What is Digg?78 Comments
- kelly, on 10/12/2007, -5/+113Apple: We're offering you several technologies that will make premiere much better. Please Use them.
Adobe: Microsoft doesn't offer these. We work to give parity to our software releases so your efforts don't help us
Apple: Well then would you at least give performance parity with the WIndows version?
Adobe: No real reason to. Windows is the future. Live with what you got.
Apple: Nearly half of your market is Macintosh users. If you don't do this you'll be sorry.
Adobe: How could we be sorry. We're the kings of video. Which current software company can change this?
Apple: We warned you... *introducing final cut pro*
Adobe: Holy crap... we just lost our Mac customers
Apple: Again... we warned you... many times.
Adobe: Holy crap, we're now starting to lose Windows customers to Final cut pro on Macintosh!!!
Apple: You only have yourselves to blame
Adobe: Ok... we're sorry. Here's the new Premiere you requested - flipmeat, on 10/12/2007, -5/+33most users would take iMovie over Premiere...
- thetanbark, on 10/12/2007, -5/+28I think most users on Mac will take FCP over Premiere any day. I honestly don't know any professionals worth their rate that use it as their primary video app. The price difference is about $500, which is worth it for FCP. Unless Adobe plans to cut their price, I doubt they do any damage to the FCP/Avid marketshare on Mac users.
- adam84a, on 10/12/2007, -0/+14I'm imagining this conversation taking place in the style of the get a mac ads
- motherwell, on 10/12/2007, -4/+16FCP is finally making inroads in Hollywood over Avid. There is absolutely no way people are going to suddenly switch to Premiere.
FCP is a better application anyway. - bleutuna, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I've used both FCP and Premiere Pro. I prefer Premiere Pro, but frankly, the two have more in common than they have different. The big issue that FCP has over PP is its ability to easily intake .MXF files and edit HD video. PP has a problem with HD Video, even on a good system (I've got a brand new core 2 duo 2ghz with 2GB RAM and a GeForce 6800 with 128 on it).
- rasterbator, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Lame. Adobe: In order to compete with Final Cut Pro, you will need to totally rewrite Premiere. It is awkward to use. Final Cut Pro is much easier to use, and the Production Suite bundle kicks ass.
- jeickholt, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6As a heavy After Effects user Premiere on mac should save me time. At the end of the day that's all i care about.
- bleutuna, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8I disagree. Premiere Pro *does* have better color management/correction tools than Final Cut Pro does. Adobe knows more about imaging than Apple, honestly. Doesn't mean it's a better piece of software, only that its color correction tools are amazing.
Also, if you make any move/change to a video file in FCP the program wants to re-render everything. FCP is messy at times as well, storing captured video in strange places, making it tough to find things if you aren't used to the way it works. That caused me many heartaches when I first started. Organization and color correction are two big pluses for PP.
The .AVI format that Premiere Captures in is also visually superior to QuickTime.
Both, though, are more like each other than they are Avid. So it really comes down to either you're an Avid style editor or you're a FCP/PP style editor. The two workflows are very, very different. - dvddesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4No, tuna, Apple bought what Adobe'd done. If you knew the applications, both Premiere and Final Cut had their beginnings with the same set of programmers, with one going for Adobe, and the other going to Macromedia. When Final Cut got sold, Apple retained the coders and had them work in DV and other features before the product officially launched. Meanwhile, Premiere chugged along on it's broken code for YEARS until they gave up at 6.5 and started over on 7.0/Premiere Pro. PPro was a complete rewrite and stole a lot of design elements from what the FCP and Avid people had put in the software from the getgo.
I can't TELL you how many people I had to switch back from 7.0 to 6.5 because they didn't like the 7.0-current changes to Premiere. I had so many complaints about how broken or useless the application is in it's current state. Personally, I liked the changes because they were more universal, more like FCP and Avid. I've built several hundred NLE machines, and I tell you, I like FCP. It's smart and it works just fine. It's a lot better now than it was at version 3 or even 4. I've built, trained, and edited on every machine from edit 5.5, Speed Razor, Video Toaster 2-4, Avid Symphony, Edius, DVStorm, to Matrox Axio HDs and Pinnacle Studio machines. The only configurations I've ever liked were: Edit 6.0 on a Digisuite, Axio HD on a PPro system, and FCP. Until 1.5, DV editing on a PC was a joke in Premiere. The render times were ungodly. Unless you had a render card for your editing (Matrox RTX100), you were kidding yourself thinking you'd get things done in a timely fashion. And renders were VERY inconsistent as well. I'd have to render things 3-4 times to get settings right, and I eventually stopped messing with it and I'd just do my end renders through Cleaner/TMPEGENC/VirtualDub, 'cause, even though it was slower than Premiere, at least I could visually see what my end result would be BEFORE I rendered, and could customize my quality a LOT more before hand.
