FORUMS: list search recent posts

Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Steve Connor
Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 2:59:12 pm

Despite being a "Cheerleader" for FCPX I'm not stupid enough to ignore other options. I've been experimenting with PPro over the last few months and I'm very impressed.

Merlot fuelled rants aside, how are others here finding it in real world use? also how is the XML out as we use Resolve extensively. Although I could be convinced by Speedgrade when Adobe hopefully sort out xml roundtripping with PPro.

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Bernhard Grininger
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 4:26:51 pm

Hello,


recently we finished the first real projects with FCP-X.
Within FCP-X we had 90% of the features we needed for 90% of our work.
Additionally, FCP-X has high-end image processing algorithms under the hood.
No doubts regarding quality. A very streamlined process.


PP CS6 has some great special features and it benefits from the whole CS suite.
It's consequent native format support it great! Because of this it is confusing, PP needs 'render files' at all. Mercury runs very well! Also confusing is the sequence setting by codec instead per video standard. I also get headache when I need to do rocket science to get full quality out of it (GPU yes/no, 32bit float yes/no, etc...) or hack my app for GPU support at all... WHY???

Too much of thinking...
Too many plugins and other CS-apps needed...

To convince me, Adobe needs to implement all those boring features, no evangelist on this planet could convincingly praise as 'awesome', but that are extreme important for real professional workflows (100% 32bit float, motion-compensated de-interlacing, spline-masks, color-grading, etc...) so that 90% of work in 90% of the projects could be done within PP.

Currently I have a clear bias towards FCP-X !


Best regards,
Bernhard


Return to posts index

Cameron Clendaniel
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 4:35:05 pm

Slowly becoming devoted to PrP6. Works very nicely with the Magic Bullet suite and I find it handles everything I throw at it with good speed and stability. The flexibility of easily passing projects back and forth with FCP7 is also a big plus for me over Symphony6. It's also been rock solid with my LHi (monitoring at least). Audio scrubbing could be improved.

Cameron Clendaniel
Film Editor, NYC
718-254-8027
cam@camclendaniel.com
http://www.camclendaniel.com

Mac Pro: 5,1 2.93 12-core
Memory: 32GB RAM
GPU: nVidia Quadro 4000
System Drive: 512GB SSD
Media Drives: CalDigit HDOne 8TB, Internal RAID-0 8TB, Miscellaneous eSATA
I/O: AJA Kona LHi
NLEs: Avid Symphony, PrP 6, FCP 7



Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 4:47:47 pm

[Bernhard Grininger] "Also confusing is the sequence setting by codec instead per video standard. I also get headache when I need to do rocket science to get full quality out of it (GPU yes/no, 32bit float yes/no, etc...) or hack my app for GPU support at all... WHY???"

Because you're not using a support GPU? Perhaps you should try paying attention to the specs? Plus, Adobe needs to certify that the GPU in question would cause issues in rendering. Why support what you haven't thoroughly vetted and then, it if causes errors, then people get upset. This way, you know what you're doing isn't officially supported yet, and if you happen to get a render error, you very well can't get pissed at Adobe. And don't for a second think it's easy to vet a GPU.

BTW, why are you setting your sequence settings manually? I've never had to do this, I just load up my footage, drop it into the timeline and Premiere will ask if I want it to automatically set the timeline for it (hint: the answer is "yes"). You don't have to create a sequence as soon as you start a new project if you'd rather do this. Just click "cancel".

[Bernhard Grininger] "Too many plugins and other CS-apps needed..."

For what exactly? You do realize that everything you're using in FCPX to apparently do 90% of the work you need is actually a plugin too, right? And at least with Premiere you get stuff like Curves.

[Bernhard Grininger] "(100% 32bit float, motion-compensated de-interlacing, spline-masks, color-grading, etc...) so that 90% of work in 90% of the projects could be done within PP."

It's already there (not spline masks, but that's easy enough with AE dynamic linking...and besides, doesn't that require Motion to pull off anyway?).


Return to posts index

Bernhard Grininger
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 5:27:27 pm

[Gary Huff] "if you happen to get a render error, you very well can't get pissed at Adobe"
I do not get 'pissed' at Adobe. No app is perfect. No company is. And I understand well Adobe can't test all configurations out there, especially on Win-PC side.
With DaVinci Resolve, BMD follows a model of self-responsibility of the user.
When enabling Mercury GPU, PP could warn and inform the user that the GPU isn't officially supported and force to confirm this.


[Gary Huff] "Premiere will ask if I want it to automatically set the timeline for it "
Yet I have to activate 32bit float and MRQ manually.


[Gary Huff] "You don't have to create a sequence as soon as you start a new project if you'd rather do this."
Good point. Then why does the dialogue appear at all?


[Gary Huff] "You do realize that everything you're using in FCPX to apparently do 90% of the work you need is actually a plugin too, right?"
How do You know what I need for 90% of my work :-)


[Gary Huff] "that's easy enough with AE dynamic linking"
Agreed. Dynamic linking is great! But tools directly inside PP would be more streamlined.


[Gary Huff] "doesn't that require Motion to pull off anyway?"
Again: no app is perfect. Spline Masks and Motion Tracking would be VERY useful
inside PP as they would be inside FCP-X.


Best regards,
Bernhard


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 5:36:59 pm

[Bernhard Grininger] "I do not get 'pissed' at Adobe."

