Thoughts on editing software

[legstud]

Hey ya'll

What are your thoughts on editing software? We're trying to decide between Adobe Creative Suite Premium, Final Cut Studio, or some combination of individual products (e.g. Final Cut Pro + After Effects + Magic Bullet + Soundtrack/Soundbooth).

If we went with the individuals, how is it moving from one product to another (like Final Cut to After Effects)? Or is it best to stay within a family of products (Apple vs. Adobe)? Any thoughts on special effects, pros/cons of one family over another?

Thanks!
Tom

 

[wheatgrinder]

I cant speak to FCP..

The adobe creative suite has some nice integration between the NLE (premiere) and the visual effects too, (After Effects) that make it very handy to work with.

 

[directorik]

The Apple products cannot be used on anything but Apple
machines so in that case it's best to stay within the family
of products. The software interface is quite similar, if you
start with one and then decide to stitch to the other you
will be fine.

This really is the Coke/Pepsi debate. Neither is better. People
who start with one are usually happy to stay with it throughout
their career. Depending on what special effects you are doing
there are efx-specific products available. But After Effects and
Motion are quite similar.

 

[NickClapper]

I really want to get the Adobe creative suite, but heck is it expensive...

I wish we could go back to the good old days were people used to steal this sort of software all the time. Actually, it may still be the good old days, just not for me...

 

[legstud]

The Apple products cannot be used on anything but Apple
machines so in that case it's best to stay within the family
of products. The software interface is quite similar, if you
start with one and then decide to stitch to the other you
will be fine.

This really is the Coke/Pepsi debate. Neither is better. People
who start with one are usually happy to stay with it throughout
their career. Depending on what special effects you are doing
there are efx-specific products available. But After Effects and
Motion are quite similar.

I'm not too worried (at least not right now) about the Apple-only thing because, regardless of what we get, it's gonna be on a Mac. But definitely something to keep in mind.

I had heard that After Effects was superior to Motion, but that was pretty much a bare-naked assertion. Do they really do pretty much the same thing?

What do you think about Color vs. Magic Bullet?

Thanks
Tom

 

[directorik]

The way I understand it, the Adobe products are no longer
compatible with the current Apple operating system. Someone
with more knowledge than I can say for sure.

I, too, have heard that After Effects was superior to Motion. I
haven't used AE since 1999. Again, it depends on exactly what
efx you need to do. In many cases hiring out is an option so if
you only have Motion and you need specific efx done you can
usually find someone willing to help. I know Motion is good and
each version is better.

I'm sure others can give you better tech specs on why one is
better than another. I haven't done extensive comparisons between
Magic Bullet and Color. In fact Color confuses me and I haven't
used MB in years. I have someone else do my color correction. But
Color for small things is easy and very good.

But we again enter the Coke/Pepsi situation. One software isn't really
better than the other. People prefer one to the other and many people
use the words "best" and "better", but both platforms are excellent.
Since you will be using a Mac you will be using Final Cut Suite. You will
soon find that their products are excellent and can do what you need
done.

 

[sonnyboo]

This really is the Coke/Pepsi debate. Neither is better.

Indeed. This is 100% true.

I am an Adobe CS user, professionally no less. I would say though, if you are on a Mac, to learn Final Cut Pro because that will be more compatible with anything going into the professional arena.

Then again, the new CS5 allows you to import and export Final Cut Pro projects...

It's becoming even less important what you edit with these days.

 

[chilipie]

The way I understand it, the Adobe products are no longer
compatible with the current Apple operating system. Someone
with more knowledge than I can say for sure.

Can't say I've heard this before, I'm running Photoshop and After Effects CS5 with no problems on the latest OS.

Motion's great for motion graphics stuff - lower thirds, titles, credit sequences etc., but it's not fantastic for compositing.

I think Color is an absolute fantastic piece of software, and I'm yet to learn half the stuff it can do - before Apple bought it I think it was about $25k new, so it's arguable worth the price of Final Cut Studio Alone. The only member Magic Bullet lineup that I've used is Colorista II and I would highly recommend it. Makes colour correction within Final Cut Pro as easy as with the built-in tools but with a lot more control.

 

[legstud]

Motion's great for motion graphics stuff - lower thirds, titles, credit sequences etc., but it's not fantastic for compositing.

Do you mean green (or blue, I guess) screen type stuff? I'm doubt we're going to do too much of that right now, but you never know. Do you know of any other areas where AE might be better than Motion?

What I'm thinking is that Final Cut and Premiere are pretty much a toss-up, but I don't want to get short-changed with FX software; if AE is really "better" than it might be better to go with the Adobe suite. If not, we're probably looking at FCS.