I don't have any of this with Premiere. I know what an h.264 render is going to look like on FCP every time. I can batch export my renders out to file for digital a lot easier on FCP than I could on PPro. (I mostly do ingest and export stuff now for YouTube based television shows) I would never have agreed to do some of the YouTube stuff I do in FCP on a PPro platform. - JoeNick, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5
The only advantage I see for switching back from Final Cut to Premiere is the new compatibility features between Premiere and After Effects. The fact that you can now import AE sequences into Preimere and change them (in realtime!) back in After Effects is HUGE. For animators that is going to save entire days worth of work. For me, thats well worth the switch. - crawdad62, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5>"The .AVI format that Premiere Captures in is also visually superior to QuickTime."
I think that's the Achilles heel to Premiere. I'm not about to get into the quagmire that is .AVI. - dvddesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Yeah, why do people think there's like no support on the mac for Avid anymore? They knew they were beat, and despite Apple's dominating prescence, no one wanted to deal with two companies that skewed towards contract support and THAT much proprietary hardware.
The Avid Symphony systems I used to build were SUCH a pain to work with on the mac, and they were no better on the PC, but at least on the PC if something broke, you could fix it same day on your own...
BTW, I hate Avid. I know it's industry accepted to bend over and take it from Avid, and to like it... But people out there have no idea what's good if they blindly accept Avid's old editing techniques, poor render times and miserable support team. Avid is where they are because they developed a lot of the original tools. That certainly doesn't mean someone else can't make your product better. - HeatVision, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5They're gonna have to give it away to get users back from Final Cut Pro.
- MacParrot, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Wow! A lotta hate from FCP users. Why not be happy that Premiere is coming back to the Mac? Why not look at this as an affirmation that the Mac is worth developing for? Frankly I wish Adobe a lot of luck and I hope they do well. That will spur Apple to improve FCP and FCE, Avid to improve their products, who knows what other companies to take a second or even third look at developing Mac software that might not have existed before or was Windows only.
Competition is a good thing guys - kevine, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3I used Premiere for quite some time, then went to Avid and eventually to Final Cut. I'm really looking forward to Premiere coming back.
1) Competition is good.
2) Adobe will probably offer bundle deals, so it will come with other products I want.
3) I'm sure I'll find Premiere to be better for at least *some* of the projects/workflow situations I'll have.
4) It will help me support/collaborate with editors using Premiere on Windows.
I really hope Adobe releases Audition for the Mac as well. - mikeflynn, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Wow I didn't see this coming at all. I switched from Premiere to FCP when they stopped making it for the Mac, but there is no way I am switching back now. Way too late Adobe.
- dvddesign, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3You didn't see this coming? After they decided to exclusively write PPro 1.0 for Intel? And still, the program, at 2.0 is best threaded for Intel CPU's?
Uh, okay. Well, either way, I switched a few months back, moving from PPro 2.0 to FCP 5. I'll be more than happy to use Premiere again if it integrates with AEX as well as PPro does.
And even aside from digs at premiere, it's SO much less time consuming to build a quality DVD in Encore than it is in DVD Studio Pro. DVDSP is just a hair easier to use and work through than REELDVD, which was just shy of being useless if not for the fact that the german translated into poorly worded english manual that Sonic provided with it actually clicks the 5th time you read it at 3am on the last day of a project...
I avoid DVD projects all the time now while trying to slog through DVDSP. Nothing I bring in from AEX wants to work properly like it does in Windows, and I'm not about to start using Motion as some sort of crutch for production when I've got AEX and Combustion available to me. - Morky, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Er, it's not the same code for Mac just because it running on intel. It's a completely different API.
- stegdump, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@ derekknight
Think about it, it will be released in 6 months, a full year and a half after Apple STOPPED selling PPC computers. The people at Adobe have been selling software for quite some time (more that just about any other company). They realize that there are cost over benefits in developing software. PPC is really not worth the money and effort when viewed in the long run. Apple will probably be dropping support for PPC after the major versions of their own software (Apple really wants to sell hardware, remember?)
