I wish Sony would release Vegas for Mac.I tried Final Cut Pro but didn't like it at all. Wasn't user friendly like most Mac apps are. Premiere and FCP share the same kind of inferface, as they were designed by the same person. So basically it's more of the same. I guess I have to stick to a PC for editing.
But at least it's nice to see more choice hitting the Mac.
It's not as if there aren't other options. Avid has a few different versions for the Mac, from free to pricey. There's Media 100 as well.
The integration between After Effects, Premiere, and Encore is better than Apple's integration between Motion, Final Cut, and DVD Studio Pro in my opinion. After Effects still blows Motion away.
If I had a project that I was mainly working on in After Effects (which I do alot) and only needed simple editing, then I would prefer to just use it with Premiere and Encore for the Final output to save time and disk space with much more ease in making changes.
Until Apple makes an After Effects killer (which they haven't done with Motion or Shake), Adobe in the Video world is going to be a mainstay no matter PC or Mac.
Also Photoshop and Illustrator are essential to most editors and motion graphics designers. If they include a lot more useful tools for the video industry and integrate those with their Production Suite line with the CS3 line then they could go head to head with Apple's line once again. Unless Apple makes a photoshop & illustrator killer, which I don't see being accomplished within the next decade if at all.
The way you originally said it, it sounded like the same person had a hand in the origins of both products. This person didn't.
Did you read the page? That's exactly what it says. He was the initial designer of both Premiere and Final Cut Pro.
From the webpage:
Quote:
Randy was the initial designer, architect, and lead developer of Adobe Premier leading the product from concept to completion and continuing as the lead architect through Version 4.
Serving as Senior Architect, Professional Video Group, Randy has been the initial designer, architect, and lead developer for Final Cut Pro.
Word initial means "first" aka origin.
I'm not trying to be a smartass here, it's just that someone said I was wrong and I wasn't. I provided a link to the information to prove it.
That depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Motion does not have the bells and whistles of AE. Apple did not want it to. Because of that Motion is easier to learn how to use.
Photoshop CS3, Illustrator CS3, and After Effects 8 will all be universal, but newly ported apps (Premiere, Encore) and Soundbooth will be Intel only. Understandable.
What Mac user on earth would use Premiere instead of Final Cut?
Or put differently, what Windows user would not switch from Premiere to Final Cut in a heartbeat if FC was available on windows.
Rewind a few years and an Avid editor might have said the same thing about FCP. Things change.
Consider that there are many opinions like this review of Adobe Production Studio 2, it sounds like it might already be the best package and value on any platform. If nothing else, read the last paragraph of the review.
Does anyone seriously care? The adobe products just do no match up to the Final Cut Suite, Shake, and Combustion.
If you have to use a layer based compositor, why on earth would you take after effects over combustion?
I used the Adobe suites through most of college, and uni, but also in Uni I got to grips with Smoke and Final Cut. Adobe is like Tomy's My First Video Editor and Comper...it's not real!
According to this link, Randy only designed Premiere from the ground up. Macromedia designed what was to become Final Cut Pro. Once Apple bought that, Randy took over adjusting the program to what Apple wanted.
There is a big difference here because most decisions about a program are made at the initial design stages. Moreover, even if Randy did design both programs, which he did not, that does not mean he would have designed both programs the same way. I suspect he would either start over all together, or improve on his original design.
The link was interesting, so thanks for sharing that.
This is good news. After-all, more software for the Mac is better then less. Personally, I am rooting for Final Cut Pro, but many people thinking about switching to a Mac would use Premiere. Moreover, Adobe gets dumped on for not making Mac versions of its software, here it is doing the right thing.
Unless you have used the newer versions of Premiere and FCP, you can't speak to this.
Are you saying that you are a pro with extensive experience in both programs? I know a number of those who use it for pro work, and they are pleased with it.
As a matter of fact I am saying just that: I do have extensive experience with NLE's: 15 years on AVID, regular Premiere user since 4.0, currently on PPro 2.0 and at least 3 (4? ) years of occasional FCP use.
While it is true that a small number of people prefer PPro over FCP, a similar percentage also liked New Coke, and some people actually enjoy fruit cake.
I stand by my original comment: Why would any Mac User trade FCP for PPro?
What Windows user wouldn't RUN from PPro if FCP were available on Windows?
I can only assume that what this means is that it's very cheap to port apps from pc to mac at this stage. Otherwise, why bring a product to market that no one wants.
All those former GoLive and freehand developers need something to do right?
Rewind a few years and an Avid editor might have said the same thing about FCP. Things change.
The most compelling argument for anything over AVID is cost. AVID is/was/will most likely always be expensive.
I don't know what the future match ups between FCP and PPro will look like. I do know that today, FCP is more stable, has a better track record of fixing bugs without charging for them in the next version, has vastly superior handling of HD media and HD output, easier and superior audio editing capabilities and allows layer based editing and compositing.
Some would also argue that FCP has a better interface and better media handling, but that may just be a matter of what you're comfortable with.
Comments
Yeah Vegas is pretty different from Premiere or FCP.
People either really love it or really hate it.
Vegas is...odd.
It's very good, though I've only played with it a bit. But it takes some getting used to.
