FORUMS: list search recent posts

Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.

COW Forums : Apple Final Cut Pro X Debates

<< PREVIOUS   •   VIEW ALL   •   PRINT   •   NEXT >>
Aindreas Gallagher
Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 23, 2015 at 9:28:25 pm

Long thread on the nature of CC dev - off that there was a post from Alex 4D I wanted to dredge up - it outlines just how far adobe went to town in one 12 month period with PPRO operating outside a sale cycle.



just scanning through - adobe anywhere - totally new re-linking architecture -closed captioning - new track patching - avid style nested sequences - through edits - LUTS - it goes on for yards -

and that nevermind 2014-15. To say that adobe are largely operating as a facsimile of a CS release model is not fair to the engineers involved in that list at all. I made a joke that my 600 quid should go for their engineer staff party - but come on seriously Jeremy. Premiere's been on a rip the like of which I've personally never seen in twenty years.
Mollinaire paint through discreet effect to combustion was fun but this is off the scale. You could say, or I maybe I would like to say, that adobe are only doing this to load us onto the subscriber beast train del muerte to the promised land in 2019 where the board are waiting with open arms once we're all locked in - but in the meantime those engineers are producing something utterly different to a CS schedule. Sure for all we know - they're on their own beast train even. Still - Premiere Pro 2013-2015 dev deserves real respect?

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 24, 2015 at 4:44:36 am
Last Edited By Jeremy Garchow on Jun 24, 2015 at 7:36:59 pm

There's no question that I deserve to be called out. I made a few remarks, and then subsequently furthered my opinion through the discussion, and perhaps that came through as disrespectful.

That was not my intent.

I'd like to point out, that I was, for the most part, talking specifically about the number one feature request of After Effects. The number one, as evidenced by what I found to be a rather cajoling blog post, even back when it was written in 2013. Perhaps, I need a break.

I also noted, that Adobe has proven what can be achieved with Creative Cloud. I gave credit where credit is due. I acknowledged the accelerated development. I even said that it feels like all the other apps got a whole lot of love, while Ae was floundering around with a cache system left over from the 90s.

Also, "CC 7.0" should have been called CC 2013. That would have set the tone. It would have let everyone know what to realistically expect out of this "new" development cycle.

Pr one the other hand, has come an amazingly long way in a short time. But it's still Pr. There are ever more bolt on features, and that is my long standing issue with Adobe.

The Adobe engineers, and I say this over and over, do absolutely amazing work. Building and modifying complicated software while dragging a 20+ year legacy is no small feat. The engineers do deserve respect, and I didn't mean to insinuate otherwise.

I'm a paying customer. I, too, have opinions. It's OK to question the motivations (and communications, and marketing) today, as you did very early on. I'm happy Pr now has join through edits and keeping sync with third party SDI cards as of December, 2013. CC has allowed Adobe to address issues like that whenever they can slot it in, but I was hoping for a little more actual new features to reduce all the clicking. Even the new color panel needs to have two panels open to get the most control out of that one effect. That's just weird science to me. Perhaps I'm expecting too much and need to change my frame of reference.


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 24, 2015 at 1:09:45 pm

I know this is the internet and we all have a soap box to stand on but for me if it doesnt work then my thoughts will be just that...Premiere doesnt work for me at the moment. Should I bother to see if CC 2015 fixes my issues?
Well if push comes to shove then I guess Ill have to but for now, I just need it to work for what my intentions are and it still doesnt with CC 2104.


Return to posts index


Oliver Peters
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 24, 2015 at 5:12:23 pm

[Eric Santiago] "Premiere doesnt work for me at the moment. Should I bother to see if CC 2015 fixes my issues?"

But wait. Aren't your issues with Premiere Pro largely due to trying to move complete productions between different NLEs? That's difficult under nearly every circumstance. In any case, if you don't like CC2014, then I'm afraid CC2015 won't change your mind.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 24, 2015 at 5:15:01 pm

[Oliver Peters] "But wait. Aren't your issues with Premiere Pro largely due to trying to move complete productions between different NLEs? That's difficult under nearly every circumstance. In any case, if you don't like CC2014, then I'm afraid CC2015 won't change your mind."

Partly yes but there are other options not quite there for myself.
I was hoping some of them would be answered in CC 2105.
I will wait it out till the smoke clears.
Im reading enough in the Premiere forum to keep me away for now.