Say this was all happening one year from now, or even two years. Would a non-PPC version even be mentioned? No, nobody would notice. Honestly, how is being Intel only any different than being only for OSX (I am sure there are plenty of OS9 computers still out there, but should software companies be killing themselves developing software for OS9?).
PPC is a dead architecture, Adobe sees that right now, everyone else should too. - vegasmacguy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Actually the AVI that Premier captures is just an encapsulated DV file. The same thing that FCP captures. I've used AVI's from PP in FCP on productions. You get a warning but it is perfectly usable. But both are of the same quality because they are both the same technology.
Quicktime does do a poor job of rendering DV to the screen, but honestly I don't care about that, it looks fine on output. VLC shows you what it should look like.
The only thing I don't like about FCP is the preview is choppy so I just right click and preview in Quicktime to find my marks. As for PP, It sucks all around. I've never seen a program crash so much and forget about HD unless you're running DP and 3GB RAM. - mac-interactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5An interesting announcement but are they too late?
It may however bring Premiere users to the Mac platform. - bleutuna, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Rock, what did you guys decide on? How are you handling it?
- rockon81, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3First of all, stop with all the "FCP is better/Premiere is better" crap. To those of you who have never heard of Premiere, you probably haven't been editing very long or all you do is make slide shows of your sister's My Little Pony collection on your iMac. Premiere has been around longer but it is totally up to the user. And with Adobe Bridge, Adobe products integrate more fully. It's not about "any software worth two cents can export to After Effects" Its about being able to drop an After Effects comp straight into a Premiere time line and not have to render twice. And I agree that PP has a tough time dealing with HD without third party help. The TV station that I work at just got an HVX and trying to figure out a tape less, HD work flow has been a pain with PP. I still prefer it though.
- mikeflynn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3"Also, if you make any move/change to a video file in FCP the program wants to re-render everything"
Only if you are changing the values of a filter or effect. And even then it only needs to render that clip. Not sure what you mean here. Moving a clip doesn't require a re-render.
"FCP is messy at times as well, storing captured video in strange places, making it tough to find things if you aren't used to the way it works."
Scratch disks FTW. - chedabob, on 10/12/2007, -6/+8Any software worth its two cents can export to After Effects.
Personally, its gotta be Vegas for me. Best thing by Sony ever, and its a breeze to use. - AHemp, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The Photoshop CS3 beta is great... It launches in 2 seconds.
- ahansent, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4RE: bleutuna
I disagree. Premiere Pro *does* have better color management/correction tools than Final Cut Pro does.
You mean built in right? And right now, because there is an incredible FCP plug/application Final Touch (http://www.siliconcolor.com/) that Apple has just purchased. This is not for wedding videos, this is for uncompressed HD and 2K.
Also, if you make any move/change to a video file in FCP the program wants to re-render everything.
- you don't know what you're doing if that's been your experience. I sometimes edit on my g4 laptop and this is not the case, let alone on a dual core G5.
FCP is messy at times as well, storing captured video in strange places, making it tough to find things if you aren't used to the way it works.
- FCP has an extremely open and powerful architecture, that once you understand can let you do some amazing things. It always stores video in the capture scratch, which you can find under your system settings. RTFM.
The .AVI format that Premiere Captures in is also visually superior to QuickTime.
- what are you talking about? Which codec? I have never heard this and I've been a professional editor on a variety of platforms for years.
Both, though, are more like each other than they are Avid. So it really comes down to either you're an Avid style editor or you're a FCP/PP style editor. The two workflows are very, very different.
- no, actually, it's the person, not the system that defines the style. The software is just a tool. Some software gets in the way more than others, but in the end and editor envisions something in his/her head and follow through, whether it's with a razor blade on film or a NLE. - shockingbird, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Premiere and After Effects.. beautiful thing!
- Johannesrexx, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Adobe marketing has gotten silly. There are way more PPC macs out there then Intel Macs. Also, they should be using Xcode, which is Apple's developer tool and it has a nifty little provision to create FAT BINARY programs that run on both PPC and Intel Macs.
