Can anyone compare Avid to FCP & PP

[Peter Moretti]

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

I'm not saying he can't run it, but he'll be short on CPU, won't have a nitris box, and probably doesn't have a quadro card to help out either. For the cost of a hot quadro he's halfway to a solid PC. For the cost of a Nitris, he's paid the same for a hot PC WITH a Quadro.

After seeing what Media Composer did with my Avid spec machine with a Quadro FX 4800, I wouldn't want to cut with anything else.

Perrone, I understand what you're saying. But the OP may not realize that MC really is quite fast on even under-CPU'd machines using GeForce cards.

It's kind of odd that Avid is known for needing hardware acceleration and yet is (in my experience) the fastest software-only NLE by a wide margin. I actually think there is a pretty good chance his computer is up to the task.

[Perrone Ford]

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti

Perrone, I understand what you're saying. But the OP may not realize that MC really is quite fast on even under-CPU'd machines using GeForce cards.

It's kind of odd that Avid is known for needing hardware acceleration and yet is (in my experience) the fastest software-only NLE by a wide margin. I actually think there is a pretty good chance his computer is up to the task.

One need only look at the fact that Avatar was edited on hardware purchased in 2007 to understand what Media Composer can do. And they were running old versions of Media Composer... 3.1.2 if I remember right. How funny is it that Avatar was edited on a version of Media Composer that was not 3D! They didn't want to upgrade in the middle of editing.

[David Parks]

I think after all of my time editing I have finally come to the conclusion that one needs to edit with what works for the edit task. I know that has been said over and over and is stating the obvious.

At my job here at NASA/JSC/Jacobs, we have five editing platforms. Avid MC 4.04, Edius NEO for quick turn AVCHD testing footage, Vegas for importing strange cell-phone and consumer formats that come in the door (it will import anything) , FCP for when the Avid is busy, and Premiere, which a few IT guys use to edit down productions for flash presentations. All legit and different.

What I realized recently is that most media pros, for example 3D animators or flash programmers aren't needing to do what I call "advanced editing". 90% of the time they just need to trim a few clips, convert to a format, or slam together a presentation. Not much narrative or commercial style editing going on with them.

Most of the them can't comprehend or could care less about 3 point editing, or tracking hours and hours of footage. Trimming? They would tease me about trimming 3 frames.

So, after trying to train a couple of guys here on Avid, and expecting them to have a "eureka" moment on Avid media management, i got a ho hum. They finally said, oh we hired you to do the "long form" edit jobs and hard stuff, so we don't need Avid, you need Avid. Yes, I do.

Now I hilariously have experience with five platforms but use Avid for 70% of my work.

BTW, I agree with Peter that Avid's performance since version 3 is much faster and robust, even without hardware acceleration.

Sorry for the long post.

[Richard Alvarez]

David - I think you're assessment is fairly good. I work in a small TV production situation. I have AVID at home, work with FCP and Vegas at work. Different NLE's have their strengths and weaknesses. The key is to figure out what your MAIN workflow will entail. Short clips, compressed for web? Mixed media reformated and transfered to web? LONG FORM documentary or feature work? Figure out what you need by figuring out what the bulk of your deliverables will be.

[Shaun Roemich]

I agree, David - a pretty accurate assessment.

I've been an FCP editor predominantly for 11 years and at my former 9 - 5 (at a teaching hospital) most of the stuff WE shot got edited in an FCP bay but every now and again, clients would come in with some bizarre consumer/web footage that FCP just didn't like so I'd boot up an aging seat of Premiere and hobble through it (due to MY inexperience with Premiere).

And no need to apologize for "a long post" when the signal-to-noise ratio is that high!

[Dale Guthormsen]

Along these lines:

I moved from PP to Vegas as I moved to HD. I intend to stay with Vegas but have found it has a little trouble on long projects. Last one was a 2hr 20 minute Hd.

I have always felt one needs two systems. I am considering AMC and Edius.

I have looked at tutorials for both.

On a long project I would like to preview from the timeline in real time. Mostly hdv, a few composites, color correcting.

I use a I7 920 quad, 10 gigs of ram, vista 64 bit.

Am I capable of doing this stabely (without hardware) with MC or edius for that matter.

Intend to make this move in the next month.


Does MC do a good job rendering down to SD too?



Dale

[Peter Moretti]

MC is picky about videocards. nVIDIA is usually a good match. Avid recommends the Quadro FX series, but many people use GeForce cards just fine.

I don't know what videocard you're using, but otherwise, your system looks plenty fast for MC w/o any additional hardware.

[Perrone Ford]

Originally Posted by Peter Moretti

MC is picky about videocards. nVIDIA is usually a good match. Avid recommends the Quadro FX series, but many people use GeForce cards just fine.

I don't know what videocard you're using, but otherwise, your system looks plenty fast for MC w/o any additional hardware.

Agree. The nice thing about Avid is that it seems to be able to take a look at whatever you've got... CPU, RAM, Video Card, external hardware, and use it ALL to help itself. Run of the mill quadros are all THAT expensive any more. Of course you can spend $3k on one if you want, but you can get into one for a few hundred dollars. But if I wasn't doing a lot of 3d effects, I don't know that I'd plunk down so much money on one.

