PDA

View Full Version : Adobe Spurns Apple - film at 11:00



mattclary
07-08-2003, 07:54 AM
LOL


http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=620&ncid=620&e=1&u=/nf/20030707/bs_nf/21857

Beamtracer
07-08-2003, 11:10 PM
Old story. I think it's the other way around... Mac users drop Adobe Premiere (and flock to Final Cut Pro).

takkun
07-09-2003, 12:12 AM
This is just revenge for Apple dropping Windows support of Shake. :D
I think it's the other way around... Mac users drop Adobe Premiere (and flock to Final Cut Pro). Apple does have a strangle-hold on NLE's on the Mac Platform, it makes perfect sense that Adobe dropped Premiere for the Mac.

cresshead
07-09-2003, 04:42 AM
also note that:
1.corel have dropped bryce for mac.
2.microsoft have dropped internet explorer for mac.

is this a new trend?...."drop the mac version"

steve g

Beamtracer
07-09-2003, 05:31 AM
What would you prefer to use? Premiere or FCP? Be honest!
What would you prefer? After Effects or Shake?
'DVDit!' or Apple's DVD Studio Pro?

The mediocre software stays on Windows. If you want best-of-class software in these areas you've got to get a Mac.

cresshead
07-09-2003, 05:46 AM
to be quite frank, "prefer" doesn't come into the equation for most people in the real world...

there's the omnipresent "bottom line" of price.

i'd prefer to use pixars animation tools and a small r & d team and then finish in inferno and flame.

but if i can't afford [the bottom line] that [which currently i can't]

i'd like to have "choice" of software available.

apple is heading away from the "platform of choice"

also note that choice helps drive inovation forward and also keeps the price competative.

steve g

Red_Oddity
07-09-2003, 05:49 AM
Thank you Beam, here we go again...

Do you have to be blond, have blue eyes and speak with a german accent aswell in order to own a Mac?

I've had it with this stupid superiority complex of Mac users, assuming anything on a PC is made for retards and is only half in quality of what is available on a Mac...

cresshead
07-09-2003, 06:03 AM
oh and just to burst your "mac reality bubble"!!!....

""The mediocre software stays on Windows. ""

is that why :
1.maya unlimited is NOT available on mac
2.renderman is not available on mac
3.flame/inferno is not available on mac
4.pdi/disney/pixar now render on linux>>>>not i sniff of mac!

mac's true role is for design for print/layout industry where it really does lead currently.

don't get me wrong though ..i like the new g5's..they look neat and i hope that they are succesful...that would give us a choice...

so we can choose:mac, windows, sgi or linux

panini
07-09-2003, 07:55 AM
Under $3000 I prefer to use Vegas ( Windows only of course ) and I do.

Better than FCPro or Premiere and cheaper. Most of FCPro's "new" features were already in the original Vegas.

Toaster + Digital Fusion is another Windows option which works as well or better than the most ridiculously priced Mac software.

cgolchert
07-09-2003, 08:27 AM
Originally posted by Red_Oddity ...assuming anything on a PC is made for retards...

and then just for fun--

Official Apple policy

That's right..you PC users and your stupid multi-button mouse. Don't you realizes it is far better to have to also use the keyboard in addition to the mouse to provide your punny OS the proper mouse click? :)

Our shiny cases are also better looking. They tell the user, "Look, but don't touch" Just like at a museum

Apple - We make shiny things.

Red_Oddity
07-09-2003, 11:11 AM
Red_Oddity : <runs away crying> Mommy mommy...cgolchert is teasing me again...<sob sob>

mom : <slaps R_O on the head> And he has good reason to, you cry baby! Now stop it and play nice...all of you kids...there's enough Lightwave to go around for everybody....

cgolchert
07-09-2003, 11:16 AM
Oh, I wasn't making fun of you. :) It is more fun to poke at Apple themselves.

takkun
07-09-2003, 01:12 PM
What would you prefer to use? Premiere or FCP? Be honest!
What would you prefer? After Effects or Shake?
'DVDit!' or Apple's DVD Studio Pro? I prefer Vegas!!! Sadly, it's now Sony Vegas, I hope they continue to develop it. Actually, I would really "prefer" a VT[3].:D

Rei
07-09-2003, 01:52 PM
Vegas has been bought by Sony, so this means the price goes up, the app stays the same but crashes les and looks better.

