I keep going?

All I am saying is that I get a kick out of it when he walks in after editing with a client, comes in with his head down in a playful way and tells me how glad he was to have used VT on that project.

:thumbsup: In fact, as I type this it hit me. :thumbsup:
If you have a client sitting with you making changes upon changes for every edit, VT and SE is the tool that works best for us.
If you edit alone to please yourself, you make fewer changes, and maybe FCP fits that bill?
If you have a client with a clock going, maybe it's the speed to explore and make changes that makes VT and SpeedEDIT best.

[axaboss]

Sorry to have misread your earlier statement. Thanks for the clarification. There are lots of things to like about Speededit. I will not deny that. For over-the-shoulder, pay-by-the-hour clients, Speededit may be the best thing out there. I'm still getting use to the methodology and its limitations.

For some jobs... at least for me... everything is not there. There is a sacrifice for speed. Its in the details.

[KiloWatkins]

LOL, Nappy Headed Format Ho's! I have no problems with MacTel's and FCP users, as they get their work done their way. I have not rendered from SE for some time. I pipe the SE Preview as SD to my VT then switch with transitions or fades and record to a server as 16:9 Mpeg or WMV.

Baklava...cake easy

[axaboss]

LOL, Nappy Headed Format Ho's!

Watch your language! They may kick you off this forum. :)

[couryhouse]

final cut is becoming the standard in many cases...

if I was a mac person Iwould conider it more..... If I had to interoperate with people more I would conider it or avid.

ed-

[imagic]

Everything Mac has been "Becoming the Standard" for so long, it's become a cliche. FCP is no different. The Adobe Video Suite might very well become the standard now that Premier is returning to the Mac platform. Don't believe it? Just give Adobe a few years; Apple is more interested in selling pocket doodads these days; they are even willing to sidetrack their OS development just to get a cell-phone out on time.

The point is Adobe gave Apple free reign when they cancelled Premier for the Mac. FCP didn't really grow until that happened, because Apple had no competition. Those days are over, and Adobe will undoubtedly bundle Premier with almost everything. Eventually I expect it to be like the browser wars, and I do expect Adobe to win regardless of whether FCP is superior.


final cut is becoming the standard in many cases...

if I was a mac person Iwould conider it more..... If I had to interoperate with people more I would conider it or avid.

ed-

[imagic]

...and of course I'll be using SpeedEdit all the while

[smmurph]

...and of course I'll be using SpeedEdit all the while

Nice Save!!!

[axaboss]

Everything Mac has been "Becoming the Standard" for so long, it's become a cliche. FCP is no different. The Adobe Video Suite might very well become the standard now that Premier is returning to the Mac platform. Don't believe it? Just give Adobe a few years; Apple is more interested in selling pocket doodads these days; they are even willing to sidetrack their OS development just to get a cell-phone out on time.

We are all pretty much guilty of taking on more profitable projects over clients who do not pay as much. Its competition. Its survival. Apple would be a lame duck if they didn't pursue their best interest to survive and compete. Besides, Apple's FCPro is not sitting on the sidelines waiting for PremPro to pass it by. I can't wait to see the development cycles increase now that Adobe is introducing some decent competition. Their most recent demonstration at NAB 2007 is proof that they are not going to sit around like AVID and watch the competition catch up.

I want to see Speededit go Mac. There is nothing like it on that platform. Besides MS is dumping WinXP next year and I don't plan on upgrading to Vista. WinXP works just fine.

[DiscreetFX]

We have FCP & SE @ DiscreetFX. We are used to the NewTek workflow from way back in the Amiga Video Toaster days so we like SpeedEDIT better. We did start the editing of our film back in 2006 on FCP though, only because SE was not available and Oil Change is shot in HDV so our VT[4] could not edit it. Ironically our PowerMac G5 dual that is only two years old died. Apple has been rude and a big pain getting it fixed since we did not have AppleCare. So the film is being re-edited with SE. FCP is a nice program and can do just about anything if you like the interface, we don't. But if you have any Mac issues Apple can be a pain to deal with.

[KSTAR]

The only standard is what gets the job done.

[DiscreetFX]

Well said KSTAR.