- 04TL, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7"FCP has serious faults that users overlook like most Apple products."
yeah, the ipod was a real flop...maybe i'll go out and buy a zune instead...
you throw around idiotic apple-hating statements, but yet don't provide any facts to back it up...i could call you gay and it would have to be true because i said it, right...?
premiere doesn't compare to the capabilities that fcp has...like already mentioned, it doesn't handle HD content as well, fcp accepts a greater range of formats and has far more creative tools rather than just filters to apply...
if i want a graphics program, i'll use photoshop...but when it comes to professional video editing, it's final cut pro (or vegas if i need to use a pc)... - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4@chedabob
Sony bought Vegas from SonicFoundry. So you can't really give them that much credit. - archerx, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4I use both A LOT! I prefer Premiere 2 over Final Cut, Premiere handles thing in a more organized way than FCP. Also Premiere 2 handles 16:9 footage better when you want to use it as 4:3, final cut stretches it you has to guess to get it back at the right ratio but with premiere it's is all you have to do it scale it down.
But thats just the opinion of me, a film student... - esquire360, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2well I'm gonna get it because i have it for windows and love it.
The dynamic link feature is amazing, photoshop to encore to preimere to after effects they lend to each other. its great! this will get people like me, i almost pulled the final cut trigger, since i went mac, but was hoping that adobe would do this.
this will get some PPro users over to the mac for sure. How does final cut work with photoshop files? - diggumjonez, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1oh, just like Apple did when they started releasing FCP? Several studios not only received full FCP software, but the computers to run it on and additional funding. This wasn't enough for many of the production houses to switch, but enough did to help Apple's marketing drive.
- billd222, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1As a user of both Premiere Pro and FCP, I can tell all of you there really isn't that much difference at all in the programs.
They both do the exact same things, the menus and keyboard shortcuts are in different places that's all.
Premiere Pro is way ahead of the old school original Premiere which was buggy and bloated.
FCP users really shouldn't just dismiss PP, especially because you are going to be able to very easily find your way around inside of Premiere.
Think of it as FCP, but with an Adobe interface. A lot of the shortcuts and filters that are in aftereffects and photoshop are in Premiere Pro.
I wouldn't dismiss it, Avid users for a long time scoffed and made fun of FCP and look what has happened to the Avid user base.
Muhahha
I hope this made some sense. - rowlodge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1another reason i need a new mac...
- SystemError, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1nor any or the other Pros or Co's that are switching from Avid to FCP for HD
- 04TL, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2@gregcotten
it's always funny to read the 'intelligent' posts (or in your case, irrelevant replies) on here.....in ten seconds i learned i don't know what the ***** i'm talking about and that i'm ignorant for using vegas, when it comes to pc, all by someone who fits the description of my initial post perfectly and probably googled "the coolest way to say import" by using the word ingest...
your one-line comments have no value other than taking up space...you could have at least provided ONE fact as to why premiere is better than vegas...you know, to educate us ignorant folk...and finally, you mention smokeHD as the best editor, in your opinion of course, most likely as your scapegoat rather than a valid recommendation, to sound somewhat knowledgeable on the topic without knowing anything about the products at hand... - jb978, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1pretty sorry there wont be an ppc or UB release :( I feel bad about my dual 2.3ghz g5.
- billd222, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Why would Adobe even want to write a NEW program for a technology (power PCs) that is now finished?
There aren't going to be anymore powerpcs in the future, so stop whining about the lack of support. Apple isn't even gonna make PowerPC versions of their software in the future.
You think Apple is gonna make a PPC versions of the next releases of FCP, Motion or DVDSP?? Time to drink some coffee, splash some water on your face, or whatever it takes —It's time to wake up.
Apple is in the hardware business: ipods and computers. The proprietary software is just there to get you to buy it's pricey hardware. - dvddesign, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2It's your own fault if you couldn't guess that Adobe wouldn't even start working on a CS3 UB until Mac Pros shipped.
I saw that one coming the second they said there wouldn't be a UB of CS2. - polyGone, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Can we stop bragging about FCP? Some of us are stuck with Windows. Well, we get 3DS Max, so HAAAA!!!
- flipmeat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1 Comment dugg, as integration is very important. I also wish to point out that Final Cut Studio (FCP, DVD SP, Soundtrack, Motion, etc.) has nice integration features as well, which work for one person or a workgroup. Adobe's integration has a cool name and better branding. :-)
Let us not forget that it's not the tools, it's the talent.