ChrisS
07-09-2003, 02:55 PM
Speaking of Adobe Spurning things...
System requirements say XP, but nothing about 2000. Is 2000 no longer supported? Seems a bit ridiculous to me, especially since a lot of users seem to prefer 2000 over XP.

Castius
07-09-2003, 08:51 PM
Microsoft is forcing XP on the pubic cause it has implemented new features to lock down software and also working with Intel to lock software to hardware. So win2k is just short of unsupported and we are lucky to get service packs.

wacom
07-10-2003, 12:08 AM
Shake huh? Are Combustion and it's big brothers a hunk of crap? Is it just me or is Digital Fusion one of the slickest programs for comp work? There are more programs to list...but I just can't see how these programs that also run on a PC are crap? There are other NLE apps besides FCP and Premiere as well (too many to mention) that many pros use. Since when was VT just for churches either? I think if it can do a lot of what FCP can do, but in real time that says something. Besides- half of the crap you try to pull off in a NLE is done better in a comp program...

Still...Premiere is a piece of poo...but lucky for me I don't have blinders on and can see other programs made by Co. that don't start with "A". Can we get off this PC vs. Mac planet and realize that at the end of the day the tape or image we hand the client is all that maters- they don't care if you did it on an Atari 2600 so long as they got what they wanted.

JReble
07-10-2003, 07:29 AM
Oh you've got to be kidding. The Atari 2600 is a piece of crap for editing. All the best editing is done on the Colecovision!

Red_Oddity
07-10-2003, 08:57 AM
Yeah, and i still do my color grading on a BBC...

Beamtracer
07-10-2003, 10:44 AM
Look, if you guys would prefer to use Digital Fusion rather than Shake, I'm not going to bother to persuade you otherwise.

If you don't know what you're missing then it doesn't matter anyway.

js33
07-10-2003, 11:50 AM
Beam,

Do you own Shake?
Shake is cool but the price! 5k for Mac and 10k for Windows/Linux.
Maybe if the price ever comes down it will be an option for more than the studios.

Cheers,
JS

Rei
07-10-2003, 12:15 PM
XP is based on 2K, if a program runs on XP is very likly that it will run on 2K as well. if you get programs before XP came out, and use them on XP, they register it as 2K, or NT if there really old! (i have some).

JReble
07-10-2003, 01:59 PM
Ok, just to dispell this whole Mac vs PC thing...

I recently installed the new Macintosh emulator on my Pentium 4 1.8Ghz system and it's working great. I'm running OSX and Final Cut Pro on my PC just as well as I ever did on the Mac. It emulates the Mac so well that my PC is now locking up at least once an hour just like my Mac. It even has a little message pop up every time it boots into OSX notifying me that I must pay Steve Jobs an additional $3,500 to be legally entitled to run the software. It also has this annoying pop-up that I have to click ok on everytime that just warns me that my computer case and monitor are not groovy and shiney enough and that excessive & reliable system resources may cause the operating system to become unstable, but so far everything works fine.

Nicodemus
07-10-2003, 02:23 PM
MAC's rock......but then so does my PC. Premeire made the decision they had to, it is simple as that.

They have lost major ground to Apple in the area of editing on the MAC. They have also lost ground because of Avid Express. The combination of MAC introducing such a solid product and Avid trying to combat it with a solid alternative pushed Adobe out of the MAC market. While premeire is a great program it lacked functions that the other two had or added. I have heard of Post House's putting in Final Cut Pro suites or Avid Express suites but never a Premeire suite.

Adobe is having to play catch up in an area that they held a certain dominance for a long time. They did not anticipate the kind of competition they have gotten from Apple and Avid. I cannot fault Apple for seeing a need and offering an affordable solution to it.

~L~

Beamtracer
07-10-2003, 08:19 PM
Avid is suffering losses as a result of Final Cut Pro. FCP is a juggernaut that keeps growing and growing and sweeping the film and television industries.

Adobe Premiere's retreat into the Windows market will only make it harder for them to compete. This is the same mistake that Avid once made, to which they are now correcting.

Post production companies want to standardize on one type of video editing software. They can then easily hire freelance staff if they need. I don't think Adobe's Premiere Pro will be able to gain any foothold whatsoever in this area, an area full of Mac people.

