Is getting Premiere to much behind with FC??

[Jose Milan]

Hello,

Some time ago I posted: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/attend-wo...re-doesnt.html

Got some insight about it, but now things seem to have change, let me explain:

Once again I have to get in this topic because I have a friend that used FCpro and confirmed me that after you do the final render output you can "re-render" only just a part of the video (like when you have to add or fix something) instead of rendering the whole video again and FC will maintain the whole video with the part fixed, but cuting render times by big factors. He also told me that with FC he is able to render a lot of videos at the same time!!! (not only one after another like premiere does).

Is this all true?

At work I'm having to pressure to switch to FC because they think FC will solve all the problems we might have with premiere. I don't really now if this will be true. I also wondering if FC has multicamera editing like premiere, I guess it does. I'm running out of arguments to stick to premiere (I would like to keep premiere because I've been using it for a long time and because the integration with other adobe software is getting better), but FC features seems to good and want to confirm.

Can you people share a little?

Thanks

[Paul R Johnson]

Can't see the arguement here - there are dozens of differences, and some may be critical to choosing the platform you edit on, but in general they simply do things a different way. Video and audio editing software all has similarities and critical differences that make one 'nice' and another 'pain'. In general, though - over the years I've discovered that the likes and dislikes people have boil down to a gut feeling about a piece of software. I've been a Sibelius owner for music work for many years and absolutely hate it with a passion, but I guy who does work for me is simply amazing, fast and accurate on it, in the same way I am not. I don't like Logic, but love the old Cubase. I've bought the very latest versions, and a few features I use lots have changed, and I don't like it any more. I have Avid on one machine in the edit suite, but because I've been using Premiere since version 6, I don't use it. Nothing wrong with it at all - but I'm just not that comfy with it.

I'm also not quite sure that it's easy to compare features. Adobe have started the render queue system, and you can now have jobs lined up - BUT, as far as I can see, the only real advantage is that you can go away, and jobs get done one at a time. If FCP can do them in parallel, that's great - or is it? Your machine can only process data at a certain rate. One after the other or in parallel can't make a difference to total time. It's just different.

For me, the key issue is workflow. How much time does it take to complete a project. If you are using and experienced on Premiere, then changing to FCP is going to mean starting all over again. How long did it take to get used to all premiere's shortcuts, and when you discovered them kicked yourself for not knowing earlier?

If you need multi-cam, then Premiere works for me. Most of my theatre work involves 3 or 4 camera. I can recommend it. What I can't do is comment on how FCP does it. I know it does - it was one of the shopping list features, but is it better? Not sure. I suspect that you won't convince an FCP person that Adobe is better, but now I'm embedded into Adobe, I can't change. It would have to be some major essential feature for me to even consider it. Sure - Adobe isn't perfect, but the little issues I find ways around. I'm sure FCP people also have similar work patterns.

I know NOTHING about Apples. I do have to use them sometimes in clients premises, and apart from the lack of the second mouse button, they're just different.

As for the rendering issue - in CS4 you get the option to render the entire work area, or just the effects. So if you've changed a few things you don't need to re-render, only bits that have changed - and to be fair, I only do this when I have to.

[Jose Milan]

Originally Posted by Paul R Johnson

Can't see the arguement here - there are dozens of differences, and some may be critical to choosing the platform you edit on, but in general they simply do things a different way. Video and audio editing software all has similarities and critical differences that make one 'nice' and another 'pain'. In general, though - over the years I've discovered that the likes and dislikes people have boil down to a gut feeling about a piece of software. I've been a Sibelius owner for music work for many years and absolutely hate it with a passion, but I guy who does work for me is simply amazing, fast and accurate on it, in the same way I am not. I don't like Logic, but love the old Cubase. I've bought the very latest versions, and a few features I use lots have changed, and I don't like it any more. I have Avid on one machine in the edit suite, but because I've been using Premiere since version 6, I don't use it. Nothing wrong with it at all - but I'm just not that comfy with it.

Totally agree!

I'm also not quite sure that it's easy to compare features. Adobe have started the render queue system, and you can now have jobs lined up - BUT, as far as I can see, the only real advantage is that you can go away, and jobs get done one at a time. If FCP can do them in parallel, that's great - or is it? Your machine can only process data at a certain rate. One after the other or in parallel can't make a difference to total time. It's just different.

I find very usefull the line up of renders in Premiere, my coworkers think that having parrallel renders will make render time shorter, I'm not sure about this.

For me, the key issue is workflow. How much time does it take to complete a project. If you are using and experienced on Premiere, then changing to FCP is going to mean starting all over again. How long did it take to get used to all premiere's shortcuts, and when you discovered them kicked yourself for not knowing earlier?

Yup, this is the main key, it took me a lot of time to get the feeling of Premiere, now I have more experience, and more to learn, but now I start to getting the feeling of control with premiere.

