Why I have moved over to Adobe Premiere CS6 from Final Cut 7

30
Sep
2012
Share Button

ETHICS STATEMENT: I have not been paid by Adobe to use Premiere. I have all the main NLEs and I have been BETA testing CS6 for a few months. The improvements as detailed below convinced me to go with the CS6. I have no financial relationship with Adobe. Read more on my ethics statement here.

 

I learnt to edit tape to tape about 16 years ago at Sky News whilst working as a News Cameraman. It made my camerawork SO much better. It was a great way to learn to edit. No “Apple Z” – you had to make hard decisions and stick with them. You also had to be FAST. First time I cut my own work, I said “Who the f*** shot this?!” :) I didn’t hold shots long enough, didn’t get enough coverage…etc, etc. Knowing how to edit makes you a better shooter. Fact.

My first editing experience on an NLE (Non Linear Editor) was Final Cut Pro 1. I used this for personal stuff on my Mac. It was fun and very freeing. I loved it and could afford it! At work I trained up on Avid Newscutter and Media Composer. It felt very natural and easy too. I loved it. Way better than FCP 1 but very expensive.

When I went freelance 6 and a half years ago, I invested in Final Cut Studio as it was the most affordable editing solution for me. I knew it well and Avid was still too expensive for me and (at the time) needed additional hardware. Once I made that investment, I stuck with it and used Final Cut Pro 7 very happily ever since then.

Now, I love Final Cut. I am incredibly fast on it and I can almost edit blindfolded. But for over 3 years it stayed stuck where it was. It didn’t use the hardware of my fancy new Macbook Pros or iMacs or Mac Pros. It barely used any of my system’s memory. It stayed at 32 bit. Speed performance just stayed where it was. It was frustrating. I desperately wanted a Final Cut Studio 4. It didn’t come.

Last year Apple came out with FCPX. A revolutionary editing system that is very progressive and bold. But it didn’t and still doesn’t do a lot of what I want. I bought it, tried it and went back to 7. It is getting better and better though. I have friends who use it and like it. I am sure I will give it another try at some point. The problem is that, when it came out, it simply was not a replacement for FCP 7. Just a different way of editing, I wanted FCP 8 essentially.

So I messed around with the Avid MC5.5 and now 6. MC6 is a huge improvement and is one of the best editing platforms out there. Keeping up to speed on it for me is essential, even though it is not something I use professionally right now. It’s fast, stable and easy to use, and the price has crashed down since I first went freelance. MC6 finally opening up to 3rd party plug ins is a huge step for it.

I tested out Premiere CS5.5 last year and found its interface clunky and unattractive but with nice features. It wasn’t for me. Especially as without an Nvidia card I wasn’t getting the full speed benefits of the Mercury Playback Engine.

When I was offered the chance to BETA test CS6 I jumped at it. This was about 6 months ago and I was still using FCP 7 after trying the other systems as described above and needed to find a replacement I was happy with. It’s not that FCP7 was getting slower for me, I just knew I could work a lot faster than it was letting me.

Since getting CS6, I have been sinking my teeth into it and found it incredibly rewarding and exactly what I needed FCP to become. It’s also better for mac users without Nvidia cards as the Open CL means we can get the Mercury Engine working on non-Nvidia graphics cards. Multi-format timelines with NO TRANSCODING? Brilliant! I can even mix 24p and 25p on the same timeline. One of the projects I am editing currently is a documentary with epic, F3, a f100,5dmk2 footage all on the same timeline, all native. It works. Yeah the 5k stuff struggles on my laptop and I have to drop resolution, but you can do it. The rest of the stuff works beautifully.

In some ways I miss editing on Final Cut, and in other ways I don’t. I am not as fast or confident with CS6 yet but I am getting there… Does this mean I won’t still keep checking out Final Cut X? Of course not. I am always watching what is going on. For now, CS6 is the best editing system for me. Is it for you? Maybe. I cannot say! It depends on your needs! FCP X is revolutionary in its design and will I am sure become a great platform. MC6 is a powerhouse and used all over the industry. CS6 though, and in particular with the production premium suite, gives you integration with After Effects and much more. Premiere CS6 on its own is incredible for me. With the integration, again for me, it cannot be beaten. I am using it, loving it and very importantly I save so much time now. My computers are being used to their max and finally I have software that has caught up to my hardware.

You can read more about my experiences in this interview that was original published on provideo coalition below. 

You can also buy the bundled production premium boxed version from B&H or the download from Amazon below. It doesn’t cost you anything but it helps to keep my site running! You can also get just Premiere via the link below too!

Adobe: When did you first start learning to edit video?

Bloom: I was trained to edit approximately 15 years ago using a tape-to-tape workflow. I initially learned how to use Avid at work, and became very familiar and fast with it. For personal work, when the first version of Final Cut Pro came out, I began using that because it was more affordable than Avid.

Adobe: Why did you start looking at Adobe Premiere Pro for editing?

Bloom: With the more recent Final Cut Pro releases, I felt the hardware wasn’t being utilized to its full potential and the software should have been faster. Time is important and doing things quickly is a huge benefit in my line of work. I started exploring alternatives and purchased Avid Media Composer and Adobe Premiere Pro CS5.

Adobe: What did you think when you first started using Adobe Premiere Pro?

Bloom: In all honesty, I thought it was ugly and not very intuitive. Avid was good but it lacked integration with third-party plug-ins. When Final Cut Pro X was released, it became even more difficult to do what I wanted to do. I was a bit stuck, but then I upgraded to Adobe Premiere Pro CS5.5 and felt it was much better than the previous version. Still, I kept going back and forth between Final Cut Pro 7 and Adobe Premiere Pro CS5.5.

Adobe: What finally convinced you to switch to Adobe Premiere Pro?

Bloom: I got to test a prerelease version of Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 and felt like I was finally making a natural progression from Final Cut Pro 7. It was intuitive and looked clean. After working with it on two or three different kinds of projects, I was comfortable using it. When I tried going back to Final Cut Pro 7, it was like taking a big step backwards.

Adobe: What do you like most about Adobe Premiere Pro CS6?

Bloom: It’s really a long list of little bits and pieces. Overall, Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 feels more fluid. The interface is cleaner and simpler to use, which makes it an easy transition from Final Cut Pro 7. I spend 90% of my year traveling and I often have to edit on my laptop so the ability to go full screen is very important. The enhanced audio controls are simpler and much easier to use. I love the integration of Warp Stabilizer, which I would Dynamic Link to in After Effects when I was using Adobe Premiere Pro CS5.5. It’s great to be able to link to other software, but it’s also nice to be able to do everything in a single program because it conserves resources.

Adobe: What do you find different about working in Adobe Premiere Pro CS6?

Bloom: Initially it can be tricky to move from one NLE to another. The analogy is like driving on the right versus left side of the road – you know you can do it, but you need to get your head around it each time. With Adobe Premiere Pro CS6, I actually felt like I needed to re-learn how to do things, but it was like I was now learning to drive properly. I realized that the way Final Cut Pro did things worked, but I never realized how clunky the implementation was. The way Adobe Premiere Pro CS6 works now makes more sense and seems more thought through. It’s like Adobe took what was great about Final Cut Pro and Premiere Pro and put them together.

Adobe: What would you say is the best thing about working with Adobe Premiere Pro CS6?

Bloom: The ability to play various formats on the timeline is wonderful. I’ve recently been editing native footage from the new Canon 5D Mark III. Even with a totally new format like the Mark III, Premiere recognized it and let me work with it natively, whereas other NLEs would not recognize it and try to convert it. Another documentary I’m editing has a mixture of footage, including RED Epic, Sony F3, Panasonic AF100, and Canon Cinema EOS C300. If I was working in Final Cut Pro I would have to transcode everything to ProRes, which would take a long time. I also just shot a documentary on a boat using a Canon C300 and was able to just offload the cards, throw the footage on the timeline without transcoding, throw on some color grades, and do rough edits in my cabin. The ability to edit these different types of footage natively is huge.

Share Button

Comments

  1. gbalaji says:

    Philip,

    I completely not agree about converting footage editable format like Apple ProRes / Avid DnXHD for offline edit. It doesn’t be easy to work files natively and not necessary all the time. it may be ok at sometime whenever there is necessary to edit natively you need to polish it better with offline workflow better is my point.

    Other than that accessing natively in Premiere CS6 is great for checking and not for editing.

    Thanks for your update.

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      not quite sure what you mean!