Here's a good story that explains why Apple will grow much stronger in the area of Film and Television post production. It's worth a read. Note that this is the same story linked to in the Lightwave Mac forum titled "article on the G5 and the industry -"
http://www.thomas-fitzgerald.net/mt_test/archives/000018.html

Elmar Moelzer
07-11-2003, 12:43 AM
I would probably say Nuke is still better than Shake
Me I actually work with Digital Fusion, which does the job quite well.
Would be interesting for me to hear what people think makes Shake better than DF...
CU
Elmar

Beamtracer
07-11-2003, 04:44 AM
Originally posted by Elmar Moelzer
Me I actually work with Digital Fusion, which does the job quite well.
Would be interesting for me to hear what people think makes Shake better than DF... The 32 bit-per-channel renderer for a start. Lightwave renders in 32bpc. Then people squash it down to 16bpc or even worse, 8bpc.

You get a lot more latitude to color grade or do fx when you're working in a higher dynamic range image than what you're outputting to.

Lightwolf
07-11-2003, 05:10 AM
Originally posted by Beamtracer
The 32 bit-per-channel renderer for a start.
Yeah, but you have that in DF as well...

Beamtracer
07-11-2003, 07:00 AM
Originally posted by Lightwolf
Yeah, but you have that in DF as well... I'm not a DF user so all I can do is go by what they put on their website. It mentions 16-bit floating point, but I couldn't find any reference to 32bpc floating point. If they have this feature they keep it very quiet.

Read it for yourself
http://www.eyeonline.com/products/digital_fusion/digital_fusion.html#colordepth

Lightwolf
07-11-2003, 07:14 AM
Originally posted by Beamtracer
I'm not a DF user so all I can do is go by what they put on their website. It mentions 16-bit floating point, but I couldn't find any reference to 32bpc floating point. If they have this feature they keep it very quiet.

Actually, it doesn't mention 16 bit floating point:

Now, with DF4, process in 8 bit, 16 bit and floating point per pixel.

If I remember correctly from the SDK, floating point is 32 bit.

Cheers,
Mike

Beamtracer
07-11-2003, 08:02 PM
Well, you can also have 16bpc floating point. The fact that there is no mention on Eyeon's website about 32bpc makes me assume that it is not a feature.

If you have Digital Fusion you should test it now and see if it can. Can you load up a 32bpc LogLuv sequence, color grade it and spit out a 32bpc Logluv sequence out the other end. Does it internally process at 32bpc?

I would have thought if it could do this they would be singing it from the rooftops.

Shake can do it. Lightwave can do it. As you have pointed out, Shake comes with a hefty price tag also.

I'm sure Apple would love to reduce the price of Shake. If Apple did reduce the price they'd probably make more money as they'd increase their unit sales. However, Adobe has threatened to pull other products from the Mac if Apple made such a move.

takkun
07-12-2003, 12:47 AM
Here's a clip from the Digital Fusion 4 Demo help file:


Digital Fusion's Three Different Color Depths

8 Bit
Generally, 8 bit color processing is used for all video formats (some equipment capable of producing video at 10 bit depths now exists). 8 bit is the lowest color depth and gradients produced at this depth may have visible steps that prevent them from appearing smooth. Also, significant gamma or color corrections may produce more visible banding.

16 Bit
16 bit color depth dramatically increases the amount of precision used for images, eliminating problems with stepping in gradients and improving the resolution of the color.

Processing 16 bit per channel color takes longer and uses more RAM than 8 bit processing.

Using 16 bit processing with footage that is inherently only 8 bit (e.g. from tga files, bmp files, AVI or QuickTime movies, etc.) will not reduce banding, but does give greater precision for multiple color corrections. Note also that 10 bit and even 8 bit YUV formats, such as those used with the dpsReality or Video Toaster, will see some benefit when processed with 16 bits per channel rather than 8.

32 Bit (Float)
Commonly referred to as `Float' or `Floating Point', 32 bit per channel color processing further increases the precision over 16 bit and delivers many times greater color resolution than 8 bit processing. 16 bit color comfortably includes all of the colors which can be represented in standard digital film processing. As with 16 bit, float processing takes significantly more time and memory. The other advantage to 32 bit per channel processing is that floating point values are used to store the pixel values rather than integers. This allows float images to store out of range values, where pixels have values greater than white, or darker than black. File formats such as Cineon, HDR, and some variations of TIFF, FLX and RPF, can all store out of range color values.

takkun
07-12-2003, 01:24 AM
And here's a snip from the FAQ on eyeon's site:

Q: What is the difference between Digital Fusion and DFX+?