The only member Magic Bullet lineup that I've used is Colorista II and I would highly recommend it. Makes colour correction within Final Cut Pro as easy as with the built-in tools but with a lot more control.

I like that it is kind of a "plug in" and you don't have to go outside the editor for color correction. Definitely a plus. Functionally, though, is it getting you anything more than Color?

Tom

 

[legstud]

But we again enter the Coke/Pepsi situation. One software isn't really
better than the other. People prefer one to the other and many people
use the words "best" and "better", but both platforms are excellent.
Since you will be using a Mac you will be using Final Cut Suite. You will
soon find that their products are excellent and can do what you need
done.

Yea, I have a feeling that whatever we pick we'll get used to and won't ever look back. Just gathering thoughts for the initial purchase. It's sounding like it's coming down the FX software.

I can't tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi. So I go with the Wal-mart brand and save a buck

Tom

 

[sonnyboo]

The way I understand it, the Adobe products are no longer
compatible with the current Apple operating system. Someone
with more knowledge than I can say for sure.

Adobe ported it all back to the Mac with CS4 and CS5, so All of them work on Mac with Intel processors now.

 

[Grand Upper]

They're all very capable of doing what you want (Vegas or Premier, Final Cut) and it's more about how comfortable you are with the nuances of each.

 

[Cracker Funk]

I can't tell the difference between Coke and Pepsi.

OMG, Coke, all the way! WTF?!

Actually, I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Avid. I was under the impression that most pro studios were using super-expensive Avid workstations. Is that false? Or, did we leave them out of the conversation because those workstations are super-expensive?

 

[chilipie]

Do you mean green (or blue, I guess) screen type stuff? I'm doubt we're going to do too much of that right now, but you never know. Do you know of any other areas where AE might be better than Motion?

Well, compositing is basically combining lots of videos/images into one, so blue screen work, set extensions/matte paintings, adding 3D elements, explosions, wire removal… all that kind of stuff.

What I'm thinking is that Final Cut and Premiere are pretty much a toss-up, but I don't want to get short-changed with FX software; if AE is really "better" than it might be better to go with the Adobe suite. If not, we're probably looking at FCS.

I use the Final Cut suite with After Effects - I've always found the Premiere interface really clunky to be honest, but it is a Coke v Pepsi thing. If I had no experience with either, the ability to use ProRes might make me lean towards Final Cut (though if Premiere users have something similar please correct me).

I like that it is kind of a "plug in" and you don't have to go outside the editor for color correction. Definitely a plus. Functionally, though, is it getting you anything more than Color?

I don't think it does, no, but sometimes I'd rather just do something as quickly as possible. Roundtripping between Final Cut and Color is pretty efficient, but I can't always be bothered with smaller projects.

 

[directorik]

I'm glad to hear Adobe is back to supporting the Apple OS.

I that case the options seem clear. To me anyway. Since you
are getting a Mac, pick up FCP. Try Motion and Color and if you
find either lacking then you can pick up AE and MB.

I like that it is kind of a "plug in" and you don't have to go outside the editor for color correction. Definitely a plus. Functionally, though, is it getting you anything more than Color?

I don't use someone else because Color isn't good enough, I
use someone else to do my color correction because I'm not
good enough. Color correction is so important to me, I use a
colorist who is very talented and familiar with the software.
The woman I usually use was once using Da Vinci and now
she's using Color exclusively.

OMG, Coke, all the way! WTF?!

What kind of coke? Sprite or 7Up?

 

[IndieBudget]

Why pay for software when everything you need is FREE ? I highly suggest using Cinelerra on Linux OS , that along with Blender ( 3D animation ), Synfig ( 2D Animation ), Audacity for sound, Gimp image editor along with Cinepaint which many heavy weight studios have used for image retouching program designed to work best with 35mm film and other high resolution high dynamic range images. you will have everything you need to make magic. YOU need to supply the magic sir, that is the most important ingredient. I do not care if you have a $200,000.00 camera and the most expensive lenses, you must master your craft. IMHO. many of the most treasured classics in film were done with simple cameras and much simpler editing than a modern NLE will provide.

i have NOT yet mastered my craft, I am self-taught and have miles to go but still learning.

GOOD LUCK and I want to learn the basics from the masters, Camera Movement, Lighting, Style, Sound Design and Editing Skills cannot be clicked with a mouse in the best programs.