  2. Alex Bee says:

    Whole-heartedly agree with you, Philip (although I thought that the major step up was CS4 to CS5. I’m on PC with Nvidia Quadro 4000, though…) However, naturally, CS6 is absolutely wonderful! Would recommend it to anyone over MC or FCP… :D

    1. Atomike says:

      FCP – agree. FCP is completely dead at this point.
      MC…. I think Premiere needs a few more years until it’s competitive with MC 6.
      If time is the issue for people, the AVID AMA technology is actually what you want. You can import & transcode faster than you can import alone in most other NLEs.
      Also, I just can’t get used to the way Premiere handles transitions – I find them to be about as counter-intuitive as possible. I really wanted to switch to Premiere, but adding a simple dissolve to video and audio at the same time takes about 4 times longer than any other NLE.
      It decides how to apply the transition (head, center, tail) rather than giving you the option. That made me almost laugh out loud.
      This aspect makes it very, very slow as an NLE. Much slower than all the others.
      Overall, Premiere gets some of the big things right (title tool for one), but is probably the very worst NLE for very simple things. In a few years, it may be worth another look. I hope so anyway.

      1. Chris Vink says:

        I’m not quite sure I understand correctly.. But, in Premiere, you drag transitions from the effects panel to the transition. Where you drop the transition decides where it will be placed (head, center, tail). So that’s the option I think you’re looking for..

        Two things I don’t like about Premiere transitions though. First thing is the dragging from the effects panel. And secondly it automatically makes the transition one second long, and only after the drag you can modify that length. These two things cost too much of my time.

        If I’m wrong and there’s a shortcut for applying a transition then nevermind the above, but do tell!

        1. Gus Evangelista says:

          To apply the default transition: Rt-click and select ‘add trans’ or with the keyboard: Alt + D or Ctrl +D or change it in the ‘Keyboard Mapping’

          To choose the head/center/tail, you can drag the transition to the cut and it will snap to the head/center/tail.

          To change the default 30 frame duration, look in the general preference settings.

          I’m not sure what you mean by ‘simple things’, can you explain?

      2. Alex Bee says:

        The transitions I absolutely agree with, but in any NLE it’s far easier to use keyframes, dude! Just place once piece of footage above the other and then keyframe the opacity down. It’s the way I’ve done it for years – doesn’t matter which editor I’m using!

  3. guillaumewd40 says:

    Agreed!

  4. Ivan says:

    I have been a great fan of Sony Vegas (Studio). It has been around for many years and is very stable, but gets much less attention from reviewers than the big players. Do you know it, Philip?

    1. Per Lichtman says:

      I am also curious about any Vegas experience, especially since it shares several of the same strengths (great performance working with native files, good OpenCL acceleration, etc.) and I would love to hear more about the differences vs. CS6 (since I have only used it vs CS 5.5 and earlier). I would be curious to hear if there are compelling reasons to switch.

      1. beanpro says:

        Vegas Pro is great. It really does get much less attention then it deserves. I’ve used it since its 3.0 days. So I can’t give much insight to how to how it would be to switch from something else to Vegas. The only reason I ever feel the need to switch to a different NLE is because not enough people use Vegas. I’ve tried from time to time to just adapt entirely to Premiere or Final Cut but every time I start I just keep feeling like I’m working too hard than I should to get something simple done. The biggest thing for me is Vegas’ timeline workflow. Interacting with clips on a timeline is a much more kinetic and visual experience then anything Ive seen on any other platform.
        I remember after years of using Vegas I had a conversation with someone who explained transcoding to me and I just didn’t understand it. “You mean you render all your footage as something else BEFORE you edit it? Good heavens that sounds tedious!” I think I’ve come across one situation where Ive had to transcode a video file.
        I wouldn’t say Vegas is the one size fits all. As an editor its fantastic, and very very streamlined. The audio editing/mixing is probably the best you could find. (Vegas was born out of music mixing software.) But you will still want to use After Effects for all the heavier things. Which is also really straightforward via exporting/importing EDLs.

    2. Alex Bee says:

      Song Vegas has always had some sort of a reason for me not to use it. I guess it’s the lack of pro features. I’d probably use it a lot more if they spent a bit more time working on the interface – not for editing long projects, but it’s be really useful for laying down a really quick bare-bones edit of something. Kind of like an upgraded imovie for PC users, maybe?

      1. Angels says:

        @ Alex Bee. Absolutely not, I’ve edited an entire 6 day shoot (5 hours a day) on Sony Vegas with all clips on the timeline at once, so you can do the math on total number of hours there. What lack of pro features in particular would you be referring to?

        I’ve been using Sony Vegas for 8 years now and haven’t found any reason to switch yet. It’s a very professional very and the most intuitive editing software I’ve encountered yet. I used to work with Premier before Vegas and just got sick of the clunky interface. Vegas has so many third party plug-ins now and a lot of amazing pro effects can be given to videos. I work on advertisements, documentaries, event shoots and sometimes just plain old conversions all in Vegas and I’ve only seen it get better and better.

        Most people who aren’t acquainted with this hugely under-rated software don’t realize the convenience they’re missing. I’ve had FCP users turn their noses up at me but I say to them to try Vegas ONCE, the experience will speak for itself.

        1. Philip Bloom says:

          Biggest problem is it is PC only for me!

          1. Brad says:

            I’m a Mac/FCP guy, but want to speak up about something Vegas was doing “right” a very long time ago.

            When I was first bitten by the video bug around 1999/2000, I was already a fairly knowledgeable audio mixing engineer (been playing music full time since 1997, expanding into video slowly over the years). I was an early adopter in the home recording studio craze, and became proficient in Cubase, Cakewalk (Sonor) and Vegas 1, which was then called Vegas Audio (video was added 2.0).

            I’ll humbly admit that I started with NO formal film and video training, but did have a good understanding of audio multi-track sequencing engines & workflow from a software perspective, and plenty of working knowledge in analog audio.

            Here’s what folks should know about Vegas. At version 3.0, the interface was “easy on the eyes” and user intuitive. It was the only video editing software around that seemed to train the user by just staring at it. So, in a VERY short amount of time, I was flying, having no prior training. No, it wasn’t as strong as FCP then, and I can’t speak for versions 6 thru 10. But, it WAS easier, faster and light-years more intuitive than FCP on the 90% of pro editing functions that it did offer.

            From day one, my film/video AND multi-track audio peers were outspoken about the need to switch to FCP and ProTools on the Mac. Succumbing to the pressures of ubiquitous support for FCP & ProTools, I switched platforms and have been exclusively Mac/FCP for the past 6-7 years. I haven’t touched Vegas since 5.0 in 2006.

            I still use and love Final Cut Studio, and am trying to get comfortable with CS5.5, but it sure seems fiddly. (clearly I need to check out CS6 given the info above). But I do truly miss how fast and easy Vegas was “back in the day”.

            All of these things, hardware and software alike, are simply tools. Nothing beats mileage, diving in, and getting some working experience under your belt.

            That being said, I like tools that work, are easy to learn, and don’t force to get out of the flow of creativity to figure out where the hell the designer hid some crucial function. Vegas rocked in this regard.

            I’m sticking with Mac. But, I’m contemplating going dual boot, simply so that I can see where Vegas has come over the years. If they’ve continued at the rate they started, it is a platform worth considering.

  5. Edan Cohen says:

    Philip, welcome to the Premiere party! I think I speak for the rest of the users when I say, we’re glad you’re here! I’m looking forward to seeing the work you edit with CS6.

  6. Don McVey says:

    I’m currently trying to decide between FCP X and CS6. One thing that isn’t often mentioned when comparing the 2 is price. FCP X is massively cheaper.

    With the recent updates with FCPX, can’t it pretty much do everything now? The big deal about being able to edit various formats in the CS6 timeline. You can do this in FCP X can’t you? You just tick the box so it doesn’t optimize media. And if it is optimizing media, it does it on the fly.

    I’m just wanting to know exactly what CS6 has to offer over FCP X now that X has had its updates.

    I get the feeling that a few years down the line, editing programs are going to look more like FCPX and less like CS6.

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      quite possibly.

      CS6 works with multi format and frame rate timelines without any transcoding, FCPx cannot do that, real time playback with effects on and fantastic integration with AE.

      1. Don McVey says:

        Hmm, I used FCPX on a job the other day with multi formats (not frame rates) and it worked really well without converting to Prores. If you optimize media, it converts it to Prores in the background, but I don’t think you ever have to convert to Prores before you can start editing in the timeline. Never put a grade and graphics on the footage though so not sure how it would have coped with that. Also, the syncing and multicam in FCPX is very nice.

        I’m soooo confused! I hear that pro editing facilities are moving more towards FCPX. That CS6 is still only a product for home editors. I think, like many of us, I’m going to be forced to learn both. Really annoying as I’m lazy with learning software.