I didn't mean you. I meant the universal "you".

[Bernhard Grininger] "Yet I have to activate 32bit float and MRQ manually."

You're activating it for the MPEG render files that Premiere generates when you select the "Render Work Area". You don't need to bother with this unless you want Premiere to utilize these MPEG render files when exporting the final, which I never do. You're just wasting your time otherwise.

[Bernhard Grininger] "Good point. Then why does the dialogue appear at all?"

Because some people might get upset if that wasn't the default? I have no idea, but clicking "Cancel" takes a second.

[Bernhard Grininger] "How do You know what I need for 90% of my work :-)"

Because I would assume by "work" you mean more than just stitching clips together? Willing to concede that I'm wrong if that's all you actually do.

[Bernhard Grininger] "Agreed. Dynamic linking is great! But tools directly inside PP would be more streamlined."

Except each app is geared towards different kinds of workflows. You can make a jack-of-all-trades NLE, but then it wouldn't excel at anything. Premiere is powerful enough for basic stuff in and of itself, and then AE adds an additional level of complexity for projects that require it, all easily accessible with each other through Dynamic Link.


Return to posts index


Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 11:40:16 am

[Bernhard Grininger] "PP CS6 has some great special features and it benefits from the whole CS suite.
It's consequent native format support it great! Because of this it is confusing, PP needs 'render files' at all. Mercury runs very well! Also confusing is the sequence setting by codec instead per video standard. I also get headache when I need to do rocket science to get full quality out of it (GPU yes/no, 32bit float yes/no, etc...) or hack my app for GPU support at all... WHY???

Too much of thinking...
Too many plugins and other CS-apps needed..."


I agree that sequence settings become somewhat superfluous because it doesn't really matter what is on the timeline. Given that you don't need to render until you're ready to output a final, I don't really worry much about preview renders. That said, if you do, it's a simple matter of setting up your own custom sequence preset.

As for hacking for GPU - we want to be very careful about what we officially 'white list' because we a guaranteed experience. The fact that we've enabled people to find the 'hack' fairly easily and it works 99% of the time for any decent card is a bonus. Simply put - we want to make sure your experience is great and the GPU can be a variable. We'd rather you be mad at us for having to change the text file than not offer GPU support at all. Can we do better? Yes and we will.

[Bernhard Grininger] "To convince me, Adobe needs to implement all those boring features, no evangelist on this planet could convincingly praise as 'awesome', but that are extreme important for real professional workflows (100% 32bit float, motion-compensated de-interlacing, spline-masks, color-grading, etc...) so that 90% of work in 90% of the projects could be done within PP."

We've done a lot of the 'boring' stuff already but there is always more. FCP7 keyboard shortcuts, change sequence preset to match first clip, basic editorial tasks like trimming and the list goes on. Most of our effects and process pipeline are 32 bit float already (just check out those icons to the right of many of the effects). Spine-masks - YES! I'm with you 100% on that one and I've asked for it for ages. There are workarounds and some free plugins, but yes... Color grading - we work with Resolve and others and we are working on better integration with Speedgrade for the future. I think we're there and/or getting there.


Return to posts index

Bernhard Grininger
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 3:48:14 pm

Hello Dennis,

Thank You for Your reply!

[Dennis Radeke] "We'd rather you be mad at us for having to change the text file than not offer GPU support at all."

I'm not mad at Adobe :-)
I appreciate that Adobe enabled this to get other GPUs running.
Also, Thank You for the detailed explanation!

My point is: BMD Resolve shows, there is also an alternate (and very elegant) model to handle this issue: Self-responsibility of the users by warning and informing them.



[Dennis Radeke] "We've done a lot of the 'boring' stuff already"

I see that and CS6 was a huge step - no doubts.
But for me, the feature Motion-Compensated De-Interlacing has become an indicator on how far I can rely on PP in a workflow.



[Dennis Radeke] "Most of our effects and process pipeline are 32 bit float already (just check out those icons to the right of many of the effects)."

But on the long run those icons should disappear so I don't need to filter for filters at all.
The less I need to take care of those things, the more creative I could be :-)



[Dennis Radeke] "Spine-masks - YES! I'm with you 100% on that one and I've asked for it for ages."

Very glad to hear!



[Dennis Radeke] "we are working on better integration with Speedgrade for the future"

Recently I read an interview with Adobe's Patrick J. Palmer (Speedgrade) and I do very appreciate what he said; that Adobe also takes care of the 'One-Man-Bands' who don't have the time for being specialists. At least I do see the necessity being a 'One-Man-Band' more and more emerging.


Thank You for listening!

Best regards,
Bernhard


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 6:32:33 pm

[Bernhard Grininger] "But for me, the feature Motion-Compensated De-Interlacing has become an indicator on how far I can rely on PP in a workflow."

Can you give me some more details on exactly what you expect here?

Thanks,
Dennis


Return to posts index


Bernhard Grininger
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 13, 2013 at 9:50:18 am

Hello,

Motion Compensation aka Optical Flow aka Pixel Motion
for De-Interlacing would make most sense if there also was an additional Effects Category in the Effect Controls Window, e.g. labeled Standards Conform and containing everything about the Clip's conforming behavior in the sequence (Fit to Sequence, De-Interlacing, Frame-Blending, Color Space, etc.).

