Final Cut V.S Avid

I have a question to all Guru's. Avid just introduced that Media Composer will now be stand alone and able to run on a laptop. This is huge for Avid users. Now does any one know what apple has up its sleeve to compete with this? Most post houses in L.A. use Avid but was considering crossing over due to price, but now with the composer under $5000 and stand alone they might stay with the Avid's. My real question is do you think this poses a threat to Final Cut? Does this put a road block in the way of Final Cut becoming the standard? Their advantage was edit cheaper than avid without extra hardware. What can they do now? I'm only asking becasue If I have to become a cross software editor because the compitition is getting a little thick I want to know now.

Sincerely shaking in my boots
Loyal Final Cut User

Charles:

Have you seen how much the add-on hardware will be? Yes, the AVID interface is considered better than FCP by many professional editors (definitely not all) and some of the tools function better (media management for one). But is that interface worth 3-4 times as much money as FCP Studio?

Not for me.

I work at an AVID-based production company and I like a lot of things about AVID better than FCP. But would I buy it over FCP? No. We have a new Nitris Symphony here and you would not believe how many functions are limited, dealing with the DNxHD codec has been a pain with the DVCProHD media we mostly shoot. They keyer is okay but not as good as most of the software-based keyers available for AE. Overall, I look at the Nitris and say, "why did we drop $90,000.00 on this?" It's a good system but massively overpriced IMO.

I am building my own HD FCP system with a Kona 3 and a SATA Raid for around $8,000.00 that does a lot more than the Symphony. Works for me.

I think you only need to worry about AVID if you want to work for AVID houses. If you are on your own, FCP is a practical and cost-effective tool for most situations (not all).

Best,

Dan

It's my considered opinion that AVID is a "Deer in the Headlights" looking at FCP's growth of acceptance. They have got to do something to compete. The AVID and DigiDesign (our crap don't stink) is not working. Just get the skinny from the NAB booth across the aisle.

While it will always play a dominate part in the industry, as it has garnered a Major role in Hollywood and in NewYork, FCP is turning heads across the country where independant edit houses are concerned.

You can always stay up with the AVID interface with AVIS Express for < $2K, if that is your concern. Other than that, FCP can edit video and hopefully will come to parity someday with AVID features for 5x less the cost. It is getting closer each version, but at $10,000 for setting up a system (less storage, that is) you can do almost anything with FCP. No special versions cost more as you can do more, hooks.

<<< Does this put a road block in the way of Final Cut becoming the standard? >>>

You're confused, methinks... you make Avid sound like the upstart. Avid is the standard, my friend...been that way for a long time. Do some research = how many Features were cut on Avids and how many were cut on FCP? It's 100 to 1. It's Final Cut that has been posing the threat and continues to do so mostly in the lower to mid level market. Feature Films will take a bit longer as the old curmudgeons are harder to convince.

Avid was definitely shaken up by FCP - which sparked the release of the software-only Media Composer and the SDI Mojo. Now, add a Quad you can have a full Digital Media Composer for not $40,000, but $12,000.

It's Apple's move. FCP6 better be good.

Coming over as pretty much an Avid convert (I still own & use Express Pro), I think the next big version of FCP will be the barometer. Now that Steve Bayes is onboard with the FCP Design Team (...ex Principal Product Designer for Media Composer, Symphony and DS Nitris at Avid Technology for 8 years and the author of the Avid Editor's Bible: The Avid Handbook), the next version should be geared more towards Professional Power Users who have been whining about better Professional features.

Personally, I can't wait for the next big upgrade.

My 2 cents.

- Joey



When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

I have been an Avid editor for 9 years and still get Avid edit jobs (all the way from Composer on NuBus to Adrenaline on a Quad) and an FCP editor since its inception with Apple.

In all honesty I prefer FCP bar a few Symphony/Adrenaline options that I would like to see on FCP.

Sure the FCP interface could do with a face lift and the Colour corrector could do with updating amongst other things, but its faster and more simple to cut any way you want on FCP, but on Avid you do it the Avid way and it takes longer (Marginally longer but still damn irritating).

