Premiere Pro vs Final Cut Pro for longer projects

[stevie wara]

Hi. I was wondering if those here who are "in the know" could share your opinions on Premiere Pro vs Final Cut Pro. Over the last couple years, I have found many internet posts by users who have had stability issues with PP especially when projects grow large, such as for a feature length film. But I know the industry moves fast, so I think a current state of the NLEs report would be very helpful. Thanks!

 

[Jasons56]

Hi. I was wondering if those here who are "in the know" could share your opinions on Premiere Pro vs Final Cut Pro. Over the last couple years, I have found many internet posts by users who have had stability issues with PP especially when projects grow large, such as for a feature length film. But I know the industry moves fast, so I think a current state of the NLEs report would be very helpful. Thanks!

As with all PC systems, its a big fat "depends".
I have varying success with stability on the same system depending on the codecs in play. I have found Premiere to be really stable on my system when working with DVCPROHD. I recently did a show with 12 timelines, some nested - over 500 assets spread across many bins, and was taking HD timelines and creating SD versions in both letterbox and pan and scan by taking the HD sequence into an SD timeline. The longest timeline was 2 1/2 hours.
Not one crash even with Photoshop, AE, Encore, dynamic link, and the media encoder running too. I did have a few times where the computer FELT locked up because I was running too hard with too many processes going - but each time I just went out and warmed up my coffee and came back to everything running fine once the virtual mem got straightened out.

I have a co-worker that SWEARS by FCP and has found a way to crash my system more than a few times. Why he has problems I don't confounds me but I'm guessing running the system too far into virtual mem and then loosing patience may explain a lot of it. I don't think he has ever edited on a low end MAC low on memory. I think that explains half of the talk you hear about MAC stability. Most of the people editing on a MAC are spending more money. I bet if you were trying a large edit on a $1000 MAC VS. a $1000 PC they would perform similar - poor.

I did run into issues on my latest "big" edit. the client is a fan of editing on a large HDSDI display. I use a Blackmagic card for that. Everytime I tried to drop my material into a Blackmagic sequence to see it on the production monitor I would start crashing every hour or so.
Realize this could have everything to do with my pc and config and nothing to do with the Blackmagic card.

So, IMHO DVCPROHD editing on Premiere is pretty rock solid as long as you have a decently configured and outfitted computer.

I know of one local post house that has occasional problems outputting long format programs out of a very expensive AVID system over HDSDI. So they end up doing most of their work into DVCPROHD over firewire! Between you and me I'm pretty sure its just a throughput problem on their array. But hey, if a $375hr AVID suite is having problems doing UNCOMPRESSED HD, I shouldn't be too upset a $3k PC is.



YMMV.

BTW - I've seen many of high-end producers and post houses have plenty of problems with MAC systems over the years. Anyone that thinks they are bulletproof just hasn't been working with them long enough.

I do spend more time backing up and maintaining my PC systems than I would on a MAC. However, the benefits of the integrated solutions offered in the entire CS4 suite has such an incredible effect on productivity for me, I think I come out well ahead in the end. Plus I can afford 3 edit systems at work and 2 at my home studio. Couldn't do that with a MAC.
I do a lot of very quick turn-around production where I have to be able to simultaneously edit in HD and SD and turn out WMV and FLV files at the same time. A network of 5 affordable PC's , a bunch of 1tb drives in a couple of RAID 5 arrays, gigabyte ethernet - and for under 10k I turn out work IN A HURRY.

To do the same with the MAC platform I would be adding at least 30% to that cost. That adds up quick when you like to upgrade every year or so like I do.

If you have money to burn and need the support local producers - FCP is definitely a safe bet for most people. But if you are willing to do what it takes to get a good PC setup and learn to keep it happy - there are definite benefits in that route too.

NOW, if you are really talking Motion Picture work and want to do 2K or something like that then get ready to be bleeding edge (either spend a lot and learn a lot) on EITHER platform or software.

 

[mastermind]

I just recently started post on a feature on premiere cs4 and after a week decided I had to change over to a mac with FCP though i couldnt afford it. Id be careful and do some testing before committing to cs4.

problems i had were unable to sync clips and use them as individual clips in the bins, so had to sync sequences and from a crapload of sequences, second problem was due to editing that way i was unable to export OMF files of my main sequence to send to audio post guys and third thing i HEARD but didnt experience cus i never got that far is that you can't edit a long project in a single cs4 project, you have to split it up in 2 or even 3 so it doesnt slow down. i guess if you have an awesome system that would be fine but i heard this from people running quad cores and 8gb or ram like myself and thats pretty "standard" nowadays.

