fcp versus avid

I know there is no simple answer - I am only looking for honest opinions.

I have been told that Avid might be a better choice for cutting a 25 minute documentary which involves 20-30 hours of both SD and HD footage - and possibly some Red footage. the reason given was Avid might be more helpful organizing the footage.

Cost is not an issue.

I'd appreciate any opinions and have no ax to grind with either Avid or FCP.

Cody

> I'd appreciate any opinions and have no ax to grind with either Avid or FCP.

No worries -- we're all about different viewpoints here and don't always agree.

I personally hate the way Avid tries to dominate your file management. I prefer to know exactly what each file is called, and where it is, and Avid's file-naming protocol drives me freakin' bananas. There are also many things I don't use with Avid, such as multiple users for one project file, bins as individual, automatically updating files, etc. The things I do like about Avid, like the floating sound EQ window, aren't necessarily better for documentaries.

There are other factors, though. If you're the editor, I think the most pertinent one is, which software are you most comfortable with? Will you have an assistant editor? Many people use both, but most people prefer one over the other. If you're more fluid on Avid than FCP, then just go with Avid -- the creative side should always win, and the shortcomings of either application probably aren't anything a good assistant won't solve. And honestly, a 25-minute documentary with 30 hours of footage sounds pretty easy. I was assistant editor on two feature documentaries with 100 times the footage you're talking about, and FCP didn't give us any problems.


www.derekmok.com

Does Avid have a RED workflow yet?

If not, that's your answer right there if you know for certain that there will be RED footage.

Personally, if there aren't a lot of heavy graphics or effects to be done during the edit, I'd lean towards Avid. If all I'm doing is telling a story and I need to be able to keep things organized and/or hand off stuff to the graphics department, audio department, and finishers, under most circumstances I think I'd rather use Avid.

If I'm the whole band, however, I prefer FCP. I don't enjoy doing graphics in Avid at all.

That being said, I started on Avid. Do you have an Avid background at all? There are things about it that are uniquely Avid and don't really make sense unless you understand the nature of NLEs from the beginning. There's stuff in there that was designed under much different computing-power limitations that a lot of folks nowadays try and say, "Well, that's a stoopid way to do it"...until they realize that it was probably the ONLY way to do it when it designed. Some things they can change to keep up with the computing times, but some stuff doesn't get changed because it would require way too much re-jiggering of stuff. They patch it to be functional and move on.

If you've never used Avid before, I'd suggest getting a hold of a training book first and trying to get some time on one before you start. It's not the kind of thing one can usually sit down at and pick up as one goes.

deb

I'm with these guys. If you have a choice, go with the platform you enjoy working on the most. Both can do the job you describe with one hand tied behind their back, so it's really about your own comfort levels.

And whichever one you go for, get a good assistant who knows the program well. That seems to be a big part of problems on long format stuff we see - assistants getting it wrong in the beginning and making it so much harder to work in the mess afterwards.

Oh yeah, sorry, I don't know if Avid can handle R3D yet either. So like Deb says, this might be the clincher.

Derek, Deb, Jude,

thanks so much for your time and thoughtful replies.

It's obviously not one of those "either-or" situations, but you've all very much helped me get a good feel for the pros and cons. For instance, it's good to hear your opinion regarding Avid and file management. I will be shooting another film while I'm cutting this and keeping the footage organized is enough of an issue even when I'm not otherwise engaged.

Red camera is also an issue - the DP finally got his and is itching to use it all the time now.

My experience with Avid has been as supervising editor, which is way different than hands-on, so I fully intend to take your advice and try it out myself before committing to it, that is, if I decide to move away from FCP.

Great forum. I will definitely take advantage of your generosity, hopefully not in a way that becomes painful to others!

