OT: FCP vs Avid

Hi: I recently saw this video on Youtube where the the editor was praising Avid. I know its a strong system and I, myself learned NLE on Avid in school. But I switched to FCP after I got my first job where I had to use FCP and became a fan. But his point was that what can be achieved in one or two steps in Avid would take about 10 steps in FCP. Since its been a looong time that I have used Avid I was wondering if anyone here uses both and what's there take on it or the overall FCP vs Avid debate.

Thanks'

> But his point was that what can be achieved in one or two steps in Avid would take about 10
> steps in FCP.

He'd be mostly wrong.

Try moving a clip. Go into Overwrite Mode, move the clip, exit the mode. In Final Cut Pro, drag and drop.

Try closing a gap. In Avid, you'd have to activate the right tracks, deactivate the right ones, go into Overwrite Mode. In Final Cut Pro, click, delete, done.

Try applying filters. More than one? You'd have to "step in". Want the same filter on 200 clips? See you in 15 minutes. In Final Cut Pro, Copy, select the 200 clips, Paste Attributes, done.

Try copying content between timelines, making different versions, or comparing two cuts. Avid can't have more than one timeline open at a time. FCP can.

Try backing up your project, just your bin information and editing decisions. Avid has multiple files involved with the project file. FCP has one. Not to mention Avid's antiquated "we'll do it for you but in an illogical way" file management, where all files get renamed to something nonsensical.

The one thing that's faster in Avid is complex audio mixing because of the ability to leave the audio FX and EQ windows open while you skip from clip to clip. But this is still not faster -- it's useful if every clip needs a customized EQ setting, but not faster.

There are good things about Avid. I would argue that speed ain't one of them. There's no point in forcing skillful personnel to pick one over the other -- an experienced Avid editor wouldn't be slower than an experienced FCP editor unless the show were very effects-intensive. But in terms of the tools themselves, it's just a fact that Avid is not computer-friendly -- it was designed for people who aren't very computer-literate. Many, many design things in Avid simply don't make sense in the computer world (eg. inability to just grab and drag); they only make sense to a film editor who's used to actually chopping up film strips.


www.derekmok.com

Sort of like saying being right handed is better than left handed. It is if you are...

Noah

Final Cut Studio Training, featuring the HVX200, EX1, EX3, DVX100, DVDSP and Color at [www.callboxlive.com]!
Author, RED: The Ultimate Guide to Using the Revolutionary Camera available now at: [www.amazon.com].
Editors Store- Gifts and Gear for Editors: [www.editorsstore.com]

We support both. After you grow past a certain size, you just don't want to tell a director you don't support one or the other.

I did notice one oddity. It's rare to find really bilingual editors. I'm sure there are some out there but they do tend to be all chocolate or vanilla. Some of the Avid people came back from FCP training horrified how easy it was to dig yourself a hole. That's the down side of FCP being an eager puppy doggie and immediately doing anything you want.

I'm sure going the other direction, you get "What do you mean I can't do thus and so?"

Koz

> I'm sure going the other direction, you get "What do you mean I can't do thus and so?"

Indeed. You can argue that FCP's easy access to FX features is both a blessing and a curse. Fast at doing certain things, yes, but it also means that people expect it to do jobs it should never be doing -- graphics layout, for example.

"Oh, just do it in FCP."

It also does contribute to young editors who train themselves in the wrong thing -- spending months figuring out how to do motion graphics and manipulate colours, for example, instead of cutting the damn show. It takes a lifetime just to learn one of those disciplines, and now we're getting more people who are semi-competent in all those disciplines, instead of truly great in one of them.

Oh yeah, and the speed of the tools also contributes to unreasonable deadlines. I just did a corporate reel that clashed with a Christmas commercial where the voice-overs were recorded at 1PM and the 19 finished tapes had to meet FedEx deadline that same day. A little sanity, please?


www.derekmok.com

Derek I do agree with you that a lot of burden gets thrown on FCP's shoulder, specially for graphics. They expect to do it all within FCP and then ask the question what's the need for Motion or AE? But to be fair, the job industry these days would prefer someone semi competent in all disciplines rather than someone who is fluent in just one.