[DiscreetFX]

imagic what you said about Adobe might have been true if they got back into the Mac game sooner with Premier. However they are jumping back into the game kind of late. FCP has over 800,000 users now. Just as it is tough for Microsoft to catch up to the iPod I think Adobe will have a tough time trying to convert all those Final Cut users back to a lesser product. Plus with Final Cut Studio Apple gives customers a very complete package. I think Adobe is back in the game only because Apple is starting to take away their customers interested in creative software. Apple has products that take away Photoshop sales, and DVD Authoring sales and even audio sweeting sales from Adobe. With iWeb Pro Apple will also be taking Dreamweaver sales, new Mac customers already get iWeb for free. I feel Adobe has brought back a more complete Creative Suite product to the Mac out of fear of loosing the creative customer. This hurts NewTek too, many customers when they think of office work they think Windows but when they think about creating a movie, cataloging their photo collection or anything else with creative flair they think of OS X and getting a Mac. This is a misconception because Windows has tons of creative software from NewTek and many other developers but it is the message Apple has been able to send via marketing loud and clear. This is nothing new and Apple stole a play right out of the Amiga's playbook, the computer for the creative mind.

[KSTAR]

Well said KSTAR.

Hey if hadn't bought into that concept I would not have been able to learn the biz and collect paychecks over the last 13 years, especially being an independant. Sometimes I read these forums and laugh. PC's Macs, software, computers, ram, hard drives, single cores, duo cores, Mghz, wacom tablets blah blah blah are still ultimately a tool, and extension of your hard work, desire, and creativity period!

With that thought I must say Newtek, has afforded me more opportunities through the power and price of their hardware, and software, than any other company in the business. Thats no plug thats just the honest truth

[rycar_m]

For every fcp in the market there are about 4 adobe premier and about 2 liquid
the only place fcp has a big edge over premier is in the low to low mid end post houses and boutiques used as a cheap offline editor mostly in lala land (california) the high end is avid, smoke, quantel. premiere is a no show in this market but the muscle behind adobe can clearly make fcp run specialy now that its on mac

Apple marketing makes you belive that everyone has a mac and fcp while the truth is that despite there growth it still only about 5 percent

while fcp bought a lot of innovations (mostly buy purchasing pc apps) at this moment it is catching up and still needs a way.

i am no mac basher i will buy a mac for my pc apps only because i can cover more territory than with just one platform.


ric marty

[Lightwolf]

For every fcp in the market there are about 4 adobe premier and about 2 liquid
the only place fcp has a big edge over premier is in the low to low mid end post houses and boutiques used as a cheap offline editor mostly in lala land (california) the high end is avid, smoke, quantel.
Hm.. if I look around here in town... one HD Smoke, a few higher end Avids (slowly dying), a few PPros and tons of FCPros being used.
Having said that, there has also been a big shift from production companies doing their own editing as opposed to going to a post house (during the past 5 years). And FCPro plays a huge part in that.

FCPro seems to be what every camera man, editor or director has on his laptopt... and quite a few productions are run on those now.

Cheers,
Mike

[rycar_m]

You are just looking at a small portion of the industry when you take into account, one man shops, corporate,indutrial,public relation, weddings, events and not to mentio low to mid level post house, you will find that fcb is not really a player, just read the following article from a former avid executive: Most fcp are in one man shops.

I had a chart of nle market shares for last year (2005 trying to find it) avid was 4 before vegas. liquid and premiere and after vegas cam all others if you added all others plus the top 4 fcp was somewhere musch lower in terms of user base. But read from an insider a former adobe competitor now working at the cow site


Name: Tim Wilson
Date: Jan 9, 2007 at 11:07:39 am


When I worked at Avid, David Krall, the CEO, insisted that the first thing he wanted to hear out of your mouth during a presentation was the conclusion. Last slide first, he said.

So here's the last slide first. Not one hip-hopper on the planet cares that you hate hip-hop. You're not the target audience. You being a hatah (ask your daughter if you can't figure it out) doesn't pull a dime out of their pockets. Ask Jay-Z if you can't figure THAT out.

The moral of the story is that Premiere isn't meant for people like you. Or me, but I like Premiere, and I like hip-hop, too. (Ghostface Killa is still at the top of his game, but I miss Busta Rhymes.)

The other moral of the story is that people outside Preemie's target audience use it anyway.

Read on.

1) The FIRST thing I said to Simon Hayhurst at Adobe when he told me the news was that I did NOT think this was good news. I thought it was BAD news, and I didn't like it. I said exactly what several of you said -- PPro takes such advantage of Windows-only architecture that there was no way it could work.

He pointed out that Adobe has been developing dual-platform apps for ten years, and they're pretty good at it. Point taken.

He also pointed out that the Intel thing cut a full year off Adobe's development time...and added that it wasn't until Mac OS 10.5 that Adobe started seeing the performance they wanted on Mac. STARTED. Which says to me that it's not all the way there (although Simon said no such thing).