Motion-Adaptive De-Interlacing analyzes, which parts of the image have moving objects at all and discard+interpolate to fill up only those parts of a line that contains motion.
Motion Compensated De-Interlacing tracks detail information to intelligently fill up the discarded parts of the lines.

The analysis for Motion Compensation could also be used for speed changes
and for Super Resolution (upscaling by collecting detail information of neighboring frames).
I'd guess, Adobe could use the analysis currently done for Warp Stabilizer to perform an excellent De-Interlacing, and Super Resolution processing ;-)


In detail I would expect a more automate and logical behavior of fields handling, e.g.:

if I place a 1080i/25 clip in a 1080p/25 sequence, PP should automatically assign
Motion-Compensated De-Interlacing to the clip.

If I place a 1080i/25 clip in a 1080p/50 sequence, PP should automatically distribute
the 50 fields to the 50 frames and interpolate the missing lines via Motion-Compensation.

If I place a 1080p/25 clip in a 1080p/50 sequence, PP should automatically interpolate the missing frames not by frame-blending, but by motion analysis.


Thank You for listening!

Best regards,
Bernhard


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 5:37:18 pm

Hey Steve,

Don't forget, NAB is right around the corner, and so, the release of Adobe CS7 is only 8-weeks away.

Although I'm not privy to any of the secret sauce Adobe is releasing in CS7, I do know they very much intend to wow the industry and to further position themselves as a real contender for professional editors.

FYI, I do have it on good authority that there will be no more .5 versions of any Adobe apps or suites ever again, and users will be able count on new releases at NAB every year for the forseeable future.

I'm looking forward to seeing your review of CS7 after your first look.

David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.com

Sales | Integration | Support

David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 5:44:34 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Don't forget, NAB is right around the corner, and so, the release of Adobe CS7 is only 8-weeks away.

Although I'm not privy to any of the secret sauce Adobe is releasing in CS7, I do know they very much intend to wow the industry and to further position themselves as a real contender for professional editors.

FYI, I do have it on good authority that there will be no more .5 versions of any Adobe apps or suites ever again, and users will be able count on new releases at NAB every year for the forseeable future.

I'm looking forward to seeing your review of CS7 after your first look.
"


I hadn't even considered that! Also I didn't know that there will be no more .5 versions.

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index


Gary Huff
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 5:49:03 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "
I'm looking forward to seeing your review of CS7 after your first look."


Are they skipping CS6.5?

EDIT: Glad I'm Cloud...automagically upgraded!


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 5:55:49 pm

[Gary Huff] "EDIT: Glad I'm Cloud...automagically upgraded!"

Cloud was a very good idea, it sold me!

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 11:43:39 am

A Creative Cloud subscription model is a very good model for the vast majority of users out there and I think we'll see more and more of the industry move that way. In fact, I saw Microsoft do the same with Office 365, which is a pretty good deal.


Return to posts index



David Roth Weiss
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 11:40:16 pm

As I mentioned, no more .5 releases, ever. Let's just say that CS5.5 was a bust for Adobe, and they will not be repeating that again.

David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.com

Sales | Integration | Support

David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Richard Cardonna
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 9, 2013 at 6:22:59 pm

Would this mean that upgrades will cost double? $800.00.

Boy they want to push the cloud very much, and I don.t like it.

Ric


Return to posts index

Shawn Miller
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 10, 2013 at 7:45:14 am

[Richard Cardonna] "Would this mean that upgrades will cost double? $800.00."

Why would a full upgrade cost more than a point release? I don't think Adobe has ever done that.

Shawn



Return to posts index


Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 11:47:42 am

No we won't charge double....


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 11:47:15 am

[Richard Cardonna] "Would this mean that upgrades will cost double? $800.00.

Boy they want to push the cloud very much, and I don.t like it."


Ric - Yes, we do push the cloud, no doubt about it. I tend to think of it as a win-win. You get more value, features and products and we get predictable business. I understand that there are many who are hesitant about going this direction, but as I said above (or below?!) I tend to think that most software will be going this way in the future.

Let me know what your specific problems with it are.

Dennis - Adobe guy


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 3:13:13 pm

My problem with the Cloud concept is what happens if you stop subscribing? Will I still be able to go back and open a 2 year old project if I haven't subscribed fro a year? I can open my 9 year old version of PPro 1.5 and re-edit and old doc I did on it anytime I want - is that possible if I get a cloud subscription and then stop subscribing for any length of time?

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 4:51:42 pm

Hi Herb,

Subscription is all that you think that it is. If you do not continue with your subscription, the functionality of the products ceases. You wouldn't expect your cell phone to still work free of charge after you cancelled the contract would you? It's much the same, but I totally understand your concerns. Some people just prefer to pay more to have a 'perpetual' license of the software. But you are definitely paying more: so if you're a business, it makes sense to consider a subscription. You get a couple of benefits - it's a predictable cost, you can write it off on taxes as a legit business expense, you will automatically get upgrades when new versions become available and you get a growing list of services from the Creative Cloud.

Hope this helps,
Dennis


Return to posts index

Herb Sevush
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 6:34:11 pm

[Dennis Radeke] " You wouldn't expect your cell phone to still work free of charge after you cancelled the contract would you?"

No, but I am able to access the sim card and get my info into another phone.

I understand the value proposition of the Cloud and I think it's great that you offer it, I was just pointing out the main negative for me. If I went the Cloud route I would want to make sure I exported an XML of any finished project as a way to future proof my workflow. It's not a bad idea under any conditions actually.

Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
---------------------------
nothin' attached to nothin'
"Deciding the spine is the process of editing" F. Bieberkopf


Return to posts index

Richard Cardonna
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 5:39:06 pm

Glad to here about the cost.

For me the cloud does not offer much I only use production premium and only encore.A/E, on location prelude and audition. So all the other programs while great are of no use to me. Besides I edit mostly my projects and sometimes there could be a span of months between them.

Thanks for your reply

Richard C.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 10, 2013 at 8:43:16 pm

[David Roth Weiss] "Although I'm not privy to any of the secret sauce Adobe is releasing in CS7, I do know they very much intend to wow the industry and to further position themselves as a real contender for professional editors.

FYI, I do have it on good authority that there will be no more .5 versions of any Adobe apps or suites ever again, and users will be able count on new releases at NAB every year for the forseeable future.
"


David Roth Weiss strolling back in there.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 11:42:33 am

[David Roth Weiss] "Although I'm not privy to any of the secret sauce Adobe is releasing, I do know they very much intend to wow the industry and to further position themselves as a real contender for professional editors."

On this I can agree and comment. Nothing else. ;-)


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 9, 2013 at 10:18:28 pm

Look - I can't be left the only one writing insane rants. That's not on.

re: premiere - I just literally got it from the horses mouth that an extremely large editing and post services provider has *finally* decided on their next editing system post FCP. They extensively tested FCPX before beginning testing PPro, and they have decided they are going premiere. This will probably have pretty large knock on effects in London for commercial, corporate - a whole bunch of stuff.

Between this and associated press, I think that's pretty likely the other shoe dropping, in London terms at any rate. The guys who were Avid are going back to Avid, everyone else who was FCP is probably going to be drawn into premiere now. Given the scale of the company involved, its a massive vote of confidence - i think a lot of people will very likely follow it as professional guidance, given that the group involved have been pretty minutely road testing the software in a variety of workflows.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

Andy Field
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 10, 2013 at 12:28:49 am

I'm doing a job this weekend with FCP 7 for a client that's got 100's of hours of repeatable projects and can't upgrade...this after spending months on Premiere CS 6 --

It's painful going back to FCP....hours of render time -- transcoding, rerendering.

Premiere CS 6 - once you get used to some of the differences..is a joy

no rendering while edit
throw everything AND the kitchen sink in a timeline - no problem
quick
intuitive

Yes there are some issues they will certainly address in CS7 (audio mixing, media management)

Yes it needs a more robust set of plugins - but developers are katching up)

And yes if you've worked with FCP legacy - you can easily make the switch without skipping a beat --

Andy Field
FieldVision Productions
N. Bethesda, Maryland 20852


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 10, 2013 at 2:15:43 am

[Steve Connor] " I'm not stupid enough to ignore other options. I've been experimenting with PPro over the last few months and I'm very impressed. "

In my market (cen Fl) the majority of pro editing folks moving away from FCP are going to PPro. No one is using X, except my own experimentation. A few folks are going Media Composer, but around here, even some of the Avid editors are getting very friendly with PPro.

[Steve Connor] "also how is the XML out as we use Resolve extensively. Although I could be convinced by Speedgrade when Adobe hopefully sort out xml roundtripping with PPro."

I haven't tested XML to Resolve with anything complex. It works, but Premiere's XML isn't identical to FCP 7's, so there may be some issues. Speedgrade is quite good, but you really have to get into how it is designed. Think Photoshop layers for grading, instead of Rooms in Color or Nodes in Resolve. Right now, Speedgrade isn't yet very "Adobe-ized" as they only had about 6 months to figure out how to bolt it into CS6 in this first version.

There is a "send to Speedgrade" function in Premiere, which renders intermediate DPX image sequences of the "flattened" timeline, before opening in Speedgrade. That's for two reasons: 1) Premiere and Speedgrade do not yet work with all of the same native codecs; 2) DPX is the standard format of DI systems (Speedgrade's heritage). I'm sure that will change.

As an FYI - the folks running Resolve on Linux also prefer EDLs and linked media (not AAFs or XMLs) as well (Speedgrade is fine with EDLs) precisely because EDLs work best for them.

The biggest Speedgrade issue is lack of video output through the same hardware as Premiere. It can display fullscreen to a second computer display, but is really designed to send SDI out through an SDI-equipped NVIDIA card, which Mac OS does not support. FWIW, Scratch works the same way.

As David has said, look towards NAB. There'll be the next version of CS, which will likely have PPro improvements and better Speedgrade integration. Adobe will probably also show a real product version of Adobe Anywhere for collaborative editing.

As far as PPro and editing, for me there are a few issues that are still problematic.

1. You cannot open multiple projects at the same time.

2. You cannot modify audio channel configurations after the clip has been edited to the timeline. The source clips may be changed and then edited again to the timeline.

3. If you import a sequence from another project (like two editors working on the same project with mirrored media files), the import include a folder of master clips that correspond to the sequence. These are essentially duplicate master clips, but they cannot be deleted.

BUT... On the big PLUS side, PPro blows away FCP X in the performance with just about any complex third part effects filter. Magic Bullet Looks, Tiffen DFX, Sapphire, BCC, etc. They all perform better with Premiere than X. You can also "send to" a real audio program in Audition.

- Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 10, 2013 at 8:41:47 pm

[Oliver Peters] "As far as PPro and editing, for me there are a few issues that are still problematic.

1. You cannot open multiple projects at the same time.

2. You cannot modify audio channel configurations after the clip has been edited to the timeline. The source clips may be changed and then edited again to the timeline.

3. If you import a sequence from another project (like two editors working on the same project with mirrored media files), the import include a folder of master clips that correspond to the sequence. These are essentially duplicate master clips, but they cannot be deleted.
"


I should add that the group I am referring to have had access to the current beta for a bit. That is really exactly all I know though.

http://vimeo.com/user1590967/videos http://www.ogallchoir.net promo producer/editor.grading/motion graphics


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 4:48:31 am

[Oliver Peters] "As far as PPro and editing, for me there are a few issues that are still problematic.

1. You cannot open multiple projects at the same time.

2. You cannot modify audio channel configurations after the clip has been edited to the timeline. The source clips may be changed and then edited again to the timeline.

3. If you import a sequence from another project (like two editors working on the same project with mirrored media files), the import include a folder of master clips that correspond to the sequence. These are essentially duplicate master clips, but they cannot be deleted."


Other annoyances:

1) Clip marker behavior is inconsistant and barely usable on clips with linked media (video with linked dual source audio for example). A huge bummer because I use markers extensively for logging.

2) No match frame from a timeline clip loaded in the source monitor back into the timeline.

3) WYSI not WYG if you use maximum render quality and don't have the right hardware. Lots of confusing variables.

4) XML import does not bring in clip volume levels.

I deal with the multiple project issue by creating a new master project, then importing the projects I want to access into that. I can then set up tabs for each imported project and their sequences. Not perfect, but it works well enough for now. Looking forward to something better.

Despite the gripes, that honey badger timeline, rock 'n roll trim tools and overall stability and responsiveness has me hooked. I hope we see great new things in CS7 at NAM this year.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 6:28:32 am

5) No soft edge wipe.

Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 6:49:13 am

Seriously though I've been using PPro since 1.5 and it's still my NLE of choice. I've used FCP X on and off for nearly a year now and I just find it too frustrating. I can't get past that magnetic timeline. Yes, yes I know use the position tool. yada yada yada. Too annoying.

Every time I re open PPro I feel like I've come home and this is where I belong. And over the last 8 years it's just got better and better but I am very grateful to Apple for FCP X as I believe that has made people sit up and take notice of it, (for some actually opening it for the first time) and then realising, "hey, you know this ain't half bad". And of course then the migration of many from FCP 7 has only helped the cause.

6) The RT audio mixing really needs to stay with the clips and not the tracks.

PLUS

What would be great would be to have the old discreet edit* system of timeline modes. i.e. being able to switch your timeline between insert and overwrite. Thus getting double duty for keyboard commands. Their effect would depend on the timeline mode you were in. Lovely. I used to love that flexibility.

Editing a base? Beautiful. Whack your timeline in insert mode and away you go. Non destructive and simple. Overlaying a story bed or cutting to a time limit? Switch to overwrite and away you go.

Now I understand that we have keyboard functions that do all these things as a one by one operation and so some might say it's a bit superfluous and hey, they may be right. But it would sure as hell be a great option to have.

Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 6:50:27 am

BTW DRW.

You are sorely missed sir. It's nice to see your beaming face once again.

Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 7:12:14 am

Thank you very much Alex. It's great to be back, and you can expect to see me around a lot more. I took a year off to totally immerse myself in my new gig at ProMAX, and that year is now over.

DRW

David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.com

Sales | Integration | Support

David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Steve Connor
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 10:51:03 am

[David Roth Weiss] "Thank you very much Alex. It's great to be back, and you can expect to see me around a lot more. I took a year off to totally immerse myself in my new gig at ProMAX, and that year is now over.
"


This is good news, I'd be very interested in learning what insights that year at ProMAX has given you about where the industry is heading

Steve Connor
'It's just my opinion, with an occasional fact thrown in for good measure"


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 9:53:30 pm

David! Welcome back!


Return to posts index

David Roth Weiss
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 10:30:55 pm

[Chris Harlan] "David! Welcome back!"

Thanks Chris! Swing by ProMAX Burbank sometime soon. I'll buy lunch.

DRW

David Roth Weiss
ProMax Systems
Burbank
DRW@ProMax.com

Sales | Integration | Support

David is a Creative COW contributing editor and a forum host of the Apple Final Cut Pro forum.


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 12:09:43 pm

[Alex Hawkins] "6) The RT audio mixing really needs to stay with the clips and not the tracks."

Probably the #1 FCP oriented feature request still remaining to be done by us post-CS6. We are well aware of this issue and request.

File a feature request on the other one. ;-)


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 6:55:54 am

[Alex Hawkins] "5) No soft edge wipe."

You can do that with a Linear Wipe transition effect. It's in the Video Effects folder, not the Video Transitions folder.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 9:12:07 am

Yes David I know you can do it like that but it's not a transition is it. It's a transition video effect, applied to a clip.

PPro is just totally lacking in the whole transition effect area IMO. In FCX I can apply a whole host of different FX as transitions. And that's exactly what they are. A transition effect applied as a transition between 2 pieces of video. Totally customisable.