> But to be fair, the job industry these days would prefer someone semi competent in all disciplines
> rather than someone who is fluent in just one.

You'd be surprised!
But usually, the bigger and more prestigious the project, the more specialized the personnel. Bigger projects just won't bother bugging the editor with doing only "okay" graphics when a graphics expert could be producing "truly great" graphics while the editor whizzes out the scene content. The cost on a big project of hiring the wrong person is just too high, both in time and quality, much higher than the savings of hiring fewer people.


www.derekmok.com

I'm on the low end of feature work, and am strictly in that place, but I am well above average in both Avid and FCP. Or maybe it is just feels that way considering the amount of Avid and FCP calls I get from assistants, despite not truly assisting since '05. I know both, own both. My philosophy is that I never wanted to not be considered for a job because of the system it was on. I even knew at one time and assisted on both Lightworks touch/heavyworks in addition to being fortunate enough to get into the game while film was still being conformed, considering I just turned 31 thats saying something. Funny thing is I actually needed that conforming experience on Pineapple Express as we had some 3perf print and wanted to view it because of strobing problems. Conforming 3perf prints not exactly fun. Too much math. lol.

Anyway, back to some point I guess I could make...... My personal opinion is this. Avid great for 1st cuts, trimming, Unity, scripting, and project management. FCP great for timelines already assembled, quick audio mixing, cheaper HD monitoring, number of audio tracks. They really both do the same things, albeit a bit differently. I feel I produce the same quality regardless of the system. I'm quite proficient on both, so I never will step into a situation where I feel as if I can't make a deadline because of the system. I will however let the budget and the project type decide what tool will suit me best. If its a small HD shot show 2 systems, FCP all the way. If it's a bigger budget thing with a 5 person crew, Avid all the way.

In the feature world there just aren't enough gigs on FCP for a crop of people to get proficient on both. There is a definite divide when looking for assistants. I compare it to TV/Feature divide. Producers doing a movie don't want a TV guy, and making the jump to features is tough. In my own experience on Miss March (recently voted the worst movie of 09 BTW lol) When I was looking for a 1st, I wanted someone that was proficient in FCP. Although there is a greater pool of assistants that are phenomenal on Avid, I wouldn't consider them because of their limited knowledge of FCP. I also found there just weren't that many capable feature 1st's with FCP experience. Sure I had lots of TV assistants and film school types as well, but to find someone that has actually done it on a real type of movie is tricky. As a feature assistant these days it just isn't easy to know and have a lot of experience with both. I've been lucky in that I have gotten to handle just about every type of scenario in a real world place.

Not sure what I really rambled on about, but there it is. LOL.

An excellent add to this thread is for all of you reading this to download and watch the Nov lafcpug meeting where we talked about strengths and weaknesses of both Avid and FCP. Walter Murch has a nice chart of what he likes and does not like. Good stuff here and its cheap.

Go here and sign up and subscribe and start watching.

[opentvnetwork.com]

click on:
Sign up for a Customer account

Select: LA Final Cut Pro User Group Meeting Video Feed
watch via iTunes

"what can be achieved in one or two steps in Avid would take about 10 steps in FCP"

Out of interest, i'm not pro or anti-avid but could you give an example of what takes so much more 'doing' in FCP?

> Bigger projects just won't bother bugging the editor with doing only "okay" graphics when a
>graphics expert could be producing "truly great" graphics while the editor whizzes out the scene
>content.

One more thing about this, is that even if you can do everything, you will still have to split your job up into stages, the way it has always been- offline cuts (or content editing, whatever you call it) then online, effects and sound. One big problem with many of the lower end workflows, is that they tend to clump everything together. And once you split the jobs up into each stage, you may as well hire a separate sound person and a graphics/visual effects person, since it takes up around the same amount of time (occasionally faster, as some parts of the processes can be done simultaneously- eg. color and sound mix) and at the same time, everyone can focus on their aspect of the job at hand with access to more powerful tools (eg. AE, Smoke, ProTools, Color, Resolve, etc..). That's also not to mention that you need different setups and equipment to do proper work in those different areas, which rarely is the case in most lower end set ups.

