Editing: Apple (FCP) or PC software

[fourirenet]

Hi! I don't want to start the usual mac/pc fight here but I need to know...

A lot of people tell me that Final Cut Pro is amazing for editing. Me, im using Adobe Premiere pro on a PC. I think it works well for what i have to do right now. Im actually doing basic stuff, but Im using more and more effects with After Effect.

My question, is it worth the trouble to go to a mac instead of a PC? What it so amazing about FPC? I just stoped by an Apple store and I tried to navigate on the Final cut pro HD for 10 minutes, but I didn't discover any amazing features on it.

If I take a class on Final Cut Pro, is it gonna to be a waste of time or am is it gonna change my mind?

[LuckyStudio 13]

I wish I switched to the MAC much much sooner.

[BenB]

Sorry this is so long winded, but to nip some issues in the bud...

First of all, with the new Intel Macs, load up BootCamp and you have both worlds running great on one machine. There's no reason to chose one or the other. Get both, on a Mac!

FCP, like any NLE, isn't going to reveal it's details in a few minutes of you working with it. NLEs are complex beasts that take time to learn. I personally know 5 independent videographers here in south Louisiana who have switched from PPro to FCP in the last year and a half, all say the same thing. There's a few things that PPro does quicker, but those are novelty processes and they would not go back to PPro for them. They all are much happier on FCP.

One of them, a member of DVXuser.com here, even had a problem with his Mac a month or so ago. Called me, posted here, fixed his problem on his own eventually. To use his words, a problem that would have taken a couple of days to fix on his old Windows machine, took only a couple of hours to fix on his Mac. And this is a super smart guy who's super tech savey.

I have a healthy respect for PPro, but IMHO, it's more of a videography NLE. FCP is more film oriented. I bet you never got to do any keyframing, compositing, etc, with FCP while you were playing on it.

If you do go with FCP, I STRONGLY recommend the following books, all in the "Apple Pro Training Series" library:
APTS, Final Cut Pro (do this book on your own, rather than the official class)
APTS, Optimizing Your Final Cut Pro System
APTS, Compressor Quick-Reference Guide

There's also the "APTS, Advanced Color Correction and Effects in Final Cut Pro" that's really super good once you have the basics down.

Again, you'll never know anything about any solid NLE by just poking around by yourself for ten minutes.

And FWIW, Final Cut Pro HD hasn't been sold in a very long time. Technically that was version 4.0 and 4.5. The latest version, very advanced from those versions, is Final Cut Pro 5.1 (technically, 5.1.2).

So, get a Mac, run Windows as well (reportedly more stable) as OS X on one machine. Get the best of both worlds.

And if you go with PPro, that's fine. You have to go with what you're most comfortable with.

Be aware that some Apple Certified Trainers such as myself and Larry Jordan (who has a FANTASTIC free FCP newsletter and WONDERFUL subscription FCP professional journal) teach "seminars." These are usually shorter than the official Apple sactioned classes, cheaper, and cover things in a more personal way. I encourage all FCP users to subscribe to Larry's news letters. And to buy my own tutorials that go on sale mid Jan 07. And see if the town you live in has a local Final Cut Pro Users Group. I'm starting one here in New Orleans next month. They're fantastic places to learn and network.

http://www.larryjordan.biz/nxlttrs.html
http://www.peachpit.com/promotions/promotion.asp?promo=3468&redir=1&rl=1

One final note, I'm a retired IT Engineer. Started out as a bench tech fixing IBM Old Blue's, which were huge old blue cabinets the size of a refrigirator, with two 5MB hard drives, each the size of an SUV tire, and had not one "chip" in the whole thing. I finished as an IT Project Manager on enterprise scale broadband wireless projects, and held just about every position inbetween (except I was never a software engineer). In all those years, I'd come home and the LAST thing I wanted to do was fix my own equipment. I always came home to a Mac (my first was a Mac Plus with a Rodine 20MB hard drive the size of a VCR and as loud as a 747 taking off, 8Mhz CPU, state of the art for it's time). Yep, always came home to a Mac after fixing Windows and UNIX machines all day long. I'm so happy Apple went UNIX, nothing better on the planet...

[mcgeedigital]

Apples and oranges.

There are plenty of Apps on the PC that do just as good a job at what FCPro does on the Mac.

How do I know?

Because I own an Avid as well as a FCPro editing system.