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 24, 2015 at 6:39:25 pm

[Eric Santiago] "Partly yes but there are other options not quite there for myself."

Such as?

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Eric Santiago
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 25, 2015 at 2:10:37 pm

[Oliver Peters] "Such as?"

At the moment the whole RED file system is keeping me from even trying harder.

When I couldnt get the RED files in via import as oppose to the Media Browser that felt a little cumbersome.

Then after loading the first day of a 100 clips and attempting Merge with Audio (sound not tc), I got a little annoyed at that point.

Now Premiere has been in my tool kit since 1994.
I know the basics and they all match with the current NLEs.
But of late I just lose patience when I cant do the same workflow as FCPX.
Maybe its old age :)


Return to posts index

Walter Soyka
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 25, 2015 at 2:39:19 pm

[Eric Santiago] "When I couldnt get the RED files in via import as oppose to the Media Browser that felt a little cumbersome."

Media Browser is meant specifically to do what OS-based file dialogs cannot: represent complex media folders as media clips instead of whatever sets of visible files (XML, spanned files, etc.) make up those clips.

That said, I think the Media Browser UX is a bit lacking, too. What specifically is it you don't like about Media Browser that makes you want to reach for Import instead?

Walter Soyka
Designer & Mad Scientist at Keen Live [link]
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
@keenlive [twitter]   |   RenderBreak [blog]   |   Profile [LinkedIn]


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 25, 2015 at 2:55:13 pm

[Eric Santiago] "When I couldnt get the RED files in via import as oppose to the Media Browser that felt a little cumbersome."

The MB is doing the same thing that the FCP X import module or Avid's AMA is doing. This is where the camera-file-specific development is going, as it understands the different folder structures used by RED, Panasonic, Canon, Sony, etc. This is very important when it comes to spanned clips.

[Eric Santiago] "Then after loading the first day of a 100 clips and attempting Merge with Audio (sound not tc), I got a little annoyed at that point."

That would be painful in FCP X, too. From my experience, you would actually be able to sync faster (and often more accurately) using a clap and manual syncing in either app.

[Eric Santiago] "But of late I just lose patience when I cant do the same workflow as FCPX."

Well, the RED workflow in X is nice, but can create its own issues when you have to roundtrip. I would still advocate generating your own transcoded "masters" or editing proxies in Redcine-X Pro or Resolve and then relinking at the end if you want to. You might also have better luck (faster) syncing to transcoded masters or proxies than to the RED files.

Ultimately none of this sounds like an issue with Premiere as much as that you are simply liking the workflow in X better. Perfectly fine and understandable, but not really a deficiency in Premiere or a sign of lack of development by Adobe (not that you meant it to be such).

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index


Richard Herd
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 25, 2015 at 4:24:57 pm

[Oliver Peters] "your own transcoded "masters" or editing proxies"

Have you used Prelude for that, by any chance? (I have not and am curious the user experience.)

Thanks!


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 24, 2015 at 8:07:26 pm

[Jeremy Garchow] "There's no question that I deserve to be called out."

Hey no - just made me think alex4D's thing. I just threw your name in the title for sensationalism...

[Jeremy Garchow] "It's OK to question the motivations (and communications, and marketing) today, as you did very early on."

Well, you know, I did just allude to the beast train to mexico in my post there - that's not unqualified optimism about the subscription long term picture wha??


[Jeremy Garchow] "new features to reduce all the clicking. "

I wonder about this notion really if I'm honest. Is reducing clicking code for 'where's the magnetic timeline type stuff? You know what has lots of clicking? Maya. Or excel, or cinema 4D, or any complex comprehensive professional software really... Not wanting to drag this back to X - but isn't that an unusually mouse driven editor? People do say that, and I've found it so for the amount I've used it. Stuff like conditional shortcuts where the same keys can do different stuff depending on whether you're trimming or not trimming - Scott Simmons made a point of that in his premiere review - he viewed stuff like that as deeply rational, but I'm pretty sure it would confuse the hell out of a casual user. Premiere is radically more streamlined relative to where it was in v 5.5. The GUI has gone through three full rounds of refinement. That's a lot of what I feel is clean about premiere at this point. Also it has the most reconfigurable interface of any editing system - bar none. And by a country mile too...

