Avid vs Adobe
- Thread starter Danny1280
- Start date
ZazaCast
Major Contributor
Whichever one you choose...there are some killer deals out there.
Avid for $995.
Adobe Production Premium w/Magic Bullet $849 and Premiere Pro is now just $399...
http://www.videoguys.com/Specials/Now+In+Stock.aspx
...or buy both for $1,744.00
http://www.videoguys.com/Blog/E/FCP...itors/0x744cb99dd8686b6c5c92478f998c1960.aspx
Avid for $995.
Adobe Production Premium w/Magic Bullet $849 and Premiere Pro is now just $399...
http://www.videoguys.com/Specials/Now+In+Stock.aspx
...or buy both for $1,744.00
http://www.videoguys.com/Blog/E/FCP...itors/0x744cb99dd8686b6c5c92478f998c1960.aspx
Hawk Teflon
Veteran
I don't know Avid, so I can't attest to them. However, upon opening Premiere again recently (to familiarize myself again), I remembered about all of the crashes that I used to endure. It brought back a sick feeling in my stomach of memories you don't want to keep. Granted, this is CS4. 5.5 may be more stabile.
Last edited:
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
Here's my take on switching…
If you work in a more "closed" environment, meaning you generally edit, mix, finish and output, I'd probably suggest going with Adobe. The tight integration of their complete suite really can't be beat, and the combination of Photoshop/Premiere/AfterEffects is impressive.
If you work in a more collaborative environment, or you need to share files with audio post facilities, telecine artists and Smoke/Graphics rooms, I'd look at Avid. These workflows have been fairly well refined over time, and have largely become standardized in large post-production facilities.
And I say this as someone who has worked both in big post houses and as a one-man operation.
If you work in a more "closed" environment, meaning you generally edit, mix, finish and output, I'd probably suggest going with Adobe. The tight integration of their complete suite really can't be beat, and the combination of Photoshop/Premiere/AfterEffects is impressive.
If you work in a more collaborative environment, or you need to share files with audio post facilities, telecine artists and Smoke/Graphics rooms, I'd look at Avid. These workflows have been fairly well refined over time, and have largely become standardized in large post-production facilities.
And I say this as someone who has worked both in big post houses and as a one-man operation.
If you are an indie filmmaker, a small production house, I would second Stephen's Adobe suggestion. I do most of the rough edit, including audio and draft CC in FCP. I rely in plugins like Magic Bullet Looks and Colorista to achieve the desired look of my piece, that I then send to a post production facility to do Resolve and Compositing. Post Production houses generally have a copy of Premiere and FCP7 handy. Since Premiere can export all the necessary files for the other editors while it shares most plugins with FCP, like Neat Video, Twixtor, Magic Bullet, etc. It seems the better route in terms of workflow- at least for me.
However, if you are thinking of freelancing as an editor, I would suggest Avid. Looks better on the resume.
However, if you are thinking of freelancing as an editor, I would suggest Avid. Looks better on the resume.
Hey, I've worked on Avid for 11 years and still do for my professional job. (editor and online editor).
At home I work as a filmmaker (personal) on anything I want to. At home I have Avid, FCP7 and now Premiere. I gave Premiere a try a few months ago when I got CS5 and then just kept using FCP. But..... last week and this week I am giving it a really good try and really comparing it to FCP and Avid.
I can tell you that I've tried Premiere years ago and wasn't impressed at all.
But....... now I've been trying it for two weeks and I can tell you it has SERIOUSLY improved. Especially if you shoot DSLR I would say it would be well worth someone's time to give it a try. Also it is more stable than previous versions. Just make sure you're using at least Premiere 5.0.4.
Hey just so you know there is another thread on this that has been going on with everything discussed about what is good about it and with a bunch of people putting it through their tests.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...uot-soon-to-be-former-quot-Final-Cut-Pro-User
At home I work as a filmmaker (personal) on anything I want to. At home I have Avid, FCP7 and now Premiere. I gave Premiere a try a few months ago when I got CS5 and then just kept using FCP. But..... last week and this week I am giving it a really good try and really comparing it to FCP and Avid.
I can tell you that I've tried Premiere years ago and wasn't impressed at all.