To get that same sort of variety in Premiere Pro you have to use 3rd party plug ins like genarts or boris and then apply them as an effect on a clip. A whole lot more cumbersome.

Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 9:20:49 am

[Alex Hawkins] "PPro is just totally lacking in the whole transition effect area IMO. In FCX I can apply a whole host of different FX as transitions. And that's exactly what they are. A transition effect applied as a transition between 2 pieces of video. Totally customisable."

Agreed. No question transitions in PrP are weak and need improvement. Just wanted to point out the workaround for anyone who may not know.

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 9:24:50 am

Cool. No probs David.

Cheers,
Alex


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 12:13:04 pm

[Alex Hawkins] "PPro is just totally lacking in the whole transition effect area IMO"

Agreed but as stated earlier, we are working on it.

http://www.filmimpact.net/
http://www.idustrialrevolution.com/

Here are two that are doing it as transitions today and a lot of others are working on it. I think we'll get there.

Dennis


Return to posts index

Alex Hawkins
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 9:50:22 pm

[Dennis Radeke] "Agreed but as stated earlier, we are working on it.

http://www.filmimpact.net/
http://www.idustrialrevolution.com/

Here are two that are doing it as transitions today and a lot of others are working on it. I think we'll get there.
"


Many Thanks Dennis. I just purchased the FilmImpact set.

Cheers.

Alex Hawkins
Canberra, Australia


Return to posts index

Bernhard Grininger
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 12:59:44 pm

[David Lawrence] "3) WYSI not WYG if you use maximum render quality and don't have the right hardware. Lots of confusing variables.
"


Very glad, I',m not the only one complaining this!

To actually get 32bit float processing in PP is nearly rocket science!

I'd expect 100% 32bit float, 100% MRQ, pixel-for-pixel 100% the same value regardles if GPU or CPU.

In FCP-X I don't need to think of it. ALL is processed 32bit float RGB.

Don't forget to write Feature Request to Adobe.

Best regards,
Bernhard


Return to posts index

Cameron Clendaniel
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 11, 2013 at 3:09:04 pm

[Oliver Peters] "As far as PPro and editing, for me there are a few issues that are still problematic.

1. You cannot open multiple projects at the same time.

2. You cannot modify audio channel configurations after the clip has been edited to the timeline. The source clips may be changed and then edited again to the timeline.

3. If you import a sequence from another project (like two editors working on the same project with mirrored media files), the import include a folder of master clips that correspond to the sequence. These are essentially duplicate master clips, but they cannot be deleted."



I have the exact same gripes. #2 is the hardest to adjust to. Will submit a feature request, fwiw.

Cameron Clendaniel
Film Editor, NYC
718-254-8027
cam@camclendaniel.com
http://www.camclendaniel.com


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 13, 2013 at 11:25:14 am

Maximum Render Quality is used when exporting from one frame size to another:

Maximum Render Quality Maintains sharp detail when scaling from large formats to smaller formats, or from high-definition to standard-definition formats. Maximum Render Quality maximizes the quality of motion in rendered clips and sequences. Selecting this option often renders moving assets more sharply.
At maximum quality, rendering takes more time, and uses more RAM than at the default normal quality. Select this option only on systems with sufficient RAM. The Maximum Render Quality option is not recommended for systems with the minimum required RAM.

Maximum Render Quality often makes highly compressed image formats, or those containing compression artifacts, look worse because of sharpening.

Maximum Bit Depth is also not always to be used:

Maximum Bit Depth Maximizes the color bit depth, up to 32 bpc, to include in video played back in sequences. This setting is often not available if the selected compressor provides only one option for bit depth. You can also specify an 8-bit (256-color) palette when preparing a sequence for 8-bpc color playback, such as when using the Desktop editing mode for the web or for some presentation software. If your project contains high-bit-depth assets generated by programs such as Adobe Photoshop, or by high-definition camcorders, select Maximum Bit Depth. Premiere Pro then uses of all the color information in those assets when processing effects or generating preview files.

Link (long): Adobe Help on Sequence Settings


Return to posts index

Bernhard Grininger
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 13, 2013 at 12:03:59 pm

[Dennis Radeke] "Maximum Render Quality is used when exporting from one frame size to another:

Maximum Render Quality Maintains sharp detail when scaling from large formats to smaller formats, or from high-definition to standard-definition formats. Maximum Render Quality maximizes the quality of motion in rendered clips and sequences. Selecting this option often renders moving assets more sharply.
At maximum quality, rendering takes more time, and uses more RAM than at the default normal quality. Select this option only on systems with sufficient RAM. The Maximum Render Quality option is not recommended for systems with the minimum required RAM.

Maximum Render Quality often makes highly compressed image formats, or those containing compression artifacts, look worse because of sharpening."



Solution:
discarding the term 'maximum render quality' and implementing user-selectable scaling algorithms, assignable individually on clips in a sequence
(selection would fit perfectly in a new category Standards Conform I proposed above)




[Dennis Radeke] "Maximum Bit Depth is also not always to be used:

Maximum Bit Depth Maximizes the color bit depth, up to 32 bpc, to include in video played back in sequences. This setting is often not available if the selected compressor provides only one option for bit depth. You can also specify an 8-bit (256-color) palette when preparing a sequence for 8-bpc color playback, such as when using the Desktop editing mode for the web or for some presentation software. If your project contains high-bit-depth assets generated by programs such as Adobe Photoshop, or by high-definition camcorders, select Maximum Bit Depth. Premiere Pro then uses of all the color information in those assets when processing effects or generating preview files."