Although the Avid is getting used less and less the more I shoot with my HVX, because the FCPro P2/MXF integration is REALLY solid, and all of the studio apps work WELL together.

[MikeCurtis]

BenB has a good point. I would suggest waiting until after MWSF before making a buying decision.

Horses for courses - I'm a big FCP fan, but Stu Maschwitz, whom I trust/respect/admire greatly, is a HUGE fan of the PPro/AE workflow.

Depends on what you need.

[puredrifting]

Hi:

I agree with McGee. While PPro and AVID on the PC are strong, they cannot compete with the integration that you will find in FCP Studio. The way that all of the apps interact together is superior even to the Adobe Suite IMHO. Simpler, easier and quicker. Sure Motion is no replacement for AE but for the average video editor on a deadline, Motion is MUCh easier to grasp and much easier to use for many "typical" graphic chores.

Is Soundtrack Pro better than Pro Tools? No, but it's free with FCP, much better integrated with the workflow and a heck of lot easier for the average video editor to use. I have had DVD Studio Pro since V 1.0 but I actually use iDVD a LOT more because it is so much easier and quicker. I hate complex DVDs anyway, simpler and quicker for DVD interfaces is almost always better IMHO, at least with the movie studios as clients.

I work at an AVID production company, we have 10 DV Xpress systems on Macs and PCs plus a Symphony Nitris on-line room. I just sit over here with my Kona 3 FCP system, happily getting work finished (we use my system for laying off all HVX-P2 media to DVCProHD tape as our archival backup). My little $10,000.00 FCP system does a LOT of things that the $100,000.00 Symphony Nitris sitting in the on-line room doesn't, things like 4:4:4 and RT 2K and easy and effective real time HD upconversion. The stupid DnxHD codec that the Nitris uses is stupid, all of the re-rendering and changing of codecs is a waste of time IMHO.

I also agree that getting an Intel Mac is a stroke of genius for flexibility. Macs are better PCs than PCs are although it must be weird to get a PC virus on your Mac but whatever.

I have been on FCP since V1.0 and since V4.03, FCP has been truly a professional tool with some limitations but for the money, one of the best pieces of software ever written. You will love it if you switch. It's not that PPro is bad, it's not but it's not as well integrated with a total post production workflow IMHO although Adobe has been trying. AE obviously rules all as far as motion graphics but it is difficult to become good at and it very time consuming to learn.

My .02

Dan

[BenB]

We can also pit AE against Shake, for the money. Shake integrates with FCP just like all the other apps. And no, Shake is NOT very difficult to learn. Which remind me, if you're way geeky like me, check out Conduit for FCP and Motion.

As for SoundTrack Pro, since it's gone Pro, it's a very powerful audio editing app, very overlooked.

Then there's FX Factory, which let's you make your own plug-ins. Especially cool since FCP 5.1.2 now recognizes the FX Plug format plug-ins that Motion uses.

BUT, I'm a firm believer in using what you feel most comfortable using, regardless of platform or brand.

[LuckyStudio 13]

For the MacPro, do you guys see the benefit of getting the 512mb ATI graphics card for additional $249 vs the stock Nvidia 256mb graphics card ?

I heard the quad core Mac pro and a 12" mac book pro are going to show up this jan at MWSF. Also heard of new Apple monitor designs as well.

[BenB]

We hear a lot of things, but Apple never officially says anything until the unveiling.

Upgrading to the best graphics card you can afford is always a good idea for video work.

[cinemakinoeye]

[...] First of all, with the new Intel Macs, load up BootCamp and you have both worlds running great on one machine. There's no reason to chose one or the other. Get both, on a Mac! [...] By the way, I think Parallels Desktop for Mac (http://www.parallels.com/en/products/workstation/mac/) is a better way to run Windows (or Linux or FreeBSD for that matter) and Mac OS X at the same time.

Parallels seamlessly runs in parallel (clever name they chose) with Mac OS X and takes advantage of the hardware-support for virtualization technology built into the Intel Core Duo processors (it does not support G4 and G5 based Macs). I currently need to run several utilities that are Windows only, so thus I run Parallels on my Mac Book Pro and it's quite a delightful experience (not Windows in and of itself, but the ability to have two machines in one). With the latest version of Parallels you'll find that there's very little performance hit as long as you're running on a machine with 2G of memory and allocate 512M to Parallels. Of course, you're still sharing the processor resources, so there is some hit, but it's not like the old days of running the dog-slow Virtual PC.