In my opinion the only real downside to FCP is the lack of video processing hardware and so at the high end - render times.

But remember at the end of the day, if you use Avid - especially the high end HD Avids - then thats great...

However, if you use FCP - you get all of us amazingly helpful people in LAFCPUG to speed you up and help you out!!! What else can anyone possibly want? (hehe)

I want to see a "Minority Report" 3D interactive interface for non-linear editors because barring my Wacom and my keyboard thats the only thing thats going to speed my cutting up! (Well if it doesn't it will still look cool and get me some more excercise!!!)

But joe is right - Apple need to blow EVERYONE away with FCP6.

That's my $2 and ¢52

Ben





For instant answers to more than one hundred common FCP questions, check out the LAFCPUG FAQ Wiki here : [www.lafcpug.org]

grafixjoe wrote:


>
> It's Apple's move. FCP6 better be good.
>

Not to call you on this Joey but this has become a mantra since FCP 2. "FCP 3 better be good. FCP 4 better be good. FCP 5 better be good."

FCP 6 will be good.

>FCP 6 will be good.

Well at least better:-)

When is FCP6 coming out? Any ideas on the cost to upgrade from FCP5 to FCP6?

The Universal Binary version of FCP was just released. I think you'll have a bit of wait before you see an FCP6. If for no other reason than it would marketing folly to release a new app so soon after the major crossgrade to Final Cut Studio. The current crossgrade offer to move users to FCS runs until the end of the year if I'm not mistaken. I don't think you can expect an upgrade before that offer runs out.



All the best,

Tom

Thanks Guy's

and to Joey

<<You're confused, methinks... you make Avid sound like the upstart. Avid is the standard, my friend...been that way for a long time. Do some research = how many Features were cut on Avids and how many were cut on FCP? It's 100 to 1. >>

I am not confused I know it is the standard METHINKS you are when I clearly stated in my questioning do you think that this move from AVID will put a bump in FINAL CUTS road to BECOMING the standard. SO no research is needed It was long understood. But you did answer all of my questions so I thank you for that. So take it easy on the newbies...

It was a wonderful discuss GURU's



Post Edited (06-04-06 11:23)

<<< My real question is do you think this poses a threat to Final Cut? >>>

Take it easy on newbies?? Sorry charles, but you post a question = you get opinions - colorful as they may be / like them or not. We can't possible know what someone is thinking or wha that person knows about anything by just reading some text on a forum. Do you want someone to blow sunshine up your skirt or tell you what's on their mind? I do the latter because it's what I would want someone to give me if I posted a question here.

Just to clarify myself, your questions are not so clear to me. Your questions read like FCP is the boss and Avid's latest product may pose the threat. If I misunderstood, that's my problem...but don't expect anybody to "take it easy on you" when you post questions as broad as that.

<<< If I have to become a cross software editor because the compitition is getting a little thick I want to know now. >>>

The competition has always been there - ever since FCP was released. Every FCP upgrade has been a thorn in the side of Avid. You don't "have to" do anything. The SMART thing to do is to knnow both programs. Try using the Avid software and decide for yourself. They will both be around for a looooooooooooooong time so it pays to know them both inside out (it doubles your freelance worth in the community). If anything, Avid's Software-only Media Composer might get back those Avid users that recently converted . Makes me do a double-take at Avid again.

Peace

- Joey



When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

" I'm only asking becasue If I have to become a cross software editor because the compitition is getting a little thick I want to know now.

Sincerely shaking in my boots
Loyal Final Cut User"

Well I like FCP too. If I get to chose, that is my way to go, but I am not walking away from a job just because someone wants to use Avid.

Why not stop shaking, get a copy of a low end Avid (do they still offer Free DV?) and learn the interface. Then instead of shaking you could be running to the bank to make deposits.

-Vance

As long as they are pushing themselves (AVID and APPLE) and competing we will all benefit.
So hopefully AVID build a monster machine at a very low price so that Apple has to follow.

The only thing I'd like apple to fix ASAP is the incredibly retarted way of dealing with nested sequences. The stupidity still shocks me.



