AMA missing in settings!
Hi, I just started learning MC(v8.4) so I'm sorry in advance for my lack of knowledge. I have a video to edit next week so I'm taking this week to practice when I can. The issue I'm having might be quite easy to fix, but I didn't find any comments about that nowhere.
When I go to the settings tab, it doesn't have AMA - it starts with Audio.
Also, if I click on a bin with the right mouse button, there's no AMA Link option...
Someone could please help? Thanks!
It's just called "Link" now. They are phasing out the term "AMA" as people coming from other systems don't have any idea what it means and keep using legacy import.
Explained in the 8.4 docs
Oh, I see! A quite new update. Thanks so much for clearing that out, John! Such a relief... I just went through the 8.4 doc as well, always a good idea.
One can argue that those coming from other systems don't really need to link either... ;) Just open, or drill down to the folder until media shows up like in Resolve. Users still need to know that Link requires the proper (still named)AMA pug-in, etc.
Michael, have you ever tried to explain AMA, legacy import etc. to someone who only knows FCP classic or Adobe Premiere? They get the same look on their face as a cat gets when you try to teach it algebra. :). Don't even get me started on the fact that some AMA plugins are built in and some need to be downloaded. Plugins that are unnecessary on any other system.
Basically all other systems edit using "Link" full time. That's what importing actually does in FCP and Premiere. Only in Avid, does importing create new media, which is a huge distinction. The fact that the idea of editing using AMA..errrr....Link...is still discouraged among Avid users (for good reason)...despite what the marketing says...is kind of mind boggling to users of other systems. How can it not work well? Its nothing exotic...it's just how every other NLE works.
Back on point...Avid has it tough here. Much of the kludge with ingest is well understood by the grumpy longtime user base, but for people new to it, it's borderline incomprehensible. Link is pretty straightforward and descriptive about what's actually happening, at least. The term AMA requires you to know a bit more about the underlying architecture of Avid.
sorry for the rant. Not directed at you at all. I don't really know what the answer is, but Avid needs to do more than just fiddle with the names of these things.
I did teach a Media Composer class at the Community College level not too long ago, and as with most students of that age, all came in using either FCP or PPro. There are lots of things in the UI that we take for granted having been on it for so long, but when looking at it through their (fresh) eyes, Yikes! There's lots of illogical stuff going on - a lot of that started in 5.5, and 6 did no favors UI wise, and even new features seem more bolted on rather than part of a creative, logical UX design. For example, ask them to create a custom column...
That being said - AMA is one of those things that benefits Avid more than it benefits the user. I can understand the reasoning behind it, Avid couldn't keep up with all the different codecs being generated so it created a single plug-in architecture to allow camera manufactures to create their own relieving Avid of keeping up. But - from a useability perspective it is not that intuitive at all. Now it called Link, but you still need to download an AMA plug-in (will they be called Link Plug-ins?). As you say, they are not installed when you install Media Composer other than the ones Avid develops. Can't recall if RED is pre-installed as Avid develops that one too. This has been a discussion since this concept was introduced. I have asked why not include all AMA plug-in that have been tested and qualified for that release?
This will be interesting to see what happens with they release Media Composer | First for the newbie to be introduced to Media Composer. Once they do figure out where to find them, then off to the manufacture's site, then download - they still have to shut down MC to install, relaunch, etc. All to link to a !$@#$!#@@ file. I have asked for the last several beta that if I select "Link" from the File menu that the clips are created in a new bin. If I select Link from an active bin, the clips go in that bin. I don't care if it's folder or file - consistency and predictability goes a long way. Then you need to know about folder level linking versus the file itself. When selecting folder you need to know how many levels up (can't the system figure that out on its own!?!?!?). etc. etc. etc.
Then you have to transcode in many cases for performance reasons, so you do. Now you got a .new clip to manage doubling your media management... then conform issues, re-relinking, etc. It is not intuitive at all.
In Resolve, just keep navigating till you see media clips - drag them to the mediapool/bin. Done. No plug-ins needed. No knowing what level to select, etc. Same for PPro.
So yes, I agree with your assessment - your "link" will still depend on AMA Plug-ins.
[John Pale] "Basically all other systems edit using "Link" full time. That's what importing actually does in FCP and Premiere. Only in Avid, does importing create new media, which is a huge distinction. "
I think FCP X can work similar to Avid, FCP just does a better job of streamlining/limiting what's going on so as to be less confusing to the user. When you import new media in X you can choose to leave the media in place or you can have X copy the media into the library storage location. You can also have X create proxy and/or 'optimized' ProRes media upon import. Compared to Avid it's much less confusing, but it's also much more limited. FCP X also requires you to download camera plugins for RED, Canon and Sony. Even with FCP 7 though you had to download camera plugins in order to use Log and Transfer (which then created new media that had to manually be managed).
In Premiere Pro you can either use the Import function or the Media Browser and while they seem to do the same thing they actually don't. The Media Browser adds metadata and other invisible, asset tracking data to media when it is ingested that way where as just using the import function does not. Adobe actually recommends *not* to use the import function as some media won't be handled correctly if brought in via the "import" command. Why the import option is still there I have no idea.
And it's not like the 'link' method isn't without its own set of problems. Files scattered all over the place, people not realizing that 'import' means 'link' (so they 'import' media from a drive, disconnect the drive, then wonder why their new media went offline), spotty media management by the NLE, etc.,.
Pick your poison. If you want more nuanced control over what your NLE is doing then that will up the learning curve. Avid could take a cue from Apple though and instead of having separate 'import' and 'link' functions just have a single 'ingest' function then then from w/in that Ingest function you select if you want to move the media into Avid's database ('import') or leave the media where it is 'link').
I agree with you for the most part, Andrew. FCPX does the ProRes optimized video thing rather elegantly. And yes, all the other systems have media management shortcomings that don't exist with Avid (non-AMA) managed media.
I am rather new to Adobe CC and wasn't aware of the distinction you mentioned between using the Media Browser and importing...so thanks for that! I guess my main beef with Avid is the way AMA (now Link) has been marketed as a huge time saving feature, yet three or four versions later, newcomers are still warned not to listen to the marketing and transcode everything because it doesn't work well as advertised with anything but the most simple of projects. It's not just paranoia, as from experience, I know it doesn't work well. When other edit systems link to media directly by default (yes, you can choose to "optimize" in FCPX), it's hard to justify that limitation. They should, make it work or stop touting it. It's not something exotic. I am about to start a large sports highlight project that involves getting large amounts of H.264 material off of FTP, and the transcode time is staggering. If it were possible, I'd get the production company to switch to Adobe for this..as we could just download the files and start editing with Premiere Pro....but they are heavily invested in an all Avid infrastructure.
PS: I really love your idea about a unified ingest pane that clearly identifies your options. This could also be done for output.
I see the Link option sadly Im still having issues with updating RMDs.
Avid doesnt seem to accept the updates in RCX.
I just noticed it doesnt like RED TRIM files.
Not sure if thats an 8.4 thing.
link to media seems to load more folders/cards then i want.
i cant seem to drill down to one card like i did with link to AMA what am i missing?
tia ross Boughton IIL Media
Ross Byron Boughton
Editor / Webmaster / Sound Designer