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

[S8 Booster]

....
Editing is cutting the images and arranging them in the desired sequence and at the desired pace, with occasional transitions, period. Adding effects doesn't count....

id tend to say;.... thats not editing - just assembling.

in the old days when cuts were made on the real stuff editing was much more critical - example:

already at shoot one planned for the editing which in turn had a primary and secondary requirement of smoothness and flow unless other effects were wwanted. from one scene shift to another there should be no jerkiness in the viewers eye - it means that where the viewers eye was fixed on the ending take the next should fit right on no need to move the vision. often a piece of tape were put on the editor/viewer screen to remember the viewpoint fixture before finding the match in the next scene.

to me this is one part of true editing that is challenging but with a A/B rolling editor it becomes simple match but i am not sure i see a lot of that.

thus i separate greatly assembling from *true* editing.

s

[tlatosmd]

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. [...] 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.

I'm glad we agree on that. ;) As for Premiere Pro's not state-of-the-art encoding, I use other stuff for that, such as VDub, what I put out of Premiere Pro is either DV or uncompresssed.

And Premiere Pro is HD-compatible as well as much as I know, though I haven't used that feature before.

[sooper8fan]

paulcotto wrote:

Did you see a little movie called "The Aviator"?

Yes I did...it sucked and it bored me to death. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the editing program they used, does it. No. Besides, you had nothing to do with the movie either, did you. No.

Evan Kubota wrote:

That's not really editing. Are you going to flick me off too?

No, but to use the right word, I'll FLIP you off. Don't comment on the clip if you haven't even watched it.

Evan Kubota also wrote:

Editing is cutting the images and arranging them in the desired sequence and at the desired pace

Geez....read what you just wrote. Now go watch the frickin' clip. If you can honestly tell me that I did NOT "cut the images and arrange them in the desired sequence and at the desired pace" then I'll quit shooting and editing forever. Seriously. Don't make me say what I really thought about "Taco".
The purpose of the clip I posted was to show something done in it's entirety within Premiere Pro, since that is what the stupid topic was about. It was a fun little clip that my client wanted to play at their stupid wedding reception right before their slide show, then add to their final wedding DVD. And right away people are bashing it? I'm a little confused there.
I don't give a rat's ass what movies have been cut on AVID, FCP, whatever....I was under the impression this topic was regarding personal use....where are all your clips, people? I'm also still waiting for Mattias or somebody to tell me specifically what effects were cheezy, or why the whole clip was cheezy? Maybe because my actors are not real actors...they're just regular people. We couldn't find people that looked close-enough to the real bride and groom....the guests might have noticed. Maybe because I like to add my own sound effects and edit to the beat of the music. Maybe because it's a low-res preview.
Regardless of any of this or what any of you think, this project was extremely fun and it took a lot of work on both the shooting end and the editing end. Sorry if it wasn't shot on film and "edited" in FCP. Sorry you can't handle all the "whizz-bang", but that's what some people want so that's what some people get. I just laugh my fat ass all the way to the bank. 8)

By the way, where's HuntingtonGault? he started this thread and he hasn't even chimed in with anything yet. He's probably in the other room laughing his ass off at the fire he started. good one.

[MovieStuff]

paulcotto wrote:

Did you see a little movie called "The Aviator"?

Yes I did...it sucked and it bored me to death. But that has absolutely nothing to do with the editing program they used, does it.

No but it does have to do with your demand to see something created successfully in FCP.

Besides, you had nothing to do with the movie either, did you. No.

I think that you are over-reacting a bit and also being a tad disengenuous regarding your part in this disagreement you're having. You previously threw down the gauntlet when you wrote:

I'm hoping somebody else will post a clip they did from start to finish in FCP

The way I read your post, it seemed as if you were implying that it was somehow a problem to complete a project successfully in FCP as compared to Premier-Pro. And then when someone posts examples of professional projects that used FCP (as you requested), you then dismiss them out of hand because they were not created by people on this forum? What difference does it make who made them? If you can "laugh all the way to the bank" because you make money using Premier, then why is the success of "The Aviator" any less significant, regardless of whether you liked it or not?