I get that the right click menus have gotten.. rather long in some instances, but have you ever right clicked in maya? IT'S BONKERS.



things could be worse like... I know X is a lot cleaner maybe, although i think it's debatable really, I just don't like all the compromises involved in getting it to look that nice and simple on top?

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


Return to posts index

Eric Santiago
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 25, 2015 at 2:13:40 pm

Thanks Aindreas for bringing up the Marking Menus from Maya :)
In the past Ive brought that up with Adobe and have asked numerous times to steal it.
I love that option in Maya and hopefully someone writes an OS plug-in that can be utilized on all apps :)


Return to posts index


Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 26, 2015 at 9:13:40 pm

[Eric Santiago] "In the past Ive brought that up with Adobe and have asked numerous times to steal it."

Jesus christ - take that back immediately. If anyone from adobe is reading this - he's joking.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 25, 2015 at 6:33:11 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I just threw your name in the title for sensationalism..."

I will make this statement a screensaver.


[Aindreas Gallagher] "I wonder about this notion really if I'm honest. Is reducing clicking code for 'where's the magnetic timeline type stuff? You know what has lots of clicking? Maya. Or excel, or cinema 4D, or any complex comprehensive professional software really... Not wanting to drag this back to X - but isn't that an unusually mouse driven editor? "

We don't have to dag it back to X, but it's rather convenient to compare:

The timeline window has some very mousey moments, but other than that, no. X is very keyboard centric with a gold standard contextual keyboard shortcut editor. That is another thing I don't like about Pr (or anything Adobe) is the absolutely arcane keyboard customization. I know people argue that the interface is customizable, I find it completely annoying. With X, I can open and close what I want with many shortcuts, and the controls are in the same region of the screen every time. It's similar to Smoke in that fashion, which is a pretty complex interface, and not very straight forward. The nice thing about Smoke is that the tools are in the same place all of the time with great keyboard navigation shortcuts to get to where you need to go, and hide/reveal what you need, but you do have to take the time to learn it. I find similar ideas in Motion (although no where near as complex as Smoke, obviously). What you can get done with the tabbed interface of the Browser, Library, and Inspector (all kb selectable), and the separate layers tab as well as the minimized timeline, you almost never need the full timeline open at al, including keyframingl. It is an extremely efficient interface, but you have to learn where things are. This workflow is really efficient, and I blame Simon Ubsdell for reinvigorating an new found interest in Motion for me;



I'll mention it again, but you really need two panels open to use the Lumetri Panel to it's full potential. First, you need the newly designed Panel to access all the sexy GUI stuffl, and then you need the effects panel open on the source as well to access reset buttons. I find it weird and full of crazy amounts of mousing back and forth between the two panels, as well as constantly clicking between the Panel "categories" (Correction, Creative, Curves, etc). Say what you want about the Color Box, but almost that whole entire interface can be keyboard driven right down to opening (or revealing) the Color Box, selecting which parameters to work from, and adjusting the pucks without touching one mouse, one trackpad, or one wacom pen, and then sealing it all back up with the same shortcut to get it out of the way. If I wanted to get rid of the Lumetri Panel in Pr, I'd have to create two custom interface settings, save both of those settings, and then assign shortcuts to each of those settings. In order to make those settings, I'd have to touch almost every single panel in Pr to get them all situated, twice. And those two different philosophies are all over each of the separate programs.

The place where X is missing a lot of keyboard love is vertical navigation in the magnetic timeline, and audio fade handles. They are needed, but I digress.

Getting back to the original post, yes, there has been a lot of work done on Pr. A lot of those features sound like direct feature requests from converts from other NLE's to make Pr work similar to those NLEs. This seems to show that Adobe is certainly listening to its users and trying to make Pr what everyone wants it to be. I hope it works out.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 26, 2015 at 9:09:21 pm

yes, I'll nod along with all that -

I'd only add that I did a complex boolean google search, pulling in wolfram alpha, for the six most stupid things made by human hands -

and surprisingly, the FCPX keyframe editor architecture came up at number four. Surprising, a little harsh, but you'd feel it's on the money.

