Final Cut pro X vs adobe premiere pro CC

[The Chris]

11 hours ago, HelsinkiZim said:

The only editing software that will integrate with everything you will need to know to maintain a video production business now and tommorrow, is Premiere Pro.

Can I have some of what you're smoking?

Premiere is hardly the gold standard for NLE's. Most of the production houses and freelancers I've worked with use FCPx and Avid. I think in a few years Resolve may put all of them out of business if they continue to develop the editing side of things and give it away - unless Adobe buys them to keep people from dumping that stupid subscription model.

Adobe's programs have become too bloated and slow. If it works for you, cool, but its not for everyone.

[jcs]

14 hours ago, jgharding said:

Apparently Macs can use Cuda, my mistake, I'd only ever tried Premiere ones that use Open CL only that's why I thought otherwise.

Open CL isn't an equivalent, it's much slower on the same machine if you switch between it and CUDA.

I work with a fellow who uses FCP X on MacBook Pro, the only way he can get close to my playback speed of R3D files is by cheating and transcoding it all, or "creating optimised media".

So in this particular case the speed of Premiere on my Win10 machine doesn't "approach anywher near" FCP X, it far surpasses it. He has a quicker CPU too! :O

You're right, CUDA used to be much faster on OSX. I switch between CUDA and OpenCL from time to time (e.g. after driver/OS updates) and performances now switches back and forth (GTX 980ti, 2010 MacPro 24GB RAM, SSDs)- sometimes OpenCL is much faster. When editing 1DX II and C300 II 4K footage with greenscreen keying, sometimes it will run butter smooth, but other times it will choke. Have to start and stop frequently to see sections play smoothly. Clearly a design issue with buffering and timing (something FCPX doesn't suffer from: it runs fast continuously or chugs slower continuously). What gfx card are you using on Win10?

5 hours ago, The Chris said:

Can I have some of what you're smoking?

Premiere is hardly the gold standard for NLE's. Most of the production houses and freelancers I've worked with use FCPx and Avid. I think in a few years Resolve may put all of them out of business if they continue to develop the editing side of things and give it away - unless Adobe buys them to keep people from dumping that stupid subscription model.

Adobe's programs have become too bloated and slow. If it works for you, cool, but its not for everyone.

I wouldn't mind the subscription model if the products were continuing to improve and were the best on the market. I'd pay for Resolve once it reaches closer to what I can do in Premiere (would make sense for them to start charging for a mid-priced version once it has near feature parity with FCPX and PP CC).

[Bioskop.Inc]

Will this ever end?!

When I first got introduced to Digital Editing there were only 2 NLEs being used - Avid & FCP. Avid was the weapon of choice for the high end stuff - Natural History & Drama. FCP was used by everyone else. Premiere - never even got a look in (never mentioned, didn't know it existed at first).

The problem has become the importance placed on After Effects, by small independant companies - the new build Motion is either on a par or just behind it, but not enough to make it redundant. In Big companies, the titles are done by one team (outsourced) & the Editor actually spends his time editing.

The real difference between FCPX & Premiere - one you pay a one off fee for & the other you pay monthly for. And if you really wanted to go that step further - one works better with Macs & the other with Windows. They're NLEs, nothing more & you use the one that gets the job done best for you.

[DevonChris]

I used and really liked FCPX but had to switch to Windows and therefore used Premiere, which I didn't like as much as FCPX.

I switched to Resolve 12 (now 12.5) which rocks. Black Magic are improving Resolve dramatically and I intend to stick with this now.

[tomekk]

One thing that keeps me with Adobe is their ecosystem around the software. If I want to do something I haven't yet learned, I just type it in in google/youtube and get plethora of resources about the subject. I'd guess Resolve is still too young to provide community support like this. Isn't it the case guys? It might not be important for advanced guys but it's extremely important for beginners/enthusiasts crowd. Software could be wonderful but it doesn't matter if you don't know how to use it.

[DevonChris]

Whilst the eco system around Adobe products is far larger than for Resolve, there has been an explosion in the number of high quality tutorials since Resolve 11 started to become a viable alternative.

I think you would be surprised by how large the Resolve community has become.

[The Chris]

9 hours ago, jcs said:

  I'd pay for Resolve once it reaches closer to what I can do in Premiere (would make sense for them to start charging for a mid-priced version once it has near feature parity with FCPX and PP CC).