But....... now I've been trying it for two weeks and I can tell you it has SERIOUSLY improved. Especially if you shoot DSLR I would say it would be well worth someone's time to give it a try. Also it is more stable than previous versions. Just make sure you're using at least Premiere 5.0.4.
Hey just so you know there is another thread on this that has been going on with everything discussed about what is good about it and with a bunch of people putting it through their tests.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthrea...uot-soon-to-be-former-quot-Final-Cut-Pro-User
Brandon Rice
Distributed Producer
I'm an Avid guy, have edited on it for about 8 years. It was the first NLE I ever used (back in XPress Pro days).
crazyhendrix
Member
Premiere CS5 has been stable for me so far. Natively editing footages from a Nikon d7000. Still, I've been thinking about trying out Avid. FCP was good while it lasted.
keylight
Veteran
Great advice. I'd only add that knowing how to use both isn't a bad idea.
Alpha Beta Omega
Veteran
I've been an Avid editor for about 15 years but since PP5 I've steered away from Avid since PP in conjunction with the other Adobe applications works perfectly for me. times change and the trend has been smaller tools and when we went to solid state recording it changed alot.
I think I read somewhere the Avid product that's being offered is 32 bit and being EOL'd with the current release. Is that correct and what would be the next progression in their product line? I've never gotten a good grasp of what they sell due to all the hardware options and add-ons.
Postmaster
Dark Side of the Camera
I don´t know, how that is done in the US, but here in Germnay I exchange audio files as OMF and the standard for Smoke/CC andwhatnot is DPX - Premiere spits out both without problems.
Frank
keylight
Veteran
Some of their older hardware (like "Adrenaline") will not be supported in future versions of Media Composer. The newer hardware will. Also, Media Composer is at/near the EOL as a 32 bit product. The next full version release (MC 6) is supposedly going to be a native 64-bit application, out sometime next year.
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
It's certainly not that Adobe isn't capable of this workflow, but in my 15 years working in production and post, I've never set foot in a post house that used Premiere. They all have it, but nobody really uses it. So the issue is more the "acceptability" of the Adobe workflow in that environment. They're all just much more comfortable and familiar with Avid and Final Cut workflows. Now, if you're simply passing off materials for an audio session, no worries. But most post facilities have a very particular (and sometimes peculiar) workflow that they swear by. So if, for example, you plan on freelancing at a place like this, Premiere won't really help you much, because it's a workflow they're not familiar with, and it's a program likely none of their other staff is familiar with.
Again, it's not about what Premiere "can't" do. Premiere is just as, if not more flexible than Avid. But it's an established and "known" entity in the world of commercial post.
Not so. As long as you pass off the file type they need at another post house or use whatever they require ..say.. and OMF or EDL. then they won't be program specific. Trust me. I work in Hollywood on trailers and we move stuff from post house to post house all the time.
Love the integration between After Effects and Premiere.
But that said, I'm an Avid editor, and love Avid. No matter how many times I'm forced to use FCP, I'm always greatly relieved to return to the much more responsive, much more precise Avid Media Composer. And you can export QuickTime References (no transcoding) which can then be composited and colour corrected in After Effects at 32-bit float.
But that said, I'm an Avid editor, and love Avid. No matter how many times I'm forced to use FCP, I'm always greatly relieved to return to the much more responsive, much more precise Avid Media Composer. And you can export QuickTime References (no transcoding) which can then be composited and colour corrected in After Effects at 32-bit float.
cheezweezl
Veteran
If any LA people are interested, Avid is doing a presentation called "Committed to the professional" at Warner Bros. next Wednesday night, 7/13. It's free, you just have to register.
http://www.cvent.com/events/avid-media-composer-committed-to-the-professional/event-summary-2e980e56b9bd4ec9a8e6537b95c8379e.aspx?elq_mid=4610&elq_cid=1537963
http://www.cvent.com/events/avid-media-composer-committed-to-the-professional/event-summary-2e980e56b9bd4ec9a8e6537b95c8379e.aspx?elq_mid=4610&elq_cid=1537963
Stephen Mick
Totally Usable
Again, this is fine you're passing off your work for a session at another house. But if I show up for a freelance job at a post house built around Avid Media Composer, and I want to cut in Premiere, they won't be happy. If one of their staff editors needs to make a change or update a project later, and they're not familiar with Premiere, then they're going to have a problem.