My observation of Premiere was that it didn't scale well for larger more complex projects. - DigitalKid215, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I use both Premiere and FCP but I prefer Premiere, especial PP2.0, over FCP for a few reasons. 1. It is far easier to use, as in jumping and just getting something done. FCP isn't quite as user friendly as people would have you believe especially if you're coming from any other NLE. 2. GUI is much better, I can do a lot more without having to deal with extra windows needing to be opened, ie making changes to audio. 3. Since Production Studio 1.0 integration with other Adobe apps. which is even better now with 2.0! 4. Much better work flow with the Adobe Apps and even a lot of non-Adobe apps. 5. This is the most important one of all, NO RENDERING for previewing! With FCP you have render everything before you can see it! From titles to something as simple as a dissolve! You would have thought this would have been addressed when they went to the G5.
A lot of people have to admit that once Adobe Premiere left the MAC OS there was little to no choice and who wants to purchase another Workstation when you just got that nice Dual G4 or G5? You use what is available and compared to the price of Avid, FCP looked cheap for someone who freelances or small company just starting.
Adobe Production Suite will slowly begin to dominate on the MAC Platform and those who think lowly of it just haven't given it a chance. Having said that there are a few things I do like about FCP, I like how you can color code your markers and how any info in them can be displayed on playback and I like that it does support a lot of formats out of the box. I have to remember the rest and to be honest I haven't used FCP much but it is very clumsy to use if you use other NLE's. Vega though nice is hard to use at first too, but I almost feel like FCP is harder for many basic tasks.
Once people start seeing the ease of use of Adobe Production Suite, it will begin to get the "Pro" title that FCP has seemly captured. Try using Adobe Encore and then try to use DVD Studio Pro. You will have what took you longer to do in DVD Studio finished in half the time.
Lastly lets not through in EDU pricing, it makes little sense to even try to compare the pricing right now. FCP Bundle was priced at a nice sweet spot for what you got and if Adobe to meet or beat that price it will be a non-issue. Also have you tried to go from FCP Exp to FCP? It's difficult which says a lot about that app.
No matter what though, like a lot of people said already it's about preference. A good editor can use just about anything once they know where the tools are. Besides, competition is always good for customers!! - Mark_DeRidder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I've used both, and I prefer Premiere. I'm very happy to hear that it is coming back to the mac. FCP is a great app, but I can't seem to get used to it. Premiere seems more intuitive, especially for manipulating scale, opacity, motion. But I am probably just biased since I started with Premiere and moved to FCP. Either way, happy to have it back on the mac.
- gregcotten, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@04TL
I apologize for what I said. I was slightly enraged at the point of posting. No, I don't believe ingest can be found by "googling" to coolest ways to say import. I try to avoid saying digitize (because that would refer to changing an analog signal to a digital signal) and import, well, just because it is the "norm". Anyway, smokeHD runs on Linux, and I prefer their GUI approach to streamline editing more than FCP or Premiere (or Vegas, for that matter). For example, Smoke's footage proxying features for working with 4K, 2K, or HD footage really are far superior than FCP or Premiere. Additionally, its interfacing with RS devices (such as HDCAM CINEALTA decks and basically any other deck with serial interfacing) is unparralelled. This can probably account for the price difference. Sometimes I just get annoyed with elitist/snobs (which you are not) who will push their agenda needlessly. Let's face it, FCP does have critical acclaim (all be it self-fueled from Apple) and has found it's way even into the lower-budget Hollywood community and mainstream commercial television. They're right - why use proprietary hardware for things that you don't need proprietary hardware for? However, this does not excuse flaming other editing systems with (in my opinion), comprable features that help people make a living. I use Premiere Pro at home for self-projects, but stick with more streamline applications at work. For some background, I work with compositing on a daily basis. Usually this involves integration with Maya, Shake, (sometimes) After Effects, and (sometimes) Combustion.
In any case, I again apologize for my flame - it was uncalled for. - Aleks, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Jesus christ! After reading most of the comments here, there's some actual intellectual conversation going on with Final Cut vs Premiere!
In regards to Color Correction in Premiere over Final Cut.. remember Apple recently bought out Silicon Color - Check out Colorista for more info. I think Final Cut 5.x is long overdue for a new release.. possibly see a new version at Macworld? - zioxide, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Thinking about this though, I hope Adobe does a good job on this, because hopefully it will motivate Apple to make FCS6 even better. :D
- beggersfunk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Good stuff at lease now Adobe is showing more flexibilty towards to a Mac user and also showing Mac has another option . And good healthy competion to Apple is great because it's only pushes one another to be a better a software.
-
Show 51 - 78 of 78 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is