A: The most notable difference between Digital Fusion and DFX+ is color depth or precision. DFX+ supports image processing at 8 bits per channel, while Digital Fusion expands that support to 16 bits per channel, and 32 bits per channel.

16 bit color support is often desired for film because the extra colors allow for smoother and more accurate reproduction of the colors captured on the film negative. Smaller degrees between colors also mean that successive color corrections will introduce less error. 16 bit processing has long been the standard for film effects.

32 bit color is often referred to as floating point color. Like 16 bit, 32 bit offers even more colors (virtually infinite) for smoother and more precise image processing. This is not the only thing that makes float color processing attractive. Floating point colors are easily capable of handling out of range values, such as extremely bright "brighter than white" highlights often found in film materials.

wacom
07-12-2003, 11:15 AM
Originally posted by Beamtracer
Look, if you guys would prefer to use Digital Fusion rather than Shake, I'm not going to bother to persuade you otherwise.

If you don't know what you're missing then it doesn't matter anyway.

How in the hell would you know what DF and DFX are like if you're on a MAC? But don't take it from me Le' Big Mac ... take it from the Pigsfly list

"Dear Jason,

Here is my opnion. We are a high end post house - recently we had to
choose
between shake or fusion. We chosed fusion for many reasons but the most
important is that Shake was taken over by Apple - I don't think Apple
can
manage to keep shake at the high level it is today. Another reason is
that
DF feature set is bettet - tools like Grid warp, 3D particles and alot
more
that you can't find inside shake. The paint tool in DF is also much
better
than the one in shake.

As I see it there is only ONE major drawback for fusion vs shake. The
matte
handling in shake is brilliant, if you create a new polylinemask in
shake,
it'll create a node for this and will automaticly connect to your node,
and
it's easy to use the same matte for diffrent nodes. You can connect
matte as
image and the overview is really great. To this also comes that shake
has
seperate softnes for each point in your polyline.

In fusion all mattes are "hidden" in submenus, you can't see them in
your
flow - this is really anoying, If you're new to fusion, this will take
some
time to get used to. I really hope the guys at Eyeon will look into to
this
and maybe have a look how shake handles mattes. Another strength of DF
is
that the guys at Eyeon really are lisnening to us user.

But I would still strongly advise you to go for fusion. Download the
free
demo version on eyeonline.com and I think you'll be impressed.

Jonas


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jason Toth" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 12, 2003 5:09 PM
Subject: compositing software (fd - shake)


> hi all, i'll make this short. i would like a professional opinion on
> high-end comp programs, mainly between shake and df. what everyone
likes
> better (pros-cons). i know this is a df forum but would still like to
know
> your thoughts. i'm a resent student and heading out into the field,
been
> working with and know after effects and combustion extremely well.
both
have
> there goods and bads but would like to step up to a real compositing
app.
> i'll always use AE for motion graphics but for comping it has its
issues,
> now combustion? (i'm over it - its a piece of garbage). i just want
some
> help with making a decision.
>
> thx , jason
>
> ps, i know the differences on the bells and whistles of the two
programs
> (df-shake) but which one you ya always turn to, to get the job done.
>
> :)
>"

Not my words...but they hit the spot...

Lightwolf
07-12-2003, 11:24 AM
Hi Wacom,
you beat me to it, I just read the post on pigsfly as well... :)
On the thing that goes for DF imho, they have the best support I've ever experienced by any software co. Turnaround times of two hours with a reply from a senior programmer (even if it is just a bug confirmation and a promise to have it fixed in the next release) make DF worth the money for me.
Cheers,
Mike

wacom
07-12-2003, 11:28 AM
PS- BeamTracer do me a favor and stay off the Pigsfly list 'till you've ran DFX or DF and gone through the courseware. Thanks:)

wacom
07-12-2003, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by Lightwolf
Hi Wacom,
you beat me to it, I just read the post on pigsfly as well... :)
On the thing that goes for DF imho, they have the best support I've ever experienced by any software co. Turnaround times of two hours with a reply from a senior programmer (even if it is just a bug confirmation and a promise to have it fixed in the next release) make DF worth the money for me.
Cheers,
Mike

It's kind of like this LW group in a way and that's something they don't list on a product page- outstanding support from a great community. I'm glad Newtek went with DFX as a package deal- the mentality of each company and community seems in-sinc. Just the little DFX quick start videos they have on the courseware CD are a great example of how much support they give you out of the box- not to mention speaking with them by phone or via email. Good stuff.