Confusion:
Mercury on GPU processes 32bit float all the time.
So if I need 8bit for web-purposes, should I disable GPU processing at all?
This explanation doesn't make sense to me.


Solution:
Making 32bit float the default and adding a tiny checkbox labeled Preview Quality which means '8bit only' somewhere in the GUI near sequence viewer.



Best regards,
Bernhard


Return to posts index

Gary Huff
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 13, 2013 at 1:31:52 pm

[Bernhard Grininger] "Making 32bit float the default and adding a tiny checkbox labeled Preview Quality which means '8bit only' somewhere in the GUI near sequence viewer"

Very confusing.


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 12:08:24 pm

Dave,

For the first three, I'd file feature requests with specifics. You can also email me privately to discuss.

For #4, this is a known bug. There is a workaround. Basically, if the audio has no keyframes in FCP, it brings the audio in at -infinity level. Add a single keyframe to your audio tracks and it should come in correctly. Yeah, it's a hassle and I'm sorry.


Return to posts index

David Lawrence
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 13, 2013 at 5:46:00 am

[Dennis Radeke] "For the first three, I'd file feature requests with specifics. You can also email me privately to discuss.

For #4, this is a known bug. There is a workaround. Basically, if the audio has no keyframes in FCP, it brings the audio in at -infinity level. Add a single keyframe to your audio tracks and it should come in correctly. Yeah, it's a hassle and I'm sorry."


Hi Dennis,

Thanks for answering so many questions today! I'll make the feature requests and will also email you about a couple details later in the week.

Re: XML - will give the workaround a try. Since the problem is already well know, hoping CS7 will bring a fix :)

Thanks again!

_______________________
David Lawrence
art~media~design~research
propaganda.com
publicmattersgroup.com
facebook.com/dlawrence
twitter.com/dhl


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 12:02:28 pm

[Oliver Peters] "As far as PPro and editing, for me there are a few issues that are still problematic.

1. You cannot open multiple projects at the same time.

2. You cannot modify audio channel configurations after the clip has been edited to the timeline. The source clips may be changed and then edited again to the timeline.

3. If you import a sequence from another project (like two editors working on the same project with mirrored media files), the import include a folder of master clips that correspond to the sequence. These are essentially duplicate master clips, but they cannot be deleted."


1 - Yup, and we know it.
2 - I'm not a product manager, but I would think that this idea could easily get messy quickly. The audio engine Premiere Pro is powerful and I agree it requires a bit of know-how to set it up properly, but once you do, it should work and respond as you would expect. Changing how audio looks and represents in the timeline is problematic. If I wanted to change a clip with 8 mono audio clips to a single adaptive track - what do I do with the other tracks? what if there is other material on them, is it global to the sequence or just to the clip that I selected? I get your request, I'm just not sure how it could be handled cleanly.
3 - yup.


Return to posts index

Dave Jenkins
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 5:11:20 pm

We should be able to change 2 Mono to Stereo and vice versa. Sure I could learn how to work around this shortcoming but I shouldn't have to. If a client says he want this at the end of an edit, what do I say? Sorry I need to rebuild the audio portion of the program.

[Dennis Radeke] "2 - I'm not a product manager, but I would think that this idea could easily get messy quickly. The audio engine Premiere Pro is powerful and I agree it requires a bit of know-how to set it up properly, but once you do, it should work and respond as you would expect. Changing how audio looks and represents in the timeline is problematic. If I wanted to change a clip with 8 mono audio clips to a single adaptive track - what do I do with the other tracks? what if there is other material on them, is it global to the sequence or just to the clip that I selected? I get your request, I'm just not sure how it could be handled cleanly."

Dajen Productions, Santa Barbara, CA
MacPro 3.2GHz Quad Core - AJA Kona LHe+
FCS 3 OS X 10.7.4
FCP X, Adobe CS6, Logic Pro, Squeeze, Filemaker 10.8.2


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 5:19:22 pm

[Dave Jenkins] "We should be able to change 2 Mono to Stereo and vice versa. Sure I could learn how to work around this shortcoming but I shouldn't have to. If a client says he want this at the end of an edit, what do I say? Sorry I need to rebuild the audio portion of the program."

I'm sorry if I misunderstand, but isn't it simply a matter of panning your clips?


Return to posts index

John-Michael Seng-Wheeler
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 28, 2013 at 12:27:36 am

Then how's this for a solution to #2: Don't have audio assignments be a property of the master clip, make them a property of each instance of the clip anywhere in the project, like the way in/out point are; when you bring a clip from the project panel to the timeline or the viewer it opens with the current audio assignments, but when you change them in the project panel it doesn't affect any clips already in the timeline.

So, say, you bring in your clips as dual mono, and you stick a bunch on the timeline. Then, you modify the channels on any of them and any future clips added to the timeline will come in with the new assignments, but everything already in the timeline remains the same.

As an added bonus, add the ability to change the audio assignments of a clip already in the timeline. You'd just need the appropriate warning boxes about possibly overwriting stuff.

As a bonus, this would solve one of my biggest peeves... that there is no way to bring back the audio to a clip once the audio has been unlinked and deleted. You'd just right click the clip and select "Audio Assignments" or something like that and a window would come up and all the audio track would be turned off. You could then turn the audio back on and you'd have your audio back. No need to match frame back to the bin to get the audio back.