I think your clip was fun but it is hardly something that either side of the camp should use as a unit of measure regarding potential of a given edit system. That's not a slam. It's just a realistic evaluation of a frivolous project that you admit was made for the amusement of the client. However, like it or not, you changed the course of this discussion by using an effects heavy clip to seemingly suggest that Premier-Pro was somehow superior to FCP for editing; as if effects were the benchmark of a quality editing program. Perhaps that wasn't your intent but it certainly came across that way in a thread that was specifically about how FCP and Premier stack up against each other as editing tools, not special effects tools.

I think everyone (including you) needs to take a few steps back and count to ten. This is just silly.

Roger

[Sparky]

As a total novice, so far I have found windows movie maker far more intuitive and easy to use than Premier 6 if that means anything at all- no idea at all about the others!

Mark

[Uppsala BildTeknik]

It is like this: they are just tools. Use whatever anyone feels "fits their hand" I guess.

Both sides of this battle has taken it all too serious. It is like asking a carpenter wich type of hammer is the best? Well there are many different, they all feel a bit different in your hand. Everyone picks the one that feels right for them.

That said there are of course shit-hammers that are no good at all (well not for proffessionals anyway). ;)

But I guess both FCP and Premiere Pro 1.5 are good enough "hammers" to be used by anyone serious about their editing. It being filled with cool, cheesy, over-done, perfect, well placed or bad effects. Or just plain cuts, no effects whatsoever.

Regarding this clip that is so eagerly discussed and dismissed I think it was fun, and I think it was supposed to be fun! Without all those effects it would not have been as much fun. ;)

It's just a realistic evaluation of a frivolous project that you admit was made for the amusement of the client.

Well I´d like to think that all projects that anyone is hired to do is done to amuse the client and give them what they want. If the client ain´t happy ain´t nobody happy! ;)

[Evan Kubota]

"Don't comment on the clip if you haven't even watched it."

What comment did I make? That it uses motion graphics? FWIW, I tried to watch it but the buffering never finished. Maybe your server was overloaded with people trying to watch it.

If you want examples of work edited in FCP, take a look at any of the stuff I've posted on this forum. It's retarded to ask for examples of work that was produced in a specific editing program, since barring some major problem, they all produce identical looking cuts. Your clip tells us nothing about the usability of Premiere. Also, no one here cares that you make money from your wedding videos which your clients apparently like. I'm glad you're able to eat from doing that, but that doesn't mean it has any relevance to the topic at hand. My personal preference is FCP, but I do acknowledge that Premiere is a perfectly usable NLE. Your initial comments in this thread were completely absurd, and if you had used FCP, you would know that it is more than competent.

[ccortez]

but if I capture a 3-hour clip, it only takes a couple minutes to conform all the audio...

what's a 3-hour clip?! 8O

and why would i want to capture or conform "all the audio" of one?

christoph: i never buy dvds, but i may buy this.

[etimh]

What's the point of posting something if you become angry at anyone who doesn't like it.

But what good does negatively critiquing someone's work do in this little rarified world? We're all doing pretty much the same thing here--we should be supportive of anything and anyone who has the balls to post work. Nitpicking and adding your critical "commentary" to people's posted films is just petty and in the end will really make people think twice about presenting their projects. People particularly don't need commentary on their commercial work. The market will determine its validity and value one way or another.

some people like red, other like blue... I like Ozu, Bresson, Cassavetes, Godard and the like.
If you don't, fair enough, but please don't let us turn this thread into a flame war again.

You condescending dope. It was a fucking WEDDING video. Ozu. Bresson. Cassavetes. Did you just look those names up? And if anyone started the fire it was you with your half-witted "critique" of a clip that was clearly presented IN CONTEXT of the discussion around editing programs. I'd like to see your wedding video when it gets produced. Shoot for Bergman, that will really get the crowd going. What an ass.