 

[BVX]

I have had many stability issues with my CS3 & now CS4 Premiere Pro/ Matrox Axio/HP Vista 64 system w/ 10 GB RAM (assembled by a very reputable, authorized dealer). The issues are multiplied as the project lengthens past even about the 15 minute mark.
FCP looks very tempting although I realize it isn't perfect by any means either and I'm not convinced Apple is all that committed to keeping it up to date in the future or even keeping it around.

I expect to give Adobe one more chance this year as the user reports coming out about the upcoming 64 bit Premiere & AE coupled with nVidia GPUs are very, very encouraging.

 

[stevie wara]

My current plans are to be editing at 2k for a feature length project, so I am just wanting to get things sorted out before I purchase a system. What I find so tempting is the vast savings in hardware cost when opting for a PC vs an imac or mac pro, the latter starting at $2500 for a basic quad-core. A quad-core imac looks somewhat tempting, but then I would be severely limited if I ever wanted to do any upgrades. But with a PC, man you can buy a ton of hardware for that same $2500, and I think that calling it a 30% difference might be a bit conservative! :smile: Yet all the hardware in the world won't make a difference to me if the software doesn't run, and I also wonder how much it would cost in time and effort just finding the right hardware combo to make the software happy. I have owned macs in the past, and although they are generally stable and easy to use, once you depart from basic tasks and move into expensive software for professional use, issues can and do arise. I wasn't aware that a new 64bit version of premiere is expected soon; perhaps that coupled with windows 7 will make a significant difference.

Thanks to all of you that have replied so far...

 

[BVX]

"CSNext" news from last year:
http://blogs.adobe.com/davtechtable/2009/10/its_official_the_future_of_ado.html

and here, where you should watch the 14 min Adobe Mercury Playback Engine demo at the top:
http://blogs.adobe.com/genesisproject/2009/11/technology_sneek_peek_adobe_me.html


Some pretty impressive stuff there. That said, Adobe has built up my hopes in the past only to let me down in a big way, so time will tell.

But about your system budget, that nVidia CUDA card & extra RAM could add $1500 or more.

 

[Mike Harvey]

I built my own system based on Vista x64, and haven't really had any issues with stability in CS4. That said, I have been converting to Cineform or DVCProHD to do all of my editing as AVCHD has been a bear to edit on my system (Q6600 quadcore 2.4 Ghz w/8gig of RAM).

 

[medeamajic]

I just recently started post on a feature on premiere cs4 and after a week decided I had to change over to a mac with FCP though i couldnt afford it. Id be careful and do some testing before committing to cs4.

problems i had were unable to sync clips and use them as individual clips in the bins, so had to sync sequences and from a crapload of sequences, second problem was due to editing that way i was unable to export OMF files of my main sequence to send to audio post guys and third thing i HEARD but didnt experience cus i never got that far is that you can't edit a long project in a single cs4 project, you have to split it up in 2 or even 3 so it doesnt slow down. i guess if you have an awesome system that would be fine but i heard this from people running quad cores and 8gb or ram like myself and thats pretty "standard" nowadays.

My system is a cheap $600.00 and I can edit videos over two hours in length using both HDV and AVCHD on the same timline.

I am not sure what you ment by syncing sequences Vs. individual clips in bin. What were you doing exactly?

 

[Jasons56]

My system is a cheap $600.00 and I can edit videos over two hours in length using both HDV and AVCHD on the same timline.

I am not sure what you ment by syncing sequences Vs. individual clips in bin. What were you doing exactly?

Hmm.. I'm wondering too.

Maybe trying to link up sound recorded separately from his material on lots and lots of short clips?

I can see where that might be tricky with certain workflows, which definitely sounds like the issue he had.

Not to say their aren't plenty of ways of dealing with dual system sound:
http://ifsstech.wordpress.com/2008/09/22/dual-system-sound-sync-options/

 

[Jasons56]

My current plans are to be editing at 2k for a feature length project, so I am just wanting to get things sorted out before I purchase a system. What I find so tempting is the vast savings in hardware cost when opting for a PC vs an imac or mac pro, the latter starting at $2500 for a basic quad-core. A quad-core imac looks somewhat tempting, but then I would be severely limited if I ever wanted to do any upgrades. But with a PC, man you can buy a ton of hardware for that same $2500, and I think that calling it a 30% difference might be a bit conservative! :smile: Yet all the hardware in the world won't make a difference to me if the software doesn't run, and I also wonder how much it would cost in time and effort just finding the right hardware combo to make the software happy. I have owned macs in the past, and although they are generally stable and easy to use, once you depart from basic tasks and move into expensive software for professional use, issues can and do arise. I wasn't aware that a new 64bit version of premiere is expected soon; perhaps that coupled with windows 7 will make a significant difference.

Thanks to all of you that have replied so far...

