Editing Software

[cine-mon_roll]

I'm looking for a great video editing program. Any suggestions? I know that there is a extremely wonderful program made for Mac computers, but that name escapes me now...

[Guest Charlie Seper]

Its hard to find many good proggies for a MAC. It'll handle video just fine but you're really limited in what you can do with one anymore. One thing to be careful of if you don't already know this, is that the MAC GUI is generally specified to work at 72 dots per inch. Now there are monitors you can buy for a MAC that can go well over a hundred but you have to know how to set your MAC up to accomodate it. Unless all this has changed recently, I mean. Otherwise you'll be editing your vids at 1/4 the resolution you'd have on a PC at 96-dpi.

[Brian Drysdale]

I'm looking for a great video editing program. Any suggestions? I know that there is a extremely wonderful program made for Mac computers, but that name escapes me now...

 

Final Cut is the program associated with Apple computers, but it needs the later models. You should check the Apple web site.

[Jaan Shenberger]

Its hard to find many good proggies for a MAC. It'll handle video just fine but you're really limited in what you can do with one anymore. One thing to be careful of if you don't already know this, is that the MAC GUI is generally specified to work at 72 dots per inch. Now there are monitors you can buy for a MAC that can go well over a hundred but you have to know how to set your MAC up to accomodate it. Unless all this has changed recently, I mean. Otherwise you'll be editing your vids at 1/4 the resolution you'd have on a PC at 96-dpi.

 

 

dpi has no relevance in the digital realm. a pixel is a pixel is a pixel. your monitor displays in hard, objective pixels (ie. 1600 x 1200 pixels). dpi only exists as a way to tell the computer at what physical size you want your pixels (or vector shapes) to come out of the printer or whatever output device. what physical size your pixels appear on your monitor as are determined by your monitor and/or its settings.

 

digital video is especially irrelevant to dpi. each flavor of digital video exists as a predetermined pixel dimension (ie. 720 x 480 pixels).

 

final cut pro is the software the original poster is thinking of-- excellent software considering the price, comprehensive toolset, media management and ease of use.

[Matthew Parnell]

I would go for AVID. Its the industry standard editing platform in nearly all of the top post houses and TV stations. Xpress Pro is probably the most suitable version for you.

 

The software, and its relating hardware if you choose to get more advanced isnt really cheap, but having used Final Cut, Premiere and others it is my favorite, worth the extra money and if i had the choice, the only software i would cut on at the moment.

 

AVID is avaliable for both PC and MAC.

 

cheers,

matt.

[Guest Charlie Seper]

what physical size your pixels appear on your monitor as are determined by your monitor and/or its settings.

 

Exactly; and that's determined by the settings of your video card and the OS GUI settings. The default for a MAC is still (unless its changed recently) 72-dpi. Scan in a photo at 300-dpi and then bump it up to 1200-dpi in a graphics program and you'll notice no difference in the way it looks on-screen unless you change it's frame size. Now take it down below 72-dpi to 40 or so and you'll see it get pixelated. MiniDV is shot at 72-dpi. On a monitor set-up with say--150-dpi--you can make the photo/video much larger before its starts to break-up. That's really helpful if you need to zoom in to a portion of it to do corrections, use cloning, erasing, color swapping, etc.

[timHealy]

What would you like to do with your films and what level are you editing at?

 

Avid is the top of the line system but would break the bank for anything other than professional film and TV work (unless youre sitting on a trust fund). I believe their top price point is somewhere around $130,000. They do have a lower price point software that I believe came out after Final Cut was released but I do not know what that cost is.

 

I have been using Final Cut since it came out when I was considering buying a Media 100 system at the time, but I could not justify the price for hardware and software for a personal system that did not make money for me. If I recall it was about $10,000 for their low end system and close to $40,000 for their top of the line system.

 

Working in the mini DV level, Final Cut got me started for 1000 bucks for the software and maybe two or three hundred for a dedicated video drive.

 

I understand Final Cut is hardware independent so you can upgrade to a sd or hd system in the future. I have not done that but I would be interested in doing so if and when I start transferring directly to hardrives. Maybe someday.