I think that's a possibility as it becomes a powerful editor, there's a lot of space between free and $1000, if they can resist selling to a larger company. 

[jcs]

Needed to render some basic particles (sparks) quickly. Hadn't used After Effects in a while (never tried particles there- always used 3D Studio Max for advanced 3D rendering). 5 minute googling and a few more to tweak and got the basic look I was going for. Opened the .AEP file in Premiere, placed it over the other content, tweaked it in After Effects, after saving results, showed up in PP. Decent performance and seamless. However rendering again failed with "Unknown Error Compiling Move" (same nested Warp stabilizer bug. Also had many issues with audio failing and having to switch between different audio devices to 'reset' the PP audio system). When everything works, cool, however the many bugs are major time wasters.

[trafficarte]

I use FCPX for editing and bought Color Finale for the lack of curves, but I've also began to explore Resolve 11 and then 12, now 12.5 to try to achieve better results in grading.
While there I've found that "ecosystem" with everything connected: ingesting, editing, color correction and delivery. But I've also found an hybrid of FCP7 and FCPX in the editing window.
Right now I'm still on FCPX for editing (and for minor color correction), but I send the Project to Resolve for grading, without a single bug until now...
Resolve is deeper than FCPX so I'm reading and watching a lot of tutorials about it, and I've also found that its audio sync function is far less accurate than the one in FCPX.
But I also want to be platform free in the near future, and FCPX runs only on Mac.
I've also used PremierePro, but not enough to say anything more than: I didn't like it, I found it too much twisted, too many clicks to achieve the same thing. And I'm not a fan of the subscribe form of payment.

[HelsinkiZim]

On 09/06/2016 at 1:16 AM, Oliver Daniel said:

Sorry what? FCPX will spit in my face? 

I've been using it since 2012 and I have to say it's been an absolutely awesome pleasure to use, They have really improved the editing experience and I feel I can work much faster and have more time to be creative. 

I happen to run a business with FCPX. I don't need Premier Pro because I choose to work successfully with FCPX. 

The negativity towards it is getting a bit tiring now. It works, and it works amazingly well for many professionals. It's strange that people would be upset with that. 

I know its tiring but everything anyone says on any topic is hackneyed now because thats the nature of the internet. No opinion is new. But the fact that you have seen this opinion many times before must mean that something is wrong for a lot of people, maybe not all, but enough for for you to get tired by the complaints.

I agree its lazy to want nothing to change, but when you have choices as a consumer, it is frustrating when something you have supported for so long changes its focus to a newer clientele. I am old and worked with final cut from circa 1999 so I can honestly say that fcpx was the biggest shift in its interface by a very long way. I have never had to change workflow to adapt to all the previous changes. That is just a fact for me.

I also agree that it is a pleasure to use, which is why I was suggesting a newer editor would benefit from a challenge.

It is MY belief that as things stand the industry standard for editing will be soon won by Adobe, if not already. But then again, there is no 'industry' anymore and maybe that is Apples point.

Eh, what do I know? What do you know either? We all have credits, have worked on documentaries to commercials, as production assistants to directors, editors, production coordinators on our own projects to others, filmed events and weddings... by now we have all worn the hats and all been paid for our work. We are entitled to our opinions.

[HelsinkiZim]

On 09/06/2016 at 2:18 AM, The Chris said:

Can I have some of what you're smoking?

Premiere is hardly the gold standard for NLE's. Most of the production houses and freelancers I've worked with use FCPx and Avid. I think in a few years Resolve may put all of them out of business if they continue to develop the editing side of things and give it away - unless Adobe buys them to keep people from dumping that stupid subscription model.

Adobe's programs have become too bloated and slow. If it works for you, cool, but its not for everyone.

Sorry, I don't know what production houses are using as I left the commercial scene 7 years ago. I just know what frequently uploading content producers are using, home business type folks or small businesses in my area. Adobe is not better than fcpx in usability, but they have nailed a market for content producers who want to streamline editing, effects and 3D animation on a BASIC level to achieve results that used to only be the foray of the MIlls and Mollinaires (if you lived in london). And its just what I see and hear, and experience on a personal level. I am agnostic for tools. But yes sometimes they spit at me when I try do something I have done for ten years, that someone has decided should be done a different way.