I started with Adobe Premiere 5 and 6, 10 years ago, we also used Premiere CS2 at school. Then I had to work, and teach with Avid Xpress at work for a couple of years, even today with MC.
Now days we have all three major suites at work.
For the last 4 years I've been working with both Avid (Xpress/MC) and Adobe Premiere (CS3/CS4/CS5) and the first thing I can tell you is that none of them demolish the other with superior technology or workflow. It's a matter of what you are used too and comfort. It's very personal in most cases.
And the second thing is that all you guys who ever tried Premiere back in the days, PRE CS2/3 and even CS4 for that matter, can not compare those versions against CS5. It's a whole different story. Adobe have done a very good job on fixing the stability and performance. So please don't even go there in comparing, it is so different. The thing that's still the same "more or less is the GUI.
The biggest problem with Adobe is, or maybe more what they should have done when they redesigned Premiere, is to change the name of the software. Many people I talk to, comparing editing package, has bad experience from early Premiere. And that stucks to them. It's there even though it sometimes is several years they tried it. It's a big deal this name thing, look at FCP that today still keeps the name while many thinks it should be named iMovie..pro.. or something. I mean it is a whole different software now. They stuck with the name for a good reason. Killing the FCP name brand would be devastating.. yes, more then it already is
Avid has been around for very long in the professional arena and since it has been a lot of money and training hours involved it's tough and expensive for a big house to change software, hardware and workflow. Some has changed though, often towards FCP, but that not so weird since a Apple software works very well on Apple hardware, and Apple did a good job creating FCP.
So Avid is where they are for very obvious reasons i.e: economical, know-how and historcal, besides making a great piece of software of course.
Now, that said, as for today I think Premiere CS5.5 is a better editing software for almost everyone, except for the big houses and maybe big news companies. And that's mainly because the workflow is so strict common and works very well in those types of environments. Expensive infrastructure has been built around the Avid workflow. For the small houses and companies, "lone wolfs" freelance etc. I believe Premiere is the better one. It's faster, cheaper, easier to learn, better with different hardware, works better than any one with industry standard AEFX and Photoshop.
The mercury engine kicks ass, specially with CUDA, though just with nVidia cards, but still. It's a deal breaker for many, specially the DSLR people. Avid need to make MC6 better to be able to compete with Mercury Engine.
The Media Encoder is a good tool for most things. It sucked in CS4 but CS5 and 5.5 is one the better out there. They could however develop it a little bit more towards the Pro-arena with more extensive settings for different codecs, and the dream is of course to be able to utilize different h264-engines, like the x264.
Avid's export dialog is somewhat a joke I think, and you need to use the bundle software to have some decent options, or a complicated Interplay setup. Great perhaps for big houses, with a lot of different post houses involved. Though I love DNxHD.
Avids AMA is not good. It feels like it's in beta phase. And lacks several functions to really be as fast and easy as Avid want us to think.
Titles are much more easy to work with in Premiere if you use the built in title designer. And everything that needs to some kind of FX is way faster to do in Premiere.
From my perspective, what Premiere is missing are better CC-tools, a native, optimized and stable format like ProRes and DNxHD. Now, you could use the existing ones in the CS5 suite but maybe Adobe would feel better with it's own. Along with that a tool that let's you import media to any of those formats ie. log&transfer / import function. Transcode maybe not wanted for several, but for some it's the only way, and then there should be an option for that. Premiere really needs to have it's GUI redesigned as well. to much dead space, and on some smaller laptops it's too much unused buttons that steals space from the things that really matters.
Anyhow, besides looking at specifik functions, the interesting thing is, watching these suites for a couple of years now, both Premiere and Media Composer are leaning towards a same look, feel and workflow. They have never been so much a like as today. So it's not a big thing to move from a suite to another, as long as you know the basics. Some new buttons, some different way of saving files and manage media, other than that it's very similar. The black sheep now however, is FCPX, and we'll see what happens there, after this boiling pot has cooled down a bit.