 

Final Cut has room for improvement and perhaps someday Apple will, especially in the sound features, but I love the way I can use it in conjunction with Photoshop, After Effects, Combustion, DVD studio pro and the like easily importing and exporting files or shots from one program to another for work Final Cut can't do or another program does better.

 

I have never heard anyone who knew Avids to say anything nice about Final Cut. But Hey I don't know Avids, but perhaps ignorance is bliss. I'm sure it is a better program for 130,000 reasons, but FCP works for me and has been working terrifically for a few years.

 

There are also a few other programs like Premiere or Vegas that may be worth checking out as well. I have used Premire a little and it was fine, but never used Vegas although it seems many people out there are.

 

Best

 

Tim

[Keith Mottram]

what physical size your pixels appear on your monitor as are determined by your monitor and/or its settings.

 

Exactly; and that's determined by the settings of your video card and the OS GUI settings. The default for a MAC is still (unless its changed recently) 72-dpi. Scan in a photo at 300-dpi and then bump it up to 1200-dpi in a graphics program and you'll notice no difference in the way it looks on-screen unless you change it's frame size. Now take it down below 72-dpi to 40 or so and you'll see it get pixelated. MiniDV is shot at 72-dpi. On a monitor set-up with say--150-dpi--you can make the photo/video much larger before its starts to break-up. That's really helpful if you need to zoom in to a portion of it to do corrections, use cloning, erasing, color swapping, etc.

 

 

This is complete bollocks I honestly have no idea what your talking about a screen is measured in pixels and thats it- I am writing this on a 2560x1600 apple screen (whilst editing full 1920x1080 HD ). What is a proggie anyway? Are we discussing proffesional film applications (FCP, Shake, Avid etc- which all run on the mac platform) or some twaddle for editing handycam pictures of a church cake sale? I know of not a single professional photographer that uses a PC and I can't think of a single pro editor that prefers working on a PC either. Whenever I am dragged onto a PC adrenaline I spend the whole time wondering when it'll crash (then again the first generation of Mac adrenaline sucked big time). Changing print resolution is completely irrelevent to film work- and that is what dpi refers to print resolution.

 

Keith

[Guest Charlie Seper]

I honestly have no idea what your talking about

 

I know....

 

As to editing on a MAC... there was a time when you had to during the stone age of editing. When I got my certification in computer repair during the late 80's the only graphics manipulation that could be done was on a MAC. PC's handle video every bit as well now and more so if you have one of the new 64-bit Athlon systems. But aside from that there are a ton of free and inexpensive proggies available for post work that won't run on a MAC. VirtualDub is a great example. WinMorph and Wax are two others. There are several Flash knockoffs out now. Almost none of them will run on a MAC (and yes, I use stuff like SwishMax for lettering and photo effects all the time). And when you get around to adding in multitrack sound editing you'll find that the outrageously expensive Pro Tools is one of the few that a MAC can handle.

 

If you ever had to write a proggie for a MAC you'd know why there are so few available for them. You won't find a programmer anywhere who doesn't hate writing for MAC's. They're a royal pain. That's also part of the reason why the few proggies you can find for a MAC are so darn expensive--they take forever to write.

[Brian Wells]

Final Cut Pro HD v4.5 and a Mac Mini can be had for around $600 on eBay. That's enough for basic MiniDV-level editing.

[Tim Tyler]

> Its hard to find many good proggies for a MAC

 

'proggies' means 'programs', right? Final Cut Pro is hardly 'hard to find'. I bet it's probably the most popular ~$1000 NLE available for any operating system.

 

> MiniDV is shot at 72-dpi.

 

Really? Where'd you get that statistic from?

 

> On a monitor set-up with say--150-dpi--

 

How does one setup a monitor to 150dpi?

[Andy Sparaco SOC]

Whatever you buy-avoid hardware dedicated editors. I have garage of old mac and PC computers with lots of expensive video cards which aren't worth a dime. Luckily the software and hardware companies I did development and beta testing for supplied most of them- enough $$$ to buy a new MB 500SL. The computing horsepower is approaching the point where software only editing is a reality. If you are clever and use proxies that even goes for HD

[Tenolian Bell]

Charlie are you here to go from thread to thread and spread misinformation.