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


Return to posts index


Jeremy Garchow
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 26, 2015 at 11:40:19 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "I'd only add that I did a complex boolean google search, pulling in wolfram alpha, for the six most stupid things made by human hands -

and surprisingly, the FCPX keyframe editor architecture came up at number four. Surprising, a little harsh, but you'd feel it's on the money.
"


Ha!

Certainly, some things could be better, but I guess it depends on how complex you need to keyframe. I do find this to be really easy, albeit overtly simple:



Simply add a key frame and adjust what you need to adjust in the viewer, move ahead on the timeline, make the transform adjustment by dragging the position/crop//scale/handles right in the viewer, and the next keyframe is already made. Use the arrows to bounce back and forth betwixt. If you need to move (retime) them, then you have to go in to the pop-up (or remake them) but since I don't do a lot of complex key framing in NLEs in general (mostly because FCP Legend was pretty terrible at it too, at least for video) the X method is alright, if a little weird, just like FCP7. I just wish you could send a f*cking edit to Motion.

Jeremy


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 27, 2015 at 12:28:34 am

[Jeremy Garchow] "Certainly, some things could be better, but I guess it depends on how complex you need to [stated action]. I do find this to be really easy, albeit overtly simple:"

And that's FCPX.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 27, 2015 at 12:41:44 am

Some of it. Honestly, even though it looks weird, the key framing doesn't bother me a whole lot.

I don't know if you ever did that exercise of exporting multichannel audio out of X vs Pr, in X it's very simple and powerful, in Pr it's overtly complicated, not in that it's hard to do, but in that it takes a lot of steps.


Return to posts index

Bill Davis
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jun 29, 2015 at 6:09:52 pm

Nope, A, it's your VIEW of X - once again.

While X certainly has some areas where someone conditioned to how keyframes work in other apps will be frustrated, there are other aspects of the X key framing that are extremely well designed and powerful.

One example is in ducking voice against music. In X, the range selection capability lets you define a range and duck with a single drag, with X instantly auto defining the 4 keyframes necessary for the ducking. Perfecting the slopes is simple, visual and intuitive. You can even drag the whole ducked range right or left along your audio clip to better position it.

It's visual, intuitive, and precise. And best of all, while you do it, your brain stays in the task, not in the interface.

When I originally learned about that, I wondered why they didn't allow the same capabilities for other attributes such as opacity. Then last month, 10.2 came out and there was a major functional refinement of the effects system enabling effects to be applied in stacks so that the order of their effect on the signal can be re-arranged.

It reminds me that X is still young and rapidly developing.

Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com - video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jul 1, 2015 at 7:05:32 pm

[Bill Davis] "there are other aspects of the X key framing that are extremely well designed and powerful. "

Nope. there really aren't - it's all completely terrible.

[Bill Davis] "the range selection capability lets you define a range and duck with a single drag,"

except for that one thing. everything else is a nightmarish mess. The UN produced a study on it.

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


Return to posts index

Oliver Peters
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jul 1, 2015 at 9:00:34 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "except for that one thing. everything else is a nightmarish mess."

One issue I see with the range-based keyframing is that there's no automatic way to adjust the distance between KF 1-2 and 3-4. So you still end up fiddling with the ramp down and ramp up distances.

- Oliver

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


Return to posts index

Aindreas Gallagher
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jul 2, 2015 at 3:46:20 pm

[Oliver Peters] "[Aindreas Gallagher] "except for that one thing. everything else is a nightmarish mess.""

[Oliver Peters] "One issue I see with the range-based keyframing..."

fantastic. I withdraw the exception - the keyframing is an unmitigated disaster.

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


Return to posts index

Jeremy Garchow
Re: Garchow calls Creative Cloud Creative Suite by another name.
on Jul 2, 2015 at 4:18:14 pm

[Aindreas Gallagher] "[Oliver Peters] "[Aindreas Gallagher] "except for that one thing. everything else is a nightmarish mess.""

[Oliver Peters] "One issue I see with the range-based keyframing..."

fantastic. I withdraw the exception - the keyframing is an unmitigated disaster."


This isn't any different than any other NLE, so by default, keyframing is an unmitigated disaster anywhere?

It's so easy to make a range, duck the audio and adjust. It literally created 4 keyframes for you instantly, rather than making four key frames and adjusting each one. It's not that bad, it's very handy, and if this is the type of shit we are now arguing about, FCPX has officially arrived.


Return to posts index

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