Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5

[David Silverstein]

Wow. I just got premiere pro 1.5 becuase I decided to stick to windows operating system after a thinking long and hard I thought it would be more practical to keep windows.

 

anyway, so I got premiere pro 1.5 and its about 10 times smoother then the last premiere I used which is 6.0 and 6.5. 6.0 would freeze on my computer but pro 1.5 now runs soo smoothly without a problem and my computer is about 5 years old with some upgrades like 1gb of ram. The rest is from 5 years ago, long time in the computer world.

 

Anyway I just wanted to praise my love for premeire pro 1.5 for helping me find my way and decide to keep windows becuase of this awsome program.

 

David s.

[Tenolian Bell]

The motivation came from Apple.

 

Adobe Premiere on Macintosh was also lackluster.

 

The release and susquent competition from Final Cut Pro gave Adobe a swift kick in the pants, and motivation to improve Premiere.

[Keith Mottram]

pitty its still pants.

 

keith

[Phil Rhodes]

It's not pants, it's just not final cut.

 

Final cut is beloved of traditional editors because it's much more Avid than Premiere is. This is a particular bugbear of mine, everything wanting to be like Avid. Avid, like many first-in-the-field pieces of software, suffers some irksome idiosyncrasies and, frankly, UI mistakes which now seem to be not only set in stone for that line of software, but also to be an actual target for non-Avid software. This is a big mistake.

 

Premiere is much better for people from a computing background (that's me, originally) who want a lower-level interaction with the software; it's much more a tool of After Effects specialists than pure editors.

 

And frankly, I don't think that the difference between Premiere and FCP is enough now to warrant changing platforms over.

 

Phil

[Brian Drysdale]

An editor friend of mine loves Lightworks. He thinks that Avid has been written by software engineers so that you can use it on a computer, rather than ease of use.

 

Funny enough, he has a degree in computer science.

[Phil Rhodes]

Hi,

 

Actually I see both sides of that. Avid feels like an application written by software engineers (they never, ever ever listen) which is dripping with the baggage of old-style editing.

 

The criticism that it's a computer program that edits rather than editing on a computer could be more accurately levelled at Premiere, but then again that's exactly what I like.

 

Phil

[Michael Collier]

I like the new premiere pro. I feel more at home on it. And yes I do have an Avid background, but started on premiere. I think the 1.5 gives you all the same user goodies (a few missing, but I'm getting used to the new workflow quickly) but this edition also has many professional features availible. The waveform/vectroscope options are awsome, they really help with the color correction. Which by the way they did a great job of improving. Much closer to After Effects. In the end editting relys on 2 things. Software package and codec. If your cutting DV codec is set (and their HDV codec is better than pinnicle, which I suspect avid uses in their newest offering) but software doesnt affect the image quality very much (not as much as codec selection will) so the question is which piece of software is easier for you to use. Thats it. I have cut Avid, Premiere, FCP and pinnicle and hands down for the price I would choose Premiere. Now if funds were unlimited I would go with Avid, but partly because the avid interface gives clients a nice warm feeling when they wonder where their money went.

[Brian Drysdale]

Another editor friend of mine was a big fan of the old Premiere, but he now has the latest Final Cut Pro. He never took to Avid.

 

However, the one to go for could depend on the kit around you. I've heard that within the BBC using Final Cut Pro for the producers editing their own material has caused real difficulty with the post production workflow in regions set up for Avid and have been for years.

[Dickson Sorensen]

I like the new premiere pro. I feel more at home on it. And yes I do have an Avid background, but started on premiere. I think the 1.5 gives you all the same user goodies (a few missing, but I'm getting used to the new workflow quickly) Now if funds were unlimited I would go with Avid, but partly because the avid interface gives clients a nice warm feeling when they wonder where their money went.

 

Adobe just introduced Premiere Pro 2 and as added several great features. I am a satisfied user of 1.5 and agree at the price point it's hard to beat and when you combine it with the closely intergraded After Effects it becomes a real powerhouse.

 

AVID still holds the highest bar but it is becoming more and more of a way to justify charging clients a premium rate. For some funny reason people often wrongly assume that the more you spend on your tools the better your work.

[Michael Collier]

Adobe just introduced Premiere Pro 2 and as added several great features.

 

ok, my ears are peaked. what new features? (which new features that actually matter i mean)

 

AVID still holds the highest bar but it is becoming more and more of a way to justify charging clients a premium rate. For some funny reason people often wrongly assume that the more you spend on your tools the better your work.

 

Hahaha. When I was 16 I had a cracked version of Avid DV Xpress 3.5 and by the time I was 17 I had a paid version (please dont sue avid, I just wanted to learn). Funny thing is my editting was just about equal to my premiere editting. funny.

 

I am currently cutting a feature movie and the director insists on using Pinnicle of all things. I am pleading with him to use Avid, because after the rough cut I have to go back and do audio correction, color correction, and export it to a standard format so a post house can put the HDV onto HDCAM for playback (I dont want to push it to HDV tape and have them recompress it, I want to do the compress work before I send it out)

 

He has 7 years on pinnicle and its hard for him to get out of that habbit. In the end I convinced him to cut 4 more scenes in premiere, otherwise I have to hand conform the whole movie from pinnicle.

[Dickson Sorensen]

ok, my ears are peaked. what new features? (which new features that actually matter i mean)

Hahaha. When I was 16 I had a cracked version of Avid DV Xpress 3.5 and by the time I was 17 I had a paid version (please dont sue avid, I just wanted to learn). Funny thing is my editting was just about equal to my premiere editting. funny.

 

I am currently cutting a feature movie and the director insists on using Pinnicle of all things. I am pleading with him to use Avid, because after the rough cut I have to go back and do audio correction, color correction, and export it to a standard format so a post house can put the HDV onto HDCAM for playback (I dont want to push it to HDV tape and have them recompress it, I want to do the compress work before I send it out)

 

He has 7 years on pinnicle and its hard for him to get out of that habbit. In the end I convinced him to cut 4 more scenes in premiere, otherwise I have to hand conform the whole movie from pinnicle.

 

Check out www.adobe.com they have all the details. The siginfigant features that might apply to your project are that you can work in native HDV and worry about compression after you finish your edit. (we don't like to bounce between different codecs if possible) and they finally added multi camera edit. (Good for up to four cameras and you can edit on the fly). The biggest movement is a stratigy to capture the small house market. They have made it very easy to run back and forth between P Pro, photoshop, After Effects and their other apps. They even thought of a way to send approval clips inside a PDF with timecode cues. (wow, now our clients don't have to come down to the shop to make frame accurate impositions)

 

Unfortunately you are already in the middle of your project and may not want introduce a new variable into the mix. Good luck.