 

Its hard to find many good proggies for a MAC. It'll handle video just fine but you're really limited in what you can do with one anymore.

 

I've never heard of proggies as a computer term. Tim assumes you mean programs. Limitation can be only defined by the need of the user. What do you find limiting about it?

 

One thing to be careful of if you don't already know this, is that the MAC GUI is generally specified to work at 72 dots per inch. I mean. Otherwise you'll be editing your vids at 1/4 the resolution you'd have on a PC at 96-dpi.

 

GUI elements in OS X scale to 124 dpi with antialiasing. The Apple 30 inch Cinema Display maximum resolution is 2560x1600. Why would they not make the GUI fit their own monitor's dpi?

 

If you ever had to write a proggie for a MAC you'd know why there are so few available for them. You won't find a programmer anywhere who doesn't hate writing for MAC's. They're a royal pain. That's also part of the reason why the few proggies you can find for a MAC are so darn expensive--they take forever to write.

 

This is untrue. OS X has a settled base of API's for writing applications (Core Data, Core Video, Core Image, Core Audio) which work under the Cocoa API framework. This system works so well that developers are currently able to recode their applications with little pain from Power PC architecture to Intel IA-32 architecture.

 

From what I understand Microsoft is following the same basic path in developing new API's for its new OS Windows Vista.

 

There are many dedicated 3rd party developers for the Mac. The Mac has a smaller user base than Windows and thus has a smaller developer base. Software for the Mac doesn't generally cost more than PC software.

 

I'm looking for a great video editing program. Any suggestions?

 

The answer to this question depends on your needs. Do you need a simple DV editing application or something more professional and scalable between SD and HD codecs?

 

If you buy a Mac it will come with iMovie HD and iDVD. Basic editing and DVD authoring software.

[Tenolian Bell]

I made a mistake. GUI elements scale to 124 pixels not dpi.

 

But anyway by virtue of the screen sizes OS X can work with more than 72 dpi.

[Scott Fritzshall]

Macs will work with pretty much any monitor you want, so if you don't like the dpi of Apple's, you are more than welcome to use a different one.

[Sam Wells]

You can get Final Cut Express for $ 300,if you like it upgrade to FCP 5.xHD for the difference

 

Works the same way (timecode functions are disabled etc).

 

If you're a student FCP 5 isn't much more come to think of it.

 

I've used iMovie as a kind of sketchpad for ideas, very easy to use (cutting audio is awful though)

 

All of them seem more oriented toward "computer thinking" than "film editing thinking" (takes 2 minutes to learn "Steenbeck" :)

 

-Sam (who really wants a resolution agnostic NLE that's designed like a sequencer (Logic, Digital Performer)

[Tenolian Bell]

I have not been able to find the maximum dpi OS X is able to support.

 

2K Cinenon files are 1250 dpi, the 30 inch Apple monitor is able to show 2K resolution.

 

Oh and Photoshop for OS X can support 30,000x30,000 pixels at 1200 dpi.

Edited December 20, 2005 by tenobell

[Guest Charlie Seper]

'proggies' means 'programs', right?

 

Yeah, and anybody that's been using computers for more than ten years already knows this term from the 80's, you know, the kind of people who ought to be answering questions instead of no-nothing kids like yourself desperately looking for attention.

 

How does one setup a monitor to 150dpi?

 

Like this on a PC:

 

 

How you do it on a MAC is a mystery....

 

> MiniDV is shot at 72-dpi.

 

Really? Where'd you get that statistic from?

 

A...from the statistics window in Premiere maybe... among other apps. I won't even ask what you though it was shot at.

 

Charlie are you here to go from thread to thread and spread misinformation.

 

Hey tenobell, nice to see you're still the ever graceful 12-year old.

 

I've never heard of proggies as a computer term.

 

I'll bet. There's a lot of ignorance that comes with your age.

 

Limitation can be only defined by the need of the user. What do you find limiting about it?