He said I'd be pleased with the performance, and I'll wait and see. I'm especially concerned with OpenGL -- Mac display cards are dog slow. We'll ALL see, won't we?

2) Listen to the podcast. Simon explicitly calls out Discreet edit. He says that Discreet was positioned to make edit the standard editing platform, but decided they'd sacrifice that aim for a bigger slice of the top end of the market. Simon says that was a BAD call, both for us and for Discreet, and I have to agree. I suspect you might too.

Simon was at SGI at the time (10 yrs), and felt they made the same short-sighted call. As he quotes one of the bosses, "SGI always learns from its mistakes -- they're just the wrong lessons." Short version: SGI made a desktop display card in 1992 for $3500, and said, this is ridiculous -- nobody can make money selling desktop cards for so little money. Tell that to nVidia, says Simon.

3) I've had TWO jobs where my primary responsibility included hard verification of both sales and market share. In my position at Boris, I had some inside information, as I watched OEM sales rise and fall. Discreet went from number one to off the bottom of the chart in under two years. Sorry.

That wasn't the whole picture, though, since it focused on OEM sales. First Media 100, then Avid rose to the number 1 slot of Boris Red sales, even though Avid will never have CLOSE to the number one slot for NLE sales.

Except in Hollywood, where Avids are used on 100 times more features than FCP. (Very easy math in Hollywood -- just pick up the phone and ask. Not that many features being made at any one time, and people loooooove to talk about themselves.) But I think Avid has made the same mistake Discreet made. I think Avid thinks so too, even if they never call it a mistake. Look at the signs: they're working diligently to create a new business for themselves.

Where does Premiere fit into this? They rocketed up through the Boris database from zero to number two in under a year, with NO bundling! They were easily ready to pass Avid when I left. Even more remarkably, this was solely looking at sales of Boris Red, for $2K (at the time). I left out the cheap products.

These were hard numbers, verified with cold hard cash. Make no mistake, Premiere folks are making money, and there are a ton of them.

4) So when I got to Avid, I was actually in a position to get even harder numbers for a wider range of stuff. Why? Because there were a bunch of us at other companies doing the same job, and our lives were all easier when we gave each other the straight dope -- we were probably going to wind up working at the same company with each other some day anyway.

The other great source of info was resellers. They loved being sources of inside info TO us so they could get some inside info FROM us. Here's how THAT works: just before NAB, everybody has their reseller meetings, where we go over sales figures and lay out our strategies for the coming year. To pump your team up, you exaggerate your strengths and brush over your weaknesses.

And every year, by the end of lunch time, everybody has everybody else's sales kit. Most dealers carry most lines, and don't forget -- they want to be your source so that you'll tell them inside stuff in return.

No need for corporate espionage. Just wait for lunch.

So you write the sales kit KNOWING the other guys will have it in their hands by the end of lunch on the first day. And you read everybody else's sales kit knowing that they know the same thing.

5) You put together all your sources and you triangulate, with one final point of reference. You go on the road. Folks here who knew me from Boris know that I spent upwards of 200 days on the road every year, going to user groups. I was still travelling half that much at Avid.

What I saw on the road -- in hospitals, firehouses, schools, offices, PR companies, and more -- was a dominance of Premiere easily 3-to-1 over anyone else.

I spent a lot of time in event videography groups, an audience that Boris coveted, and that both Avid Xpress and Avid Liquid (both part of my responsibility) coveted too -- you might think them beneath you, and maybe they are -- but they have crazy money. The wedding guy in my neighborhood grosses around $300K/yr and takes home a little over $100K yr. He buys more editing gear more often that I ever did.

Among those groups, Premiere has EASILY 90% of the market, with everyone fighting for their slice after that. FCP was the rising star there, but Premiere is growing so much faster it's ridiculous.

This is a loooooooong story to tell you that I never met ANYONE ANYWHWERE in the industry who would dispute the following sentence:

Premiere. Has. More. Market. Share. Than. Everyone. Else. Combined.

Okay, sentence fragments. Here's the sentence: Premiere has more market share than everyone else combined.

Not prosumer, btw. Pinnacle Studio has that locked up so hard your head would spin. My teeth hurt just thinking about the numbers -- which, again, I had clear access to. When I talk about Premiere market share, I'm talking about PRO video editing. That is, people who earn money from video.

6) Here we are again at the last slide. I'm not surprised to hear that you don't like Premiere all that much. You're not the target audience all that much. Yet.