Lightwolf
07-12-2003, 11:39 AM
Originally posted by wacom
Just the little DFX quick start videos they have on the courseware CD are a great example of how much support they give you out of the box- not to mention speaking with them by phone or via email. Good stuff.
Well, I'm still on DF 3.12 , so I don't have the courseware and can't comment on that. (Can't wait to scrape together the money for DF 4.0 though...)
But I find eyeon to be very responsive, and, if I may add, I think NT could use a slice of that as well. Full release notes, fast feedback, almost instant bug confirmations to mere mortals, plenty of patches...
They used to hand out "We suck less" T-shirts, and they do! :D
Cheers,
Mike - DF lover...

Zach
07-12-2003, 12:46 PM
DVD Studio Pro is by far the superior DVD authoring tool compared to DVDit.

Better documentation, better scripting support, great interface options, blah blah blah.

It just rocks!

I hope Adobe Encore matches it with at least those features (I want scripting support in Encore, and I don't know if it is there).

But the integration between Premiere, AFX, Photoshop, and Encore should prove to be rather exciting!!!

Adobe's got a great deal for their revamped Digital Video Collection. Until September 30th, it is only 800 hundo.

I don't know how Audition(CoolEdit) is, I've always been a big sonic foundry fan. Vegas seems a little buggier than FCP or Premiere, but that could be my OEM RAM!! But being able to record multiple audio tracks at once on a multi-input audio card is a real great feature! It takes me back to the days of analog 4-track recording!

cresshead
07-12-2003, 01:50 PM
hi everyone...

let's just open this "bit" thing a little wider...

okay DISCREET's combustion 2 on mac AND pc has floating point colour depth

Whether you need to create images for the Internet, video, HDTV or film, combustion 2 ensures that there is never any compromise in image quality. New support for higher color resolutions allows you to import and render images at 8-, 10-, 12-, 16- and 32-bit (float). High color resolution allows you to reproduce film scans and HDTV images with greater fidelity as well as eliminate banding and other undesirable artifacts that occur when processing high-resolution images at 8bits.

and is VERY capable for film...and Very cheap.and is being used right now for major film and broadcast effects...and links transparently to it's higher brother/sister apps as listed below...
plus 3ds max...

want better?

discreet, flint, fire, inferno and flame plus the new colour correcter
called lustre as well as smoke for finishing...
not to forget backdraft and burn for rendering and asset management.

if you want choice...from the bottom to the top..discreet offers all levels from entrylevel with combustion which is as capable as fusion or shake to medum and high level compositors which are well above anything else mentioned here...except nuke of course.

...WOW!...i sound like a discreet advert!!!!!...

my point here is most people are simply looking straight ahead at the apps available on the shelf...tilt your head upward to see what's avaiable on the high side as well....

combustion links extreemly well to the hi end and can share workspaces with inferno and flame and also has their colour corecctor, keyer, tracker and gmask's....work in combustion and finish in inferno...you also learn the ways of hi end apps by using combustion so your training time for inferno is reduced...

hope that helps people understand a little more...

steve g

Chris S. (Fez)
07-12-2003, 04:50 PM
"In fusion all mattes are "hidden" in submenus, you can't see them in
your
flow - this is really anoying, If you're new to fusion, this will take
some
time to get used to. I really hope the guys at Eyeon will look into to
this
and maybe have a look how shake handles mattes."

Absolutely. Also, I prefer the "smooth" node connections in Shake to Fusion's angular "Pipes".

Beamtracer
07-12-2003, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by wacom
How in the hell would you know what DF and DFX are like if you're on a MAC? No need to get emotional. I made it clear I was searching for information about DF features from their website and asked for DF users to test whether it can handle LogLuv files. Eyeon should make the 32bpc color space a bit more obvious on their website, and they'd sell more copies of DF.

Lightwolf
07-13-2003, 05:18 AM
As far as discreet are concerned:
I have a couple of problems with them, the restrictive licensing (no selling of licenses) being on of them. Also, how they dropped edit was a very bad move...
I tend to have problems with companies that sell higher end solutions (...than I can afford), since it tends to cripple the lower end feature wise. No doubt that combustion 2 is very capable for the price, but discreet will never let it compete with the higher end products...
DF on the other hand, while not a direct competition, can compete for certain kinds of jobs (it isn't marketed as a front door solution like discreets higher end apps)
Cheers,
Mike