They weren't designed by the same person. Some people were involved in both for a short time, but that's different.
http://www.portlandave.com/randy/DEST/DEST.html
http://www.portlandave.com/randy/DEST/DEST.html
What are you trying to prove here?
http://www.portlandave.com/randy/DEST/DEST.html
The way you originally said it, it sounded like the same person had a hand in the origins of both products. This person didn't.
I wish Sony would release Vegas for Mac.I tried Final Cut Pro but didn't like it at all. Wasn't user friendly like most Mac apps are. Premiere and FCP share the same kind of inferface, as they were designed by the same person. So basically it's more of the same. I guess I have to stick to a PC for editing.
But at least it's nice to see more choice hitting the Mac.
It's not as if there aren't other options. Avid has a few different versions for the Mac, from free to pricey. There's Media 100 as well.
If I had a project that I was mainly working on in After Effects (which I do alot) and only needed simple editing, then I would prefer to just use it with Premiere and Encore for the Final output to save time and disk space with much more ease in making changes.
Until Apple makes an After Effects killer (which they haven't done with Motion or Shake), Adobe in the Video world is going to be a mainstay no matter PC or Mac.
Also Photoshop and Illustrator are essential to most editors and motion graphics designers. If they include a lot more useful tools for the video industry and integrate those with their Production Suite line with the CS3 line then they could go head to head with Apple's line once again. Unless Apple makes a photoshop & illustrator killer, which I don't see being accomplished within the next decade if at all.
The way you originally said it, it sounded like the same person had a hand in the origins of both products. This person didn't.
Did you read the page? That's exactly what it says. He was the initial designer of both Premiere and Final Cut Pro.
From the webpage:
Randy was the initial designer, architect, and lead developer of Adobe Premier leading the product from concept to completion and continuing as the lead architect through Version 4.
Serving as Senior Architect, Professional Video Group, Randy has been the initial designer, architect, and lead developer for Final Cut Pro.
Word initial means "first" aka origin.
I'm not trying to be a smartass here, it's just that someone said I was wrong and I wasn't. I provided a link to the information to prove it.
Did you read the page? That's exactly what it says. He was the initial designer of both Premiere and Final Cut Pro.
From the webpage:
Word initial means "first" aka origin.
I'm not trying to be a smartass here, it's just that someone said I was wrong and I wasn't. I provided a link to the information to prove it.
But the origin of Final Cut Pro is in Final Cut, the pro version didn't spring from nothing.
After Effects still blows Motion away.
That depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Motion does not have the bells and whistles of AE. Apple did not want it to. Because of that Motion is easier to learn how to use.
other sites are reporting that it will all be Intel binaries only, not universal.
As is Adobe.
http://www.adobe.com/products/productionstudio/faq.html
Photoshop CS3, Illustrator CS3, and After Effects 8 will all be universal, but newly ported apps (Premiere, Encore) and Soundbooth will be Intel only. Understandable.
http://www.portlandave.com/randy/DEST/DEST.html
That's interesting. I was told by people at Apple that he just consulted on the project.
the program was bought from Macromedia.
What Mac user on earth would use Premiere instead of Final Cut?
Or put differently, what Windows user would not switch from Premiere to Final Cut in a heartbeat if FC was available on windows.
Rewind a few years and an Avid editor might have said the same thing about FCP. Things change.
Consider that there are many opinions like this review of Adobe Production Studio 2, it sounds like it might already be the best package and value on any platform. If nothing else, read the last paragraph of the review.
-- nd --
If you have to use a layer based compositor, why on earth would you take after effects over combustion?
I used the Adobe suites through most of college, and uni, but also in Uni I got to grips with Smoke and Final Cut. Adobe is like Tomy's My First Video Editor and Comper...it's not real!
There is a big difference here because most decisions about a program are made at the initial design stages. Moreover, even if Randy did design both programs, which he did not, that does not mean he would have designed both programs the same way. I suspect he would either start over all together, or improve on his original design.
The link was interesting, so thanks for sharing that.
http://www.portlandave.com/randy/DEST/DEST.html
I'm sure many wouldn't.
Unless you have used the newer versions of Premiere and FCP, you can't speak to this.
Are you saying that you are a pro with extensive experience in both programs? I know a number of those who use it for pro work, and they are pleased with it.
As a matter of fact I am saying just that: I do have extensive experience with NLE's: 15 years on AVID, regular Premiere user since 4.0, currently on PPro 2.0 and at least 3 (4? ) years of occasional FCP use.
While it is true that a small number of people prefer PPro over FCP, a similar percentage also liked New Coke, and some people actually enjoy fruit cake.
I stand by my original comment: Why would any Mac User trade FCP for PPro?
What Windows user wouldn't RUN from PPro if FCP were available on Windows?
I can only assume that what this means is that it's very cheap to port apps from pc to mac at this stage. Otherwise, why bring a product to market that no one wants.
All those former GoLive and freehand developers need something to do right?
If you have to use a layer based compositor, why on earth would you take after effects over combustion?
Exactly!
Rewind a few years and an Avid editor might have said the same thing about FCP. Things change.
The most compelling argument for anything over AVID is cost. AVID is/was/will most likely always be expensive.
I don't know what the future match ups between FCP and PPro will look like. I do know that today, FCP is more stable, has a better track record of fixing bugs without charging for them in the next version, has vastly superior handling of HD media and HD output, easier and superior audio editing capabilities and allows layer based editing and compositing.
Some would also argue that FCP has a better interface and better media handling, but that may just be a matter of what you're comfortable with.