Two stories on that count. The first is in the article in the magazine -- Premiere is starting to gain acceptance in specific parts of the digital intermediate market for its flexible IO, and because it natively supports 4K image sequences with dandy performance. Oh yeah, and because of unmatched integration with Photoshop and After Effects. Read the rest of the story.

Here's the other story. I met the fella who's now the VP and General Manager of Adobe Dynamic Media when he was the VP in charge of the product group that included Flash at Macromedia. He collegially strolled up to the Avid booth at NAB, and with a pleasant smile said, "We're coming after you." Again, this suggests to me that he has no illustions that Premiere is there YET.

The cool thing about Adobe is that, like Microsoft, they have the resources to be patient. Nobody can name a single target that they've ever missed. Oh yeah, except for web and interactivity design, and they bought the guys with 80% (Dreamweaver)and 97% market share (Flash) in those categories...along with one of the industry's strongest server markets, web conferencing technologies, and more.

Bet against Premiere at your peril -- even though you might never like it, might not even ever see a copy being used by any of your clients. Adobe gets what Adobe wants. They want to keep winning.

Okay, I'm ready for a cocktail after that. See you kids in the hot tub on the Lido deck.


http://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/13/859821?


ric marty

[Bobt]

WOW!
I have to admit you are correct Adobe does blow away FCP in shear numbers but the har core artists and users are turning to FCP. Though when you looked in the Adobe booth there was a TON of people in it as well. Hard to walk in that booth at NAB.


<FCP has over 800,000 users now
Premiere had that several years ago and the pentration has only gotten bigger.

[rycar_m]

WOW!
I have to admit you are correct Adobe does blow away FCP in shear numbers but the har core artists and users are turning to FCP.

<FCP has over 800,000 users now
Premiere had that several years ago and the pentration has only gotten bigger.


bobt,

yes and those hard core artist are using adobe products. the future at this moment seems to be going towards premiere. Fcp was designed by the original premiere designer who defected to apple about 7 years ago and made fcp into what he thought that premiere should have been. At this moment FCp core is about 8 years old while Premiere is almost brand new. fcp is basically an unorgaized premiere clone.

Just ask yourself how much money for r&d can apple put into fcp when you compare to what adobe can do for premiere.

Unless apples dedicates its self exclusivly to fcp i am sure that premiere will blow away apple in the near future and now that its back on mac its literaly at fcp's gates. could i be hearing checkmate soon?


ric marty


all said i prefer speed edit for editing

[DiscreetFX]

A very interesting read about Adobe. We do get asked quite a lot to port our digital video effects to Adobe Premier. This may be a major mistake on my part but I will never allow it. I have no interest in seeing our products on this editing app ever. If after I tell the customer our products will never appear on Premire, if they still insist I finally tell them the only way it will ever happen. Adobe would have to buy DiscreetFX and port the effects themselves. This gets a good laugh from the customer but it is the gods honest truth. I run DiscreetFX the way I want to right or wrong. We have survive the might of Autodesk trying to crush us so we must be doing something right.

[axaboss]

bobt,

yes and those hard core artist are using adobe products. the future at this moment seems to be going towards premiere. Fcp was designed by the original premiere designer who defected to apple about 7 years ago and made fcp into what he thought that premiere should have been. At this moment FCp core is about 8 years old while Premiere is almost brand new. fcp is basically an unorgaized premiere clone.

Where did you get this information? It doesn't exist any where I can look. As a matter of fact, the original developers of FCP came from Macromedia and Asarte Toast. 8 years old is not old in the world of software. Premiere is still using code from version 6. That's at least 8 years old. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I love Speededit, but some SE users are a funny in the head. :)

[axaboss]

Another thing to keep in mind. Many people who purchase a computer at an Apple store also purchase FC Express. Not to mention, the influence a physical store selling the most popular product in the history of music, has on computer buyers. Apple stores will push their products first. Its design to work the right way on their computers. Not all the time, but most of the time. Adobe needs a store to keep up with the public. Once the iPhone comes out the mud will hit the fan. Adobe will be back to giving away their software like they did in the mid-90s.

[DiscreetFX]

axaboss don't you know yet? rycar_m works for Adobe.

:)

[Lightwolf]

As a matter of fact, the original developers of FCP came from Macromedia and Asarte Toast.
Actually (FCP): Adobe then Macromedia which dumped the project and then Apple (which dumped the windows side of the project).
The Toast guys are responsible for the DVD authoring side of things.
Cheers,
Mike

[rycar_m]

Yes it was originaly developed by macromedia and purchase by apple because at the time avid had announced that it would be stopping mac development due to poor performance. The information about the adobe app designer came from an article i read about 6 years ago and discussed in the old discreet edit forum. In fact it was mentioned by Greg Niles then the chief desiger for "Combustion" who is now "Motion" chief designer. I belive that he left adobe for macromedia.

