BBC is switching to Premiere Pro CS5

Postmaster

Postmaster

Dark Side of the Camera
This is huge - BBC is known as rather conservative.

The BBC is switching to Premiere Pro CS5 software, through which the corporation is improving workflow efficiency, creating a tapeless environment and reducing costs. The corporation is now implementing an additional 2,000 seats of Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 software as the company’s primary tool for desktop nonlinear editing. The broadcaster’s expanded use of Adobe Premiere Pro CS5 software highlights the growing momentum for Adobe Creative Suite 5 Production Premium across the broadcast industry.
Click to expand...

http://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/2010/09/09/bbc-switches-to-adobe-premiere-pro-cs5/

Frank
 
All I can say is woah...

I'm glad though, that people are finally taking Premiere seriously. CS5 has really improved the suite as a whole, but I've met many people who have associated versions as late as CS4 with the *old* Premiere, pre-Pro label. It's a terrible rep that Adobe clearly has worked to rid itself of. Videographers in general are close-minded with new software/hardware, so this is great.

... and now I have more ammo in PC vs. Mac debates.
 
Barry_Green said:
Well, no need for that here, we don't indulge in that here.

Besides, it's kind of moot in this discussion, since Premiere Pro works on both platforms.
Click to expand...

Oh, I'm not gonna start one here, but I have to hear an earful of it in many workplaces. Think of it as a defense mechanism. :) I have utmost respect for FCP as an editing platform in fact, it's just that I can't tolerate uninformed statements by many professionals (Usually in the form of sweeping statements like "X is better than Y")
 
Yeah, a lot of FCP and Avid "elite" editors, always looked down on Premiere users as some sort of unprofessional hobbyists, because they use "the wrong" software.

I think that attitude is gone for ever now.
I see more and more editors switching, especially since CS5 and Cuda.

If you look at the Adobe section of REDuser you can see that there is a big change going on.

Frank
 
I've used FCP, Premiere Pro, and Avid.

PP I've used back and forth since 2000, and FCP since 2004. Avid, I just started with and my experience is that is it way slower than FCP or Premiere in terms of editing. It is not very intuitive, and I might just be scared from using PP and FCP to much and being used to the fact that there are several ways of getting the same result. But, my problem with Avid is that I have to click and select tracks all the time, where as in the other programs I can just "drag and drop" if I feel that is faster.

Now, Avid seems pretty rigid and robust, but I feel it is a much more time consuming process to edit on it. I will though continue to try it, and see if it gets better.

I've always been annoyed with "elitist" thinking that Avid is so pure and nice, and even FCP users thinking it is so damn good compared to PP. When asked "why is it better" it is 90% of the time just BS-reasons.What it would always boil down to was that they really didn't need whatever the difference is. Just a while ago I met a "professional editor" for a TV series, and she was ranting about how good Avid is and that FCP and PP is for nothing serious. Well, she didn't know what resolution she was editing in, codecs, etc. nothing really techie she would know anything about. She was an OK editor, in terms of the material she was editing, nothing bad, nothing special. So, basically, there you have this person saying how bad FCP and PP is, without any real knowledge. She isn't the first or the last person that I have met, but she is probably the worst case.

The teachers I've had, that I've think have been "good filmmakers" don't care if it is edited in Avid, PP, FCP, they know that with every new version they all change, and that PP and FCP been closing the gap to Avid. My bad teachers, are the ones that have this illusion that editing will only be good on Avid, and then FCP...

So it is really nice that BBC is removing some of the stigma that PP been carrying around. Also, I am not so fanatical and sees this as BBC thinks PP is better, because I guess/know that it is all about the CS5 production suite, it's work flow, etc. but it does show that PP is a viable option.
 
I love the Adobe Creative Suite. I use it on both PC and Mac (although I prefer the latter) - and the interaction between all the programs is absolutely top notch and when done right is so intuitive and makes crossing software in workflows a breeze. I have no idea (after having learned non-linear editing on AVID, using FCP for awhile and having settled on Adobe) why Adobe always got snubbed in the professional world. I'm glad it's getting some decent recognition.

Adam
 
This is good to hear, Premiere has a bad rep because all the versions prior to when it changed to premiere pro were pretty horrible, but now it's essentially final cut with a nicer interface. I think a lot of "professionals" attribute their professionalism to the fact that they are able to navigate their way around impenetrable poorly designed software rather than their cutting skill, a good workman never blames his tools as they say...
 
Great post by Highlander. I haven't had the exact same experience, but I concur. As I've said when it comes to gear such as cameras, it's the carpenter not the tools.

I like FCP and still use it, but it seems like it's time for them to make a step up for their pro clients. The way PP and AE work so seamless is also a real benefit for Adobe users.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top