You could even do the same thing with audio that's lost it's video... just turn the video "track" back on.


While you're at it, do the same thing to "source settings" for Red footage. I've often had to duplicate Red clips in the bin to apply two different color corrections to them.


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 11:49:38 am

[Andy Field] "Yes it needs a more robust set of plugins - but developers are katching up)"

And we are working with our developers to help them make more plugins. Realistically, the issue is more transitions. This is something that can be done by plugin developers for some time but until recently they didn't have as much incentive to do it.


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 5:34:44 pm

[Dennis Radeke] "[Andy Field] "Yes it needs a more robust set of plugins - but developers are katching up)"

And we are working with our developers to help them make more plugins. Realistically, the issue is more transitions. This is something that can be done by plugin developers for some time but until recently they didn't have as much incentive to do it.
"


I went with Red so that I could have a seamless experience between MC and Pr, but popping in and out of the Red interface is a wee bit of a hassle--not terrible, mind you, but sometimes a bit of overkill. I'd sure like to see Continuum transitions work in a less awkward, non-layered manner--is this something Boris has the power to do now, but hasn't yet implemented? Or is there something on the Adobe side that still needs a bit of tinkering?


Return to posts index

Boris Yamnitsky
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 7:29:05 pm

Glad you mentioned Boris FX transitions for Adobe Premiere. Both Boris FX 10 (least expensive option) and Boris RED 5.2 work as true single track transitions in Adobe Premiere.
To get an idea of available presets, please see this browser:

http://www.borisfx.com/red/Movie-Gallery.php

Since Premiere does not allow native parameters for transitions, our custom UI becomes necessary. To ease the learning curve, you can use the Browser mode where you can choose a preset and go right back to Premiere to render.

This Boris TV episode provides more detail:

http://www.borisfx.com/videos/FX/Custom-Transitions.php


Needless to say, this is not our last word on Premiere Transitions, stay tuned for future releases. Hope this helps.

Boris Yamnitsky
BorisFX


Return to posts index

Chris Harlan
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced! (and someone just was)
on Feb 12, 2013 at 8:03:03 pm

[Boris Yamnitsky] "Glad you mentioned Boris FX transitions for Adobe Premiere. Both Boris FX 10 (least expensive option) and Boris RED 5.2 work as true single track transitions in Adobe Premiere. "

Boris! I'm a fan. I am truly grateful for that Red transition plugin. And, I DO use the browser view quite a bit. Its also terrific that I can go back and forth so easily between MC and Pr. And, btw, thanks for those free Eye Scream presets you folks sent out today. I'll be playing with them a bit later this afternoon.

Because of its customizability, I would still use the Red Plugin much of the time, even if Continuum transitions were available on a single track. But, having the single track option would be very nice. Of course this is a niggling issue in MC, as well. I just got spoiled by Continuum's ease of use in FCP.


Return to posts index

Dennis Radeke
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 12, 2013 at 11:30:39 am

Thanks Steve, love to hear your input.

I'll try to answer some of the comments on the thread and see where it goes. Apologies if I repeat what someone else has already said...

Premiere Pro and Speedgrade integration - yes, definitely something we all want to see get done.
XML - we work to keep the workflow with Resolve going. I think we had a dot release in the CS5.5 timeframe specifically for XML fixes to the REsolve workflow. We want people to have choices and integration with other software and hardware.

Dennis - Adobe guy


Return to posts index

Mike Cohen
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 27, 2013 at 1:50:45 am

Wow what a fun thread. So nice to see someone from Adobe responding to nearly every point.

Here's my primary annoyance - you want to reuse a clip on the sequence elsewhere in a sequence or project. Double click the clip on the sequence to open in course monitor. But then if you change an in or out point, it changes the clip on the sequence. You can right click the clip and select "reveal in project" but not necessarily get to the same in point in the original clip.

Here's another - if you have keyframes set on a clip, then you shorten that clip, Premiere maintains the keyframes beyond the end of the clip. There is no way to delete the phantom keyframes easily.

And another - sometimes you want to make a new sequence, maybe a scratch pad to try something outside of the main sequence. If you follow Adobe protocol, such as in Photoshop, you select an item, copy, make a new sequence, then try to hit paste, it does not paste anything. When you make a new sequence it clears whatever is in the copy/paste buffer.

All this being said, CS6 is the best Premiere yet. Even on my Core2 Quad with 8 gigs of ram and no CUDA it is rock solid and exporting to h264 is faster than CS5.5. I've had maybe 2 crashes in as many months, vs CS5.5 crashing daily. That is much more important than new features.

Mike Cohen


Return to posts index

Mike Cohen
Re: Premiere Pro - I could be convinced!
on Feb 28, 2013 at 5:20:16 am

[Mike Cohen] "Double click the clip on the sequence to open in course monitor. But then if you change an in or out point, it changes the clip on the sequence. You can right click the clip and select "reveal in project" but not necessarily get to the same in point in the original clip."

Ok, so the match frame command solves this riddle. Did match frame exist as a function prior to CS6?

I can tell you how to do a match frame on an ACE 25 if anyone is interested :)


Return to posts index

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
© 2017 CreativeCOW.net All Rights Reserved
[TOP]