 

[legstud]

Why pay for software when everything you need is FREE ? I highly suggest using Cinelerra on Linux OS , that along with Blender ( 3D animation ), Synfig ( 2D Animation ), Audacity for sound, Gimp image editor along with Cinepaint which many heavy weight studios have used for image retouching program designed to work best with 35mm film and other high resolution high dynamic range images. you will have everything you need to make magic. YOU need to supply the magic sir, that is the most important ingredient. I do not care if you have a $200,000.00 camera and the most expensive lenses, you must master your craft. IMHO. many of the most treasured classics in film were done with simple cameras and much simpler editing than a modern NLE will provide.

i have NOT yet mastered my craft, I am self-taught and have miles to go but still learning.

GOOD LUCK and I want to learn the basics from the masters, Camera Movement, Lighting, Style, Sound Design and Editing Skills cannot be clicked with a mouse in the best programs.

I'm all about free, open-source and I'm going to keep these in mind for a playground in the future. I already use Gimp and Audacity for other things. But I'd have to buy a new x64 PC to support Cinelerra since my current laptop is 32 bit. My wife has a MacBook Pro, which is where the new software is going.

Good info, though, thanks!

Tom

 

[directorik]

IMHO. many of the most treasured classics in film were done with simple cameras and much simpler editing than a modern NLE will provide.

You ever shoot with a Mitchell BNC? Or Bell & Howell? Or
the early Panavision? Or even the Eclair NPR? Those are
not simple cameras to work with - especially by comparison
to the cameras availabe to us today.

And editing? Ever edit in an upright Moviola? Or a 6 plate
flatbed? Ever have to search through the bin for those five
16mm frames you tossed in there three weeks ago because
you were certain that you would never need them again?

The modern NLE is much simpler to use.

 

[legstud]

Well, compositing is basically combining lots of videos/images into one, so blue screen work, set extensions/matte paintings, adding 3D elements, explosions, wire removal… all that kind of stuff.

Well, sheesh, that sounds like the bulk of what you'd want to do with special effects! Is Motion that much worse than AE in this? Are we talking the difference between a 9 and 3, or a 9 and an 8?

I use the Final Cut suite with After Effects

How is it going back and forth between FC and AE? I was a little worried about that. Are you opening FC projects in AE, are you import/exporting AVI's, etc.

I that case the options seem clear. To me anyway. Since you are getting a Mac, pick up FCP. Try Motion and Color and if you find either lacking then you can pick up AE and MB.

If cost wasn't an issue, I'd be happy to get both!

What kind of coke? Sprite or 7Up?

See, ya'll don't know about Cheerwine. Best soda in the US. But you gotta be in the South.

Also: I went to Japan once. They had all these different flavors of Fanta. Usually you see strawberry, grape, orange. But I saw black cherry, pineapple, peach, watermelon. Now: WATERMELON FANTA is what you want. Nothing like it.

Tom

 

[IndieBudget]

"But I'd have to buy a new x64 PC to support Cinelerra"


Im running Cinelerra on a 32 bit 4 core i5 machine 4gb of ram- NO Problems editing HD files. I also have been doing some commercials for Comcast and it works for me. I must admit the interface with cinelerra is daunting at first and has a learning curve. The program does not have all the plugins and effects like the Adobe programs, but you still have LOTS of things you can play with and still make some magic using FOSS.

"You ever shoot with a Mitchell BNC? Or Bell & Howell?"

You mean the "Howl & Growl ?? "

Is it not easier to get an image with today's cameras ? you still must master lighting, composition and the like. Yes for sure the mastery of the tool was certainly required to simply operate a film cam and get the shot, use of a light meter, DOF and the like to get a pleasing image to capture & heighten the scene. PLUS you were paying out the wazoo for film & processing. You still have to master DOF, Lens choice, and the like with today's cams...Not to be over-simplified, but today's cams make it easier , AND you can check your work with a field monitor. Yet the magic of film still rules and a great cinematographer who has mastered film still can give me more of a thrill than most HD cams nowdays. I was simply stating that many of the older classics were done with fairly simple cams in the 40's - 50's & 60's in comparison to todays cam.

"The modern NLE is much simpler to use. "

My point exactly is that the tech aspects of sound on tape along with filmed image marrying the two together were complex and the effects were simple in comparison to what you can easily do now with an NLE. The basic NLEs can easily do chroma-keying and how easy was it to do that with 35mm film in the 60's ??? I must admit, Im ignorant of the higher aspects of waht was done in editing in the past, but effects were simpler in what could be done vs what you can now do with a click or two..

Add your mastery of the craft. The mastery is what takes time and experience. IMO that is what makes the project come to life.

I am just a low-end scab just learning this craft and have yet to come up with anything that projects a mastery of the craft, but i am learning and getting better each time I work. I choose to use a simple setup and want to use the simpler tools available today to express myself.