[BenB]

Have you actually editing DVCPRO-HD footage in an NLE in Paralles? If so, how was the performance?

[David S.]

Which utilities are you running and for what purpose?

Appreciate some more info.

Also VMWare has its beta out as well, and they've been doing virtualization a lot longer. They also have additional hardware support.

[Shaw]

FWIW, if you're a big user of After Effects and wish to stay with the software staying with Premiere is probably your best bet due to it's fantastic integration. It's so very nice being able to move between PP and AE without having to render. That said, if you want to move to shake and motion, Apple is the only way.

[cinemakinoeye]

Which utilities are you running and for what purpose? [...] Here are some of the things I run under Windows which I can't (currently) run under Mac OS but I can under Windows w/ Parallels:
FLV MetaData Injector (http://www.buraks.com/flvmdi/)
Media Cleaner XL
Sony's NSP-100 control application (don't ask)
Testing PowerPoint with Windows Media embedded
Browser testing with IE on Windows
etc.As a video producer who also does some web work, I have to be dual-platform (not by personal choice, but it's the reality that a large percentage of the world out there runs Windows, yet for my own editing and every day computer work, I find Mac OS more reliable, aesthetically pleasing, and requires less technical support activities.

[cinemakinoeye]

Have you actually editing DVCPRO-HD footage in an NLE in Paralles? If so, how was the performance? I've only edited the DVCPRO HD footage with FCP on the Mac OS X side. I'd be curious to know how well Premiere handles something intensive like video editing running under Parallels. I wonder, given enough memory, it might not be so bad? For editing, Parallels seems perverse, but as machines get faster and faster...

[THoff]

One other thing to remember is that Adobe just purchased Serious Magic, so I would expect the next update of Premiere to have native support for DVCPro50/DVCProHD and MXF, so staying with the platform and tools you are currently on probably makes sense.

[David Jimerson]

Edius Broadcast runs wide circles around everything else for HVX/P2 integration.

[spunknoid]

Edius Broadcast runs wide circles around everything else for HVX/P2 integration.


That's what I heard, then I hear that FCP is the best thing since sliced bread. I guess if the new Macs had the slots to handle the P2 cards, it would make sense so go mac.

However, since it doesn't, I guess my question is, does Edius come close to FCP ?(since it handles the P2 integration the best).

[cinemakinoeye]

If you've invested time in learning an editor, and you like it, you probably should stick to it. Eventually all the major editors (Avid, Edius, Premiere, FCP, even Vegas) will have better support for new formats. Stick with what you like if it works for you.

On the other hand, if you're new to editing and in the process of choosing what NLE to invest time in getting to know, you have to weigh each according to what aspects are important to you, like

platform supported (Mac, Windows)
key features (editing, color correction, media management, integration with type, graphics, and effects programs, etc)
installed base
what people you work with are using
what clients demand (if you're working as a freelancer)
what appeals to you on a personal, aesthetic level
what works within your budget.
I'm not going to say one NLE is better than another, there are plenty of threads on that topic. Among indepedent filmmakers and small production houses, FCP has a solid footing, having been around since the days of those charming blue G3 towers, but Edius, Avid, Premiere, and Vegas all have solid, loyal user-bases. Each NLE has a unique combination of features, price, and performance, yet in the end, clients and audiences don't give a *&^% what something was edited with.

[David Jimerson]

That's what I heard, then I hear that FCP is the best thing since sliced bread. I guess if the new Macs had the slots to handle the P2 cards, it would make sense so go mac.

However, since it doesn't, I guess my question is, does Edius come close to FCP ?(since it handles the P2 integration the best).

Unfortunately, I don't yet know Edius well enough to say outside of its P2 integration. Seems pretty typical, though.

FCP and Premiere are extremely similar programs. If you have experience with Premiere, you pretty much know what to expect.

[spunknoid]

Unfortunately, I don't yet know Edius well enough to say outside of its P2 integration. Seems pretty typical, though.

FCP and Premiere are extremely similar programs. If you have experience with Premiere, you pretty much know what to expect.


Over a three month period, my camera was stolen, finally received the insurance $$, ordered a new HXV, and just received the replacement HVX today. Now I'm ready to purchase an NLE. The only NLE experience I have is a little with Premier and Vegas.