      2. Just a correction: FCP X does work with multiple formats (and frame rates — even in multicam!) without transcoding them, and can handle real-time playback of effects with many formats, without rendering. Certainly, XDCAM/DSLR/HDV/DV footage works natively — and RED support is coming soon. The integration with Motion is very good and the ability to create your own titles, transitions and effects in Motion for instant use in FCP X is superb.

        Here’s an article I wrote for macProVideo.com on optimising media (or not):

        http://www.macprovideo.com/hub/final-cut/fcp-x-the-truth-behind-performance-with-optimized-media

        Short answer: you probably don’t need to transcode.

    2. One way to compare the economies of CS vs FC:
      CS6 not only gives you a professional editor, but also industry standard effects editor (AE) and graphics editors (PS, AI) in a neatly integrated package. Adobe will also honor my previous patronage with a substantial upgrade discount.

      FCX is just a video editor with an optional sideshow motion graphics app, and Apple don’t care a whiff how much I’ve already spent upon their products.

      CS6 may be initially more expensive, but IMO a better overall value (and the way I’m headed).

      1. Alex Bee says:

        I entirely agree! FC is Okaaay, but all you get is Final Cut. It doesn’t make for a good investment.

        1. Motion is another US$50, an absolute bargain even if you only use the Keyer (same as in FCP X). Compressor is another $50 if you want that, but not everyone needs it.

    3. westonwoodbury says:

      It’s also worth mentioning that it’s not that big of price difference, even cheaper in some situations.

      FCP+Motion+Compress = $400; CS6 1 year subscription from an CS3 or higher upgrade, for all of their programs, including programs ike PS = $360. Or, the Production Premium box from 5.5 upgrade or academic is $375.

      If you don’t qualify academic or have an old version you can upgrade from, subscription is $600 a year which still isn’t a massive difference. By time you buy a couple crumplepop add-ons for FCPX you’re right there.

      Similarly, note that Avid offers MC for $295 and Autodesk Smoke is actually free to students. You probably aren’t a student but my point is, for them, FCPX is actually the most expensive option after you look into it.

      Also, pro editing facilities are not at all moving toward X. The opposite is true though, many of them are moving toward Adobe or Avid as these apps suite their needs better at this point in time; while I see FCPX picked up primarily by home editors and new editors. There are exceptions but I think that’s generally what’s going on.

      Always good to know both, and even beyond those 2 if you can! Open up as many possibilities as you can for future work. :)

      1. wooter says:

        You are comparing student discounts and yearly subscriptions after buying a previous very expensive version to a full paid, bought and lifetime ownership. My accountant would frown on that logic.

        1. Dave Reid says:

          An important thing to keep in mind with subscription is it usually better tax wise to be including that subscription as a business expense than captializing the cost of outright product. Not to mention the annual cost of upgrades is almost as much as the subscription cost.

  7. Al_Saenz says:

    Thanks for this article Philip! Always appreciate your honest opinions. I have been using Final Cut since 2007 but with all the changes over the past year, I have been giving heavy consideration as to where I should go to next.
    One question though. My editing computer is an iMac from 2007. It would probably be best to upgrade the computer as well, yes? Thank you.

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      I would say so yes!

    2. BuddyC1481 says:

      I don’t necessarily think so myself, I have read many users say they were getting fantastic performance from CS6 on 4 year old computers. Granted these 4 year old machines might have been very expensive powerhouses in their day, however I have seen many people mention that they are cutting on 3 year old Macs with CS6 without any major issues.

    3. Remmik says:

      Obviously it depends on your content and time frame. I have a Mac Pro 1,1 2008 model (tail end of the original 2006 models) quad core 3.0 Ghz with 6GB RAM and it is taking 33 hours to Export my latest project to QuickTime. An hour and 20min of JVC 720p HDV, GoPro h.264 and Sanyo H.264 on a multi-cam sequence. As well as noticable lag when editing in multicam. Actually, even just going from one video to another in a non-muticam but multi-track sequence, while in play mode causes major disturbance in the videos. I have the playback resolutions turned all the way down.
      This is my first time editing on Premeire Pro CS6 as I am trying to get away from FCP because of the before mentioned lack of hardware usage by FCP. I was expecting better performance with Premiere but these systems are getting old quick, especially with the advent of HD content everywhere. A 2009 quad core is 2 times faster than my machine (from blogs that I have seen) and that is not including GPU support.
      Luckily my workflow right now, allows me to experiment (like I am now) or leave the machine running overnight to get to the next point. So a new machine is not in the picture for now. I’m always behind on hardware. I purchased this machine last year after shelving my PowerPC G5. I really should have spent $500 more for a 2009 model that would have done much better but it was an impulse buy…and a good deal.

  8. Daniel says:

    It’s a shame what happened to Final Cut Pro, perhaps Apple will fix it one day.

    So how does Premiere CS6 compare to earlier versions?

    P.S
    Have you ever used Sony Vegas? If so, what are you thoughts on that NLE?

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      It’s PC only and I don’t use them am afraid Daniel!

      1. Per Lichtman says:

        Ah, there we go. Ignore my other comment. :)

        1. Dave Reid says:

          It is coming to Mac.

  9. Bart says:

    Thanks for your statement. You ‘re so right about Final Cut; I love my FCP 3 but my iMac wants to use more than 2/3 GB memory. I tried FCP X but its for me like a better iMovie version. And now I see a lot of good stuff from Premiere CS6, especially the connection to After Effects. But it’s still a hard decision to sell my FCP 3. What about my old FCP 3 projects or my ProRes files, can I use them probably in Premiere?

    Greetings from Bremerhaven
    Bart

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      yes you can Bart!

    2. elijAH starr says:

      IMovie was actually upgraded for iLife 2011 to test what the Final cut X would eventually perfect. It does need to be noted that software quality and difficulty are to very different things.

  10. Gene Sung says:

    I do a lot of animation for work, so I use After Effects and Adobe products a lot, so the Premier interface is much more intuitive for me than FCP (even though I’ve used FCP since the first version). Plus, it integrates so well with After Effects for color correction and footage fixes.

    The main reason I switched is NO transcoding. That really sucked on FCP 7 and would take up so much space. Every clip for FCP basically had 3 iterations 1) The original 2) Pro-Res convert 3) 24fps frame rate convert – for B-Roll I like to shot 30fps and then convert to 24fps

    With Premier, just take the original clip for editing then export the project to After Effects for grading. 1 iteration. tons of time and hard drive space saved.

    I have heard the latest Final Cut X revision is pretty good though. But I’m too lazy to switch back again.

  11. Atomike says:

    I have tried Premiere Pro, and it’s okay. But I would desperately miss the “Fluid Morph” effect in Avid Media Composer. Premiere doesn’t have anything even close to this ability – where you can morph seamlessly between shots (nothing like a dissolve). Since I sometimes need to do “talking head” shots, and edit out words or sentences, I don’t think Premiere would ever really be a viable option. It may have a nice interface, but I think it really lacks power under the hood (for what I do anyway). I find Premiere to be an exciting new option, but I think I would be giving up a lot. But I appreciate your review!

    1. nathan says:

      You’re in luck ATOMIKE, Adobe is working on a feature like that. check it out here….. http://tv.adobe.com/watch/prototype/creative-technologies-lab-seamless-edits/

    2. BuddyC1481 says:

      Sir your answer is here.

      http://www.borisfx.com/red/

  12. Sen says:

    Hi Philip, I really enjoyed reading this! I find myself in the exact same situation. Definitely going to have a look at Premiere Pro CS6. Cheers!

  13. Bill Vincent says:

    Hi Philip,

    I am inclined to agree overall with everything you’ve said – however, I am going through a bit of a nasty time right now with Adobe technical support. I’m hoping it gets resolved with a comped upgrade to CS6. Let’s hope they do, because of course, I downloaded the CS6 Premiere demo and CS6 magically fixes the problem I’ve been having ever since I purchased it in June. Grrr.

  14. PBS says:

    I have to admit (being PC based) I’ve used Adobe Premiere (at the time very slow), Avid (bloody awful), Sony Vegas (yuk), After Effects, Combustion, Digital Fusion (now Fusion) and while not all are editing packages I’ve good working experience in them all but I use something totally different for editing and have been using it for years.

    Newtek’s Video Toaster
    I went many years ago to a preview of VT 2 at CVP as I can remember bit of an open day and as I sat there and watched the guy do his stuff (I was editing on Premiere at the time) I sat open mouthed as he made cuts moved footage around while the time line was playing! And dragged the clips into the end of the time line just before the marker got there and it carried on playing………………….it was totally ground breaking editing without a rendering! After using Premiere make a cut …………render……adjust a clip length …………………..render….adjust again ………make a brew!