 

Well, since you aparently can't read I guess I could say again how you can't find programs for a computer that has only 5% of the market. You're limited (there's that nasty word again) to a very small choice of just about any program function you need, and since software companies know they have you over a barrel they're happy to charge you accordingly. Pro Tools is just about the only multitrack app available for a MAC...oh, and did I mention its the most expensive? There's nothing that can be done with Pro Tools that I can't do with Audition at half the price. For that matter, there are a number of "free" multitracking apps (I'll avoid saying proggie since you don't seem old enough to have basic computer terminology down) for that matter.

 

Ever try finding a decent DVD authoring program for a MAC? SpruceUp is one of the few I know of. Of course you may find it comforting to know that with so few programs available (a situation that's not likely to change) that you'll be just like everybody else who utilize MAC's for video work instead of sticking out in the crowd. I mean, since you're all using the same few DVD authoring tools, you'll be using the same templates and its more likely than not that your DVD pages will all look the same.

 

Try finding simple converter tools. How many wav to ac3 surround sound converters have you uncovered for a MAC lately?

 

Know of any Flash knockoffs made for a MAC? I don't.

 

Know of any "free" video NLE's that work with a MAC? I don't. VirtualDub's not an end-all but it does a lot of things very well including deinterlacing. Know of a good free deinterlacer for a MAC?

 

TMPGEnc is hands down the best mpg2 encoder made. It won't work with a MAC. In fact, none of Pegasys' products work on a MAC.

 

GUI elements in OS X scale to 124 dpi with antialiasing. The Apple 30 inch Cinema Display maximum resolution is 2560x1600. Why would they not make the GUI fit their own monitor's dpi?

 

You simply DO NOT GET IT! Yes you can make the newer MACs running OS - X display at higher than 72-dpi. But they still run standard out of the box at 72. Don't ask me how to set them up for this.

 

This is untrue. OS X has a settled base of API's for writing applications (Core Data, Core Video, Core Image, Core Audio) which work under the Cocoa API framework. This system works so well that developers are currently able to recode their applications with little pain from Power PC architecture to Intel IA-32 architecture.

 

What makes it an easy OS up front at the user level is a nightmare in binary. MS-DOS is the complete opposite. Programming for a MAC requires a much steeper learning curve, especially nowadays when you have to do almost everything in object C. Sure you can use soemthing like Python for simple user interface and data base work, but if you want to make a video/audio program you'll have to do it in some form of C and everything about working in C binaries for a MAC is time consuming.

 

There are many dedicated 3rd party developers for the Mac. The Mac has a smaller user base than Windows and thus has a smaller developer base. Software for the Mac doesn't generally cost more than PC software.

 

That couldn't be a more backwards statement if you tried. I think even the majority of MAC users out there would agree with me on that.

 

But anyway by virtue of the screen sizes OS X can work with more than 72 dpi.

 

Nobody said they couldn't. If so please show me where.

 

 

Now quit wasting my time kid. Some of us have actual lives and families to support.

Edited December 20, 2005 by Charlie Seper

[Stuart Brereton]

'proggies' means 'programs', right?

 

Yeah, and anybody that's been using computers for more than ten years already knows this term from the 80's, you know, the kind of people who ought to be answering questions instead of no-nothing kids like yourself desperately looking for attention.

 

The guy that asked that question is not a 'know nothing kid', but the owner of this site, and as such, I think he deserves a little respect, as do most of the people who frequent this board.

 

I've been reading your ill-mannered posts in another thread, and I can't figure out what your problem is. This is a forum for Cinematographers and people interested in such. If that doesn't include you, perhaps you should find somewhere else to go and rant & rave.

 

If you decide that a Cinematography forum is somewhere you want to be taken seriously, then rein in the attitude, learn some manners, and try to have a rational discussion.

[timHealy]

The guy that asked that question is not a 'know nothing kid', but the owner of this site, and as such, I think he deserves a little respect, as do most of the people who frequent this board.

 

 

I guess he did not see the "member no: 1" under Tim's name.

 

I am in complete agreement with Stuart's thoughts.