So in this sense, I really don't see it as a major advantage to getting a guy who can do everything in FCS or Adobe CS4 or Avid MC/Symphony, however, having a person with a good understanding of the overall workflow can be a lot more effective and efficient at sending the project through the pipeline.


>the job industry these days would prefer someone semi competent in all disciplines rather than
>someone who is fluent in just one.

Frankly, I hate comparisons. It's too easy to pigeon hole- is he a creative person or a technical person, is he a jack of all trades or master of one? You can be good at more than one field, or you can suck at that one and only field that you work in. Not many are well versed at multiple fields, and it takes a lot of time and dedication, but it is very possible. And having multiple skill sets isn't something you necessarily have to expect everyone to have, nor should it be seen as a handicap. As far as advantages go, it's really not as productive as you'd think. But most importantly, you don't have to restrict yourself to knowing only one area.



www.strypesinpost.com

You know...everyone talks about Avid owning the lionshare of the feature work. That is fine & dandy and true.

Now...show of hands...know how many features are produced in relation to commercial / short form / corporate / web / etc?? Feature work is a teensy weensy percentage of the Post Production market worldwide...and it is mostly specialized. Shooters shoot. Editors edit. Title Designers design titles. Compositors composite. Visual FX artists do the visual FX. Colorists colorize. That's how it is in the feature market for the most part.

In 99% of the rest of the real world outside a major market (LA / NY), today's Editor, if he / she wants to expand their marketability and work with steady clientel, has to be GOOD at Motion Graphics Design / Compositing / Visual FX / Color Grading as well as Editing. Gerard says "Not many people are well versed at multiple fields..." and that is true...which means THOSE THAT ARE WELL VERSED GET MORE WORK!

When life gives you dilemmas...make dilemmanade.

Basically, do whatever you do but do a good job at it. There's no definitive answer to whether it's better to learn everything or one thing, as that depends on what you work on, and as long as you do a good job at it. Left hand or right hand, know each tool well, and make sure you're good at whatever you do.

Not that much difference between FCP and Avid as 10 years ago. It's kinda like a ball point pen vs a fountain pen. Which can you write better with?



www.strypesinpost.com

IMHO...
I think you have to be well versed in many things. Knowing how one process effects the other is becoming more of the standard in the freelance and independent realm. Our economy is getting more cost effective due to lower budgets outside of feature work.

I have been at this for about 16 years as an independent starting in audio and graduating to video. Clients ask a lot of questions about what they are investing in. They want to talk to someone that understand the full workflow. Markets on a county, statewide, or regional want to deal with 1 company who is responsible for everything and know that there are no 3rd party contract buffers that limit that responsibility to the client.

The tools you use in these markets are becoming less important than the final output or quality of work. FCP is just as good as Avid if you can get the job done with it. I have less than 80hrs working with Avid but years on FCP. At one time i looked at FCP as an end all sorta. I would try to do everything in there. That was more time consuming than moving through programs that make the job effectively done at the highest quality.

So, Where Do You Think That You Will Get The Most Work?????
If you plan to work on features then maybe you should learn Avid well but be lightly comfortable with FCP. If you you will be a working freelance and selling your own skill set then learn as much as you can. Freelance requires FCS + Shake, Production Premium, 3D apps, compression and color space knowledge, camera knowledge ........ ect. You have to have some working knowledge in all.

Quote
strypes
however, having a person with a good understanding of the overall workflow can be a lot more effective and efficient at sending the project through the pipeline.

I agree. you have to be familiar with how each step interacts. And their are plenty of people that are pretty good at a lot of things but are really good at 2 things. That will be the norm eventually, i think.

""" 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 """"

derekmok Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Try moving a clip. Go into Overwrite Mode, move
> the clip, exit the mode. In Final Cut Pro, drag
> and drop.

But Modes can be done from the keyboard with a single keystroke.