    I saved and saved bought a board / software from the US upgraded via Newtek Europe and never looked back. Since then Newtek have brought out the editor section of the VT as a stand alone product called SpeedEdit and if you have not tried it yet it’s worth a play. When I watched video fo the latest FCP release I grined from ear to ear for things they were showing I’d been doing for 5 years in my old trusty VT

    Newtek have stopped making the VT product line now to get anything like it you have to drop serious cash on a Tricaster setup but while I can not stream live HD footage (unlike the Tricasters) I can still edit in any format I wish at pretty much any resolution.

    It’s always worth looking beyond the usual suspects guys when looking at tools to get jobs done IMO And no I’m not Sponsored or have any dealings with Newtek other than the licenced software/hardware packages I’ve BOUGHT from them. Oh it was Newtek who invented desk top editing after all.

    The next video tool I’m looking at at present is Lightroom I think it’s ability to save a “look” as a custom present then importing a video clip and apply that look is excellent!

  15. Jean Simenon says:

    Philip. Thank you for the review.

    I myself tried FCPX, PP CS5.5. After editing several projects on PP CS5.5, I went back to FCP7. I loved a lot of things about PP CS5.5, but i didn’t like the Timeline, where I spent 90% of my time.

    My biggest issue was the way they handle actions. For example to delete a section b/w In/Out points, you’d use one keyboard shortcut, to delete a clip, you’d use another shortcut, to ripple-delete again another one. FCP7 managed to be more intuitive, and you’d always use the same 2 keys to delete whatever you have that is selected.

    So I’m wondering what has been your experience with the timeline, and keyboard shortcuts.

    Thank you,
    Jean.

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      i use most of the FCP shortcuts with CS6!

  16. Doug Hancock says:

    I’m cutting with Media composer 6, FCP 7 and really want to see an improvement in Premiere 6. I had such terrible monitoring issues with PP 5.5 that I gave up on it. I would love I/O issues resolved with the Aja I/o express i use for clients.
    Today every editor needs a good workflow between NLE and LE. Boris transfer sucks between MC 6 and AE, works a treat between FCP 7 and AE. I just want one simple workflow that works for me and my clients. ..fingers crossed.

    1. Doug Hancock says:

      Ps the AE upgrade was enough for me to upgrade to 6. Lots of treats….

  17. Aaron says:

    After briefly going insane (for real!–almost) trying to grapple with the disaster that was CS4, I ran out and bought a Mac with the intent of switching to FCP. Still, I knew I still wanted Encore, Photoshop, and a few other Adobe bits, so I bought the Mac version of Production Pemium CS5, which of course included Premiere. While I waited for FCP X to be released, I reluctantly began playing with Premiere CS5.5, and… damn! Much as I almost wanted to hate it and swear off Adobe forever, it was just a million times better than CS4. Having now worked with it for over a year, I’m almost ready to forgive Adobe. I’m glad to hear than CS6 is good. If Adobe can pull off two rock-solid releases in a row, their honor will be mostly restored. Will I upgrade? Probably.

  18. Nick Provost says:

    I am a little worried where Apple may be headed. It seems like I continually hear more examples indicating that they may be veering further and further away from the professional market. I guess it makes sense though. I mean how much money do they really make from their professional segment compared to its consumer products? I guess I bring this up since I recently heard that they may be discontinuing their Mac Pro products along with the seemingly “consumerizing” of the final cut product. iMacs are just fine for what I and most people do but what about the really big productions that use them? Are they going to abandon them? I was just sad to hear this if it may be true. I hope not. Have any of you guys heard such a thing?

    Cheers

    1. elijAH starr says:

      The Mac book Pro has just replaced several iterations of MacBook I.e. white and so on. Retina portable was recently released. Only a prosumer or professional would even be interested in Thunderbolt. Portability is the future of professional editing for many reasons.

  19. Robert says:

    they are all tools for different jobs and can do the same thing. for example I am a FCP user but I am planing on doing a reality show and the biggest issue is that with FCP you can’t have mutable editors work on the same footage. avid can do that. different jobs call for different tools.

  20. Had a chance to look at CS6 today, really nice interface, though one a my bugs well two have not been sorted.

    This could be me or has anyone else ever noticed, the end grade in PPr is never quite the same as the finalised exported file. For example an edit in PPr with footage say in ProRes 422 then graded and exported to a master ProRes 422 QT movie file through Media Encoder is always a half stop or stop lighter than the edit as viewed in the viewer window in PPr.

    If the same is exercise is done within FCPX the resulting master is the same as the edited version on the timeline within FCPX.

    Additionally if you blow up the same video clip to 200 % or 400 % in PPr and in FCPX, you will see how the pixels are very square and blocky in PPR, but a very smooth grain in FCPX, under the bonnet FCPX is far more sophisticated than PPr.

    To me this is one of the major problems with PPr as a workflow.

    FCPX is a great tool in certain aspects but a pig in others, but at the end of the day the final graded master produced
    by FCPX is a far cleaner image than produced by PPr.

    Has anyone else noticed this.

    1. James Martin says:

      Is this not QT’s gamma playback issue? Have you looked at the exported movie in another non-QT player like VLC, mpeg-streamclip. You may find that it’s just QTplayer that is playing it back with wonky gamma.

    2. Gus Evangelista says:

      I remember the Adobe engineers caught wind of this gamma/luma/shifting a while back. They ran tests and reported that it was indeed QT being the culprit. I’ll try and find that article

  21. Pardon my poor grammar- and spelling misteaks ;)

    I just wanted to chip in my two cents.

    I also made the switch to Premiere Pro from FCP 7. Let’s just say I wasn’t too fond with how Apple handled FCP X like most people.

    There was a learning curve (and there still is) but the people at Adobe added a FCP 7 preset for the keyboard controls which was nice of them. However, I have a love/hate relationship with Premiere Pro. Here’s why.

    First, I’ll start out with some great things that I like about it.

    -I like how it can natively handle a lot of my footage. No more transcoding and I can just drag and drop a clip into a new sequence and it will auto-recognize it! Cool!

    -I love how fast Premiere Pro is. Doing any sort of graphics or color in FCP 7 was always cumbersome so I normally just exported the sequence without graphics and then worked on it in After Effects. In Premiere, I don’t have to worry about sluggish render times if I decide I want to spice things up.

    -Dynamic Link between Premiere and AE is a great feature although it still needs some tweaking (understandable since it’s relatively new).

    -I much prefer Premiere’s interface over FCP 7′s. I can make it darker so it’s easier on the eyes. Plus I like the traditional timeline instead of FCP Xs. It was a smoother transition from FCP 7 to Premiere because I had prior experience with AE.

    Unfortunately my experience has been riddled with user interface aggravations and bugs (and this is an abridged version). Here’s just a small list of items that I have run into (and have reported to Adobe but have heard nothing back. I always love the Adobe twitter account that tells me to go to their poorly organized forums /sarcasm)

    Let me be CLEAR in stating that I have sent emails and consulted the forums for many of these issues but have found only a few threads to be of help. Not finding an answer for these problems haven’t been because I haven’t tried. That being said, I have spent more time researching fixes for Premiere Pro than any other piece of software that I have ever owned (except for the first time I tried to install Doom 95 on my very first computer!). I understand that every piece of software has bugs and there are bugs unique to your system and setup. I am currently running a new Macbook Pro 2.3 Ghz Intel Core i7 with 8GB of RAM hooked to an Apple Thunderbolt Display. My OS is Lion.

    I will be honest. I will come across as Ranty McJerkface.

    -I have problems with the workspace. It may because I am running dual screens but the windows that I save in my workspace presets like to do strange things when I like to open that preset. Often, they will become fullscreen underneath all of the other windows so that I cannot access some of the buttons. Sneaky little devils!

    -Premiere Pro likes to crash on me. A lot. And usually, it won’t be because of something hardware intensive. I will do something like access the audio in the preferences and then, MAN DOWN! I would say, -more accurately- it has mood swings. Sometimes it will crash multiple times per day for three or four days straight. Sometimes it will be good for a week. Maybe I need to play it a little Barry White and light some candles… you know… show it that I care. Thank goodness it autosaves when crashing or else I would have switched to something else a long time ago!

    -Do not use the scrollwheel in any of the windows that you access from the menus (such as export settings). It will change the values if your mouse is over them. It’s sort of inconsistent with the general interface and quite frustrating until I got used to it.