If you need multi-cam, then Premiere works for me. Most of my theatre work involves 3 or 4 camera. I can recommend it. What I can't do is comment on how FCP does it. I know it does - it was one of the shopping list features, but is it better? Not sure. I suspect that you won't convince an FCP person that Adobe is better, but now I'm embedded into Adobe, I can't change. It would have to be some major essential feature for me to even consider it. Sure - Adobe isn't perfect, but the little issues I find ways around. I'm sure FCP people also have similar work patterns.

When I found multicamera editing with Premiere I was quite happy, because before was a lot of hassle editing, and I find the editing quite easy with premiere.

I know NOTHING about Apples. I do have to use them sometimes in clients premises, and apart from the lack of the second mouse button, they're just different.

As for the rendering issue - in CS4 you get the option to render the entire work area, or just the effects. So if you've changed a few things you don't need to re-render, only bits that have changed - and to be fair, I only do this when I have to.

I think I dont understand. For example when I render a project for final output, that last, say 1 hour and afterwards, say I have to change a name in lower-thirds that last 5 seconds, when I fix that in the timeline I have to export (render) the whole project (1 hour long) again. I don't see an option to tell Premiere I just want to change those 5 seconds and internally Premiere changing only that part, render ONLY those 5 seconds and paste it where it belongs and have my 1 hour file fixed but without the whole render of the project once again (I now you can render the whole proyects or parts, but not what I mention and that it seems FC is capable off doing). If you can do it, please tell me how because is a great option.

About the FC, I see my co-workers have the famous "mac-craze", in which they state is much better than pc's, that using a mac is the industry standard, that they give less problems, that is more stable, etc...and like you said the have the gut feeling macs and FC is not that is different, it is because they are better!!! I really don't know if switching to mac and FC will solve all our problems, because we are getting to a point where any trouble/problem that appears is due to being working with PC and Premiere in my coworkers eyes since they sense mac systems and software are coded better. I really don't know if we would have less problems but it would take a lot of time getting used to it!

Many thanks for your good reply, If you have time, please tell me about the rendering thing in Premiere and of course any more tips and insights.

[Battle Vaughan]

Hi, Jose --- puzzled here, maybe there's some features I'm not aware of; but I use Final Cut at work and Premiere at home (these days, we have to be flexible, never knowing where we may end up....) I think your friend is talking about re-rendering a selection on the timeline of FCP, which you can also do in Premiere. Once you have output the timeline to a finished file that file is a separate piece....when I have to fix something (of course, I NEVER make a mistake, but if I did ;) --- I have to re-render the whole timeline back to the output file. I know of no way to fix just a part of a rendered output file in either program. If I'm wrong, someone please inform me how, would love it to be true!

You can batch output in Compressor, which comes with Final Cut; whether this is parallel or sequential processing I don't know, but it would probably end up taking the same amount of time either way...same amount of data, one way or the other. Premiere CS4 encoder provides for batch output also, same deal, I'm sure it is sequential. BTW, both programs do multi-cam, FCP does this very well, never tried it in Premiere.

Personally, I like Final Cut better; it is more stable than Premiere in my experience -- but that's just my experience, and I have had no end of problems with Vista, so it may be a Windows thing, not Premiere's fault. I like the integration Premiere has with the rest of Production Suite (After Effects, Encore and Soundbooth, for example ) and I find Encore much easier than the DVDPro app in Final Cut. After Effects is amazing, probably needs a college course to use it right, but the same can be said for Apple Motion.... It may very well come down to what the others have said, a personal comfort with the workflow of a given program. But, I think, they both do essentially the same job in much the same ways, only the details of using them differ....my two cents....Battle Vaughan/miamiherald.com video team

[Paul R Johnson]

Probably my fault for not explaining properly. I'm refering to the rendering that needs to be done on the timeline in PP. If you have rendered the entire work area, and then need to fix a caption, as mentioned, then say modify or add another effect, this is the bit that PP can render as an option - just the changed elements, in highlighted in red against the green that's already done. I quite like the idea that if you make a change here, even if you have this in the encore timeline, any changes in PP made get updated in encore automatically. Obviously you still need to render the file out if you need it outside of premiere, and this has to be done in full - which is what I expect you meant - whereas my reply was talking about the rendering done inside premiere to keep things running smoothly when you've been clever inside PP.

I probably started this by misunderstanding the question - if so, sorry!

As I understand it, FCP always recodes on input to (I think, Quicktime) - Premiere doesn't and works in whatever format the files are, hence the need to render every now an again.