 

respectfully

 

Tim (not Tyler)

Edited December 20, 2005 by heel_e

[Brian Wells]

there are a number of "free" multitracking apps[for PC]

Audacity is FREE for several platforms, including Mac OS X.

 

"Ever try finding a decent DVD authoring program for a MAC?"

DVD Studio Pro offers everything a guy could dream of (24p, 16x9, 5.1 surround, alternate angles, etc)

 

"I mean, since you're all using the same few DVD authoring tools, you'll be using the same templates and its more likely than not that your DVD pages will all look the same."

That's simply not true. Friend of mine authors DVD's for a living. He never uses any templates! His designs are original and done in Photoshop.

 

"How many wav to ac3 surround sound converters have you uncovered for a MAC lately?"

DVD Studio Pro comes with an AC3 converter that works well enough for my needs. I believe it's comparable to the super expensive Surcode encoder that I used to use with Premier a couple of years ago.

 

"Know of any Flash knockoffs made for a MAC? I don't."

Professionals don't use knockoff software applications.

 

"Know of any "free" video NLE's that work with a MAC? I don't."

iMovie comes free with every Mac! There's also Avid FreeDV.

 

"Know of a good free deinterlacer for a MAC?"

Matt Sandstrom (another member on this forum) makes a fantastic De-Interlacer and he doesn't charge a penny for it!

 

"TMPGEnc is hands down the best mpg2 encoder made. It won't work with a MAC. In fact, none of Pegasys' products work on a MAC."

So, I can assume you own the TMPGEnc encoder? What do you like about it?

 

"I think even the majority of MAC users out there would agree with me on that."

Look at the prices of Adobe products for PC and Mac. They are identical.

[Tenolian Bell]

Ok I think I see the confusion. Windows and OS X appear to use different nomenclature to describe the same thing.

 

The Mac doesn't use dpi to change the size of objects on screen.

 

To do that in OS X you change the resolution. If you set the OS to a lower resolution from the monitor's maximum the GUI elements will appear larger and more coarse. Pixel correspond to pixel there is no dpi in this sense.

 

If you prefer Windows over Mac that's perfectly fine. But most of your diatribe about the Mac is absolutely false. Much of what you say leads me to believe either you have never used a Mac or haven't used one in really long time. Because you know very little about Apple's products.

[Tenolian Bell]

After more reading.

 

It appears Windows is using dots per inch the same way the Mac uses pixels per inch. So I was correct the first time in saying OS X GUI elements enlarge to 124x124 pixels with anitalising.

 

It appears elements in Windows can be customized but not without aliasing as they are enlarged.

 

 

But they still run standard out of the box at 72. Don't ask me how to set them up for this.

 

There is no out of the box default setting because every monitor is different. OS X is able to recognize the monitor, adjust to its resolution and refresh rate.

[Tim Tyler]

anybody that's been using computers for more than ten years already knows this term from the 80's, you know, the kind of people who ought to be answering questions instead of no-nothing kids like yourself desperately looking for attention.

 

I've been "using computers since the 80's" and everybody I know just calls programs "programs" or "applications" or maybe "apps".

 

> Like this on a PC:

 

Changing the Display dpi simply changes the way a display adapter scales everything on a monitor. Increasing the dpi just makes things look bigger.

 

> from the statistics window in Premiere maybe... among other apps.

> I won't even ask what you though it was shot at.

 

DV cannot be measured in 'dpi' and I challenge you to prove differently. Premiere may use dpi settings to display video, but that has nothing to do with the DV specification.

 

Mr. Seper, I've been getting complaints from other forum members about you for a couple of weeks now and until now I've given you the benefit of the doubt. Your insulting and demeaning contributions are not welcome here. Please refrain from participating in this forum.

[Guest Charlie Seper]

No problem Tim, or whatever name you're using this hour. But you know, if you'd get off the stupid internet, maybe join a gym, take a class, or do whatever it takes to make a few friends in life, you wouldn't have to resort to making silly forums that revolve around you and your host of personalities. You can be as crude as you want to be hiding in your parent's basement or wherever. But you're never going to learn to get along with people hanging out on the web.