Johan Polhem
Motion Graphics
www.johanpolhem.com

Yep AVID still make FreeDV

Download Avid FreeDV from here: [www.avid.com]

Its also the only way you will get the AVID DV CODEC without having to buy Express et al.


>>>The only thing I'd like apple to fix ASAP is the incredibly retarted way of dealing with nested sequences. The stupidity still shocks me.<<<

Hey Johan, how would have Apple change it? - I think you need to write it down or the guys from FCP development who probably read the forums won't know what you mean by "fix"


Ben





For instant answers to more than one hundred common FCP questions, check out the LAFCPUG FAQ Wiki here : [www.lafcpug.org]

"I think you need to write it down or the guys from FCP development who probably read the forums won't know what you mean by "fix"""

-That is a very good point.
The shockingly stupid way of dealing with nested sequences:
When you duplicate a sequence for any reason and apply a series of effects to a few different copies there is no way to change all the duplicated sequences at once.
This has cause me so many problems that I dont even know where to begin.
As an example: I just finnished a doco that we treated by nesting the final timeline twice.
One on top of the other. We used this to de-interlace the lower and upper fields on two different layers and then blending the two together and we also applied some effects and used blending modes.

The enourmous problem you get when doing this is that if you have to do any changes at all to the final timeline that you have nested you either have to do all the changes twice, one for each nest or redo all the effects.
And this was only with two nests. If you make more the problems increase.

There is no viable reason for FCP to treat every nested sequence as a separate entity.
I have thought about it and nomatter how you look at it it is really really retarted.In order for this to work there has to be a master timeline that can be changed and which automatically updates all other nests.

When this came up in an erlier post someone said that "This is just another way of working" and "It has its advantages".
It doesn't. There are no advantages in any situations whatsoever.
None.

If I wanted to have a separate copy of a timeline and change it I can duplicate it in the bin.
Why would I want a new version for every copy I do on the timeline?

This is obviously a mistake but I dont understand why it has not been fixed.



Johan Polhem
Motion Graphics
www.johanpolhem.com

It depends on how you duplicate the sequence. If you duplicate it inside another sequence or copy and paste it there, the new sequence is a separate version, like a separate duplicate. This is the only circumstance in which FCP behaves like this. It was deliberated designed to do this and has worked like that since the earliest versions. Only putting in a sequence into the timeline with an edit function makes a new iteration of the same sequence.



All the best,

Tom

Hey Johan

Does this help:

Make a new empty sequence called Nest 1

Put your Master Sequence into new sequence Nest 1

Make a new empty sequence called Final

Put Nest 1 onto Video Track 1 of new sequence Final

Put Nest 1 onto Video Track 2 of new sequence Final


Open and apply effects that need to be appied to all "globally" on the Master Sequence (as clip) in the Nest 1 sequence

If you want separate effects on each Nest 1 in your Final sequence, add them as you would normally to clips on the Final sequence Timeline.

This should mean you have control over separate and global effects

Hope this helps


Ben





For instant answers to more than one hundred common FCP questions, check out the LAFCPUG FAQ Wiki here : [www.lafcpug.org]

Tom, I believe there was a change in the way the "parent/child" relationship changed between FCP4.x and 5.x. I remember bumping into this when using Keven Monahan's book "Motion Graphics and Effects in Final Cut Pro." I contacted him and he confirmed the change.



Craig Seeman
[thirdplanetvideo.com]

I'd be interested to know what changes this refers, but this relationship has not changed. If you take a sequence from the browser and edit it multiple times into a master sequence any changes to one will affect all uses of the nested sequences. If you have a nested sequence, copy it and paste it into the sequence it does not behave recursively. The copy is a separate independent sequence that does not act recursively. Try it. It still works like that.



All the best,

Tom

How did this thread get off track?



When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

Sorry Joe - my bad


Master of OT

Ben





For instant answers to more than one hundred common FCP questions, check out the LAFCPUG FAQ Wiki here : [www.lafcpug.org]

Hi Tom,

Here's the back 'n forth I had with Telly on FCP World. After re-reading, it seems FCP 1-3 and 5 behave one way and FCP 4.x was the "odd" variation which Telly used when he wrote the book.