[Battle Vaughan]

Hi, Paul, yes, same deal in Final cut, there is an option to "render selection." i take from Josés question that someone implied you could fix a part of a fully-rendered output file...and that's the source of my comment...wish one could! Cheers / bvaughan

[Jose Milan]

Hello guys,

Thanks for your reply's, is not my intention to start a Premiere vs FC war, both can do the jobs, it's just that I keep hearing over and over again that FC is more professional and Premiere is for basic stuff, and I'm not sure. What I want it to make sure is about the features I've been asking. So to clear things up:

1. FC or Premiere can not (yet) fix only parts of video without rendering the whole file again, right?

2. FC can render files in parallel, does it mean that if you have more than one core in your system it would handle renders faster (pairing each render with each core or something like that) than the first in first out queue of Premiere?

3. FC does not have the same integration with Photoshop/After Effects as of course does Premiere?

4. FC is somehow more stable and does not crash?

Once again, thanks for the insight.

[Jiri Fiala]

Premiere is moving in DIFFERENT direction than FCP. PPro is biased towards non-broadcast world, web video, mobile, and especially small shops, whereas FCP is better for broadcast, longer features, integration with larger systems (Protools), and even film workflows. Avid is, then, most capable in film environment, PPro and FCP cannot beat it in this field.

[Jose Milan]

Hello guys,

Once again thank you for the reply's. I was sure Avid was the most professional tool. Most of the stuff we do is for web, not for tv broadcast.

So I guess Premiere is good, but like I've been saying my co-workers have the "mac-craze" and they just love everything about macs.

One of my friend uses FC and he says he can render 4 projects at once (parallel), while having Premiere rendering another project at the same time, and he still can work editing stuff (without the machine blocking because of the rendering), he has a Mac pro book with 4 gigs, but its amazing he can do this with this machine (its good, but its not even a workstation), I have a Core2 Quad with 8 gigs and when I render my machine kind of blocks because all cores are at 100% because of the rendering...it goes fast, but I cant work in nothing else. So this means Mac's have a better system and memory management than PC's???!!!! This really matter.

At the end is what Paul, said is about workflow. Nowdays I feel comfortable using Premiere because is what I've been using, and maybe I'm a little worried in how much time it would take me to have the same level using FC and not stop production so much, and not only that using Mac's, everyone says the are easier, but for the little I've used them, I don't like some stuff I do in PC without second though and that in Mac you have to go around and do more stuff, maybe the are not big things but when you are used to do things on the fly for so long it bothers a lot when you have to learn a new system, but as everything is a matter of getting used to.

Again, thanks a lot.

[Brian Huey]

Jose,

If you want to use your PC for other things while it renders I can think of two ways to do this both using the 'Windows Task Manager.' You can pull up the Task Manager by pressing 'Ctrl+Alt+Del' all at the same time.

Click on the 'Processes' tab and click the 'CPU' column. This should sort the list of running processes by the ones using the most CPU power the renderer should be at the top. Or if you do this before rendering just look for the program name.

Right click on the program name and do one of two things:
- Set priority to 'Below Normal'
- Other programs you run default to the 'Normal' so they'll have priority and should run smoother.
- Choose 'Set Affinity' and uncheck one or more of the CPUs.
- This will prevent the rendering program from using all of the cores of the processor

Changing the priority would get the rendering done faster but the other programs might not be responsive enough.

Hope that helps.

[Peter Moretti]

Originally Posted by Battle Vaughan

... but it would probably end up taking the same amount of time either way...same amount of data, one way or the other. ...

With multi-threaded and multi-core processors, it's entirely possible that parallel rendering multiple projects would be significantly faster than rendering the projects sequentially.

[Jose Milan]

Brian and Peter, thanks for the replies.

I'm gonna do what Brian suggested, that would let me run another program and keep editing.

Thanks again.

[Brian Huey]

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti

With multi-threaded and multi-core processors, it's entirely possible that parallel rendering multiple projects would be significantly faster than rendering the projects sequentially.

It is possible that rendering multiple things at once will be faster if the program isn't able to divide up the task of rendering on file efficiently to all of the cores.

But if you're able to use 100% of your CPU power on one rendering task at a time and do a batch sequentially it would be just as fast as your CPU working at 100% on multiple files at once. You'd get done with all the files at the same time.

It's not worth worrying about.

[Stephen Armour]

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti

With multi-threaded and multi-core processors, it's entirely possible that parallel rendering multiple projects would be significantly faster than rendering the projects sequentially.

I believe Cineform on the Premiere platform has made this question even harder, as their codec is super-optimized for up to 32 cores now! That means the debate over concurrent processing vs sequential, really would boil down to "being able to do something in FC (while it's not-so-optimized codec renders it's output)", vs "a short wait while some super-optimized CF-codec-enabled Premiere machine runs it's quad eight-cores to the fullest capacity"!

That's not exactly happening yet, but it's right around the corner and CS4's newest update will make for even more complex evaluations. As multi-core power climbs, true concurrency becomes a serious possibility for better time utilization.

All I have to say is that both FC and Premiere developers had better keep a watch on the capricious winds of real (and perceived) user needs...

[Ed Kukla]

you could put cs4 on a mac!