Review: Avid Media Composer 3.0
Posted 09 January 2009 - 12:43 PM
My final conclusion: Invest in a Final Cut solution - it can do everything Avid can do, plus more at a much lower cost.
Posted 09 January 2009 - 02:15 PM
A previous commenter points to several filmmakers who use FCP. With a couple of exceptions, none of these people are editors. They are directors. I know several editors with pretty good credits (IRON MAN, ARRESTED DEVELOPMENT, MATRIX, TERMINATOR 2, TRANSFORMERS, INTO THE WILD, BONES, FRINGE), and none would chose FCP over Avid.
Posted 09 January 2009 - 11:50 PM
FCP has jumped ahead for adoption and Avid's lagged behind for sure but in terms of the actual raw editing, solidity and stability, Avid's knocked it out of the park with Composer 3. It's snappy and precise, a delight to use. Frankly, it makes FCP feel like a toy. Avid have decided to get the basics right first, add features later. This is great as FCP 5 and 6 are getting to be more of a resource pig on the simpler tasks.
I'll give FCP the edge if you look at the suite, the whole studio app has some great stuff like Soundtrack Pro, but for raw editing Avid really is the way to go. Especially on big productions where you need to manage tons of media and deal with weeks and episodes of footage. And for speed, I've seen FCP experts cut and they don't quite move as fast as the Avid experts.
I don't agree with Avid 100% as a company, and Pro Tools feels cluttered to me as well, but that's beside the point of the review. Avid is doing some excellent stuff here.
Posted 10 January 2009 - 08:18 AM
Posted 12 January 2009 - 11:07 AM
Posted 20 January 2009 - 06:46 AM
And ya gotta love the guys that are quite obviously full fletched and (the typical) inflexible AVID users. Especially the ones that try SO hard to defend the only thing they know (and probably needed YEARS to even half way master, therefor there's NO chance they could possibly admit to other products being superior, since that would mean having to learn something new and BE FLEXIBLE. Not in the Avid users vocabulary). This becomes painfully obvious with comments like "If I had to render every clip to view a timeline in real time, I would be out of business."
What dung. Quite obviously NILL clue on FCP, sorry. The most superb irony being, that I'd LOVE to see an Avid editor move ANYTHING to or from the supporting apps such as ProTools and/or Sonic WITHOUT rendering first! LOL! Wake up guys! Drop the very worn and utterly outdated shibboleth such as "you have to render!" and inform yourself properly first.
I'm not only an Avid AND FCP editor since day one (of both products), I'm also a certified trainer and therefor have also had the "pleasure" of training Avid switchers (amongst others) and they are truly the worst learner's. 90% because they just can't and won't let go of their so comfy fluffy Avid world that made them feel so superior for so long and just can't face reality. Much like the company itself, if you look at it's history of misplaced, short-sighted arrogance.
I'm the last one to claim that FCP or rather FCS 2 is in any way perfect, but I'd even take Premiere and IT'S workflow with it's surrounding products ANY day over those from Avid. It's just too bad Premiere's surrounding apps (aside from AE of course) are overall horrible in comparison to those of e.g. FCS.
You wanna know what's going to put you out of business?? That is, if you don't reach retirement first... is your NOT learning and/or switching to FCS. The mere fact that Avid has a marketshare of 20% as opposed to FCP's 60% in the pro market should pretty much be a big enough hint, no?? Oh wait, I guess not if you're the classic dogmatic and hellaciously CHANGE-fearing Avid editor.
And FCP's media management is horrible?? LOL... try just plain different, okay? Since I sure as hell am happy as can be that I'm NOT told by Avid anymore how to "organize" my media (whereby using ONE folder for absolutely everything can hardly be considered organized). Which i.e. entails making Avid flavored COPIES of everything that didn't come from tape! Such as PS files etc. ... plain boneheaded if you ask me.
But then again... DO stay with your Avids. My workload may be enormous because of it, due to lack of competition, but at least I'll HAVE work for a long time to come, thanks! ;-)))
Posted 20 January 2009 - 07:01 AM
Nope, not even THEN. Assuming you are using FCP 6 with it's mixed format timeline and QT-native codecs. But even if not, on a PRO level machine FCP will even give you a minimum of a real-time during the edit via RT Extreme, which you correctly noted.
And I can hardly see any "advantage" or some huge difference to having to conform mixed footage as it comes IN, as an Avid has to do 9 out of 10 times, since it's it's own little inflexible closed-codec-island, as opposed to when it goes OUT, as with FCP. In fact FCP's approach will, 99 out of 100 times, obviously be FASTER since no unneeded footage is ever actually transcoded, which is by far the biggest time killer.
Oh but hey... why think logically? If you did, you'd ruin a perfectly good, but unfortunately irreverent, rant! ;-D
And it's still beyond me how alleged PROS can actually defend an allegedly PRO company for finally supporting various PRO formats a mere YEARS after everyone else... ouch.
Time to let go, dontcha think?
Posted 20 January 2009 - 08:30 AM
What did I say that made you think I was defending Avid? I thought I was (politely) challenging the previous poster, who made inaccurate claims about FCP.
Posted 20 January 2009 - 08:54 AM
I didn't. I admit, since my response was a direct response to your post, you could think I was speaking to you the whole time, sorry. In fact I really only was addressing you/your post with the first paragraph. The rest was aimed at your "foreposters" and/or the likes.
Posted 02 February 2009 - 09:56 AM
When will people learn not to comment on things which doesn't target their market?
Posted 02 February 2009 - 10:36 AM