On 10/06/2016 at 1:55 PM, Bioskop.Inc said:

Will this ever end?!

When I first got introduced to Digital Editing there were only 2 NLEs being used - Avid & FCP. Avid was the weapon of choice for the high end stuff - Natural History & Drama. FCP was used by everyone else. Premiere - never even got a look in (never mentioned, didn't know it existed at first).

The problem has become the importance placed on After Effects, by small independant companies - the new build Motion is either on a par or just behind it, but not enough to make it redundant. In Big companies, the titles are done by one team (outsourced) & the Editor actually spends his time editing.

The real difference between FCPX & Premiere - one you pay a one off fee for & the other you pay monthly for. And if you really wanted to go that step further - one works better with Macs & the other with Windows. They're NLEs, nothing more & you use the one that gets the job done best for you.

You said it better than I tried to do, but this was my point. +1 rep.

[M Carter]

I resisted leaving FCP 6/7 for some time, but a new mac & more horsepower needs drove me. (I did a lot of research - Premiere was "free" for me since I have the full Cloud subscription). But it was the higher-end tutorials that really convinced me - feature film and trailer editors (speaking to a whole auditorium vs. some guy doing a youtube video). Their support for FCPX was pretty amazing.

On a mac, it's pretty much a no-brainer - 4K on a 1080 timeline was bringing my previous mac to its knees, and it's a seamless experience on X - but it's fine-tuned to work on the hardware. The integration of features and the availability of plugins is great - I used to pretty much automatically run my dialogue through ProTools, but the audio and color tools have even got me doing things I used to run through AE.

I imagine I could have been just as amazed by Premiere, but every time I searched for info on the 2 packages, I found dozens of issues that worried me. 

I'm not an Apple fan boy - I'm pretty infuriated that I need to keep an older machine running in case I need to launch an old FCP7 edit. It's simply jaw-dropping that Apple took a pro app which was an industry mainstay for, what, close to a decade, and gave ZERO path for legacy projects. There should at the very least be an app that doesn't require FCP 6/7 to run, that can parse legacy files and output an XML. Doesn't seem like rocket science.

[sgreszcz]

On 16 May 2015 at 0:17 PM, O photo said:

I'm a Profesional photoshop retoucher, and latly I'm getting into video editing, very basically I have been using on trial mode FCPX and find it really easy and intuitive to use, by the other hand I just had a  quick look at premiere and it looks quite complex. Please correct me if im wrong.

i think the advantage  of premiere is integrating Adobe After effects, and maybe photoshop footage ( not sure), that I probably will be end up using. 

my my question is should I invest in FCPX or should I go with premiere even though it's complexity and higher cost.

also, do get the same amount of grading plugins on premiere then in FCPX ?  I have seen realy cool gradient effects for FCPX that I haven't seen form Adone Premiere. 

Please help, I don't know where to invest my time and money 

Thanks in advance for any feedback. 

I'm learning editing from the beginning (no previous experience).  I highly recommend FCPX as finding and organising footage is fast using the filmstrip view and skimmer.  Also things like key wording and searching is excellent.  There are excellent plugins too - sign up for the various vendors who offer deep discounts several times per year.  Lots of free ones curated here: https://fcpxfree.com.

I would also recommend Ripple Training as they have excellent workflow videos and show how to use FCPX on real projects.  Their Warp Speed Editing course has been helpful for me.  There are also good FCPX communities and educators on Facebook and Twitter.

[squig]

A colleague of mine recently cut a feature with Premiere Pro; he hated it; lots of bugs/crashes. I've been using FCP since it first came out. FCPX was a bit painful at first but I like how you can tweak it to work however you wanna work. And it's really solid. My plan for cutting my feature is to cut ProRes proxys in FCPX, debayer/render my 5D MK3 raw files in AE, and grade in either AE or Resolve.

[Axel]

On 12. Juni 2016 at 0:03 AM, HelsinkiZim said:

It is MY belief that as things stand the industry standard for editing will be soon won by Adobe, if not already. But then again, there is no 'industry' anymore and maybe that is Apples point.

Something worth thinking about. There really is no 'industry' anymore, at least not if this refers to enterprises which set up blueprints for production pipelines and man them with workers. This industry, audio-visual media, became hell for people who have to work for a living and perhaps plan for a family.