2k editing on any system at any price can get VERY tricky.
The value of high-end raid arrays and high quality RAM goes up exponentially with the amount of data you are handling.
With the good raids the controller card is as important and as expensive as the array itself. And you soon find out that a raid itself can cause as many problems as it solves. Think good battery backup on RAID and Computer.
And as you handle more data error correcting Parity RAM can solve lots of issues. Half of the time I've had "software" instability it has ended up being a RAM chip that wasn't up to the task.
Serious 2k editing will tax a computer like almost nothing else does.
A 2k HQ image stream is comparable datarates to a VERY large server on a very popular website.

The price difference between a MAC and PC is negligible at the high end because the basic computer is a small fraction of the cost of the system.
Plus high end PC's are built using the same stuff as high-end MACS.

I'd much rather have a mid-range computer with a KILLER raid for HD and 2k editing than a smoking CPU and GPU. Unless you are doing tons of effects/3d work.

 

[stevie wara]

Serious 2k editing will tax a computer like almost nothing else does.

You're apparently right about that. From what I've been reading lately, the way to go is to edit using "proxy" files. With FCP it seems, I could be editing "offline" with a less taxing codec, and then "finish" with a high quality prores codec once the edit is locked. What I like about this, is that with FCP I can still edit at full resolution even though the editing codec is of a lower quality. At least that is my understanding at the moment.

Now for Premiere Pro, would there be a comparitive workflow for a 2k project? I don't need the worlds best system and I doubt I'd be able to afford it. Is it reasonable to think I could do this sort of editing within a $3,000 limit?

 

[Jasons56]

You're apparently right about that. From what I've been reading lately, the way to go is to edit using "proxy" files. With FCP it seems, I could be editing "offline" with a less taxing codec, and then "finish" with a high quality prores codec once the edit is locked. What I like about this, is that with FCP I can still edit at full resolution even though the editing codec is of a lower quality. At least that is my understanding at the moment.

Now for Premiere Pro, would there be a comparitive workflow for a 2k project? I don't need the worlds best system and I doubt I'd be able to afford it. Is it reasonable to think I could do this sort of editing within a $3,000 limit?

You can edit with "proxy" footage with Premiere too. The big PITA with either system is how you acquire the footage and how you create the proxy. And you have to do it right or you create one hell of a mess. Of course a lot of it all depends on both how you like to work AND the type of editing you are doing.
Something with a slower pace and long takes is a whole different animal from editing fast paced material.


But I'd say to do a serious 2k feature length edit you would have to spend 3k just on the Array. You could do a "roll your own" array and save quite a bit of coin, but with the other expenses involved in making a feature who wants to risk your time and sanity on a less than bulletproof drive setup?

That being said, with a well spend 3k you could build a pretty damn respectable PC system these days, especially if you don't need any kind of analog capture.

I recently installed a generic HP home computer with an I7 chip for a client to convert files into WMV for a large archive and that thing renders like mad for a 1k computer.

The number one thing to really research is the motherboard. All my workflows require an AJA or Blackmagic card to get HDSDI in and out of the computer.
If you want to edit 2k and truly SEE 2k one of these is just about mandatory. And then you'll need a converter and one of the rare Monitors that truly does 2k. Oops, already spent the 3k and you don't have a computer yet.


Configuration of hardware is one place where the Mac setups are quite a bit easier. Because the hardware is so limited in options the configurations are much easier on Macs.
I've seen systems from major PC systems integrators that used motherboards that were known to have issues with the Blackmagic or AJA cards they were configured for.

Once you pick your video I/O card, do the research to get the right motherboard that "plays nice" with it. Then, get an array controller that plays nice with all three.

The graphics card, get something for cheap - one generation old. Because those things get outdated so fast its sick. Today's $600 card will be at Bestbuy for $75 next year.

Hard drives, be VERY careful there whether you are on Mac or PC.
All the manufacturers are in a Terabyte war now and all of them have some very flakey drives on the market. Use a vendor like amazon or new egg that has an extensive customer rating/feedback system to research and weed out some of the notoriously bad models.

Personally, I've been going Western Digital Enterprise Series 1tb and haven't regretted it once.

And oh yeah, POWERSUPPLY is VERY important. I've had 3 major computer failures in the last 3 years - one bad ram chip, two bad power supplies.
A bad powersupply can cause stuff to act like software problems. I had a supply start to act up once right after an Adobe upgrade. I spent a MONTH convinced the software was unstable until the PS. full out quit. Put in a new one and the computer was SOLID as was the Adobe update.


Honestly, my dream system includes a Mac with Finalcut AND a PC with CS5 suite. Because they both have definite strengths. And I want a KILLER Array that they can both access simultaneously.