Last and not least, editing is about being creative at the same time you are earning time and money, right?, so whatever suite that makes you happy, well.. there you go.
You can make great movies with any one of them.
Now days we have all three major suites at work.
For the last 4 years I've been working with both Avid (Xpress/MC) and Adobe Premiere (CS3/CS4/CS5) and the first thing I can tell you is that none of them demolish the other with superior technology or workflow. It's a matter of what you are used too and comfort. It's very personal in most cases.
And the second thing is that all you guys who ever tried Premiere back in the days, PRE CS2/3 and even CS4 for that matter, can not compare those versions against CS5. It's a whole different story. Adobe have done a very good job on fixing the stability and performance. So please don't even go there in comparing, it is so different. The thing that's still the same "more or less is the GUI.
The biggest problem with Adobe is, or maybe more what they should have done when they redesigned Premiere, is to change the name of the software. Many people I talk to, comparing editing package, has bad experience from early Premiere. And that stucks to them. It's there even though it sometimes is several years they tried it. It's a big deal this name thing, look at FCP that today still keeps the name while many thinks it should be named iMovie..pro.. or something. I mean it is a whole different software now. They stuck with the name for a good reason. Killing the FCP name brand would be devastating.. yes, more then it already is
Avid has been around for very long in the professional arena and since it has been a lot of money and training hours involved it's tough and expensive for a big house to change software, hardware and workflow. Some has changed though, often towards FCP, but that not so weird since a Apple software works very well on Apple hardware, and Apple did a good job creating FCP.
So Avid is where they are for very obvious reasons i.e: economical, know-how and historcal, besides making a great piece of software of course.
Now, that said, as for today I think Premiere CS5.5 is a better editing software for almost everyone, except for the big houses and maybe big news companies. And that's mainly because the workflow is so strict common and works very well in those types of environments. Expensive infrastructure has been built around the Avid workflow. For the small houses and companies, "lone wolfs" freelance etc. I believe Premiere is the better one. It's faster, cheaper, easier to learn, better with different hardware, works better than any one with industry standard AEFX and Photoshop.
The mercury engine kicks ass, specially with CUDA, though just with nVidia cards, but still. It's a deal breaker for many, specially the DSLR people. Avid need to make MC6 better to be able to compete with Mercury Engine.
The Media Encoder is a good tool for most things. It sucked in CS4 but CS5 and 5.5 is one the better out there. They could however develop it a little bit more towards the Pro-arena with more extensive settings for different codecs, and the dream is of course to be able to utilize different h264-engines, like the x264.
Avid's export dialog is somewhat a joke I think, and you need to use the bundle software to have some decent options, or a complicated Interplay setup. Great perhaps for big houses, with a lot of different post houses involved. Though I love DNxHD.
Avids AMA is not good. It feels like it's in beta phase. And lacks several functions to really be as fast and easy as Avid want us to think.
Titles are much more easy to work with in Premiere if you use the built in title designer. And everything that needs to some kind of FX is way faster to do in Premiere.
From my perspective, what Premiere is missing are better CC-tools, a native, optimized and stable format like ProRes and DNxHD. Now, you could use the existing ones in the CS5 suite but maybe Adobe would feel better with it's own. Along with that a tool that let's you import media to any of those formats ie. log&transfer / import function. Transcode maybe not wanted for several, but for some it's the only way, and then there should be an option for that. Premiere really needs to have it's GUI redesigned as well. to much dead space, and on some smaller laptops it's too much unused buttons that steals space from the things that really matters.
Anyhow, besides looking at specifik functions, the interesting thing is, watching these suites for a couple of years now, both Premiere and Media Composer are leaning towards a same look, feel and workflow. They have never been so much a like as today. So it's not a big thing to move from a suite to another, as long as you know the basics. Some new buttons, some different way of saving files and manage media, other than that it's very similar. The black sheep now however, is FCPX, and we'll see what happens there, after this boiling pot has cooled down a bit.
Last and not least, editing is about being creative at the same time you are earning time and money, right?, so whatever suite that makes you happy, well.. there you go.
You can make great movies with any one of them.