What is better.....Final cut pro or Adobe?

[VideoFred]

hmm.. please tell me the open source program that edits in native HDV etc...

OK, ok, you win :lol:

But we should do a test:

I could send you some of my original 1024 x 768 files, burned on data DVD. You edit them with your professional tools and knowledge and save them in 640 x480, max. 2MB, to compare them with my WMV files.

Then I put them on the same webpage so everyone can see the difference. I do not want to prove my approach is better, far from that. Actualy I'm curious myself to see your results.

Do you take the challenge?

Fred.

[namke]

I'm gonna put in a shout for Vegas (Ok, so I only have experience of the 'studio' versions) - very intuitive, the new 'vegas studio platinum' handles HDV and third-party plugins too (oh, and is pretty cheap) ...

... but then, I've never used FCP/Premiere, and I come from a music background - the vegas interface is very similar to other ex-Sonic Foundry products that I was already using.

john..

[BK]

I'm gonna put in a shout for Vegas (Ok, so I only have experience of the 'studio' versions) - very intuitive, the new 'vegas studio platinum' handles HDV and third-party plugins too (oh, and is pretty cheap) ...

Me too.

I have experience using both Avid and FCP at work but Vegas is still my favorite for editing at home. It is very good value for what it can do.

In the end though as always, it's not what you use it's how you use it.

Bill

[mattias]

i really liked the clip, but i agree it has very little to do with editing and that some effects were a little too much. for this kind of "editing" i recommend apple motion. it would make the exact same thing look more like the title sequence of an hbo series and less like a cheap wedding video. :-)

/matt

[gianni1]

I prefer Apple Quicktime Pro! Next is Apple iLife!
That's because I have no time...
...even though I've got legal copies of both Premiere and FCP.

Gianni :mrgreen:
<fx: ducks for cover>

[MovieStuff]

Anyone that judges an edit program by the number of whiz-bang effects has never faced the challenge of telling a good story using the basic conventions of film making and, frankly, needs more experience in the fundamentals of storytelling. This is a rhetorical statement and is not aimed at anyone in particular in this thread. Actually, I haven't even read the entire thread but the discussion is already too familiar. It comes up again and again and I am always amused by the ancient "which editing program is better" quest, especially on a film forum, since basic film story telling is made up mostly of cuts, with a few cross dissolves and even fewer fades.

So what makes a bad edit program? I guess one that can't do cuts, fades and dissolves. Beyond that, I could create a compelling story using super 8 and scotch tape and no NLE program of any kind. In my opinion, anyone that wants to make a meaningful comparison of NLE features would really need that basic ability as a foundation because all that really leaves is the user interface and that is usually something you just adapt to. People that love Premier generally learned on Premier. People that swear by FCP generally learned on FCP. People that made a switch generally did so based not on the quality of the cuts, fades and dissolves but because there was something about the user interface or the downstream handling of files that attracted them. What makes a good NLE system is relative to the individual's ability to learn and desire to actually tell a story and not sell merchandise with all sizzle and no steak. Some people find Premier easy and others find i-Movie daunting, so go figure, but both can do cuts, fades and dissolves. That should be enough for any film maker.

That said, the one good feature that I think IS important is real time color correction with a breakout to an actual program monitor. Making NTSC color corrections on a computer monitor is lame, IMHO. Waiting for your color to render is even lamer, considering the speed of today's CPUs. For SD, I personally like the Matrox RTX100 system and have just ordered a real-time varient of the new Premier-Pro HDV edit suite, which also has a real time color correction feed to an HDV production monitor. Is there a better way to edit? Probably but I will simply adapt to the changes in Premier because I am used to it. I am more interested in telling a story than keeping up with the Joneses and learning new programs.

Roger

[tlatosmd]

If we're *really* talking about FCP vs. Adobe, not FCP vs. Premiere, I'd say Adobe wins. FCP is but an editing program, just like Premiere Pro is (and that's all both of them need to be, just like Roger says), while all those effects, all that compositing is what the rest of the whole Adobe product line is for.

If you ask me what I've learned on, I learned ambidextrously. If you only know Premiere instead of Premiere Pro, you should really *test* Premiere Pro at least, like ask someone who has it if you could fiddle with it. Premiere was but a toy, yet Premiere Pro is as good as FCP and AVID for SD (yes, on my college we've learned on AVID suites, too) minus those whizz-bang effects, except for Premiere Pro's audio conforming which can be a pain at times, especially when using several timelines, while the best thing is it's independent of your system, other than AVID and FCP.

[Justin Lovell]

very good points roger.

The majority of the editing I do is exported directly into VFX/Design software (ie After Effects/combustion/shake..or whatever applies best).

I always laugh when people tell me about how FCP is far superior to Premeire (playing devil's advocate here), because as roger put best, it doesn't matter what you're cutting on, if you're cutting. They all have the same fundamental features.

However, some software has come up with features that will expediate your workflow and give your far better management of files.

It's like watching the cookie monster eat a cookie and compare it to the way I would eat a cookie.... The cookie would end up in our bellies either way, but one of us is going to make a huge mess in the process.

(wow that's a bad analogy, never going to do that again.)

justin
frame discreet
http://www.justinlovell.com

[Alex_W]

what makes a bad edit program? I guess one that can't do cuts, fades and dissolves

amen

[sooper8fan]

Well, for right now, all I have for christoph is a big middle finger....but I'll be back later with more comments. I have a bride coming over in few and she wants to give me money....

[mattias]

Well, for right now, all I have for christoph is a big middle finger...

because he didn't like the clip? while i enjoyed it i agree with him. it's pretty cheesy. it's low budget and tounge in cheek so i don't have a problem with that, but some people do it seems. leave it.

/matt

[Joe Gioielli]

I have no idea which is better. So I will not say an ill word against any other program.

I use FCP an I am very pleased with it. I took a class on how to use it and I found some books that really are very helpful in learning the interface. I also think that the software package "Production Suite" has a lot going for it. I like Apple software, it is well suited to how I work.

If you are already an Apple user, then I would strongly suggest FCP.

But in the end, it ain't the fiddle that makes the music.

[sooper8fan]

what the hell else IS a wedding video.....cheezy! I know that, you obviously know that....but that's what I do for a living. Not to toot my own horn, but doing this "cheezy" crap gets me about 80G's a year....funny...even with that, I'm trying to work away from weddings, but people keep wanting to pay me, so I'll keep letting them. "leave it"

[BigBeaner]

For years I used Pinnacle Studio series but last year due to school I took the jump to FCP. Damn thing wouldn't constantly crash for some of the stupidest thing, it was so much more time consuming. But the codecs, there was so many included. Anyways, to stop the torture I got Premiere Pro and was amazed. IT'S THE SAME THING. The format, how everything mostly appears, it's like an outright copy. I can't say which is better in that aspect because the only difference I had is my pc hasn't crashed whereas FCP would all the time, and FCP just seemed to have more options to encode it in. Plus I use all Adobe products such as After Effects, Photoshop CS and Encore DVD so the way they're all intergrated with each other really nicely.

Really, I see no difference between mostly all of the editing programs besides ease of use. I found IMovie and Windows Movie Maker at times to be frustrating.

[npcoombs]

Here's something I made for a client: http://www.desireeandseth.com/TrailerFINAL.wmv
They said "here's a song, we want to make a movie trailer for our wedding" and away we went. This was all done on Premiere Pro 1.5 and it left several of my FCP friends dumbfounded (not to mention the 300 guests at the wedding reception where it played).
.

what could you not do in FCP on this trailer?

FCP is a professional program that is continually updated for the latest technology, sample rates, resolutions and exports. There's nothing missing there.