_____________________________________________________

My Post -

Using FCP 5.0.3 on OS 10.4.3 I have an issue with EX 5-4 page 159 step 10

Parent, Child, Duplicate relationship of nests
I shift option drag Parent on V1 to V2 to create Child (step 4) and name it
In Browser I Duplicate Parent (step 7) name it and place in V3
When I open Parent nested sequence (5-4 step 10) and change orange color matte, it has not effect on the Child in V2.

To double check I go to the 5-4 prebuilt example and open that Parent Nest and change the matte there. That too has no effect on the example child.

Has something about the nest relationships changed in FCP5 as compared to FCP4 which was current when the book was written?
__________________________________________

Telly's response -

Isn't that weird? I just verified this behavior has changed when some in my class are still running 4-4.5. As I learned recently, the nests behave now as they did in versions 1-3 which is as follows:

Copy/Pasting and Duplicating Nests have the same behavior. They do not update. Option dragging a Nest? Just like copy/pasting so it also will not update.

The only way to get a nest to update globally is to drag it out of the Browser. The versions that are dragged in, in this case WILL update.
_________________
Kevin Monahan
Author, "Motion Graphics and Effects in Final Cut Pro"
fcpworld.com



Craig Seeman
[thirdplanetvideo.com]

Thanks Craig. I don't recall this changing in 4-4.5, but I'll take you guys' word for it.



All the best,

Tom

Okay, back on topic. My pie in the sky:

You will see a new version of FCP when you see a new version of the hardware. I suspect they will be intimately related as never before. This was Avid's philosophy of design, creating specific hardware added to the Mac to increase performance. Ungainly but effective.

What'll happen at Apple hopefully by MacWorld 07 is probably Intel Woodcrest (big time dual processor) towers will be optimized for Pro Apps and vice versa. Then FCS will blow Avid away for a while, on price/performance/looks.

If there *must* be an out-box, it'll be a miniature version of the tower, sort of like those G-Tech raid boxes which look like Mini-G5 towers. I mean, guaranteed, it will look *good.* That means a lot more than you might think to clients as well as users.

But in honor of the thread, a temporary change to the signoff-

- Loren

Today's Xpress Pro 4.x keytip:
Tap Left Bracket for Trim Mode!

The XpressPro KeyGuide?: your power placemat.
Now available at
www.neotrondesign.com

I gotta say that I find the FCP vs. Avid debate kinda silly. Reminds me of the Ford vs. Chevy "debate". It's editing that I love, not machines or software. I use both FCP and Avid, and don't have a strong prerference between them. Neither of these products are going to dissappear, and that's a good thing. It's obvious that the competition has resulted in benefits for us consumers. Avid editors need to stop looking down their noses at FCP folks, and FCP folks need to stop drinking the kool aid. There are many advantages to using Avid on certain projects; sophisticated media management, color correction with curves, Fluid Motion (beats the pants off FCP's implementation of vary speeding), and there should be no shame in admitting this.

<<< I gotta say that I find the FCP vs. Avid debate kinda silly. Reminds me of the Ford vs. Chevy "debate". It's editing that I love, not machines or software. >>>

OK, phil...here's a Video Toaster & 150 BetaSP tapes of raw ftg from 6 cameras of John Tesh at Red Rocks with no log (or assistant). We'll see how much you love editing in the morning

- Joey

PS...I agree with you on the AVID stuff



When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

I'm right there with you, Phil!

I've been an Avid user since '93, and a FCP user since '99...or was it 2000? The memory is starting to go....

I love both and I use both. When I'm really lucky, I get to choose which is the best tool for each particular project.

Back in the primordial days of FCP's beginning, I did just a smattering of projects in FCP, with the rest happening in Avid. Then for a couple years, my work was about half Avid, and the other half FCP, but a little heavier on the Avid side. Now it's sliding more towards FCP. About 75% of my work is FCP currently. The tide has turned...but I haven't ruled out getting some form of Avid on my own system so I can choose the best tool for the job. All of my Avid work has been on employer's or client's computers so far.