Tim

[tlatosmd]

First things first, I like that wedding video. However, a problem I have is one of definitions.

You see, we have two issues here, one being 'Premiere Pro vs. FCP', the other being 'cutting/editing vs. compositing/layering'.

As for tools, both FCP and Premiere Pro are knifes. The thing is, according to what we've learned at college, you've used a knife as a fork Sooper8fan, you used a cutting/editing tool for compositing/layering. Compositing/layering is anything beyond temporal cuts, temporal transitions, temporal dissolves, and simple titles. Simple (animated) resizing and moving of the image as a whole (as opposed to resizing only bits or parts *of* the image) and messing with playback speed is a bit of a grey area.

Of course you *can* eat your steak with two knifes instead of knife and fork, the thing is you kinda limit yourself from the POV of someone who's learned that distinction between cutting/editing on the one hand and compositing/layering on the other.

Please note this is not a matter of 'Premiere Pro vs. FCP' but rather a matter of 'Premiere Pro vs. all the rest of the Adobe line'. Adobe designed Premiere (Pro) for cutting/editing, they designed the rest for easier and more convenient compositing/layering, you can do compositing/layering so much faster and have more options with specific compositing/layering tools, just as using a compositing/layering tool for cutting/editing purposes can be a bit tedious.

[lastcoyote]

Hey come on guys! That is really silly to have argument like that.

I personally use Premiere Pro not because it is the best, I just simply don't like Mac; and FCP runs on it. The reason I don't like Mac is because I’ve been using it for almost 10 years at work. So kind of hate it whenever it crashed. But I have to admit that Mac is very good & on some area. Mac better than PC!

I have not try FCP. My friend told me it's better than Premiere Pro. I like PP. But I don't mind to give FCP a try. We should have open minded to try something we don't know.

I get used to finish a graphic by using Illustrator + Freehand

Different software has different features (That’s the marketing tricks!) I can see that FCP and PP can both work out basic editing mission fine and fast. Why to start fights because of it? We should have open minded to learn what others like and stop blocking up ourselves in the well.

Super 8 users become a weirdo to most of the people. My friends cannot believe I’m STILL using film as a media to record visual. They either amaze what I do or simply calling me “Vintage Phil”. Able to have a forum for all of us, is a faith, it’s our luck. We’ve got to meet so many from all over the world, is our fortune. Can we just shake hands to each other and stop the war?

I personally like the wedding clip. I laugh my ass off.

[etimh]

Able to have a forum for all of us, is a faith, it’s our luck. We’ve got to meet so many from all over the world, is our fortune.

Agreed.

Yes, a totally dumb argument.

Hey lastcoyote, I can't stop looking at that little dog avatar you have. It makes me smile. Is it yours?

Tim

[lastcoyote]

Yeah, let's met my lovely daughter FeiFei.

[tlatosmd]

Who says I'm going to war? I'm only trying to solve and distinguish two different issues here that got intermingled with each other ('Premiere Pro vs. FCP' and 'Cutting/editing vs. compositing/layering').

[BigBeaner]

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. [...] 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.

I'm glad we agree on that. ;) As for Premiere Pro's not state-of-the-art encoding, I use other stuff for that, such as VDub, what I put out of Premiere Pro is either DV or uncompresssed...

THANKS!
I'm checking VDub out. This post now has validity in my mind, as I really see no big difference between all editing programs. In the end, to quote the immortal words of Emersons favorite Irish Professor Peter Flynn, "they just record the in and out points and in which order they're shown in." The short I shot and edited for The Page One competition looks really good (well, a bit too dark) and you can't tell difference. Hell, I'll bring up the movie Tarnation again, and it was all used on iMovie.

What really counts is the creativity and the skill of the editor. Give a good creative editor just windows movie maker and we'll see what we get. Give same raw footage to a skill-less/average editor FCP and let's see what we can get.