8 years in the nle worls is ancient history. premiere 6.5 started the change from the old code. version six came out about 3 years ago .

no i don't work for adobe, i have verion cs-2 but i hardly use it.

cheers
ric marty


The information about thebut the
QUOTE=axaboss]Where did you get this information? It doesn't exist any where I can look. As a matter of fact, the original developers of FCP came from Macromedia and Asarte Toast. 8 years old is not old in the world of software. Premiere is still using code from version 6. That's at least 8 years old. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I love Speededit, but some SE users are a funny in the head. :)[/QUOTE]

[rycar_m]

i FORGOT TO MENTION THAT THEDEVELOPER LEFT ADOBE TO JOIN MACROMEDIA THEN IT WAS PURCHASED BY APPLE.

RIC MARTY

[axaboss]

i FORGOT TO MENTION THAT THEDEVELOPER LEFT ADOBE TO JOIN MACROMEDIA THEN IT WAS PURCHASED BY APPLE.

RIC MARTY

That's a small thing to forget. Wikipedia believers read on:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Cut_Pro

LightWolf is right on. :)

[axaboss]

Newer code. Older code. Its all relative when you think about it. Newer code can be flaky. Lots of bugs to be ironed out. Older code cannot build on newer technologies, unless they are built with the future in mind, yet have fewer bugs and are time tested.

LightWave is slowly cleaning up its act since version 6 and Speededit has bumps with version 1. Premiere Pro needs time to build confidence on a Mac.

[Bobt]

Premiere Pro has been lacking though. The FCP abilites to render on multiple nodes is a HUGE thing when it comes to HD/HDV.

Bob

[Bobt]

Macromedia was bought buy Adobe not Apple.

[Lightwolf]

Macromedia was bought buy Adobe not Apple.
I think the remarks were referring to the developer/team behind FC, not Macromedia itself.

Cheers,
Mike

[Bobt]

I was tight with many developers of Adobe P since I wrote realtime plugins for VT and 5 and 6.5 back then. They dropped the Mac support because Apple was handing off special OS fixes for FCP and were blowing off all the other developers requests. Plus they were not keeping the other developers in the loop on new things they were adding. YEOW.. Thats why folks gave them the tip of the hat and see ya later. Also the PC sales numbers compared to the Mac sales were unbelievably slanted. So much so leaving the Mac only hurt the feelings of some folks.

Now on the flip side..
I like the Adobe folks a lot, spent many a midnight round with them,
but I think FCP has been adding newer cooler stuff to their tools than the
Adobe folks have.

Not saying this is better or that. But hey.. FCP is looking pretty cool though I agree with the bit disorganized.
The combo of integrated Titling, Motion, Color, DVD burning, Audio editing,
etc is pretty compelling and is quickly making people smile.

(Just saying..)
Bob

[Lightwolf]

They dropped the Mac support because Apple was handing off special OS fixes for FCP and were blowing off all the other developers requests.
Funny, Microsoft were slagged off for exactly the same reasons ages ago (during the office wars...).

The way I see it is that Apple still seems to be a lot more agile than Adobe, which is a behemoth like Autodesk and Microsoft. By the time Adobe thinks about making a decision, Apple has released the goods (i.e. Red support).
How long did it take Adobe to incorporate OpenEXR properly into AE? Oh, still not there in CS3? -> http://www.fnordware.com/OpenEXR/
As long as Apple can use that to their advantage (plus a "fanatical" user base) they'll be ahead.

Cheers,
Mike

[Bobt]

>Funny, Microsoft were slagged off for exactly the same reasons ages ago
>(de during the office wars...).
Still is TRUE. Office is a LARGE chunk of the M$ revenue. They cant do graphics worth a $^$#& but they beat everyone at office the same way Apple is with FCP. They cheat. Now the Apple folks dont care. They just love Macs so it doesnt matter. Whatever it takes, kinda like Chicago politics,
to get what they want is OK.
To get to you your point, I agree that FCP is more agile at the moment or so it seems.
Adobe will release another version next year that seems like they just caught up to FCP's newest thing.

This year at NAB FCP was pushing finishing and Adobe was pushing output to multiple formats cause I think they already got some finishing stuff with AE PhotoShop etc..
Eh.. as KStar said somewhere in the forums whatever gets the gig out da door.