I can buy MAC or PC software. Hardware is equally available, equally well "muscled" with memory and CPU.

With that in mind, between FCP and Edius, which is the easiest to grab the files of the P2 card AND start working away on the video files?

Your recommendations?

Or is it a case of both are good and I really can't go wrong picking one and learning how to use it.

[puredrifting]

Hi Spunknoid:

I have not used Edius but I do have many years of experience with FCP. The big advantage of FCP is that it is very capable yet extremely easy to use and learn. AVID is much more difficult to learn than FCP. I am not sure if Edius is standardized as far as the interface or if it has one of those "unique" interfaces?

Many editing programs such as AVID (sorry for the multiple AVID references but I know more about it than Edius or PPro) are modal and can only be used to do one thing at a time, in one prescribed manner. The beauty of FCP and what makes it so easy is that to do any given function, there are almost always multiple ways to perform it. Many AVID-reared editors don't like this but for a beginner, it's awesome. I have always liked the fact that with FCP you can use many different methods to achieve a given result.

Sorry to harp on FCP so much but there is a reason why Apple has taken over so much of the post market.

Dan

[David Jimerson]

With that in mind, between FCP and Edius, which is the easiest to grab the files of the P2 card AND start working away on the video files?

Your recommendations?

Or is it a case of both are good and I really can't go wrong picking one and learning how to use it.

I'm only speaking of P2 integration between the two here . . .

But Edius simply blows FCP away. There's no need to convert anything; you just drop the MXF files on the timeline and edit. It will play back up to six streams of DVCPRO HD in real time. You have full access and full ability to manipulate all of the clip meta data. You can work directly off the P2 cards if you want.

No problems. No conversion issues. No quirks. It's a brilliant implementation and everyone else should emulate it. Nothing else compares.

[pdsage10]

I have been editing in Avid Media Composer for about six months now. I feel that the MXF workflow with Avid is far more streamlined than in FCP. I used FCP at school for a while and in order to edit a clip, it would need to be rendered first ( I think it was rendered to Quicktime). In Avid you can do your entire project in MXF format. Just open your media tool and drop your clips into bins. As for working with other programs, Avid Media Composer is designed to work with Protools. If I want to use After Effects, I just export a Reference file and open it in After Effects.
3.6ghz, 8gb ram, 1 terabit hd space, HD capable video card.
Just my two cents. :)

[puredrifting]

I agree, FCP's handling of MXF could be better but if you haven't used it before, the new P2 import tool in FCP is pretty great. A lot of this also has to do with your post workflow. Don't think Motion, Shake and Soundtrack Pro read MXF files (does AE?) so if FCP did support native MXF, you would still have to convert it to QT on the way out to these other programs, right?

Perhaps for editing only, MXF is a good thing but for total overall system workflow, QuickTime is far superior, many more apps read it than MXF format.

Best,

Dan

[David S.]

I used FCP at school for a while and in order to edit a clip, it would need to be rendered first ( I think it was rendered to Quicktime).

You do have to use the import p2 card function when accessing MXF files in FCP, and this was streamlined with previews in 5.1.2, which I find very useful. In this way, you can set i/o points, rename the clips, and import only those you wish. It is efficient and fast.

Second, I don't do any rendering when editing a clip. In fact, there is little rendering at all except when dealing with some filters, but very few.

[BenB]

Actually, when importing into FCP, technically it is not "rendering", but re-wrapping the container of the raw data to a QuickTime container, rather than the Panasonic version of MXF.

Did I mention version 3.0 of the FS-100, oh, never mind...

I bet at NAB, FCP 6.0 will be announced with killer MXF support. They did do that weird, huge licensing buy out with that MXF development company...

[David S.]

Finally NAB will have some FCS centric announcements. I know for certain that an associate has been invited to tire kick the new program.

[LuckyStudio 13]

Dont forget. FCS 6.0 should* be out at NAB 07 if not at MWSF

[David S.]

There is virtually no chance that MWSF will be the platform to announce FCS 6.

NAB is the traditional venue for these announcements. Moreover, the testing I believe hasn't even started.

[spunknoid]

I think I'll get out a quarter and do a best 2 out of three flips and just get started on a platform. Both definitely have their strengths.

As always, thanks for the great inputs and help.