Cody

apparently Avid trumps FCP in the media, or rather, asset management dept.

this could be useful on a huge documentary or feature film with hundreds of hours of footage,
and multiple assistants, editors, and workstations,
where footage was being sent to many differnt departments, and vfx houses, etc, etc.

but for what you want to do, FCP would be fine.

the worst thing about FCP on a doco is you cant search markers.
so you coukd have lots of great moments marked up in your clips,
and have no way of searchnig for them within FCP.


but coming to the rescue is Final Print from digital heaven:
[www.digital-heaven.co.uk]

this will print out lists of markers along with thumbnails as PDFs.
edit them all together into one document (PDF Pen, or i beleive Preview in Leopard?) and you've got a pretty good searchable database of your film.


cheers,
nick
(cutting a 90 min doco with 300hrs or footage)

Another thing to think about- Avid just released a new edit line up.
[www.avid.com]

Leopard is now supported, and there are some other new things, it looks like.
It's not yet available for sale through their web site, it seems (which is a bummer, as I am eligible for the student discount only until tomorrow).

But I have cut a similar doc, 30 minutes from 30 hours of all SD footage in FCP and had no problem with organization. I'm still working on it 2 years later every now and again, with absolutely no problems with the organization.
But I'd say just go with what you're comfy with.

Just to add another voice to this...as I also am an Avid editor.

What is your final delivery going to be? How will you need to output? Those are big questions in determining what platform you go with. And yes, if you are using RED, that pretty much determines the platform...FCP. Avid is working on it, but FCP has the definite RED advantage.

File organization? Unlike Derek I don't really care that file in the Finder on Avid have strange convoluted names. That is how the Avid works...you organize everything from within Avid. FCP is different, as you organize everything (should anyway) primarily on the finder level. This is the big difference between the two. That being said, they are both great options.

But the question of what your final output it, and working with RED are your determining factors.


www.shanerosseditor.com

Listen to THE EDIT BAY Podcast on iTunes
[itunes.apple.com]

Nope, no RED support for Avid. Doesn't sound like there will be anytime soon. For now, FCP and SCRATCH (whew $$$$) only.

More over here:

[www.reduser.net]


Clay

i will say that i feel that fcp is the best nle for versatility. I have used avid maybe 10 times and i dont like the FX workflow.
I might even say that CS3 production is more versatile than avid.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

Another important question is "Who are you going to be working with?"

(Disclaimer, I'm not a Final Cut expert - more of an occasional user and "tinkerer", I've never touched an Avid system, but I've worked on quite a few Avid and FCP projects and often talk with people using both systems.)

Not everyone in the industry shares the open attitudes shown by others in this forum. Many Avid people ( and those using related programs like Pro Tools ) still consider FCP to be more of a "junior" level program. I continue hear things like "Anybody doing high-end work in Hollywood is doing it on Avid."

On the other hand, many FCP folks seem to consider Avid to be cumbersome, old-fashioned, and costly. -I hear things like "I can to more on a FCP system, and do it better and faster, for a lot less money, and anybody who doesn't believe that is still stuck in the Twentieth Century."

These attitudes do seem to be slowly (oh-so-slowly) changing.

It would seem wise to make sure that your audio post and effects people, along with anybody else you expect to be involved in post to be on-board with your decision.

Travis
VoiceOver Guy and Entertainment Technology Enthusiast
[www.VOTalent.com]

A part of it depends on your budget. How much are you going to spend in post? A full fledged set up for Avid is going to cost more than FCP. For FCP, you get a full suite- Color, STKpro, Compressor, Motion.

There's the new Cinema Craft plug-in for Compressor that i would like to try it out, the 9-pass encoding seems pretty nifty.

> 2. flv to be put on company website

Hmm. Not sure about Avid, but FCP doesn't do it without a 3rd party plug-in. Though, with Flash 9 accepting H.264, you might prefer the H.264 route as it's much higher quality per bit rate.

What type of footage will you be working with, and who? I'm currently on a project and onlining it is kinda crazy- AVIs all over the place that shouldn't belong in the timeline in the first place. Any system will mess up if the guys aren't competent. Make sure you choose your editors properly!



www.strypesinpost.com

gerald aka Strypes,

Budget is a good question. I'm not going to get a full-fledged setup for this one. This is strictly about software that I will install on a Mac Pro (Quad Core 2.8 Quad Core Intel Xeon).