[Greg Laves]

I confess that I am not a tweek. About a week before I received the EOL notice, my NVidia card in my edit computer died. I took it into a friends shop who does computer repairs. He said he had seen more failures with NVidia video cards than any other brand. He sent me to Best Buy to get whatever I wanted but he advised against NVidia. So I bought an ATI Radeon HD 4650. It has 1GB of GDDR2 memory and it does seem to perform better than my old NVidia ever did. Will this video card work with Avid or did I just waste my money?

[Perrone Ford]

Originally Posted by Greg Laves

I confess that I am not a tweek. About a week before I received the EOL notice, my NVidia card in my edit computer died. I took it into a friends shop who does computer repairs. He said he had seen more failures with NVidia video cards than any other brand. He sent me to Best Buy to get whatever I wanted but he advised against NVidia. So I bought an ATI Radeon HD 4650. It has 1GB of GDDR2 memory and it does seem to perform better than my old NVidia ever did. Will this video card work with Avid or did I just waste my money?

1. If you can display video, you did not waste your money. But that money would have likely been better spent on an Nvidia card.

2. I've had Nvidia cards forever in many machines. None have failed. EVER. But, I don't make a habit of buying the cheapest card on the market either. And lots of manufacturers use NVidia chipsets. Some are certainly better than others.

3. I don't know that I'd be taking advice on a video editing workstation's hardware from "a guy down the street". If you want to spec a machine to run Avid well, call Avid. They can tell you what works well. I've read more horror stories about ATI drivers and issues than I can shake a stick at. I wouldn't take one for free. Not on a PC. On the Mac they appear to be the card of choice. Avid specifies NVidia. Adobe's new software specifies NVidia. RED's tools for the PC specify NVidia. Edius does it's magic with NVidia. Nearly the entire video market on the PC is specifying Nvidia cards because of the CUDA processor many of them have. It's quickly becoming a standard with people developing graphics and video acceleration around it.

I'd see if I could do an exchange personally. Comparing the speed of a brand new ATI card to and old video card... well I sure HOPE its lots faster.

[Greg Laves]

Originally Posted by Perrone Ford

I don't know that I'd be taking advice on a video editing workstation's hardware from "a guy down the street".

Perrone, thanks for the info. However, I never said the advice was "from a guy down the street". Actually, my friend's primary business is repairing computers. His business processes something like 100 repairs a day. He has maintanance agreements for several large corporations. Including some Fortune 500 companies. Ironically, his true passion is video. But I guess he can make more money with his computer repair business. He has directed, shot and edited several videos including a recent music video shot on Red. When he diagnosed the problem with my computer, I was surprised that he recommended getting something besides NVidia since all of my previous experiences had been good.

[Perrone Ford]

You did not indicate at any time that your friend had any experience in video. Merely fixing computers. Just because the guys down the street can change the tires on my Ferrari, doesn't mean that I would expect them to know how to race one. You see what I'm saying?

And if your friend has RED experience, then he should be well familiar with the need for Nvidia cards in some markets, though if you had leanings toward Avid and he was unfamiliar with Avid, that might not have been on his mind.

In any event, your video card might work with Avid, but it will not offer any acceleration.

[Dale Guthormsen]

Well,

my I7 has a 3450hd ATI card.

It appears I will need to change that, obviously with one with morre ram on it.

Without spending a fortune, what invidia cards would you recommend?

[Perrone Ford]

Originally Posted by Dale Guthormsen

Well,

my I7 has a 3450hd ATI card.

It appears I will need to change that, obviously with one with morre ram on it.

Without spending a fortune, what invidia cards would you recommend?

What's "a fortune"? My card was $1500, I consider that expensive. Some people consider $200 expensive. So you'll have to clarify a bit more.

Amazon.com: PNY VCQFX1800-PCIE-PB NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800 768MB GDDR3 Graphics Card: Computer & Accessories

 

Amazon.com: PNY VCQFX1800-PCIE-PB NVIDIA Quadro FX 1800 768MB GDDR3 Graphics Card: Computer & Accessories

Is that too much?


Maybe this one?

Amazon.com: PNY VCQFX580-PCIE-PB NVIDIA Quadro FX 580 512MB GDDR3 Graphics Card: Computer & Accessories

 

Amazon.com: PNY VCQFX580-PCIE-PB NVIDIA Quadro FX 580 512MB GDDR3 Graphics Card: Computer & Accessories

What are you going to hook to this thing? 2 flatpanels? Do you need HDMI? Is displayport ok or do you need DVI?

[Peter Moretti]

And for the really cheap card, people have been using GeForce 6800's. Sometimes you have try to force the computer to use the Quadro drivers w/ a GeForce and sometimes you don't.

Like Perrone said, an ATI might work, so give it a shot. If not, install the nVIDIA driver that Avid recommends for the version of MC you'll be running and connect the video card you want to try to use. Using a recommended Quadro, even a low-end one, does eliminate the videocard from the equation when troubleshooting. But a lot of people do use nVIDIA gaming cards just fine.

My personal opinion is that if a cheap Quadro cost only a few $100 more than go for it. There are better ways to save $200, JMHO.

P.S. What do I use? Both, LOL! I have a Quadro and a GeForce for a second card all running off of the Quadro drivers, so I have a four monitor setup, which is kind of cool.