Bob

[harlan]

Maaaaan... I'm soooooo not touching this thread - don't want to get booted off (Lightwave is still an effective part of my workflow) ;)

[ted]

Howdy Harlan. Eeeeaaaaasy! :D

[harlan]

lol.... It has taken an immeasurable amount of self-control to avoid correcting the abundance of misinformation being regurgitated throughout this thread.

:)

[ScorpioProd]

Welcome Harlan! I just found this thread, and this entire sub forum...:beerchug:

[medeamajic]

I would like to think any info based on facts would be welcomed.

[axaboss]

Misinformation is expected. I assume cross referencing is essential. Also, the background info countered by veteran experts in the field can help dis spell newly formed myths.

[ted]

Misinformation is expected. I assume cross referencing is essential. Also, the background info countered by veteran experts in the field can help dis spell newly formed myths.

Well said. As I often mention, my perspective is always subject to "opinion" because of the specific work we do, past experiences and the purchase decisions we've made based on "my" homework.
We should never jump into technology because a few people praise it. Look into who praises it and why.

Like opinions of Dogs, there are no "Best" breeds. Depends on your situation. Well, except my Jack Russell that really IS the best! :beerchug:

[KiloWatkins]

With our NEW age of computers, comes a new set of tools, we either advance with or not. OSx would be my choice for all Newtek products in my perfect world with a 4x4core(BOXX), LW9.2xx SE1.xx VT5.xx and Mirage. The TC.xyz of course, but needs a Newtek operator, as a TC Newbe would be lost for anything then a StartUpGuide, IMHO. The only thanks I can give M$, is their bedroom eyes with Intel/clones making new PC designs, to then squash the speed with an 800meg OS. Our NEW HDTV world of content creation choices is just that NEW. As time goes on, one set of tools is no better than another, if the realtime or post operator KNOWS what they are doing. I got many a little chuckle reading this too, Harlan. Thanks for your help on those many emails concerning the musicican contacts I requested.

[axaboss]

Like opinions of Dogs, there are no "Best" breeds. Depends on your situation. Well, except my Jack Russell that really IS the best! :beerchug:

Italian Greyhounds are smarted than Jack Russell Terriers! :)

[SBowie]

... except my Jack Russell that really IS the best! :beerchug:Funniest thing I ever saw on tv was a Jack Russel race ... Basenji's are very cool too though. :D

[Pete Draves]

The only ones that fit in the microwave are good to eat.

Really just a joke, but not in some places I have lived
Pete

[medeamajic]

I have seen miss information on this thread myself but I was not able to post when I first read them several days ago. I don't see why others would not have made post for clarification purposes.

[robewil]

Like opinions of Dogs, there are no "Best" breeds. Depends on your situation. Well, except my Jack Russell that really IS the best! :beerchug:Ted,
I saw this today and it reminded me of this post.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18440403?GT1=9951

[SBowie]

"George" might only have been a foot high, but he had a big heart - and no doubt - like most Jack Russel's - spent about half of his time 4 feet in the air anyway, giving him the effective height advantage over the Pit Bulls. ;)

[UnCommonGrafx]

I'd love to see some of the misinformation corrected.

Why is this thread being given to the dogs? I think the corrections would be much more interesting.

[SBowie]

Because we all know that flamewars contending that anything other than AmigaDOS are the real cure to all of mankinds ills are just wishful thinking prompted by OS-envy?

[ScorpioProd]

Eh, I think Steve's right, this thread isn't really accomplishing anything useful.

FCP and SpeedEDIT are different products with different features and always will be.

[ted]

Ted,
I saw this today and it reminded me of this post.

Thanks for the link!

[UnCommonGrafx]

It's only a flamewar if we make it; information is neutral.

[axaboss]

I believe this section is the "SPEEDEDIT Community" section, not "SE Tips and Tricks" or "SE General Support." A community can compare products, talk about horrible clients or tell a joke. This thread doesn't have to accomplish anything. Steve, who I deeply respect, doesn't have to offer input throughout this thread.

[SBowie]

It's only a flamewar if we make it; information is neutral.I know, but despite best intentions all around, the very nature of this particular subject very quickly and almost uncontrollably tends toward "Apple is better!/No it's not!/Yes it is!" that it makes my head ring ... just look at what has been written above to demonstrate that.

Tell you what though, y'all go ahead and bash away, I just won't read this one. ;)

[UnCommonGrafx]

Right, Steve. I guess my intentions are that we use some of that maturity that has been shown by many who have restrained on their comments and encourage them to speak up in such a manner. That is to say, in such a manner as to be informative and not boastful.