Post is also going to be modestly budgeted. The producers come out of journalism and marketing - not film, so it's not easy to talk to them regarding post costs. They agreed to any software editing setup I wanted as long as I kept other post costs to an absolute minimum - including soundtrack editing, efx, stock footage. I may work with another editor (who told me about this excellent forum) but I doubt it will be for more than a few days cleaning up tracks and providing another eye for pacing.

The good news is, the DP I work with is absolutely brilliant, shoots and lights quickly and helps me work out cuts as we shoot. The footage will be mostly SD with the possibility of some compressed RED footage. I also may need to convert some AVI footage to QT that was previously transferred to a PC via Vegas Video.

I will likely need to either find a plug-in for Avid or use something like VisualHub to convert to FLV. I would prefer not to, but doubt if I can render FLV directly from either Avid or FCP.

I have been horribly spoiled by spending the past bunch of years supervising other editors and having full technical staffs behind them as well as great audio post houses to finish my tracks.

All of which is why I probably sound horribly naive even though I have worked around Avid for a long time. It's why I intend to use your FAQ and this forum as much as possible!

Cody

2. flv to be put on company website

To encode flv at a very very high quality from fcp export you will need Flix Exporter by On2 technologies.

There are other plugs and stand alones that do it but i would bet my chia pet that none will do it as nicely as the On2 version.

1. dvd to be mass produced and distributed to shareholders

by the way a receipt for a good dvd is to make the file as large as possible without too much up resing.
i.e. if the normal compressor encode has a file size of say 3g, then tweak compressor so that the file becomes say 3.7g. These tweaks can be done in the frame controls and bit rate. Dont go crazy with the bit rate tho.

""" What you do with what you have, is more important than what you could do, with what you don't have."

> > > Knowledge + Action = Wisdom - J. Corbett 1992 """"

>Budget is a good question. I'm not going to get a full-fledged setup for this one. This is strictly
>about software that I will install on a Mac Pro (Quad Core 2.8 Quad Core Intel Xeon).

Haha. I'm now on a 3 Ghz octo! Cool stuff.

If you aren't going full fledged, Final Cut probably offers the better solution. Avid doesn't exactly have a studio package that blew the world away.... You get more bang for buck in FCS- Color grading, more precise audio touch ups in STKpro, Motion for some work in stills and graphics. In fact, one of the reasons why I'm on Final Cut is Soundtrack Pro. I was a 3rd year major in audio back in school and i'm quite particular about the sound. You get plug-ins from Logic that are just priceless when you need that extra cleaning/sweetening in the audio, and most of the smaller houses that i've worked in just don't have the budget for audio mixing, or have Protools/Logic installed in the editing suite. And not many know about the versatility of FCS to this degree. It's more than an NLE.

Great that you have a good DP. Nothing is more valuable when you're finishing the project that the DP.

There are of course stuff you need to know about the workflow, prepping and organizing to get the best out of any system. Dig through the Apple certificate books if you have the time or have a good Assistant at hand who is well versed with the system of whatever you choose.

For the DVD, I'd actually recommend you to check out Brian Gary's Cinema Craft plug-in if you can because... well, true multi-pass encoding with adaptive GOP structure is quite something to watch... See if you can float that into budget and that could be what you need for DVD mastering.

FLV? You could try checking out your options on H.264/.mov for web streaming flash compatible videos. Else, there's on2, Sorensen for the good stuff.

ADD:

1) In FCP, pay attention to the interlacing, especially if you're going to be mixing formats, as well as the different NTSC frame sizes (doesn't affect me coz i'm in PAL). There are simple workarounds but it's always better to have good qualified help standing by.

2) DVDs have a maximum bitrate of around 10mb/s for both video AND audio and you won't want to be doing that for DVDs that aren't going to be played in a computer. Corbett could be very wrong about increasing it from "3" to "3.7" gigs per disc. There is also the Ken Stone web page (kenstone.net) and Larry Jordan's page (not the basketballer) at larryjordan.biz that are priceless to understanding FCP.



www.strypesinpost.com

This has been incredibly valuable information - on so many fronts.
Your forum is a real find!!
Thanks again for your help.
Cody