> Try closing a gap. In Avid, you'd have to
> activate the right tracks, deactivate the right
> ones, go into Overwrite Mode. In Final Cut Pro,
> click, delete, done.

This can be done entirely from the keyboard... IMHO that is faster than grabbing the mouse.
Most of the time just a few keystrokes.

> Try applying filters. More than one? You'd have
> to "step in". Want the same filter on 200 clips?
> See you in 15 minutes. In Final Cut Pro, Copy,
> select the 200 clips, Paste Attributes, done.

Nah, select all clips and apply your (customized) filter. Only the animation takes a bit of time, but not 15 minutes.
Or, apply to a filler layer above all clips and youre done even faster than in FCP.

> Try copying content between timelines, making
> different versions, or comparing two cuts. Avid
> can't have more than one timeline open at a time.
> FCP can.

Not true. You can have a sequence open as a source clip, and even toggle the timeline to display either one of them. And you can edit from one sequence to another this way.

> Try backing up your project, just your bin
> information and editing decisions. Avid has
> multiple files involved with the project file.
> FCP has one.

Bohoo. One directory vs one file. Consider the directory as your project and you're done.

> Not to mention Avid's antiquated
> "we'll do it for you but in an illogical way" file
> management, where all files get renamed to
> something nonsensical.

Use the console to do a 'rename media files' and you have logical names.

Sorry, i could not resist :-)
But i totally agree that it makes no sense to fight over these details.
There are a lot of things in Avid i truely hate, but it still is my weapon of choice.

Just pick one you like and get the job done....

Bouke
www.videotoolshed.com

> But Modes can be done from the keyboard with a single keystroke.

Yes, but in the computer age, you shouldn't have to go into a "mode" to move things. If we don't want to move something, we'll lock it. That single keystroke (two, actually -- one to enter, one to exit) are extra steps.

> One directory vs one file. Consider the directory as your project and you're done.

That's possible. But then your problem is that the files inside that directory all have identical names to the current active files, as well as any backup that was done previously. That means an older file can overwrite a newer file. Bad, bad, bad file management. Or you'd have to manually add a suffix to every file on the backup, and with Avid, that's a lot of files. Yeah, you can add a date/time stamp to the folder, but folder names are not always adequate protection. If one assistant selects the wrong thing at 3AM and drags-and-drops a file instead of a folder, it could destroy work.

Any of these issues can be gotten around -- FCP has other issues we have to get around, such as unstable preferences, strange nest behaviour, weak titles, fussy audio interface, bad interactions with QuickTime. No, there's no point in arguing one is better than the other. Hell, if the editor works faster on it, use Lightworks.

We can only hope the companies listen to this kind of debate rather than lying back and chuckling, "We are better than Avid/Final Cut Pro!"


www.derekmok.com

I first trained on Lightworks Turbo & HeavyWorks.

Lightworks always crashed more than Avid (on a PC) though (yes yes I know - is that possible?)

...but you could edit with a cup of coffee in one hand and the other on the controller in Lightworks and cut fast! To be as fast in Avid/FCP you need both hands and be using keyboard shortcuts.

The plus side is my caffeine intake has roughly halved since 1994!

Oh on the titles front I personally hate both Avid & FCPs implementation of text handling they both suck and Avid is certainly not THAT much better than FCP at it (3D text maybe) - if both companies created something more "Adobe Like" then you would improve both systems 1000%.

Lastly - the Avid systems in many facilities are often so old due to the cost or fear of upgrading; that I find myself often cutting on old Avid Express or Media Composers on PCs that crash if you move the mouse wrong or sneeze whilst digitising.

If recent market analysis is to be believed Avid represents less than half the world market and whilst Avid's latest offerings are fantastic, they represent an absolutely tiny part of that.

However this is entirely irrelevant if you are a freelance editor - you should learn both Avid AND FCP (and possibly Premier or Vegas) if you want to be able to cover your bases. Plus understanding as many of the differences between versions of each system as you can stomach; so you don't waste valuable edit time learning on the job. About 25% of my income last year came from Avid jobs and thats no small figure.



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