    -Premiere Pro likes to “artistically interpret” my footage or sound files on occasion. I have times where I will throw in a .wav file and then sound like I’m apart of the witness protection program! Gotta love how deep and manly my talent sounds. Also, it will make frames skip (and this is after making sure all of the sequence settings are consistent). I then found out after letting the computer sit for about fifteen minutes the audio would return to normal… Premiere Pro is like if Bob Ross and HAL 9000 had a love child.

    -Dynamic link (in CS 5.5 at least) is half-baked. I hope it got better in CS6. It’s very difficult if you want to put in any sort of transitions to your sequence in Premiere after it has been replaced with an AE comp. Despite this, dynamic link is very needed and hopefully with some tweaking, Adobe can start giving Autodesk Smoke a run for their money.

    -This is picky but I will go out and say it because it’s the internet dangit! The dropdown folders are tiny little devil children. If you click on one and it’s not the folder you wanted, you can’t just click on it again to make all of the content go back into its little folder of bliss. You have to move the mouse off of the icon, move it back and then click again. This sounds petty, but it is annoying and wears on you after a while… it’s like driving your car with the door slightly ajar. Adobe, you included the incredibly powerful feature of voice recognition and translation for meta-logging but I can’t close this blasted little folder without 30 clicks!

    -Recently, my spacebar (to press play) has decided to take intermittent vacations while editing. It will work if I play media in Quicktime but not in Premiere Pro. C’mon spacebar, you’re on the clock! No breaks!

    -I wish the clip labeling colors did not have the same muted tone. In After Effects you can pick vibrant colors to differentiate them easier. I like that!

    -Adding three way color corrector will change the color balance of your image just by dragging and dropping it onto your clip… odd…

    -Why can’t I copy and paste audio into a new sequence without it deciding to add some more tone or hiss? Premiere Pro, you cruel mistress!

    To sum up everything, my huge problem with Premiere isn’t the transitional learning curve, it’s just that I can’t depend on it. In this line of work, dependability is important to me. The Adobe Premiere Pro that I work on today will be different tomorrow and different the next day. One day I will be whispering sweet editing nothings into Premiere’s ear while we dance in the meadows but the next day she’ll turn on me with no explanation. How can I reconcile this relationship? Plus, she has all of my CDs in her car.

    I need editing software that is reliable. While Premiere Pro may have a ton of great features have a generally easy-to-use interface, I would gladly go back to FCP 7 if I still had it. Maybe it’s worth saving up for Autodesk Smoke especially since the Mac price just dropped.

    I hope the rest of you have not had this experience with Premiere Pro. I am trying really hard to make it my software of choice but it keeps giving me reasons to look elsewhere.

    An extra note: I also wish Adobe would re-analyze their forums and help pages. Whenever I search for something it gives me a few pages of text to sort through until I come to the unfortunate conclusion that it didn’t answer my question. For example if I type this request into Google, “How can I get the audio to come through both speakers instead of just one in Premiere Pro”- The Adobe search results will give me a HUGE block of text about audio export mapping. It’s like telling someone that you have a cut on your knee and you want a band-aid – then they proceed to call for an ambulance… I have since stopped opening search results for the Adobe pages. Creative COW search results are INFINITELY more helpful and precise. Adobe needs some major work on their SEO.

    1. Mookie says:

      To Kaj points I would express my greatest concern. I have been using Adobe Premiere since ’98, along with Avid and FCP. I love the its flexibility with varying file formats, and the fact that its cross platform. That said, I have found that historically there is are generally a large number of unresolved bugs (and crashes) within the features of Premiere. There simply isn’t the quality assurance that you can find in FCP. It’s as though Premiere is trying to be so diverse in its application that it cannot control what it offers. Also to Kaj point, often the support by Adobe is lacking in regards to the feedback they are are able to provide for bugs. It’s disappointing that the larger Apple business model cannot see value in continuing to grow and support it’s professional line of NLE applications, (still on DVD Studio Pro 4, really???), as FCP is falling behind insofar as it’s ability to leverage CPU resources for its efficiencies. That said, choose your weapon… and poison.

      Also, to Andrew Salter’s comment: “FCPX is a great tool in certain aspects but a pig in others, but at the end of the day the final graded master produced by FCPX is a far cleaner image than produced by PPr.” .. Is there any consensus on this point? What are other folk’s thoughts in this regard?

    2. Alex Bee says:

      On my Windows machine I’ve had Premiere crash… never… in 5 years :D

  22. morsecodebox says:

    I am sure I would agree with you Phillip BUT…….. Cost in the UK. The difference in cost between US and UK is sickening and makes me mad at adobe every time I revisit it. I could live with the massive difference in cost between FCP X (+ Motion and plugins) and CS6 Production premium as I would be getting so much…. but the difference for the single program is mental for a small business like mine. I am now happy with FCP X and the way it is developing, I love the management of files now I understand how to use it…. it’s much more (time) productive than anything else.

    All that said I would love the eco system that is CS6 for all my needs as I deal with so much multimedia around video.

    Thanks for your time on this article its really useful for us all.

    Andy

    PS It would be great to see some of your really early stuff you did in the early years…just for a laugh at how far you have come…

  23. Terry Wilson says:

    I find that the more complex the project the less impact the transcode ingest process has it. In fact my preference is to be forced to do this for two main reasons: a) I spend more time looking at footage and therefore have a better understanding of it so that; b) down the line I’m intuitively much quicker at sorting the wheat from the chaff. Both these I feel have a much bigger impact on my productivity, so taking a hit at the transcode stage doesn’t feel like a big deal.

    For raw editing speed I find FCPX much faster and organic than the traditional timeline method, but it’s media management is stuck in kindergarten. It’s like post-it notes for video timelines, and less useful. Although in fairness all NLE’s I’ve used seem to have lousy media management, hence the existence of proper database systems to catalogue and organise your footage for more complex projects.

    On the simple side I love FCPX’s all round capabilities. Sitting in hotel a room in Bangladesh I edited, graded and sound mixed some DSLR shot commercial spots all in FCPX to run on BBC World News Channel. They all went through checks without a murmur.

    Although a lot still needs to be improved in ‘X I feel ironically it has the most open architecture of all the editors for future 3rd party modification to address and enhance current issues. Well, hoping anyway….

  24. Thanks for the review Philip.

    I have always used Premiere from day one and I’m glad I did. I read an article where someone made an enlighning statements. If Apple decides to stop their support for Final Cut, they won’t lose a beat. They sell too many iPhones, iPads and iPods. If Adobe got rid of their editing suite, they would lose a chunk of their product. So all in all Adobe has a good incentive to stay current and stay ahead of the curve.

    I’m really looking forward to CS6. Really want to give the ADR feature in Audition a ride.

  25. pazeditions says:

    Hi Philip,
    Hope you are well!

    You know what? I feel happy now…
    I started using Premiere Pro 1.5 back in 2005 to edit HDV footage. At that time I only had a PC so I couldn’t get the “great” FCP therefore my only choice was to use Premiere and as an After Effects user PP was my first option to buy.

    I’ve seen Adobe growing exponentially as a company since then, probably because of the photo retouching standard software known as Photoshop or the use of Macromedia Flash that Adobe acquired pretty quick at that time but anyways I’ve always known somehow that Adobe would be a future software leading company and I’ve always hoped everyone to stop using FCP and jump onto Adobe’s ship (I know stupid and selfish as I was the one using Premiere at that time).

    A year ago I finally got the money to buy my first iMac “27 and bought FCP, I have used it and still use it because most of the production companies still uses FCP in their Post Production department but again, a couple of months ago I started to cut a feature film shot entirely with 5Ds and I decided to give a try to Premiere Pro CS5.5 and I loved it back again.

    I think it is always a matter of your first love isn’t it? same thing happened to me using Cuabase and Pro Tools!

    I would like to see in the near future more Post Production companies upgrading their system to the amazing integration of Adobe Creative Suite CS6 jumping from Premiere to After Effects back to photoshop for some compositing back to Premiere and directly to Encore to output a DVD or Blu-ray disc!

    But I know that you will agree with me that the ultimate most important thing is the story telling so it doesn’t matter which new fancy software you are using as long as it gives you the right tools to achieve what you are after!
    Adobe Premiere Pro gives me what I need in my daily work but some other people will choose Avid or FCP. The good thing is that these softwares are out there competing with each other and it’s up to us to decide which is better for our work!

    Philip thanks a lot for your amazing blog and inspiring work!
    Keep at it!