On german video sites, the FCP X haters label the "pros" that use this NLE "trunk producers". I almost became one of them, it's called "Ich AG" (literally: 'Me PLC'; in Germany: person(s) in self-employment as partof a government-funded scheme to help jobless people to start-uptheir own business).

As your own camera operator, sound engineer, driver, editor, colorist and what have you - what do you need Adobe for? You can be creative (Adobes motto) at designing your own funky lower thirds within After Effects? Well, you hardly get paid fairly for that extra effort. There are thousands of free Motion templates that can easily and in no time be adjusted for your needs. A handful of specialized graphic designers, who probably do nothing else, let you use better ones for a reasonable fee. You'd be crazy to sit awake after a long shoot and editing session and try to top those on your own.

So maybe FCP X is for hobbyists and trunk producers, but who cares? I've opened an own thread on the topic. My suspicion is that Adobe would like to become less industry standard and more trunk production suite. But they fear to lose their nimbus.

[tdonovic]

On 6/9/2016 at 11:56 PM, jgharding said:

Open CL isn't an equivalent, it's much slower on the same machine if you switch between it and CUDA.

Use OpenCL on AMD systems and CUDA on NVIDIA systems. You'll get the best performance that way

[HelsinkiZim]

On 6/9/2016 at 2:18 AM, The Chris said:

Can I have some of what you're smoking?

Premiere is hardly the gold standard for NLE's. Most of the production houses and freelancers I've worked with use FCPx and Avid. I think in a few years Resolve may put all of them out of business if they continue to develop the editing side of things and give it away - unless Adobe buys them to keep people from dumping that stupid subscription model.

Adobe's programs have become too bloated and slow. If it works for you, cool, but its not for everyone.

And another thing... I, like you, am a Dancing Bear. I perform and people throw money and at the end of my routine I pick it up and then go and pay rent (or in my case, a morgate). I, like you, get home from a hard days lugging kit and filming, and scroll through the forum because I am weird too (so I am told) and love learning about tech stuff and seeing what us idiots are up to. When I see a thread where I can contribute from experience, I do so with gusto.

But please don't confuse my heartfelt enthusiasm for ignorance. Video is my life, and always will be.  I'm not rep building here, just contributing when I can. I am not aiming to be an internet forum respected thread responder. I am aiming to be the best goddamn budget filmmaker Scandinavia has ever seen. 

It is sometimes just mal-informed opinion that can and will always change.  But if we are not to speak our mind then how are we to learn. I gave up worrying about looking the fool a long time ago. Now I speak up, get answers and move on. Nothing really matters if you think long term.

Anyways, that's what I'm smoking.

[DBounce]

A bit off topic, but I didn't want to start a new thread just for this. I'm trying to edit the amount of lines of text that are displayed in the "reveal" text template that is included with FCPX. I cannot seem to find a way to alter the transform without altering the size of the text in the group. I just switch over to FCPX from Adobe, any ideas?

[jcs]

2 hours ago, DBounce said:

A bit off topic, but I didn't want to start a new thread just for this. I'm trying to edit the amount of lines of text that are displayed in the "reveal" text template that is included with FCPX. I cannot seem to find a way to alter the transform without altering the size of the text in the group. I just switch over to FCPX from Adobe, any ideas?

Haven't done any complex text yet in FCPX. However this sounds like something you might be able to tweak in Motion 5?

You could also render out text with alpha in Premiere (or After Effects) and bring in to FCPX- that way you can use the best of both apps.

[Michael Ma]

If you are going to invest in one long term, I'd go with the safe bet which is Premiere Pro.  Apple OSX (now known as macOS) has been dying a slow death.  People might argue that the professional artist community is going strong, Apple has plenty of money, and die-hard Apple fans will never move to anything else.  But look at what happened with Aperture (the Lightroom alternative only for Apple users).  Apple killed it and replaced a professional app with a non-professional consumer-friendly alternative with less features.  What makes FCPX, the Premiere Pro alternative for Apple users, any different?  How long until Apple, which is busy doing a million other things, gives up trying to keep pace with the ever improving Premiere Pro?  Video editing software is a pretty niche market and I'm sure it's only a small percentage of the reason why people buy Apple laptops.  People in this room excluded of course.