What I REALLY want is Finalcut on PC that works with Dynamic Link within the Adobe suite. But that will NEVER happen. :embarasse

 

[medeamajic]

You're apparently right about that. From what I've been reading lately, the way to go is to edit using "proxy" files. With FCP it seems, I could be editing "offline" with a less taxing codec, and then "finish" with a high quality prores codec once the edit is locked. What I like about this, is that with FCP I can still edit at full resolution even though the editing codec is of a lower quality. At least that is my understanding at the moment.

Now for Premiere Pro, would there be a comparitive workflow for a 2k project? I don't need the worlds best system and I doubt I'd be able to afford it. Is it reasonable to think I could do this sort of editing within a $3,000 limit?

A $3000.00 systm could edit the Red One R3D codec OK using Premiere Pro. You would not need a RAID unless you wanted to make use of multiple layers. What camera will you be using?

 

[mastermind]

My system is a cheap $600.00 and I can edit videos over two hours in length using both HDV and AVCHD on the same timline.

I am not sure what you ment by syncing sequences Vs. individual clips in bin. What were you doing exactly?

Hmm.. I'm wondering too.

Maybe trying to link up sound recorded separately from his material on lots and lots of short clips?

I can see where that might be tricky with certain workflows, which definitely sounds like the issue he had.

Not to say their aren't plenty of ways of dealing with dual system sound:
http://ifsstech.wordpress.com/2008/09/22/dual-system-sound-sync-options/

I'm editing a feature so syncing audio recorded seperately to the clips. a STANDARD worlflow on fcp or avid or whatever would be to sync the audio to the video then create a subclip in a bin. thats what you would edit from. in premiere you cant do that (to my knowledge atleast and from what i've read on message boards)

 

[Eric1138]

I'm editing a feature so syncing audio recorded seperately to the clips. a STANDARD worlflow on fcp or avid or whatever would be to sync the audio to the video then create a subclip in a bin. thats what you would edit from. in premiere you cant do that (to my knowledge atleast and from what i've read on message boards)

You can do it, but you have to sync the clips manually - PPro (if I'm not mistaken) currently doesn't read the timecode from audio files. But if you use a slate while shooting, you can manually sync audio using the clapboard and you should be able to create a subclip from there.

 

[RockmanX3]

I use both and like them.

If the industry wasn't so Avid/FCP oriented, I'd stick with Premiere.

 

[medeamajic]

I'm editing a feature so syncing audio recorded seperately to the clips. a STANDARD worlflow on fcp or avid or whatever would be to sync the audio to the video then create a subclip in a bin. thats what you would edit from. in premiere you cant do that (to my knowledge atleast and from what i've read on message boards)

You can nest audio and video clips and even group them as sequences. The sequences can then be edit like audio and video clips. This is better then simply creating another video clip because the sequence can be re-edited with a simple click. So yea, Premiere Pro can do it.

 

[mastermind]

You can nest audio and video clips and even group them as sequences. The sequences can then be edit like audio and video clips. This is better then simply creating another video clip because the sequence can be re-edited with a simple click. So yea, Premiere Pro can do it.

Thats the whole point. you have to create nested sequences and edit those instead of clips. the problem with that however is that once you're all done and happy with your final edit and now ready to export an OMF from all these sequences merged into a master sequence you cant do that.

So no its not better than editing from synced clips in the bin.

 

[medeamajic]

Thats the whole point. you have to create nested sequences and edit those instead of clips. the problem with that however is that once you're all done and happy with your final edit and now ready to export an OMF from all these sequences merged into a master sequence you cant do that.

So no its not better than editing from synced clips in the bin.

You are editing the audio and video clips with Premiere but now you are going to redit them on another NLE system? I think you are tying to use Pro tools where as Audition would work better with Premiere Pro. I see your point to some extent but one could argure that FCP does not integrate with Audition. All NLE systems will have Pro and Cons and support certain work flows. However, this does not stop Premiere Pro form being used for longer projects that involve audio. It may not work with Pro Tools as good as FCP or Avid.

 

[Mbala]

Premiere was never good at handling long projects. In Premiere 5.1, it would lose elements on the timeline on long projects. In Premiere 1.5, long projects would take forever to open and would crash on occasion. CS3 seems to be just as clumsy with long projects as 1.5. The fact is I use Premiere because it's the most user friendly editing program. However, Adobe has earned a long standing reputation in not quite meeting the standards of serious professional stability on long projects. As a rule of thumb, their first release of any new version of Premiere is always full of bugs and people should never touch their software until the fist patch comes along. Adobe marketing people are always earger to release software before it is ready and by the time their engineers release the right patches Adobe is already about to release a new version with yet new bugs. I can't blame you if you try other software. You may want to try Avid or Edius or Vegas and keep us updated.