I know that Harlan can do just that as I've seen him do it before.

I'm much more interested that such conversations be had, that we learn our way to have conversations like this in a mature fashion and to show NewTek what their own users would like to see in future SE versions.

I know that I am looking at what other tools do what and conversations of this nature are a help.

[medeamajic]

An Apple fan boy's opinion should be welcomed. The info may be fact or fiction but none the less welcomed.

[imagic]

Not sure what fictional info adds to any debate. Anyone involved in debate should welcome facts, period.

An Apple fan boy's opinion should be welcomed. The info may be fact or fiction but none the less welcomed.

[axaboss]

Whether FCP is considered a competitor or not, what comes to reason is that, depending on the task at hand, which program can get the job done with the least amount of clicks and crashing. Creative time is at a premium. Decreasing the user's interaction of the software's toolset to get from A to B is key.

I like to experiment and come up with something different. I need time to do that. Speededit has superceded FCP for editing certain projects not requiring lots of character generating and motion graphics. I can't wait until the slo-mo is updated.

[bobgilles]

FCP obviously has the support and HD capability that SE can't touch for years, but I have personally had experienced FCP guys sit at my SE system and marvel at how much you can do in the control tree and with a clip in the timeline. In FCP, when you select a clip, it opens it in the cumbersome viewer and takes you through it's clunky interface. If I want to spin a a 3D move in a PIP, I just right click and rotate in one move, that always freaks out my Avid and FCP friends! They always say, "what did you do, do that again, how did you make that happen????".

Let's face it, when SE matures, it will be deadly.

[axaboss]

If I want to spin a a 3D move in a PIP, I just right click and rotate in one move, that always freaks out my Avid and FCP friends! They always say, "what did you do, do that again, how did you make that happen????".

How did you make that happen?

I seem to get a contextual menu when I right click on the SE Viewer. No instant rotation thingy here. It doesn't mention any shortcuts in the manual either. I do see it in the control tree which is fine and dandy, but to interact with it in the viewer would be ultra-dandy. What's the secret combo? :)

[ScorpioProd]

Control Tree>Positioner Panel.

I agree, that is a powerful feature of SpeedEDIT, though I have seen it done in other NLEs directly in their output window.

[CreatvGnius]

I have to admit - Speededit is hands down the best editor for short form (15secs to 5mins.) projects with lots of cuts and layers. I love it. I charge the same and get more time to sunbathe near the pool.

...as well, SpeedEDIT is hands down the best editor for long form projects with simple layers, with cuts and dissolves. I love it...

As for "Final Cut catching up w/SpeedEDIT", I fully understand the rationale of asking that question, particularly in relation to the issue of the need for rendering seemingly the smallest detail within the FCP interface.

I felt I was laboring to get through a simple project, due to having been spoiled by NewTek's genuinely real-time solutions for effects preview -- let alone for speedily rendering an output file.
-PeterG:beerchug:

[ScorpioProd]

...as well, SpeedEDIT is hands down the best editor for long form projects with simple layers, with cuts and dissolves. I love it...


Honestly, since that is the same kind of work I do daily, I wish I could say that now about SpeedEDIT in my experiences...

But I can't.

Hopefully, after the point update.

[axaboss]

...as well, SpeedEDIT is hands down the best editor for long form projects with simple layers, with cuts and dissolves. I love it...

Good for you. :)

[medeamajic]

Not sure what fictional info adds to any debate. Anyone involved in debate should welcome facts, period.


The more people ramble the more your BS detector can flash. It gives you a chance to see who they are and how they edit.Some things involved in video editing are viewed subjective others are viewed objective.

[medeamajic]

...as well, SpeedEDIT is hands down the best editor I love it...

As for "Final Cut catching up w/SpeedEDIT", I fully understand the rationale of asking that question, particularly in relation to the issue of the need for rendering seemingly the smallest detail within the FCP interface.

I felt I was laboring to get through a simple project, due to having been spoiled by NewTek's genuinely real-time solutions for effects preview -- let alone for speedily rendering an output file.
-PeterG:beerchug:


Are you sure SE is hands down the best editor for long form projects with simple layers, with cuts and dissolves?

I think I should judge for myself. I admit Newtek may have caught up with Grass Valley/Canopus. I am not willing to say SE has a better or quicker GUI than Edius. I am waiting to find a SE dealer to find out. SE sounds like it has the same horse power as Edius but I will have to decide if I like the GUI of SE better than the GUI Edius before I jump ship. The GUI of Edius is decent but could be better. Edius is True RT with a cheap OHCI card. You can infact use uncompressed, DV-25, DV-50 and even a layer of MPEG 2 and it will out put back to DV-50 or DV-25 in RT (Also HD-100). I am not going to say Edius or SE is hand down the best editor for long form projects with simple layers, with cuts and dissolves. My needs may be different than others on this forum.