    1. Brad12d3 says:

      Up until a couple of years ago all my Editing work was on personal projects for the most part. I was working as a grip/electric/DP mostly. When I moved to Dallas and couldn’t find as much film work I decided to try and take on editing jobs as well as other more industrial type work.
      I had always used the Adobe Creative suite for all my post production needs. However, it seemed like everyone else in the world was an FCP user. I would see craigslist ad after ad asking specifically for FCP. What was strange about it is that it seemed like a lot of the hardcore FCP users thought that Premier was the plague or something. It’s like PPro wasn’t getting any respect from anynody.
      I ended up working for a production company for a year and a half as a shooter and editor. I cut on FCP 7 extensively for during that time since that is what they used. When the whole FCPX debacle happened, I asked if they had considered moving over to PPro since it would fit our needs well. Especially since we do a lot of after effects work. All the editors scoffed like I had made a bad joke.
      So for a long time I wished people would take a serious look at PPro and realize that it is a fantastic program and it’s integration with after effects is an enormous bonus. FCP seemed to be more agravating for me than PPRo. There were a lot of small things that I felt was more intuitive in PPro and as a result I always felt like my editing flowed better using it.
      Luckily I am about to start working with another production company that edits on PPro and will be moving to CS6 soon. :-)

      1. Gus Evangelista says:

        Yeah, I used to ask people: So, you’re an editor or a ‘Final Cut’ editor? It’s just a tool, but I’ve always preferred the PPro methodology but loved a lot FCP characterisics. Now in CS6, I feel I’ve gotten just that!

  26. AaronChicago says:

    Not only does Premiere play native files, its conforms to 4:4:4 32 bit float automatically.

  27. Brad12d3 says:

    Great review Philip. Although I use both FCP 7 and Premier Pro CS5 regularly I have always been partial to PPRO. I grew up using Adobe products and it just felt more intuitive to me. However there were things that I liked better about FCP 7, that I thought were a little rough in PPro CS5. However, I really feel like they nailed it with CS6. I absolutely love it!

    Also, one of the smartest things Adobe did was offer the subscription based service that would allow you to get access to the whole Master Collection for $49/month with a year contract or $79 on a month by month basis. This is huge for those who can’t afford to drop 2K on software. I really think this could help cut down on the piracy issue that has plagued Adobe for years. Plus another fellow I was talking to mentioned how his company likes to bring on interns for a couple of months at a time and to have to buy extra seats for them to edit on isn’t very efficient. However, they can now pay $160 for an Intern to have a workstation for a couple of months and then cancel when they don’t need it anymore.

    Say,.. when do you think they will integrate their Voodoo Blurry photo fix into Photoshop they were showing off last fall?

  28. ajaen says:

    Hi Philip,

    Do you happen tp knpw whether Premiere CS6 can do reverse telecine on Prores footage from an Atomos Ninja? I’m currently shooting with an AF100, recording to Prores on the ninja, rough editing in Premiere 5.5 then using Ae to get back to real 24FPS. If it can, it would be a serious workflow boost for simpler jobs, so I’d be more inclined to upgrade sooner rather than later. Thanks in advance.

    Artemis

    PS: Thank you so much for your contributions to the indie community. Your writing is always a breath of fresh air — so much that is online seems dominated by camera wars and people getting bizarrely hot under the collar, so it is great to see your perspective. And your recent work, paricularly the boxer doco, really raises the bar. Nice work!

  29. I own and use BOTH Avid MC and PP6 and I must say they are two totally different beasts. PP6 is my rough test grade and quick preview software of choice due to native workflow and easy access to effects. But that’s where I draw the line.
    1. People must understand there are serious performance drawbacks to editing native codecs. Never would I edit anything long natively…transcoding (DNXHD for me) will greatly smooth out performance, sync, applied effects etc. so native only goes so far. It works, but not consistently. (even on 12 core w/ fx5000) Better your chances by putting all of your media on the fastest drive you have.
    2. Media management can get really crazy really quick if you don’t plan it all out, keep track, and fully understand where everything is and HOW TO FIX PROBLEMS. Being an editor is also about fixing the many weird problems that arise out of the blue that WILL happen. This is the hugest thing for me. Nothing worse than those time wasting searches in the internet forums for the solution to some wacky issue crimping your workflow. Years and years of professionals using Avids gives them the HUGE advantage in this area. I ALWAYS found the solution to a problem and had it fixed or understood by a previous user in the Avid forums. Its so important to understand that complex software will get funked every once in a while and the way Avid handles back ups and media is really going to protect your cut even in critical error situations.
    That said PP6 is fun and works with my matrox monitor hardware just as Avid does. Just some food for thought

  30. PiDicus Rex says:

    Gday. Phillip,.
    I’m a little surprised by some of the content of this article. I seem to remember it was you who commented during the 2010 shoot out series, that the final quality output from the cameras reviewed was better after transcoding to prores then it was working with the native file formats.
    As a long time Edius user, I couldn’t understand that until it was obvious that the shoot out footage was only edited in FCP.
    Yet here is an article espousing the advantages of editing the native files, and how good it is to have that supported in Premiere.
    I agree with the comments about CS5′s user interface, but must add that FCP’s is just as slow and awkward.
    I’m finding it amusing, after many years of listening to Apple fanboys critising Edius, that they are now hailing Premiere as the savior of the FCP editors disenfranchised after FCP-X, when Premiere is only just catching up to Edius for features and native file handling.

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      actually in that shootout it was the way stuff was transcoded that that made a huge difference in the colour grading suite that was used.

      Edius is great but not much use for us Mac users and that is nothing about being a fanboy but being invested in a system that stretches across many machines and the integration with other tools and plug ins.

      P

      1. AaronChicago says:

        With CS6 it is simple. You can edit native in Premiere. Export timeline to SpeedGrade. Files are automatically converted to DPX. Playback is in real time on SpeedGrade as well. Powerful!

      2. jeffmurray says:

        I moved from MC to 5.5 last year. I found it a little tricky – however I think Adobe After Effects is far easier than to learn than the clunky Boris FX and that was the driving force for me.

        Avid AMA is a great marketing concept – however with Adobe there is no transcode for me it plays back and edits natively whereas with Avid it does have to trans-coded even if as late as when your exporting.

        Loving editing in Premiere and enjoyed your review and interview.

    2. Aaron says:

      (Apple non-fanboy here) I’ve used Edius, and it definitely rocks the native editing. Its FAST. I spent a good deal of time auditioning Edius 5 after first pushing aside the steaming pile that was Premiere CS4. Unfortunately (and very sadly, I must add!), I quickly came to realize that fast native editing was really all that Edius was good at, and I needed more than that. I wanted to love it SO BADLY, especially after watching it cruise through my AVCHD clips like they were DV AVI, but as soon as I got to adding basic effects, fixing audio, trying to create discs, it just fell apart. Grass Valley basically bought a bunch of other products, glommed them together, and stretched a very thin user interface over the top to feign cohesion. There is none. When using Edius, it absolutely feels like you’re using six different products, none of which are quite on the same page about what they’re trying to accomplish. I really wish Grass Valley would invest in something else besides the native editing, because they could really have something great if they did! (Disclaimer: I haven’t tried Edius 6.)

  31. James Martin says:

    Interesting post, Philip. Thanks.

    I was wondering what your (and other users’) HDSLR Premiere Workflow is, as I’m thinking of making the jump.

    I shoot almost exclusively HDSLR, and currently transcode to ProRes for use in FCP7. I shoot flat so always need to grade, and often have to do a lot of very heavy colour correction on product footage.

    What codec to you import to PPro, and what are spitting out? Is a ProRes workflow still the most sensible option for someone with my needs? Grading directly in PPro or taking it to AE? So many questions….

    Also confused as to what happens when you spit out a multi-frame rate sequence? What’s doing the recompressing? I know when I have to go from one frame rate to another I wouldn’t do it in an NLE; I’d get ME or Compressor to do the demanding processing needed to get good rate conversion results. Does PPro outsource that encoding to something else?

  32. mpsan says:

    Hi Philip – I’m interested in performing this switch myself. Can you or anyone else here comment on whether you’re continuing the pre-edit practice of transcoding your DSLR H.264 footage into an intraframe codec like ProRes, or are you just dropping the original files right into Premier now? Pros/Cons that you’ve found would be great to know. Thanks!

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      I am currently editing native…

    2. Anyone tried ingesting footage with the new Prelude app bundled with CS6? Allows you to transcode and create proxies all in one hit.

  33. Philip,
    Good topic to discuss.
    CS6 is great,- Adobe are a very good company.
    The real deal breaker for AVID MC6 is you cannot open a PT10 window at the same time.
    MC6 audio editing is quite honestly awful and AVID engineering must look over their desks at the PT team and sigh in anguish.
    As I understand it AVID are furiously working on the prospect (MC7/PT11) of having both open active/linked at the same time. I get a LOT of CVs from Uni grads who are pretty darned good on Protools and Media Composer.
    This will be EASY for the youngsters coming up.
    So it becomes a total no brainer given sound is on equal parity with visuals if you are going to stand above everyone else.
    Therefore all those people who HAVE used Protools and its dazzling array of plugins will understand where I am coming from. CS6 is a no brainer for the DSLR crowd who want something that works and really well.
    If you want to-do-some-really-good-stuff, stand out from the crowd look further down the line.
    The final icing on the cake is EUCON 2.6 with the Artist series of controllers.
    If my future depended upon it I would be content to run with CS6 for the time being with a very firm fixated view of the AVID landscape.
    Cheers,
    Russ

  34. biggest set back in PPRO is that it doesn’t too proxies. FCPX does it better than any app available and that enables one to use multiple codecs in one timeline as the proxies are all PRORES Proxies.

    Using Proxies in FCP X is the click of ONE button… Amazing.

  35. Alex Mills says:

    Philip, what are your computer specs?

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      My 17″ is early 2011 top spec with 16gb ram

  36. tim says:

    Hi Philip,

    how do you export from Premier on a mac for a master quicklime with out getting a color (gamma) shift ?

    From research it doesn’t appear to be a Premier issue but more a quicktime issue.

    sorry if this is the wrong place to post this,

    I’m loving everything about Premier but just can’t get to grips with the colour shift when exporting a master – either a full quality prores file or a h264/mp4 etc…

    Most of my clients need either Prores or H264

    for example what i see in quicklime player seems different to what I’m seeing in premier.

    I have tried checking FCP compatibility in quicktime settings but doesn’t seem to help.

    Have you experianced this ? if so do you know of a solution?

    Thanks in advance,

    Tim

    1. James Martin says:

      As I understand it, and I might be wrong, the gamma shift is in QT player, not the file. If you open your export in something other than QT (VLC, mpeg streamclip etc) you could check to see if it’s closer to your sequence.

      When you say your clients use QT, do you mean for approval/review or you deliver for QT player? If you’re ending up in flash, the QT gamma shift shouldn’t be a problem.

      Another option is to export to mp4 (h264) – you can avoid QT that way.

      Hope that helps, and isn’t misleading.

  37. Marco Azevedo says:

    Hello All,

    Like Phillip I have been testing CS6, and my comment it’s a bit different.

    I work in a company that builds broadcast systems, since NLE integration to Playout servers, so we test all the NLE solutions.
    What we see today regarding multiformat timeline, no transcoding, no rendering, it’s a thing of the past for EDIUS.
    It’s amazing the time that Adobe took to make premiere comparable to Edius performance.

    But right now I think that Adobe finally match the point, let’s see what future holds.

    1. sergiosanchez says:

      The problem with EDIUS was the price. Of course Smoke had great performance too or Quante EQ but the price was much much higher than Premiere. The great thing is that today most of the off-the-shelf software killed the tens-of-thousand-dollar solutions.

  38. Andy says:

    Great read :-)

    PS. It’s already been mentioned, but the cost between UK and US is disgraceful.. Same product, digital download, international market. yet nearly twice the cost.. It’s this kind of thing that pushes people towards pirated software. I don’t condone that of course, but I totally get the frustration.

    The even more shocking thing for me is that I’ll probably still succumb and buy it, because I do feel I need (and enjoy working with) it…

    Andy

  39. Kai says:

    Based on my experience (I freelance at several post-houses and ad agencies), most places that I work with and use FCP are either waiting or switching back to Avid. The feeling is that FCP 7 is adequate for the near future, and won’t consider changing platforms until they need new computers.

    I do a ton of AE work and already have Premier loaded on my computer as part of the Production Bundle, so it is enticing. Unfortunately, as someone concerned with compatibility with my clients and archived projects, I won’t be switching anytime soon.

    I do look forward to potentially going back to my Avid roots in a couple years….

  40. jakub says:

    Hi Philip,

    I’m owner of small production company in Poland. Made the same decision with FCP and Premiere CS6.
    One thing that I didn’t worked out is editing natively in ProRes. It’s my main format to store archive edits, etc, so it would be very usefull and save time while rendering to ProRes, because preview files also would be in prores.

  41. Pinto007 says:

    “Multi-format timelines with NO TRANSCODING? Brilliant! I can even mix 24p and 25p on the same timeline.”
    Your delight is funny for Vegas users. We have these things since beginning :)

    1. sergiosanchez says:

      It has been in Premiere Pro as well since CS2, I think it was 6 or 7 years ago… But since it was considered a semi professional software, people never actually used it.

  42. sergiosanchez says:

    I agree with you but in my case I stopped using final cut since version 4 and switched for premiere since CS2. I’ve always felt it was more intuitive and open than FinalCut. In the case of Avid I always loved it, but the time I had to go back and use it for a project after Premiere Pro, I felt I was loosing a lot of time making subclips, proxies and digging in the settings to fell comfortable. I didn’t felt CS 5.5 slow at all. Even in my 6 years-old computer it was running much, much faster than FC7 or even FCPX. But that’s me.

  43. eilfurz says:

    i like the creative suite from adobe, but i don’t understand why i have to pay nearly double the price only because i live in europe. even if i could afford the price, i wouldn’t pay it. i don’t need local support (happy to use U.S. support) and i don’t need a localized version either.

  44. LiamRenaut says:

    After just finishing a 35 min doco with FCP 7 and having to do a lot of editing, etc.. etc.. all the points you’ve made have just hit me and I think I’m realising a move to CS6 might be a smart one, especially the comment about FCP 7 being 32bit and holding back the computers full capability’s (13″ MBP 8GB RAM)

    I just hope it’s easy to adapt to and doesn’t take too long, as I have a lot of projects going on right now.

  45. ProRes its Apple format, but if you need to work with without convert, you must check Calibrated {Q} plugins, I can edit any kind of ProRes and other formats directly on Premiere, After Effects, etc.

    Kind regards

    Oscar ‘Nebe’ Abad

  46. Mr.Floppy says:

    I think people are being too harsh on FCPX.
    It’s not a bad program AT ALL, and since it was updated it can do all the things that people asked for.

    But yeah, I can understand people are afraid of what Apple will do with their Pro division. But until such a that thing will happen (maybe not), FCPX is a pro software, and a very good one at an unbeatable price.

    Anyway, I’m curious about Lightworks (free and paid versions), and wondering if BMD will do their own NLE such as the did with DaVinci (free version too).

  47. niaknyai says:

    Hi Philip, I agree, CS6 is the Final Cut Studio that FCP7′s editors were expecting from Apple. The software is really close to FCP and it is a suite with everything a professional editors expects.
    Adobe have a really good communication to the Pros. Apple had a very bad communication to the pros, but that doesn’t mean that it is not for them.
    I don’t agree about your comment about speed editing in FCP X.
    I think FCP X is really the fastest editing software that we have around here.
    Simply people don’t get use to the new way of editing with this singular piece of software. Worst, I think Apple shows to people the gadget features (for amateur users) while they don’t talk about the very professional way of using it.
    This end to a big confusion about the deep feature of FCP X : metadatas. Most of the people don’t understand how powerfull is the filter engine is.
    Most people critics FCP X.
    I agree about 0.0/ 0.1 / 0.2 but since V 0.3 the editing system is really stable and most of the features we need are here. While Premiere Pro CS6 is really good at handling any kind of codecs, FCP X is a really good all in one software.
    Multicam is way better on FCP X. Color correction is better, titles are better.
    I am finishing a documentary (52min) with tons of pictures and it had been really fast to achieve the first cuts.t
    I done all the job inside FCP X.
    I need only to export to Pro Tools for mixing (marquee’s plugin).
    As a FCP editor since V1.5, first I was shocked by first FCP X release then was really pleased once I get it.
    CS6 is a really nice alternative for people that don’t want to change their mind but be aware that FCP X is only 0.5, not even V1 and become a really nice piece of software for most of us.

  48. dale says:

    Hi Phillip….

    Great Article thankyou…

    I my be in a similar boat to you soon… needing to travel and edit probably multicam stuff on the run… I know Avid well but for a few reasons, like AE integration, Im interested at jumping over to Adobe. You mentioned you are using a laptop. I was wondering what your specs are?

    I will be looking at using a Macbook pro too but am slightly unelightened about which to get as yet!