[imagic]

I've hung out on much larger forums (mostly photography) and I know what you mean. Eventually you can figure out what's fact, fantasy, and opinion. I have to agree that a good forum should have all voices heard (except for trolls, of course).:agree:

The more people ramble the more your BS detector can flash. It gives you a chance to see who they are and how they edit.Some things involved in video editing are viewed subjective others are viewed objective.

[SBowie]

How did you make that happen?

I seem to get a contextual menu when I right click on the SE Viewer. No instant rotation thingy here. It doesn't mention any shortcuts in the manual either. I do see it in the control tree which is fine and dandy, but to interact with it in the viewer would be ultra-dandy. What's the secret combo? :)
As Eugene mentioned, interactive controls for rotation (and a lot more) are in the Positioner. No doubt you've found them by now. :)

The relevant manual section begins a 5.7 (3D rotation hotkeys are listed in Section 5.7.1.2). I think there may be several reasons that a dedicated panel (the Positioner tab of the control Tree) is used for this rather than the Output Window:

The Positioner panel provides a lot of ancillary controls and buttons that would needlessly clutter the Output Window 98% of the time. Too, it wouldn't surprise me if the display attributes and routines used in the two views are quite different, so that making mods to Output (as is being contemplated for the next build_ might be a good deal more complicated from a programmers standpoint if it were necessary to consider the various interactive functions and features of the Positioner display as well. Just guessing in all of this, mind you...

[axaboss]

As Eugene mentioned, interactive controls for rotation (and a lot more) are in the Positioner. No doubt you've found them by now. :)

Its not that obvious. Thanks for pointing it out. The tabs below the Control Tree Viewer window should be highlighted or beveled or something to make them obvious. Other than that, I am impressed and liking this more and more.

Now I need transfer modes when I overlay video like in Photoshop with images. :)

[SBowie]

Now I need transfer modes when I overlay video like in Photoshop with images. :)That would be wonderful, of course. I don't know enough about the mechanics of gpu technology to know how feasible it is, but would love to have Add, Screen, etc. Multiply would be very useful as well, and would set the stage for alpha mattes.

[Brian Peterson]

Honestly, since that is the same kind of work I do daily, I wish I could say that now about SpeedEDIT in my experiences...


Okay Eugene, what post of yours did I miss on long form projects? I just finished a 2 hour 15 minute recital, standard cuts and disolves, 2 cameras in SD and no problems. What's up with yours?

[ScorpioProd]

Are you sure you want to know? Most people only want to hear good things about SpeedEDIT...

And I certainly do point out good things when possible, just like a post I made yesterday about SpeedEDIT's HDV decoding being the most efficient out there compared to any other NLE I've tried, and it is...

Last time I talked about the REAL problems I had, some newbie jumps all over me about it since I wasn't being a Newtek fanboy...

Nah, this thread is about Final Cut versus SpeedEDIT, and I don't have any Final Cut stories to share. Sorry.

Glad SpeedEDIT works great for you, though. For myself, I sadly have to pursue other solutions.

[wvp]

Wow, that big news. Hopefully NT will be able to win back one of its biggest supporters -this community really benifts from your help and advice.
That all said, given the forum we are in, are you considering FCP? has it "caught up to SpeedEdit" in your opinion?

[ScorpioProd]

The Final Cut Studio 2 was something I was impressed with at NAB. I certainly am considering it.

With the magic of Mac or PC on Mac hardware, I'm strongly considering Mac hardware for my next computer anyway.

It's not an issue of "catching up", they're simply very different and with different features, and maturity.

Plus, remember, when you compare FCP (which only comes in Final Cut Studio) to SpeedEDIT, you are comparing a suite of tools to a stand-alone NLE. Kinda apples and oranges... Heheh... "Apples" and oranges... I'm so funny! :hey:

That said, since I already have Vegas 7, I might as well learn that first and see if that will do all I need. I mean, honestly, my needs aren't that difficult.

Plus, like I said in another thread, though all NLEs are different, all NLEs are also similar enough that really moving to a different one shouldn't scare people as much as it seems to.

I'm not tossing SpeedEDIT out, or anything like that. It's still here. So depending on what is fixed/added in the point release, we'll see if it can win me back. I hope it can.