    Naturally I will be shooting HD of some flavour or other… 5D, maybe P2, Maybe Canon XF…

    Anyway… would love it if you could give me a little advice.
    Many thanks
    dale

  49. bob shanks says:

    Philip,

    Great review. I too am a FCP 7 user – since FCP 2 – and I did check out PP6. I find it promising and much to like about it. A couple of things I am having trouble getting past I would like your thought on: 1. The absence of end/begin clip indicators in the viewer/ record windows. 2. The mind boggling absence of a real zoom ability for the sequence. I cant believe adobe expects an editor to send to another app to remove a audio artifact. 3. Totally lame snapping – works in some scenarios and not others – wont snap to markers??? I dont get it.

    Im not venting im just wondering if the aforementioned items influenced you at all or if they bother you.

    Bob

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      yeah bob, lots of quirks that you have to get used to and many things which are better. Just yesterday i had long chat with Adobe about the little things that I really would love to see improved!

  50. mordmckee says:

    Hi Philip,

    i have recently found out your site/ work etc… and im absolutely fascinated..

    Im leaving a reply because i would love, if you have the time, to see a video review of the main two softwares that you use…manly between the FCP and the CS6… since the edditing part of creating is still as important as the right camera for the job.

    Just an ideia….

    Love your work, keep on..

    Grats,

    André (Portugal)

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      thanks andre. i dont use FCPx so it’s not possible for me to compare to be honest. There are expert opinions here on guest posts for FCPX and Avid so feel free to check them out!

      best

      p

  51. Dave Reid says:

    I have and tried CS6 but I found it really slow to do stuff. I guess I am hooked on Vegas, just upgraded to the fantastic new version 12 that just came out. Try using PluralEyes on Vegas it will make you sick to use it on Premiere. On Vegas it’s one click and done, no bunch of hoops to jump through. Vegas has a unique builtin powerful scripting engine that lets 3rd party developers create automation tools like PluralEyes (which I believe was originally created for Vegas) that made the work a lot quicker. There is talk it will be coming to the Mac Platform.

    1. NiceLadyProductions says:

      Agree. Love Vegas Pro and version 12 is amazing (being able to export or inport between Premiere, AVID and Final Cut is a nice touch). Can’t wait until they bring it to the Mac. Sound Forge is now on the Mac and for audio editing, it’s a great program.

  52. Phil Hoyt says:

    I made the jump from using a Mac only with Final Cut Pro 7 to using a PC Desktop and a Mac Laptop loaded with Adobe Creative Suite CS6. It has been extraordinarily pain free. Could not agree with you more.

  53. jimb says:

    Love PPro! I’m hoping Speed Grade will improve quickly so that it may become my default program for colour grading. Right now forced to use dynamic linking, which IS extremely powerful, but seems to be a bit of a resource hog and organizational nightmare on larger projects when it comes to archiving. TRUE round tripping from PPro to another app and back, WITHOUT having to re-render seems to be wishful thinking…for now.

  54. Hitesh says:

    Hi Philip,

    Do you done a workflow for CS6 video?

    Hitesh

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      what do you mean by workflow?

  55. elijAH starr says:

    Hey bloom,

    It’s always good to hear you when you’re in town.

    CS6 is the second or so release for Adobe at 64bit for Mac. Cs5 Premiere, although obviously familiar because of common interface standards, is still cumbersome. The attempt at background rendering and it’s usage of ram is excessive.

    I’m think a recommendation for CS6 might be a little ambitious. To add to that its quite expensive and it’s a life long buy in and can only be on one computer. Final X does excellent with managing processing power and ram. It’s 300 dollars and can be installed on ten different computers. CS6 may prove a poor investment to most for temporary familiarity.

  56. oldsoul says:

    I have to say I’m not sold on Adobe Premiere CS6. I’ve been using FCP since 2000 in a professional broadcast environment. I’ve basically grown with the software. When FCP X came out I had the same dislikes that everyone felt. I purchased CS6 and gave it a go. The company I work even had Adobe and third party training provided for a day. I feel it is quite a sophisticated product and feels more like what “FCP 8″ should have been. However I get a feeling thats its overly complicated and Adobe doesn’t seem eager to listen to suggestions from editors that have been using Avid and FCP for almost 20 years now. There are just too may ways of accomplishing the same task and none of them seem very elegant. I wish there were less options and that thee options that are present a little bit better thought out. Perhaps I’m a creature of habit. I am taking the time to explore it further I wish Adobe had a little more of an open ear.
    I recently went back to FCP X and I am using it on a real project. The more I’m playing with it the more potential I see. It’s more Apple, more intuitive, it’s more elegant.

  57. stocker87 says:

    Hey Phillip – Great review! I have recently been getting very frustrated with FCP7 and ever since the disappointment of FCP X I have been looking at moving systems. I have however always thought of moving towards Avid MC6, because that is what seems to be the industry leader and where all the jobs are (unfortunately I dont have the luxury of working solely on my own projects … YET) I have learnt and used Avid before but still find it clunky, and unfriendly, all my Avid editing friends say its because im not a real editor!! psssh.

    Do you think the industry will move towards Premier? By industry I mean sports, doco and dramas for me.

    Loving your work! Adam

  58. Mike AvMen says:

    I am Glad to see you Using this , I dont Use MAC per say I Use Windows, But my PC is Built for Editing and I Only Use Vegas. Now that I am Doing Pro Work I need CS6, Do you recomend using MAC

    These are my Specs,
    Intel(R) Core(TM) i7 CPU 920 @ 2.67GHz 8 Processors
    24GB RAM
    64-bit operating System
    Window 7 Pro.

    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 260 GPU.

  59. AHMJakaria Habib says:

    Dear Mr. Phillip Bloom,

    I am from Bangladesh. No matter what camera you use the final output of every video of yours are beautiful and so vivid. I would be grateful to you if you make a video of color grading process or steps that you use in post production.
    I think this will help me and others to have a better understanding of color theory used in video or film in post production. If you can suggest some books or tutorial regarding this matter then it should help us a lot too.

    Thank you

  60. I think you have pushed me over the edge to move from Final Cut to Premiere. The crazy thing is I started NLE on Premiere and was so dissatisfied with it corrupting my media that I moved to FC. Great post thank you!

  61. VAKA says:

    Philip,

    How do you handle 24p and 25p editing out of DSLRs on one timeline?

    I am currently editing a film which was shot on two 5D cameras 24p. One of the dialogues was shot on 5D with 24fps and 5D with 25fps (by accident).

    I know that Premiere cs6 allows you to edit 24 and 25 on the same timeline, but how does it affect the 25p footage to be used in 24p sequence? Are there any downsides? Or it is best to transcode 25p footage to Prores and then conform?

    1. Philip Bloom says:

      it does screw up…mainly with sound sync though…i would try to avoid if you can…otherwise convert.

  62. BENisanEDITOR says:

    I’ve worked with Avid for about 6 years and recently work a series of jobs in FCP7. I also just spent 2 months working with Premiere Pro CS6. Honestly, I found FCP frustrating for various reasons, but eventually got the hang of it. Going from FCP to Premiere was cake. Very intuitive, very fast on a system several years old.

    Overall, I like everything about Premiere except audio editing. Maybe I’m neglecting something here, but I’m missing a standard feature used in FCP and Avid. That is where you can adjust clip levels using the mixer. If a clip is on track 3, and I’m viewing that portion of the timeline, I can raise or lower the clip level using the mixer track 3 slider.

    In Premiere, applying that same function creates a keyframe locked to the track which is useless in an unfinished sequence. If I adjust the clip levels in the clip effects window, it adds a keyframe to the clip, but doesn’t adjust levels across the whole clip. If I lower the levels in the timeline by clicking and dragging down the horizontal levels line thing, I can do what I need to do. However, I can’t make tiny tweaks in the levels or enter a specific number for the level to make my changes exact.

    Am I missing something here or is this just how it is? Assuming I’m right about this missing feature, Premiere just doesn’t seem to be ready for my workflow. However, I know of some very large media companies that currently use FCP7 who might be switching to Premiere. Once they convert their systems over, it’s gonna be hard for them to even consider FCPX. Then again, that doesn’t seem to be Apple’s market anymore.

    I’m trying to convince my employers to go with Avid. It’s far from perfect, but the audio editing, teamed up with an Artist Mix seems like one of the fastest ways to work.

    1. elton_john says:

      Hi Philip,
      Your using compressor for slow mo on a mac but for pc users what do you recommend? I’ve switch from final cut to cs6 lately. I’m using 7d slr for my camera setup. Need your advise. Thanks.

      1. Philip Bloom says:

        sorry elton…i dont use PCs…try asking on my forum

        best
        p

        1. monday89 says:

          Hi Phillip I recently started learning how to edit on FCPX. Would switching to CS6 be difficult to learn for someone who is just starting out?

          1. Philip Bloom says:

            not really…its quite intuitive.